You make some good points here. I've been saying "Obama/Webb" for months now, but I heard through Politico yesterday that Webb has no interest in being a VP. I love Bill Richardson but as you so aptly pointed out, Obama would already win in Bill's home state/area. I've heard other people mention Kaine but I really don't know too much about him. So thanks to your post, I will go and look him up.

I'm absolutely opposed to another Senator on the ticket. I think Gov. Richardson is a non-brainer and I don't care that it would mean putting a Latino with an African American on the same ticket. If people are freaked out by the idea of electing a Latino Governor, they aren't voting for a Freshman African American Senator anyway.

I'm not even a huge Richardson fan - it jsut makes a lot of sense given Rishardson's biography and experience.

If you do some electoral college math (http://www.270towin.com) you'll see just how important those Western state electoral votes are to the GOP's chances. If they lose Washington, Colorado, and New Mexico - that leaves McCain with little room for error in the rest of the country. (Obama-Richardson could lose OH, FL, VA, NC, MO, IN, NH and other typical red states but still win the White House)

Maybe Webb isn't interested in VP but he's the best choice. Face it, the Senate is a do nothing institution. The most impotant thing webb could do is help Obama win as opposed to being a low seniority senator. If he's not chosen Obama still needs someone who can't be tarred as unpatriotic...Wesley Clark is my second choice.

A lot of independents (and Republicans even) who are attracted to McCain are going to have very similar feelings toward Joe Biden --- and IMO Obama is more likely to excell at being an executive and need the help in dealing with Congress, an absolute MUST to get things done. (And why LBJ made so much sense despite the coolness between them - no one was better at getting things through Congress than LBJ. That was as important, possibly more, than 'placating' the second strongest candidate).

The fact that Biden has been there "forever" doesn't mean that he wouldn't be an agent for change -- in fact, anyone who has followed him knows full well that if he/his party were in power a LOT of things would change - quickly! And he's atypical in a lot of ways - raised his sons on his own for a while, still takes the train home every night rather than staying in Washington, hasn't made a bunch of money over the years.

All good points except for Ed Rendell. He is definately OLD politics, back room politics and not part of the change message.

I think removing Webb so soon from a seat he won in a surprise would be a mistake.

I respect Richardson as a person and agree that there would be some advantages to having him on the ticket. But... I'm sorry, but he's just not ready for prime time. I think he'd end up being an embarrassment for Barack. I say this based on those hideous debate performances -- he seemed confused, unprepared, was shamelessly and trasparently pandering (as opposed to having some semblance of believability), and disingenuously espoused some ludicrous positions (I'll remove every single troop from Iraq before I go to sleep on Inauguration Day).

My first pick would probably be Warner. Surely some popular candidate could be found to replace Warner.

I'm worried that picking Sebelius or McCaskill would, in a strange way, further alienate the Hillary voters. I wonder if they would take it as condescension...?

I wonder if he'd consider John Kerry -- and if Kerry would accept it? His lack of campaigning skills aside, I think much of the party still respects him very much. I'm still convinced he'd make a fine veep or president.

Webb has yet to commit his superdelegate vote even though Obama campaigned with him to help him win his Senate seat.

race baiting disqualifies Rendell!

You know .... watching Edwards just now .... if it's true that he wanted to "go after" the Republicans more fiercely but was held back by Kerry. I think he has to be considered - seriously.

Rendell looks and sounds like a typical old-fashion (phony) politician. He must turn off younger voters (I imagine -- I can't go back). Richardson has rumored sex scandals in his background.

Webb is a favorite choice because he's well experienced in and out of government (not your typical first term senator), he ran for the Senate because he was so committed to ending the war, he's a populist, and he matches McCain in McCain's strengths:

Webb is a Scots-Irish, gun-loving, Appalachian-dwelling marine who did well at the Naval Academy, who served in Vietnam, who has a son who served in Iraq.

McCain also has two sons who served in iraq and McCain can use that fact to show how patriotic he is compared to Obama.

But Webb has even more to recommend him: He got a law degree at Georgetown, he's done pro bono work for veterans, he's won an Emmy, he's written novels, he's served in various capacities in DoD, etc. The guy is extremely talented.

The drawback is replacing him in Virginia (where I live). There are just not that many well-known Democrats in this state. That we have three now or soon in high office: Webb, Warner, and Kaine, is the first I've seen in over thirty years in Virginia.

Webb is inexperienced?

?????

Excuse me? And give me a break!
Who did he serve under as Sec. of the Navy?
Where is his son now serving? (starts w/ an 'I')
How many books has he published? Hey, takes some imagination to write a book, you know.
What branch of the military did he serve in and what war was he involved in? What southern state does he represent?

And some of you are telling me that a relatively young, black, progressive candidate that we all adore is supposed to ask one or another woman or some anonymous senator from Pennsylvania or some anonymous governor from Ohio to be on the ticket.
Right.

What Webb would bring to the ticket is EXACTLY what is needed. He is truly 'stand up' and solid gold. By comparison, Bill Clinton is galvanized tin and the latter's wife assay's out the same. Their conduct over the past three months casts an interesting new light upon the suicide of Vince Foster.

Great post. I like Webb, but I think you've talked me out of him as a VP choice. He's excellent at taking on Republicans on the shout shows, but the fact that he's a first-term Senator knocks him out.
(McCaskill too.)

Maybe I'm way behind the curve here, but I haven't seen Sam Nunn's name mentioned here. Does his age make Obama look inexperienced by comparison? Other reasons he shouldn't be worth a look?

Are there any other potential draftees from the ranks of the retired?

Running the Navy is executive experience.

And under Reagan.

The Republicans won't know what to say about the guy. Can't say no exec experience.

Tim Kaine, VA Governor
Erskine Bowles, UNC System President

I think Senator Jack Reed deserves a look:
http://reed.senate.gov/biography/index.cfm

I'm kind of warming up to the idea of Ted Strickland from Ohio. He's got high approval and low disapproval ratings, which is unusual. And he might bring Ohio with him which would be nice to have in the Dem column this time.

A believable populist message seems more resonant than any particular individual at this point (that could change of course). I like Edwards. But I really don't know half of the people being tossed around here ... Erskine Bowles?

It seems Edwards could really help with the "working ... hard working, white" vote. He could also provide impetus for an Olive branch to Hillary in adopting some/most/all of her(and his) health proposal into the platform. He has Senate experience, yet also has the benefit of being away from Washington for a while (without the absence being due to losing his seat ... big negative for Daschle).

I'm in the northwest. I think Edwards would be very popular in Montana and Oregon. Nobody's likely to touch Idaho ... but surprisingly the deepest roots here are democratic ("Californians" came in and took over decades ago, pisses the old timers off) and seeds should really be planted. A little attention could go a long way and Edwards would for sure go over well here (notably in the more W.VA-like areas).

I don't know if Obama/Edwards would be the strongest ticket, but it sure would make me smile.

Sebelius is the daughter of former Ohio governor John J. Gilligan . . . think that'll help at all in OH in Nov?

Spade: "I'm kind of warming up to the idea of Ted Strickland from Ohio" ---- Lots of good reasons to do so BUT one really discouraging thought: seeing, 1,000 times over, the clip of him nodding his head, albeit uncomfortably, while HRC has her "Shame on you, Barack Obama!" fit. That could become stomach-turning (not that it isn't already, just in memory).

Unless she turns out to have some kind of skeleton in her closet I think AZ Gov. Janet Napolitano would be an excelent choice. Attack McCain in his home state, and apease those who are supporting Hillary for sexist reasons.

Put it this way - imagine these phrases getting flung around in the local press throughout the country:

"Vietnam vet", "Assistant Secretary of Defense", "Secretary of the Navy", "has a son in Iraq now", "former Republican, became a Democrat", "praised by Ronald Reagan for his military service", "was against the Iraq war from the beginning", "proposed the new GI bill now opposed by McCain", etc.

If this is not the 'tough cred' Obama's ticket needs on the ground in Appalachia and other areas I don't know what is.

BTW, Webb is an author with intellectual strength and honesty too, so I don't imagine him turning off the latte-liberal crowd either.

I would echo many of the voices above, especially 'mcdonald928' who hits the nail on the head.

I once thought this was a bad idea. Then I studied up on Webb. He has much more experience than the typical first-term Senator.

In a nutshell, I now believe he is perfect.

He brings Virginia further into play. He can help in nearby Pennsylvania and North Carolina as well. And he represents the Hillary wing of the party (conservative Dems) while matching McCain on the military experience and gravitas right down the line. He's also a change-agent, like Obama, one who talks honestly and will connect with rural, white voters. In fact, I'd let him roam the Appalachian trail and bring those voters home.

As far as being a loose-canon or outspoken: anyone note the way Cheney leveraged the position? The VP position is perfect for this type of get-in-your-face voice.

The best part is his ardent, personal stand against the Iraq War. Obama and Webb together would be a powerful and symbolic reminder of what this election must really be about: Bush and his cronies complete and utter failure in Iraq, a misstep that has led to a forced American isolationism and an economy teetering on disaster.

Webb: There is the issue of his being too much of a loose cannon and not on (Obama's) message as VP candidate and VP.

Rendell: Rumor is he has zipper problems and possibly corruption problems that would not withstand national scrutiny.

Strickland: Apparently is not pro-Abortion rights, which should rule him out.

The one I don't hear about, but wish we would is former Florida Senator Graham... beloved former senator and governor, prescient about the war (chair of Intelligence committee with oversight of CIA, etc; voted against and explained why at the time! Hillary would be Prez if she had listened), elder statesman... etc. the only question is age and health.

I honestly think picking a VP based on the notion that he/she puts regions/states into play is childish thinking, at most.

Jack Reed, as I mentioned earlier is worth a look. He blows Jim Webb out of the water in my opinion. His military service is outstanding and his knowledge on foreign affairs seems to be pretty engaging. His economic grasp is stellar, and his vast record of being a straight arrow is precisely what Obama can vibe with.