Given the Obama Rules, Biden Was The Best Choice Politically

Personally, I am not a fan of Joe Biden's policies, especially on foreign policy. But, the most important function of a Vice Presidential pick is to help the Presidential nominee win. Under that standard, given the Obama Rules (no Clinton or Clark), Biden was his best option.

Below, I criticize the rollout of Biden. But I do not criticize the choice from a political standpoint, given Obama's stubborn refusal to pick the person who would have helped him the most politically, Hillary Clinton.

Once the Not Hillary decision was made (and once Obama ran for the hills on McCain's Hanoi Hilton defense to everything), Joe Biden made the most sense. He does not help much, but he helps. And that is better than hurting - as a Bayh, Kaine or Sebelius would have done.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< Saturday Afternoon Open Thread | Obama-Biden Springfield Appearance Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    John King is going over the PA map (5.00 / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:48:16 PM EST
    on CNN right now. Scranton, just as I said.

    You think PA wasn't a concern, but I guarantee you that Dem elected officials in NE PA were concerned.

    BTW, I expect (none / 0) (#3)
    by andgarden on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:54:34 PM EST
    McCain to give up on Michigan and the Northeast. He's going to have to defend Colorado, and I think he might choose Bill Owens.

    Bill Owens?!? (none / 0) (#20)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:04:08 PM EST
    OMG, that is the funniest thing I've read all morning!  

    There is soooooo much dirt on old "Family Values" Billy Bob waiting to see the light of day, it would be a bloodbath.

    Also, Bill Owens wouldn't carry Colorado.  Very few, Republican or Democrat, like him.


    Talk about moving right along! (none / 0) (#21)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:06:11 PM EST
    Off to Google.

    Interesting (none / 0) (#26)
    by andgarden on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:09:00 PM EST
    Last I saw, his numbers were pretty good in CO.

    Besides... (none / 0) (#31)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:26:13 PM EST
    being the worst gov. ever and the whole TABOR thing, there's his personal life.  Think John Edwards plus an extra little added.

    Numbers don't always tell the full story.  You can't quantify real life.


    I really don't know a lot of (none / 0) (#38)
    by Jjc2008 on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:40:16 PM EST
    Coloradoans who liked Owens.  And I am in one of the reddest counties in the state.  Dumb pick even for a republican.

    On the topic of giving up states (none / 0) (#53)
    by standingup on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 03:30:22 PM EST
    I heard someone on CNN last night say that Obama has supposedly given up advertising in some states he was targeting.  It was one of those developments that was overshadowed by other events.  I can't recall all but believe NC was one of them.  

    Obama's electoral strategy (none / 0) (#77)
    by RedSox04 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:00:49 AM EST
    has always been foolish, and he's wasted millions of dollars so far, in advertising in states like NC and AL.  It depended on the idea that somehow Obama could defy all history by getting black turnout to increase dramatically, WITHOUT white turnout increasing proportionately, something that has always happened in Southern states.

    Obama should win this election, but he's doing everything he can to make it a nailbiter, and dragging down the Democratic Party with it.  Obama's a sleeper agent all right, but for the GOP.  Between his post-partisanship unity schtick (read: no culpability for the Bush administration's misdeeds, appeal to Republicans, dismiss lifelong Democrats) and his negative coattails, Obama's the best thing that could ever happen to a post-Bush Republican Party.


    old money (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by pixelpusher on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:53:31 PM EST
    Seems to me that the Dems' "old money" demanded that Obama choose someone over-familiar.  I'll bet the small-money donor stream is dead.

    He makes me feel a bit better (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by nycstray on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:54:36 PM EST
    than the others in that he does have a lot of experience. On the other hand, he also reinforces what a rookie Obama is, imo. And that is just from looking at photos of the 2. Once he starts campaigning, I'm not sure he won't have the same effect as Hillary, aka as why is the obviously more qualified one in the VP slot? I realize it worked out "ok" for Bush, but this just looks so wrong to me. And are we really doing this again?!

    Thank Goodness (none / 0) (#48)
    by Cards In 4 on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:59:11 PM EST
    As a conservative that comes to this site because it  has more sensible people than any of the other left blogs, I can say I'm glad it's Biden and not HRC.  She was the only VP that would have clinched the election for Obama. The nominal votes McCain would get from Republicans voting against Clinton would be swamped by the demographics that supported her. Axelrod and company didn't want to admit that, except for the caucases where the moveon crowd pushed Obama, she kicked his ass.  

    Even with spending most of his life in the Senate, Biden is a lightweight on the issues compared to HRC who has the ability to explain a position in 30 seconds or less.  Biden takes 10 minutes just to get warmed up.

    I disagree with a lot of HRC positions but it's hard to argue she was a better candidate and and the best VP for the ticket.  


    Wes Clark wouldn't (none / 0) (#66)
    by koshembos on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 04:29:48 PM EST
    Raise the question why is Obama number 1. Still he wasn't selected. BTD Obama rules are correct in my view. I would say that Obama rules are "don't select any strong personally, she/he will overshadow me." I think that Obama made a cowardly choice. Also, Biden is not an attack dog of any significance. To demolish McCain you need a Wes Clark and the Democrats have other Weses.

    Clark's Problem (none / 0) (#68)
    by Cards In 4 on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 06:42:14 PM EST
    is that he is not a good campaigner.  He was a disaster on the trail 4 years ago and a lot of Republicans were praying he could somehow win the nomination.  Biden is as big a gaffe machine but at least he's been through a lot of campaigns.  And Clark still wouldn't bring HRC's demos to the polls, he's more Biden in a uniform.

    Again, I'm very happy seeing Biden next to Obama.


    The text message (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Demi Moaned on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:54:55 PM EST
    I am so glad I didn't fall for that gambit of giving them my cell phone number so I would have been the first person within a five-foot radius to know. One diarist at DailyKos said he got the message at 2:40 am CDT. Shades of the 3 am call!

    So much melodrama for what? It was already on TV by that time, though I didn't find out until this morning.

    Kind of surprised at how little I care (5.00 / 11) (#6)
    by hitchhiker on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:56:26 PM EST
    A year ago I was so geeked about this election . . . now it's more like -- meh.

    Someone will win, someone will not.  The republic will survive.  I will get older, if I'm lucky.

    The sense of being witness to forces I have no impact on has been growing and growing; it stops being interesting after awhile when you realize you're just along for the ride.

    More like (5.00 / 4) (#9)
    by BernieO on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:58:31 PM EST
    being taken for a ride

    yes but (none / 0) (#10)
    by pixelpusher on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:58:33 PM EST
    It is interesting to watch them scurry around like little ants.  

    Agreed. (none / 0) (#30)
    by Matt in Chicago on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:26:03 PM EST
    All of the Change rhetoric and build-up to pick Biden.  Don't get me wrong, I think he was the best bet (since he was never going to pick Hillary) but he is still an uninspiring choice.

    I find it hard to believe that Biden will attract any independents or others on the fence.

    OMG - I just realized that they are going to have to keep him on-point during debates!  Gulp!


    Exactly where I fall on this pick - (5.00 / 0) (#11)
    by inclusiveheart on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:59:34 PM EST
    I like the fact that Biden has been able to show visceral contempt for Bush Administration's policies like torture and Iraq.

    I remember a hearing a few years ago on the subject of torture.  He was visibly angry that torture was being used by the Bush Administration.  He lectured whomever was testifying on why we don't do torture and he was spitting mad.  

    I have my problems with the guy, but I do very much appreciate his ability to mirror the disgust that so many of us have felt over the years about the horrors of the Bush Administration.

    On that level I do think he can help Obama - who is just too cool for school some days.  So cool that it is hard to believe he cares.  I take no position one way or another about whether he does care or not - just noting that I don't "feel" his passion the way I have in the past with Biden.

    /signed (none / 0) (#29)
    by phatpay on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:20:04 PM EST
    About sums it up for me as well.

    I really was hoping for HC on the ticket. I am a bit dissapointed and nervous.
    I thought the Country, let alone, the Dems needed to see progression. That is, putting aside real and perceived divisions, slights, etc. and doing what is needed to point this country towards progress.

    Hopefully the similarities to the Cheney (proven political warhorse) choice have similar results for the Dems. Although, I don't think the Dems have machinations in place to steal elections. And, I think, Cheney was the person tasked with vetting prospective VP choices for dubya.


    To Sen. Biden's credit, he voted "nay" (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:00:15 PM EST
    on the FISA revise.

    So, do you think if he had been (none / 0) (#52)
    by JavaCityPal on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 03:28:39 PM EST
    there to tell Obama to think again about his position, he could have gotten the big O to vote Nay, as well?

    Again, I say, today was the day Shel Silverstein wrote about in his book, "The Missing Piece Meets the Big O"


    No. (none / 0) (#74)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 09:51:14 PM EST
    Disagree, Biden is no help, only harm (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Dadler on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:34:19 PM EST
    The readymade McCain ad that you already posted about will run from now til election day and win McCain TONS of undecided voters.  Biden will do Zero to less than.  As unimaginative and uncreative a pick as I've come to expect from Obama.  Utterly nothing.

    That's like calling a horse race.. (none / 0) (#69)
    by wellfleetsurf on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 06:58:45 PM EST
    before the bell goes off.

    Senator Biden (5.00 / 0) (#35)
    by eleanora on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:35:47 PM EST
    is a better choice than many, and at least he's a good, solid Democrat. The speculation about Lugar, Hagel, and traitor Bloomberg made my blood run cold. He'll ease people's minds on experience and foreign policy, despite his drawbacks in other areas.

    I don't understand the "solid Dem" part (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by angie on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 04:20:37 PM EST
    that I keep hearing about Biden -- granted, I don't know everything there is to know about Biden but I know 2 things about him -- 1. he rolled over and allowed the Repub. to dog-pile on Anita Hill at the Thomas hearings and 2. he was an ardent supporter of the bankruptcy overhaul which is a total farce that benefits the credit card companies and hurts consumers. These two issues  are pretty much deal breakers for me -- it is not that I can't but that I do not want to support such a candidate, as I see these actions in direct contradiction to what I believe the Dem. party should stand for.  
    I also believe he initially defended the Bush regime on the torture issue, stating something about how American torture was "better" then Middle Eastern torture (I don't remember the exact quote). If someone can tell me I'm misinformed about Biden, please do.

    If those are deal breakers... (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by wellfleetsurf on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 07:02:07 PM EST
    then you'd find fault with any VP. We can dice these people ten ways to Sunday, HRC, Obama, Biden, you name 'em, but at the end of the day you vote your conscious or stay home.  

    Well, he's not a Republican, (none / 0) (#76)
    by eleanora on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 10:43:33 PM EST
    as I pointed out, which is what I was afraid we were getting. He's been a Democratic Senator longer than I've been alive and been a reliable D vote on many issues that matter to me. I totally agree that his conduct during the Anita Hill hearings is a huge problem, as is the bankruptcy bill and his caving on Bush SC appointees. The problem with a long Senate record is defending your long Senate record, that's why presidents are usually former governors.

    I was just trying to think positive for one thread, and he's not the worst choice Obama could have made.


    What a chicken choice! (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by caramel on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:48:42 PM EST
    I can't believe this... After having fished for left votes for the primary, he goes for the very middle of the road, what a disappointment. At least, it gives us an idea of what's to come...

    Obama, the new game show host (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by Prabhata on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:51:48 PM EST
    The way Obama chose to disclose his VP and sank politics to the level of "curtain number one, curtain number two and curtain number three".  Not only is Obama not ready for prime time, he is not even entertaining.  Biden should have not gone along.  I would have told Obama not to consider me if he was going to play a game.  Personally I think that making people hang and wait for the announcement was abusive.  I'm glad I wasn't interested, but if I had been one of his followers, I'd be pissed.

    in the background on this whole (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by hellothere on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 03:21:19 PM EST
    primary and now general season, one thing that jumps out at me that i see the so called pundits missing or refusing to ackowledge is how much this an old democratic leadership campaign. i see obama as their reprsentative against the clintons. look at the backers, pelosi, dean(who knew), kennedy, kerry, reid?. obama is not really new and about change. it is the sequel to the same old same old down at the local cinema in my view.

    Obama Rules ? He broke he his main rule (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Saul on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 03:22:14 PM EST
    of the new politician when he picked Biden.  So what's the big difference between Hilary and Biden as far as representing the old politics of Washington.  If you were going to break that main rule anyway then why not break it and go with a sure winner?  Does not show good judgment IMO.  You got to think of the whole picture and the party not just you and this click with the Clintons.  Obama is no longer a representative of his initial change theme and has not been for quite some time.

    As I see it (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by JavaCityPal on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 03:36:05 PM EST
    So what's the big difference between Hilary and Biden as far as representing the old politics of Washington.  

    The big difference is that Hillary is accused of it, and Biden is actually guilty of it.


    So how pretzely is the Orange going (5.00 / 2) (#58)
    by kredwyn on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 03:43:33 PM EST
    to get trying to redefine the previous disdain for most things Biden?

    Today in the NY Times (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by abfabdem on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 03:50:46 PM EST
    Bob Herbert actually writes, "Obama was always a long shot to win the White House."  WTF!?!  Then why did the superdelegates pick him?  Mr. Herbert goes on to lament Obama's lackluster campaign and hopes for better from him before it's too late.  Well, IMO Hillary sure had the drive and the smarts to do it and win, but no . . . .! This election has become a complete mystery to me.  I've given up trying to understand what happened.

    The media picked Obama for Dem candidate (none / 0) (#67)
    by bridget on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 05:14:59 PM EST
    and Mr. Herbert was a big part of it on TV and in paper. I think one could say Mr. Herbert is "covering up" his tracks with those kind of statements now.

    btw. the Media Research Center published a Special Report "Obama's Margin of Victory: The Media"

    How BO Could Not have Won the Democratic Nomination Without ABC, CBS and NBC

    a must read - don't miss it


    Misreading the public (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by wasabi on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 04:20:54 PM EST
    I felt that the Democratic leadership really misread the electorate when it comes to this "change" meme.  I don't believe for a minute that the American public believes the myriad problems exacerbated in the last 7 years are due to a lack of bipartisanship in Congress.  That is a Republican talking-point.  What the people want (except for those 27%'ers) is to get rid of the Republicans as the ruling party and give the Democrats a chance.  They just want to know that there is someone capable on the ticket that will make the case for new policies that make sense to them in their lives.  I believe it's been a tragic waste during this cycle to run someone who's first priority at this time is to blur the differences in the parties.

    With the addition of Biden to the ticket, we once again have a fighting Dem (if Obama allows this) who can speak plainly and forcefully to the public in making the case for Democratic party rule.

    With the meme that Biden is "gaff-prone", he should be able to get much more air time than the ususal VP contender.  The press will be recording his every utterance.  I have faith that he will  make the case for the Democrats.  
    While Biden may step on Obama's "change" message due to his insider Washington image, I don't believe that the majority of Americans have the same concept of change as Obama is offering.  The change they seek is a change in the governing party and Biden can lend valuable assistance in bringing along the electorate to embrace this needed change.

    Good points (none / 0) (#73)
    by Rashomon66 on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 09:11:27 PM EST
    And I would add that experience and change are not opposites. Biden can be just the catalyst Obama needs to roll out his agenda - [and if he becomes President get it through the Senate].

    Respectfully disagree--sorry Big TD (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by magnetics on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 04:24:14 PM EST
    Biden is a negative-- brings no state worth having, offends many progressives, has the charisma of cold oatmeal, is certified 'inside the Beltway' goods.

    HRC was the only reasonable choice -- the stupidity of this pick is blinding, and adherence to the 'Obama rules' does not excuse it.

    It's hard to pick a team that could lose the Rethugs this year, but I think the Dems have done it.

    Clinton was never an option (2.25 / 4) (#8)
    by Steve Davis on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:58:22 PM EST
    Bill won't disclose his library donors, which means Hillary could never be properly vetted. Besides, if Hillary supporters really believe, as many of you do, that Obama can't win, the last thing you want is Hillary as the VP choice on a losing ticket. Seriously. How would that help your cause? By having her run in 2012 as the candidate who couldn't even get her supposed 48 million voters to show up? Biden's a great choice. Imagine Biden and Romney in the vice-presidential debate. The self-funded vp choice vs. the guy who is 99th out of 100 in terms of personal wealth in the senate. The guy who just reeks of middle-class, catholic ideals, or the guy that even hard-core--strike that, ESPECIALLY hard-core--evangelists thinks belongs to a lunatic cult.

    Please don't fabricate. How can (5.00 / 4) (#15)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:01:58 PM EST
    a person be "vetted" if the person is not on the list?

    This is false (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:03:11 PM EST
    Please stop repeating this falsehood.

    Sorry, which part of that is false? (none / 0) (#32)
    by Matt in Chicago on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:30:25 PM EST
    everything between (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:41:26 PM EST
    "Bill" and "cult."

    Gotcha! Thanks. (none / 0) (#44)
    by Matt in Chicago on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:47:42 PM EST
    Whew...I glanced at the user name and (none / 0) (#24)
    by Teresa on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:07:32 PM EST
    thought someone had kidnapped our Steve M.

    I am deeply disappointed (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by Steve M on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 04:27:35 PM EST
    This is the first year I am Constitutionally eligible, and I had really hoped to be the pick.

    Seriously you just don't (none / 0) (#41)
    by Jjc2008 on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:42:31 PM EST
    get it.  Most of the Obama and/or Hillary haters (and I do recognize that are not the same group necessarily) simply can't or won't get it.

    "Bill won't disclose his library donors" (none / 0) (#45)
    by Koan on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:47:57 PM EST
    I've heard this as the reason, and it strikes me as plausible, but have yet to see any evidence to back it up.  Do you have a link or anything else?

    FWIW... (none / 0) (#54)
    by NeddieJingo on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 03:30:37 PM EST
    Thanks for that... (none / 0) (#71)
    by wellfleetsurf on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 07:10:33 PM EST

    48 million voters? (none / 0) (#59)
    by standingup on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 03:44:22 PM EST
    I bet you believe there are 57 states too, huh?

    3 am (none / 0) (#7)
    by pixelpusher on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:57:46 PM EST
    I honestly don't think the 3 a.m. thing was intentional on their part.  I think they were blindsided by the media leak and were scurrying to save face with their fan club.

    I think they were merely absolutely incompetent... and had no idea that you couldn't send 3 gazillion text messages all at once.

    The telecommunications system don't work that way.  As anyone who is responsible for time-sensitive mass e-mailings could tell you.

    Perhaps they got confused and (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by inclusiveheart on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:02:54 PM EST
    thought "We the people" were the ones who should receive a 3am call rather than the President.

    Sorry - couldn't resist.

    Still can't figure out who thought that was a good idea.


    Maybe the rates are cheaper (none / 0) (#27)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:10:02 PM EST
    @ 3:00 a.m.?

    His campaign has shown itself to be (5.00 / 2) (#56)
    by JavaCityPal on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 03:33:46 PM EST
    Masters at doing things to insult Hillary at the levels of subtlety they accused her and Bill of using in everything they were able to read between the lines to find.

    Remember all of this about the Obama campaign. When they throw an accusation at their opponent, look and you will see they are doing it themselves.

    The CNN announcement was made at 9:45 PM PDT, so Hawaiian's were learning about it at dinner time. The "leak" was either on purpose (my guess), or the press has missed the opportunity to tell us who is being thrown under the bus today. His camp seems uninterested in explaining their utter failure to keep their promise to the supporters. I did hear there was a request for money in that text, though.


    Here is the text I got: (none / 0) (#60)
    by JustJennifer on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 03:48:01 PM EST
    Barack has chosen Senator Joe Biden to be our VP nominee.  Watch the first Obama-Biden ralley live at 3:00 ET on www-dot-barackobama-dot-com.  Spread the word!

    I got the text at 12:57 AM PST.


    3am also played well in Shanghai, China. (none / 0) (#75)
    by BronxFem on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 10:22:28 PM EST
    Huckabee (none / 0) (#12)
    by pixelpusher on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 01:59:37 PM EST
    So is Huckabee completely out of the running for McCain VP?

    I hope not because a Huckabee (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by inclusiveheart on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:00:15 PM EST
    Biden debate would be extremely entertaining.

    God I hope not (none / 0) (#42)
    by Koan on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:44:48 PM EST
    He'd be the only choice better for us than Mitt The Transparant Phony.

    Paraphrasing Hitchens on Huckabee's views on evolution, Huck's an intelligent ape who's too stupid to realize that's what he is.


    Actually (none / 0) (#16)
    by jtaylorr on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:02:33 PM EST
    according to Nate's calculations Biden is a better choice (politically) than Hillary, primarily because his ability to attract Independents without turning off Democrats.
    Using Rasmussen's favorable/unfavorable ratings, Hillary does better among Democrats (+5 fav/unfav over Biden) but much worse among Independents (-31 fav/unfav under Biden).

    Nate is full of sh*t (5.00 / 4) (#19)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:04:00 PM EST
    Yes, you mentioned that many times (none / 0) (#28)
    by jtaylorr on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:11:45 PM EST
    up until he decided to write a complementary article about Hillary a few days ago...

    By all means, let's listen to Nate rather than the (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by Teresa on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:06:14 PM EST

    Completely meaningless. (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by Landulph on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:07:02 PM EST
    Hillary has been the subject of villification for over 15 years. Most Americans barely have any idea who Biden is. Let the GOP 527s start in on him--or let Biden shoot off his oversized mouth--and you may see those numbers on Indies drop sharply. You're comparing apples and oranges, dude.

    Exactly (none / 0) (#43)
    by Matt in Chicago on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:45:04 PM EST
    Let's see, the RNC is trying to paint Obama as an elitist academic... and now they can add the clip with Biden saying he thinks he has a higher IQ.

    Talk about completing the ticket!

    On the upside, he does do a good job of providing  gravitas which can only help overall.


    He's just making it easier for (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by nycstray on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:07:52 PM EST
    the pretzels ;)

    favorable ratings are dumb and misleading (none / 0) (#36)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:35:52 PM EST
    carter had better favorables than bill.  probably, i'm guessing.

    now.  check job performance.

    this could have been an election about who would do a better job.

    now it's about who the voters like more.

    how very transformative.


    nate calulates biden attracks what? (none / 0) (#49)
    by hellothere on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 03:03:47 PM EST
    not independents! biden shows some passion and thinks better on his feet(most of the time) than others. but he doesn't attack indies.

    What does this say (none / 0) (#33)
    by daryl herbert on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:33:07 PM EST
    about Dems' future election prospects, that the VP choices this time are so weak?

    Except for Sen. Clinton and a handful of moderate/conservative governors like Phil Bredesen, it looks like there isn't a single solid candidate who can challenge McCain in 2012.

    i'm hard pressed to say it's a good choice (none / 0) (#37)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 02:38:57 PM EST
    simply because a far better choice was available.

    but i agree it's better than the other choices that were also available.

    i do now feel a little bit better about how foriegn policy will be conducted during the next 4 to 8 if Obama wins.  

    Yes... (none / 0) (#72)
    by wellfleetsurf on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 07:15:03 PM EST
    And so will most Americans.

    It will be interesting (none / 0) (#55)
    by ccpup on Sat Aug 23, 2008 at 03:30:46 PM EST
    seeing how well Biden sells Obama.  Because, usually, Biden's "strength", if one can call it that, is solely in selling Biden!

    You get two probable narcissists on the same ticket and, oh boy, look out!  

    Biden ain't no shrinking wallflower when it comes to self-promotion and Obama is, after all, All About Barack, so ...

    it will be interesting.

    Life is Competition (none / 0) (#78)
    by theflysays on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:07:15 AM EST
    Competition comes with the territory of life and politics.  Everyone trashes the opposition; I have seen it in countries, in Business, in Sports, in primaries, in Elections and many walks of life.  But when I emigrate or get traded to another country or team, I immerse in their system or their society, I slowly become them, they become my goal, my family my duty. This is another reason that separates humans from animals.  
    FYI: The only two gaffes I have heard Joe Biden say was the he would be proud to serve or compete with John McCain for the Presidency and that Barrack Obama is not experience enough to be the President of the USA.

    FYI: The only two gaffes I have heard Joe Biden say was the he would be proud to serve or compete with John McCain for the Presidency and that Barrack Obama is not experience enough to be the President of the USA.