Let's see a party that's facing demographic challenges because it's perceived as too white, too old male, too Southern, and too much of a sellout to corporate intersts will nominate a 60+ year old white giver nor of Mississippi who was a former lobbyist. We should be so lucky. Could Barbour win the GOP nomination -- he's the prototype and would have to challenge Huckabee for the Bubba and evangelical vote. Now that Ensign and Sanford are done, Jindal comes off as Kenneth from 30 Rock, that really leaves Palin, Romney, and Huckabee as the leading contenders.

Living in Nashville, I can tell you that Romney will not win the South and evangelicals because they believe that Mormonism is a cult. That leaves Palin vs. Huckabee. One battle for the GOP will be the economic populism and anticorporatism of Huckabee vs. the Big Business shill Barbour. If Barbour is seen as viable, he may have the $$ to be a serious challenger. The other interesting thing will be to see whether Palin or Huckabee is more successful at emulating Obama's small donor strategy.

Either way, Obama should be happy if these are the serious contenders.

I think that it might not have been a bad idea to have announced the VP pick on Wednesday, campaign with him/her on Wed. & Thurs, and let the VP pick take the next week or so to campaign, maybe do a couple of fundraisers, and be the campaign's face for next week while Obama vacations.

Then when he returns the two of them can do a couple of visits before the DNC.

With regards to the economy, energy, education, and health care Obama has a 10-20 point advantage. His goal has to be to try and level the national security/foreign policy shortcoming he has vis a vis McCain. I agree with BO on most of his foreign policy and when people are actually asked about the specifics, more people favor BO's positions than McSame's. The problem is that McCain is seen to ahve more gravitas.

Obama's VP choice has to be his #1 surrogate on this issue and use the VP debate to hammer this point home. The only ones who have strong credibility on this issue are Wesley Clark or Joe Biden who I'd like to see as VP. Sure Nunn does (but his social views are more Dixiecrat) and while Dodd would have been a good choice, I think that the Countrywide stuff would tag him.

I supported Obama through the primaries but I have always liked Hillary. I think she'd be the best VP candidate because she has national security credibility and she is more persuasive on economic issues than Obama. I think that the problem is Bill's library and financial dealings. And I think that some of what Hillary said against Obama would be fodder against him.

Kaine or Sebelius have no national security/foreign policy credentials. Kaine's got 50/50 approval numbers in VA and ran very weak in the western part of the state. I think Kaine and Sebelius don't really add much to the ticket. I think Bayh is better than either of them but he doesn't really go after his opponent.

Obama needs a pitbull -- Clark or Biden.

Choosing a VP with military experience does not automatically confer Obama with military credentials. What it does offer is two things : 1) It tells the Beltway that Obama has a 4-star general backing him up in the Oval Office. Think about Bush's pick of Cheney. The Cheney pick told Washington insders that an experienced washington hand was available. The media narrative was that this was a solid pick. I see a Clark pick in much the same way.

2) It allows Clark to go after McCain on national security with Obama. When Obama critiques McCain on national security it is possible for some in the MSM to dismiss Obama was naive. When Clark voices the same criticisms it underscores what Obama said.

All thins being equal Obama should have a 15-20 point advantage on the economy, energy, health care, environment, getting us out of Iraq, and change. McCain will keep this race close with the threat of who do you trust in a national security crisis.

1. Florida. Gore's very presence is a living reminder of how easily things could have been so different without GW Bush.I would use Gore and Hillary to try and make a play for Florida.

2. Colorado. Gores's credibility ont he environment will appeal. They key is that McCain is not the typical Republican who thinks that global warming is a fairy tale. He has offerred up a cap & trade plan (without realizing that for a cap to work it has to be mandatory). Gore is the best person to attack McCain's plan.

3. As part of Obama's effort to reach out to evangelicals to promote planatary stewardship.

While Hillary won Clark COunty by 10 pts., Obama won the RUral areas. I think his organizers realize that this is where the greatest gain can be had. If Obama can get to a 15 pt. deficit then he'll win NV for sure.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primari es/results/state/#NV

Obama will be fine. Key is the advantage in partisan ID.

        % Vote    Part Reg Adv    Dem. Nominee    Rep. Nominee    Major Independent

1980    Dem    43    15    67    27    6
    Rep    28        11    85    4
    Indep    23        31    56    13
1984    Dem    38    3    74    26   
    Rep    35        7    93   
    Indep    26        36    64   
1988    Dem    37    2    83    17   
    Rep    35        8    92   
    Indep    26        43    57   
1992    Dem    38    3    77    10    13
    Rep    35        10    73    17
    Indep    27        38    32    30
1996    Dem    40    5    85    10    5
    Rep    35        13    81    6
    Indep    22        44    37    18
2000    Dem    39    4    87    11   
    Rep    35        8    91   
    Indep    26        46    48   
2004    Dem    37    0    89    11   
    Rep    37        6    93   
    Indep    26        50    48   
7 election Avg.                       
    Dem    38.9    4.6    80.3    16.0   
    Rep    34.3        9.0    86.9   
    Indep    25.1        41.1    48.9   

3 election Avg.                       
    Dem    38.7    3.0    87.0    10.7   
    Rep    35.7        9.0    88.3   
    Indep    24.7        46.7    44.3   

2008    Dem    38    9           
    Rep    29               
    Indep    33               

Gore lost white men in 2000 by 24 points and Kerry lost them by 25 points. The difference in the popular vote was that Gore only lost white women by 1 pt. while Kerry lost them by 11. Obama is stronger today because he is ahead by 7 pts. with respect to white women.

Republicans expect to win white men by 20 pts. This is essentially offset by the overwhelming Dem. advantage 35-50 points with nonwhite voters.Thus the key constituency to win over is white women.

If Obama can maintain his strength with this group he will win in November. If not, expect the drumbeat for a Hillary VP nod to get louder.

The election is not just about the Democratic electorate in which case Obama-Hillary makes sense.Look at the historical data that compares at the time of the candidate dropping out. While 65% of Hillary supporters initally said they would support Obama, the same percentage of Bradley supporters said they wouldn't vote for Gore in 2000 and McCain supporters wouldn't vote for Bush in 2000 and Jerry Brown supporters wouldn't vote for Bill Clinton.

But already Obama is getting 80-85% of the Democratic vote. I guarantee that he will get 90-93% of the Dem. vote with the remaining Dems being made up of Liebermann-types, die hard Hillary supporters, Dems who won't vote for a black man.

While Obama needs Hillary to campaign for him, putting her on the ticket will cost him Independents and White Men.

The reason McCain offerred it and Obama is agreeing in principle is that both sides see it as to their advantage.

McCain has less money, is dramatically less able to deliver prepared speeches, and generally seems more likable in the town hall setting. Obama sees that is a chance to look presidential by standing next to McCain and winning on debate points.

Bottom line is that if you believe in your candidate, your message, your issues -- like I do -- then go for it. I think that rather than "play not to lose" Obama should "play to win." He needs time to campaign, fundraise, visit Iraq, etc. But that can be worked out.

Plus, I think that there is a good chance that McCain's inner asshole will come out and he'll embarrass himself.

Her narcissim knows no bounds.

Newsweek's Howard Fineman just said on MSNBC at 8:35pm Eastern that the Clinton campaign is demanding that Hillary be offered the VP position, which she will then decline, and then Fineman quotes the Clinton campaign as saying "don't you dare offer it to another woman." Isn't that special. Apparently, Hillary was only planning on breaking her own personal glass ceiling. For the rest of you, you can break you own.

http://www.americablog.com/2008/06/clint on-campaign-hillarys-not-gonna.html

Sure the estimates right now are six seats. But why not 9 to be able to get to 60. It only happens if we work hard to make it happen.

Whether you are a Clinton or Obama supporter, we all agree on getting Repubs out of Congress. Let's each try and make a difference. Donate/volunteer/call/GOTV -- whatever it takes.

Make 2008 a Democratic landslide !!!

One person, one vote.

One person can volunteer and educate.

One person can make a difference.

Do you not agree that Obama is the pledged delegate leader ? Did he do this by coup d'etat. If teh Superdelegates are picking him despite all of the general election polling, dubious popular vote claims ( a number of caucus states aren't included in the pop. vote tally), etc. then it's over.

But I'm sur eyou can trust McCain on GLBT issues ? Can you say that with a straight face ?

McCain = Bush foreign policy on steroids.

Enough said.

Obama is the nominee. Deal with it. If you want to vote for McCain then give him money, volunteer for him, and see him get elected. But if we're still in Iraq four years from now, still don't have health care, have a Supreme Court that overturns Roe, then be proud of what you've done.

COyote Creek -- go join Hannity and Limbaugh.

Those of us who supported Hillary are mature enough to realize that she lost.

Defeat McCain is the Number 1 priority.