From an e-mail a friend sent me late last night:
Something about all the Kaine buzz just doesn’t feel right, unless Obama is planning on making the announcement tomorrow.Well, it's tomorrow, and in spite of Kaine having cancelled a scheduled appearance at a Baltimore fundraiser, there is no indication that Obama is about to announce that Kaine or anybody else will be his VP. On the contrary, the New York Times reports that "a decision is believed to be weeks away".
Ever since biographical videos of Kaine began appearing on websites like this one last week, there seems to have been a concerted effort to build up Kaine's brand name and introduce him to a national audience. But is this effort coming from the Kaine folks, or from the Obama folks?
One can understand why Kaine might want to take advantage of his opportunity in the national spotlight. He can't run for re-election in Virgnia, and the General Assembly seems disinclined to do him any favors, so he's unlikely to have anything he can hang his hat on to spruce up his approval ratings by the time he leaves office. This is the best opportunity he'll have, then, to build up his name recognition in preparation for life as a cabinet official, figurehead in the Democratic party, leader of some kind of foundation, television pundit, etc. -- whatever he plans to do with himself once leaving office.
But what's the angle for the Obama folks in attempting to float Kaine's name? Are they being just as obvious and transparent as they were with things like the John Edwards endorsement? Are they honestly unsure about how he'll fare on a national stage and trying to gain information? Or are they deliberately using him -- probably with Kaine's consent -- as some kind of decoy?
The latter seems a little Goldbergian, and the off-the-wall theory I'll present below will seem even more so, but let's give it a try. The theory is that floating Kaine's name in this way might have some utility if Obama intends to pick Kathleen Sebelius -- the notion being that, by using Kaine as her foil, it appears that Obama is making a considered choice rather than some kind of affirmative action hire. From among Obama's short list, Kaine and Sebelius might make for the easiest applies-to-apples comparison. Like Kaine, she got on the Obama bandwagon very early, she's a red-state governor, and she has the same sort of easygoing, folksy, every(wo)man manner. But where there are differences, they tend to work in Sebelius' favor. She has a longer and more accomplished record in elected office, she is considerably more popular in a tougher partisan environment, and she is somewhat more liberal on issues like abortion and the environment, which will please elements of the base.
In other words, the effort may be to define Kathleen Sebelius as "NOT Tim Kaine" -- to hedge against the alternative of her being defined by the media as "NOT Hillary Clinton". As anybody who has read Predictably Irrational can tell you, we human beings make judgments about things almost entirely on the basis of comparison. When compared to Kaine, Sebelius suddenly seems a lot more experienced, and almost the 'safer' choice in a way.
Well, I've almost managed to convince myself. The truth is that I just don't have any kind of gut feeling about this. The one semi-credible rumor I heard was pointed in Kaine's direction. But the whole point may be that people like me are supposed to be hearing rumors like that.
As for Sebelius, she spent her day with T. Boone Pickens, the man who helped underwrite the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and who is now engaged in a high-profile effort (with arguably dubious incentives) to champion wind power. Pickens called her a "fabulous governor". You can't pick any old Democrat off the shelf and expect to hear that sort of bipartisan praise.
From among Obama's four reported short-listers, Sebelius is undoubtedly the riskiest choice. Yes, a small part of that is because of how Hillary Clinton's voters might react to her. But the larger and more banal point is simply that running a black man and a woman on the same ticket says "NEW!! CHANGE!! DIFFERENT!!" in a way that will simply be impossible to put back into the bottle later on.
For just this reason, she may also have the largest upside. But it also means that her rollout would require the most careful handling. I probably guilty of trying to read a signal through the noise when there isn't one, but if Kaine is being used to prop her up, it would make a certain amount of sense.

140 comments
I'll buy into your conspracy theory, if only because Sebelius has always been my top choice for his VP.
I think you nailed it and I can see why the Obama camp would do that. Picking Sebelius would be more of a surprise now and would generate a lot of news(not that anybody else wouldn't)but more exciting in a surprising sense
I cannot think of a single reason to announce Kaine now.
Obama isn't sliding the the polls, it's freakin' July, and it allows McCain to make the reactive move while still allowing him to do it early.
If I were Obama, I'd announce just before the Olympics, and then I'd use some of that five million bucks in ads to introduce the Veep candidate. For both Kaine and Sebelius, it would be a great chance to catch Republicans and mark the Veep candidate as a popular governor in a Republican state before they can get smeared.
It also kills McCain. If he announces during the Olympics nobody's going to notice, and the day after the Olympics the Democratic Convention starts. It turns a period of almost a month into Obama Time.
Even more than it usually is.
I don't think it'll be Kaine. His people are talking way too much.
that seems so crazy that its completely possible. I hope so at least, Sebelius is by far my top choice.
Kaine seems like a poor choice, given his only 2 years of governor and center-right positions on mostly everything. I can't see him doing anything than annoying the base even more.
Yes, I agree, its a cover to pick Sebelius, she has been my first choice for months. I would like her to be announced right before the olympics, I really dont wanna wait till the convention. Also, as other folks say he can use those olympic ads to intro them together.
Obama-Sebelius!!
I'll buy into your conspracy theory, if only because Sebelius has always been my top choice for his VP.
Exactly what I was going to say, and you did it in fewer words too.
Also, the theory makes the Obama campaign look even smarter than I expected.
Good analysis and I'll buy it despite the guesswork. In my view Obama has to choose a woman, not for reasons of affirmative action, but to safeguard against the risk that McCain will be the first to choose a woman. And DailyKos reports that Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska is not interested in taking senator Stevens' place... Maybe she has a better proposition?
I'm still thinking that the wildly popular, famously bi-partisan, successful in business (and rich, hey, you never know) former Governor of Virginia Mark Warner is still the best choice. The current Governor, who knows him well, could also serve nicely as a foil for any efforts vetting him.
One downside to Kaine is that he leaves a Repub Lt Gov to take over the state and start preparing for his re-election. An upside to Warner is that he creates a vacancy as the nominee for the Senate, a job easily filled by one of the two ambitious Democrats ready to run for Gov next year, thereby avoiding a costly and divisive primary battle.
And don't worry about Kaine. If Obama likes him as much as it appears, he'll get something worthwhile to do with the rest of his life
As a huge Sebelius supporter I really hope your theory is true!
I'm not buying into any big conspiracy theories at this point. I don't see Obama announcing till post-Olympics, so any rumors now are just trying to keep his name in the news highlighted with Democratic stars in various parts of the country. If a serious Kaine rumor comes up, it'll get some play in the VA media (see, e.g., the Washington Post) which is just more positive media for Obama and helps his chances in VA.
From now till VP-picks and the convention, VP rumors are the only big positive news that will be reported, so he's going to take advantage of it as much as McCain's trying to. Unfortunately McCain more is just keeping his name in the news, and not as much associating himself with well-liked figures.
This seems pretty plausible. And smart.
personally I am very wary of a woman VP for Obama that is not Hillary Clinton. Maybe Hillary supporters are going to be angry with any non-Hillary pick of any gender, but I feel like they'd be more mad about a female non-Clinton pick because they'd either think of it as failed pandering to women or they'd just say, "wait, you were willing to pick a woman but not Hillary? What is wrong with you?"
Kaine is helping Obama get the "presumptuous" meme from getting too ingrained. It's a nice innocuous way to show the press mob something else shiny to look at. Beyond that, who knows.
Picking Sebelius will BLOW THE DOORS OFF any effort by McCain to shift the race by picking Sarah Palin of Alaska.
If Obama thought he might do that, this would be a preemptive strike.
Despite all the PUMA outrage, it's pretty clear that Sebelius is a skilled politician and will rally women to her candidacy when they hear her speak.
This isn't 1984 anymore.
P.S. Obama is airing a new AD attacking McCain's negative ads: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPPLSHKH0h4
"The Low Road"
"He's practicing the politics of the past. His attacks on Barrack Obama:
"Not True" - MSNBC, "False" FactCheck.com, "Baloney" USA Today Editorial", "The Low Road" NYT, "Baseless", Time Magazine
"John McCain: Same old politics, same failed policies" [cut to picture of McCain and Bush]."
The ad goes on to cite Obama's $1000 middle class tax cut, his support for alternative energy, etc.
It's about time he started doing this. This ad ought to be running in every battleground state where McCain's ads have run pretty soon.
If the reason she is a risky pick is her gender than its an easy call; pick her. Obama can say they discussed her potential for VP with aides who suggested she would be perfect except for her gender (which will happen) at which point he decided to pick her because to not pick her because of her gender would be a waste of talent for a stupid reason.
Sarah Palin is also in the middle of a scandel involving using her power to get people fired so she might not be the best pick. JMC would be stupid to go with anyone except Pawlenty, unless he really isn't interested in winning which seems to be possible given how he is running.
cugel is right for once: it's not 1984 and she's as far from that nutjob Ferraro as it gets. wind power does suck tho.
WOW! This is just devastating news for McCain's big push on "Drill Our Way to Energy Independence." Rasmussen's new poll shows more support for "cracking down on speculators" than for "opening up more oil-fields."
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/
politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_ election/americans_split_on_which_is_more_
important_offshore_drilling_or_crackdown_
on_speculators
A major partisan divide on the issue, like the split in Congress, is evident, however. Sixty-seven percent (67%) of Republicans say lifting the ban is the highest priority, while 59% of Democrats – and 48% of unaffiliated voters -- say controlling speculators is more important. Only 29% of unaffiliateds say lift the ban first.
Basically, the rise in support for drilling is coming from REPUBLICANS, and they all support McCain anyway!
McCain can continue his "Obama opposed drilling" ads from now till the election and it won't make any difference. They only people who are likely to be swayed by these ads are either Republicans or Republican leaning Independents, and they are likely McCain voters anyway!
That means Obama is NOT going to take much of a hit at all by proposing alternative energy plans and cracking down on speculators rather than opening the continential shelf to drilling.
Republicans won't like it, but they virtually all support McCain anyway. And the rest of America is on Obama's side on this issue.
NATE: your saying that Seb is 'the riskiest' is more CW bull. I thought better of you, I really did.
Excellent analysis, Nate. Also, love the idea of an announcement before the olympics. McCain would be left in the dust!!! Aside from Jim Webb, Sebelius is my top choice. She knows exactly how to assuage red state voters. Given enough time, the Hilary crowd is going to fawn over her. Post convention, I expect the dem support of an O/S ticket to approach 90%.
Ann Veneman was the canary to test the atmosphere for Sebelius, who has a known aversion to toxic coal.
Tim Kaine is a huge political asset whether he is the VP or not. Even if he is not tapped for VP, he will stump for Obama... with Latinos, Irish Catholics, Evangelicals, Virginians. Raising Kaine's profile and fame only helps increase his audience, especially as he endorses Obama at the Convention.
Here is the most valuable thing Kaine brings. With his passionate Christianity, personal friendship with Obama and coincidental connections of their mothers sharing a hometown, no one is more useful to help Obama control the narrative about his faith. The 10% of people who think Obama may be Muslim is so obviously depressing his poll numbers in general and specifically on Commander-in-Chief perceptions. Kaine offers a great ally to push back against that and there is no cost to elevating his fame.
I also believe the timing is precautionary against John Edwards fallout. If Edwards crumbles in scandal, Kaine is a new pious soul to move to the vanguard Democratic Party- a dynamic akin to Gore's selection of Lieberman. But I think the Republicans fear an Edwards scandal blowing up in that it is so easy to turn that laser back on John McCain's own shameful record as a husband.
Does anyone think it's at all plausible for Obama to actually pick Hagel? I never hear his name mentioned except as a very long shot, which is understandable. When I heard Obama's remarks on "Meet the Press" I immediately thought of Hagel. THAT would be a huge change, signaling that his administration would truly operate differently. And I'd think it would be attactive to independents. Would the reaction from the left make this choice impossible or are there other considerations I'm not thinking of? Thanks.
Yep. If I had any money, I'd bet on it.
If there is one story that is overblown, it is the "he can't pick any woman other than Hillary" line. A large part of Hillary's supporters supported her because she was a woman. Plus there is absolutely zero evidence of any real Hillary resentment at this point. I'm convinced that all the PUMAs are really just Tad Furtado typing away at his keyboard. Exaggeration, but you get the point.
I've always loved the idea of a Sebelius pick. I really don't get the idea of a Kaine pick. Others are better in so many ways. Bayh or Sebelius is definitely the way to go.
Hagel is my first choice, he is the game changer.
Sebelius and Bayh are tied for second.
Clinton is third, but only third as she and Bill ("is") Clinton would energizethe right.
As a McCain supporter I hope Obama picks Kathleen Sebelius, she adds nothing to the ticket geographically, will anger Hilary Clinton supporters, and isn't well known enough to generate any short term buzz.
Also, Kathleen Sebelius just might continue to widen that male-female gap. Many states show a 20%+ male-female gap in polling, with females siding for Obama and males for McCain. Kathleen Sebelius would alienate more working class white males that are already overwhelmingly McCain.
The Democratic base would riot if Hagel were the VP, but they'll be largely fine with him running the State Department or the Pentagon, and I suspect he'll almost surely end up doing one or the other.
"Does anyone think it's at all plausible for Obama to actually pick Hagel? "
Short answer: No.
They will just rehash every domestic issue Hagel ever took a stand on. Abortion alone could stop the idea. Obama would never alienate his feminist base. If Hagel became instantly pro-choice, he'd be mocked as the most insincere flip flopper of all time.
Hagel has a very good shot at SecDef but VP...I just don't see it.
I love Obama, but my wife believes sexism stopped Hillary. There are a huge number of 40-60 year old woamn who are convinced they would all be CEO if it were not for sexism, they are almost all wrong, but they are so invested in it that they cannot leave it behind. This 4+% of the electorate are the true PUMAs. Almost all come to Obama for Sebelius.
Hagel is a conservative Republican who happens to have a sane attitude about the war, which makes him stand out from his fellow Imbeciles like a sore thumb.
But, he's totally unacceptable to much of Obama's base in the party. Progressives will be VERY unhappy if he picks a Republican. Democratic Politicians will be VERY unhappy too.
There's a PARTY LOYALTY requirement in politics that says you just don't do things like that, especially at the national level. They all serve for years and years through boring committee meetings, dreaming of the day when they get the nod to be VP!
And then after eight years they're the inside track to the grand prize!
To see someone who's not even in the party get it is like drinking bitter waters.
Obama can post Hagel to his administration in a cabinet position if he wants one, but NOT as VP.
It might play well among Independents, but not so well among Democratic constituencies. I for one would not be pleased at all, and I'm by no means alone.
It would be a slap in the face at the worst possible time, just when the liberal base was starting to get over Obama's betrayal on FISA.
Has anybody ever met a Hillary supporter that dislikes the idea of another woman on the ticket?
My wife was 100% behind Hillary and she loves Sebelius. I know thats anecdotal. But I just don't understand the mindset of anybody that would say "I'm OK with a woman as long as its one specific woman and nobody else". Thats a tough sell. Its also pretty damn sexist when you think about it.
Let me point out what happened the last time a president and VP were different parties.
The president was assassinated and the VP was impeached.
It sounds good in theory but I don't think it would work. You need to make sure that the President and Vice President agree on at least 95% of the agenda. Otherwise there is just to great a temptation for wackos on the other side to hold an election with a bullet.
""Otherwise there is just to great a temptation for wackos on the other side to hold an election with a bullet.""
That's also one of my main objections to Hillary being VP (and why Obama would lose my vote if she was). A lot of her supporters burn with hatred of Obama. That's a powder keg.
Jeffrey: I agree with you. But to give you the PUMA perspective -- to the extent this can be sanely explained:
Hillary was the most experienced and she was "robbed" of her rightful coronation. .. I mean nomination, by a MALE conspiracy in the media to belittle her and her candidacy and make her cry, aided and abetted (in some mysterious fashion) by Obama's campaign.
Every Woman supposedly felt the outrage over this treatment of Hillary, who many middle-aged women had grown to identify strongly with.
It reminded them of their own battles with sexism, especially successful business women ("Hill-raisers") and feminists of all stripes.
Then to see another "less qualified" woman get the VP slot instead of Hillary, "who got the most votes" (if you don't count caucus states but whatever) is a double-insult.
About the only thing that can mollify these people is if Hillary herself says she didn't want the job.
And it's not at all clear that she DOES want the job of being second fiddle to Obama for the next 8 years.
She has her own name recognition, policies, and priorities and standing in the party and she doesn't need to be a tag-end of an Obama administration.
Bill seems to have other ideas though. He seems to want back in the White House pretty badly for some reason. Fond memories of "fun" in the Oval Office? Who knows?
Proposed changes in taxes after 2008 General election:
CAPITAL GAINS TAX
MCCAIN
0% on home sales up to $500,000 per home (couples) McCain does not
propose any change in existing home sales income tax.
OBAMA
28% on profit from ALL home sales
How does this affect you? If you sell your home and make a profit, you will
pay 28% of your gain on taxes. If you are heading toward retirement and
would like to down-size your home or move into a retirement community, 28%
of the money you make from your home will go to taxes. This proposal will
adversely affect the elderly who are counting on the income from their homes
as part of their retirement income.
DIVIDEND TAX
MCCAIN 15% (no change)
OBAMA 39.6%
How will this affect you? If you have any money invested in stock market,
IRA, mutual funds, college funds, life insurance, retirement accounts, or
anything that pays or reinvests dividends, you will now be paying nearly 40%
of the money earned on taxes if Obama becomes president. The experts predict
that 'higher tax rates on dividends and capital gains would crash the stock
market yet do absolutely nothing to cut the deficit.
INCOME TAX
MCCAIN (no changes)
Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K -tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $31,250
OBAMA (reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)
Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 125K - tax $38,750
Under Obama your taxes will more than double! How does this affect you? No
explanation needed. This is pretty straight forward.
INHERITANCE TAX
MCCAIN 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax)
OBAMA - Restore the inheritance tax. How does this affect you? Many families
have lost businesses, farms and ranches, and homes that have been in their
families for generations because they could not afford the inheritance tax.
Those willing their assets to loved ones will not only lose them to these
taxes.
NEW TAXES BEING PROPOSED BY OBAMA
* New government taxes proposed on homes that are more than
2400 square feet
* New gasoline taxes (as if gas weren't high enough already)
* New taxes on natural resources consumption (heating gas, water,
electricity)
* New taxes on retirement accounts and last but not least....
* New taxes to pay for socialized medicine so we can receive the same level
of medical care as other third-world countries!!!
""Bill seems to have other ideas though. He seems to want back in the White House pretty badly for some reason.""
I'm convinced that, if not for Bill's influence, Hillary Clinton would have dropped out of the race once it was clear that it wasn't going to happen for her. The night of the Indiana and North Carolina primaries, if not sooner.
I blame Bill for the polarization...the poisonous atmosphere, the PUMA movement, the racism...the whole package...about ten times more than I fault Hillary.
I would pick Bayh. Very popular in his home swing state. He'd put the squishy middle-of-the-road-centrist idiots at ease. He's been vetted, and comes from a longtime talented political family. Very successful as governor and senator. He's a perfect fit. If he didn't exist, we be trying to invent him. And we don't need some risky pick (like relatively unknowns in Kaine, Sebelius, etc), with an African-American already on the ticket.
Tyrone...even if that's true I don't care.
That America cut taxes while waging war is a travesty.
I'd prefer to pay my share of it now rather than leaving it all to future generations.
Sarah Palin is, along with Sen Stevens and Rep Young and the polar ice, is melting away into nothing.
Her value is meaningless, and does not need to be defended against by choosing Sibelius. Sibelius might be chosen for other reasons, but not because of anything to do with Palin.
Sebelius as Not-Kaine? Hmm...
Much of the current Kaine-hype is based on that meeting he and Obama had 2 days ago. So the theory would be that they decided to form a ticket. And since the outstanding quality of Obama´s campaingn is its organization, I would assume that they would announce their ticket at the height of media interest.
If they decided to delay their announcement they would risk an uncoordinated leak, or developments that would make other VP candidates look better, and a derailment of the narrative.
So in short, yes, they probably would announce their ticket very soon if they had decided on it.
But if there is no Obama/Kaine ticket one has to guess what else they talked about. Adding my own cup of guessing, Obama probably said he would not go with Kaine, but would try to enhance his national standing. There is a problem for Kaine since he probably cannot run against Webb or Warner, so he would have to wait until Warner would leave for a national job (something about him screams president in 2016/2020 - or even 2012 if Obama loses). Kaine would be 6 years (2010-2016) without a high-profile position if he cannot reach a national slot.
In addition, Obama might feel it necessery to reward Kaine´s early endorsement and friendship. I also remember the MSNBC shortlist of 15 names that included 5 top-picks (Sebelius, Kaine, Warner, Daschle, Nunn) and 10 "also-rans" which I thought to be crowded with people who simply "deserved to be mentioned", like Clinton, or Edwards - well, I thought that list, circulated by Obama´s VP-vetting-team, was a friendly gesture to all the people he would not take - so I could imagine the same thing going on with Kaine, too.
I have found the lack of hype surrounding Sebelius interesting. She has never really been "the-pick-of-the-week", like Kaine this week, and Bayh last week, and Webb for so many weeks. But she makes a lot of sense if one spends a second thought about it. It´s so typical of her to meet with Boone Pickens because she exploits the fractures of the Republican camp, that´s "working across the aisle" and "finding common ground" as Obama promises.
The difference between her and Kaine on abortion are notable. But I am not sure if there aren´t other, easier ways to explain the Kaine-hype. Still, I have posted here yesterday how I thought that the floating of Ann Veneman (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/12059.html) was a test to determine the strength of the remaining Hillary-fans. That also assumes that the decision is already made and then you start to see all things in a certain way.
But the larger and more banal point is simply that running a black man and a woman on the same ticket says "NEW!! CHANGE!! DIFFERENT!!" in a way that will simply be impossible to put back into the bottle later on.
We Virginia Dems pulled this one off in 1985, when we ran Jerry Baliles (white male) for Gov, Doug Wilder (black male) for Lt Gov, and Mary Sue Terry (white woman) for AG.
All three won.
And for an encore, Wilder won the governorship with Terry on the ticket in 1989.
If Virginia could deal with a black man and a white woman on the same ticket in 1985, I think America as a whole is ready for it in 2008.
I have to admit I have trouble understanding the thinking of supposed "feminists" who take the attitude of, "Well, if he doesn't choose Hillary, he'd BETTER NOT choose another woman!" So only Hillary can break that "glass ceiling"? (Well, okay, the "glass ceiling" of a woman VP nominee has already been broken, but another one would be broken if a ticket that includes a woman wins...)
Also, for those who supported Hillary at least in part because they wanted to see a woman President, do they not realize that if Obama and a woman VP win, and he is re-elected, his (female) VP would have the inside track to the 2016 nomination?
Okay, got it on Hagel. Not a good idea, apparently. For what it's worth, I think Hillary would be the worst possible VP choice (I'm a mom of 3, formerly a corp. ladder climber). I always liked the Clintons & defended them endlessly in the '90s but the primaries changed my mind. The focus would be entirely on them, not Obama (which is what they'd prefer). It has such a dysfunctional, undermining feel.
Please don't feed the Tyroll.
Anyhow, I like that Sebelius looks older than Hillary. I know that's stupid, but I don't think the PUMA logic fits here because of that. Arguing that Sebelius isn't qualified enough so some (apparently) younger woman gets the job...that's a nono. Now, if Sebelius looked 40....
I have yet to hear one actual Democrat say that they'll support Obama if he picks a man but not if he picks a woman other than Clinton. Certainly it will piss off Bill and probably also Hillary (although it's not clear to me what her motives are).
I think there are plenty of good reasons Obama can think of for taking Sebelius over Hillary. Personally, I think that when somebody says "Could you take a look at this Mister President" only one hand will reach for the papers is good enough for me. We've never had two Mister Presidents in the White House before, and I don't see a reason to start now.
"INHERITANCE TAX
MCCAIN 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax)
OBAMA - Restore the inheritance tax. How does this affect you? Many families
have lost businesses, farms and ranches, and homes that have been in their
families for generations because they could not afford the inheritance tax.
Those willing their assets to loved ones will not only lose them to these
taxes."
Normally, I wouldn't waste my breath bothering to contradict an idiot right-wing troll with the facts.
However, I happen to practice law in this area so I know a little about it.
This is all B.S. Bush did NOT "repeal" the estate tax. Congress couldn't afford a permanent repeal since it would cost the Treasury TRILLIONS of Dollars, so they merely increased the exemption amounts from $1 million in graduated steps to $3.5 million in 2009.
Then in 2010 there's NO tax. But, in 2011 the entire law expires, because it would otherwise blow a GAPING hole in the budget and Congress couldn't fund it back in 2001 when they passed the Bush tax act.
So, unless Congress does something (which they will) the Estate tax exemption will go back to $1 million in 2011. If you have NET assets (after subtracting what you paid for them), over $1 million you would be subject to some tax.
However, Congress will pass a bill between now and then which will raise the exemption from taxation to between $2-$3 million most likely.
That means than unless you die (single) having assets of OVER $2 or $3 million (after subtracting what you paid for your assets) YOUR FAMILY WILL PAY NO TAX!
This is a typical right-wing Swindle. About 1% of the richest Americans pay the vast majority of the Estate Tax. And it's been that way for 80 years.
What happened? A small group of Billionaires got together and started lobbying Republicans to back "repeal" of the Estate Tax and use various swindles to convince ordinary Americans that this was a burning issue to THEM.
It's not and can easily be handled by the next Congress so that no middle-class American will ever pay this tax.
Of course I don't expect Right-wing trolls to stop spewing their garbage just because it's all lies, so carry on!
BTW: If you are MARRIED, then you and your spouse EACH Get an exemption so you can shield up to TWICE the exemption, say $4 to $6 million (using tax loophole Trusts we Estate Planners know about).
Got enough assets to worry about this? Hire a lawyer!
Tyrone -- that email you posted about Obama and taxes has been debunked by both Snopes and factcheck.org
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/taxes.asp
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/would_obama_tax_my_profits_if_i.html
Nate - your theory rings true for me. In fact, if really is Obama's strategy, it did in fact work on me over the last couple days.
I was lukewarm to both Kaine and Sebelius. Then came the (possible) Kaine head fake. It forced me to really picture Kaine as VP and I didn't like the picture. THEN ... when I began to think of Sebelius as "not Kaine", she started looking damned good.
I didn't even read the rest of the Troll's argument, so I missed the rest of the lies.
Needless to say, the rest of his tax arguments are as baseless as his position on the Estate tax. Retirement accounts are NOT facing a tax increase for instance because they're to be exempted.
Typical lying right-winger.
yep ... reading the rest of the comments, Sebelius would be a great pre-emptive move against Palin.
As for the diehard PUMAs (minus the Republican trolls among them) the open question is whether they're for Hillary because she's a woman, or whether they're for the idea of a woman because they're for Hillary and she happens to be one. If the former, Sebelius is at least as good a choice from a feminist point of view since she didn't have any male former presidents helping her get to the point of being in a position to be considered (and breathing down her neck if she's chosen).
Sebelius is the smart choice.
Hagel is the crazy, gutsy choice.
Kaine is just a bad choice.
'
Well, I suppose if this is the reason for it, that'd be fine with me, as I'd vastly prefer Sebelius to Kaine. With that said, I'm not sure this amount of trickery is needed... I think most of us can recognize that Sebelius is the superior pick, and those that are not following this as closely won't know either of them and would both require introduction anyway.
It's nuts to think Kaine is enthusiastically acting as a decoy. He wants the job and apparently doesn't know how to shut up about it. Obama is just crazy enough to pick Sebelius -- it's very plausible that he would. But in the end, as he says himself, he's pragmatic more than idealistic. There are too many problems with Sebelius. At this point I believe Kaine has talked himself out of the job and that it'll go to Bayh.
Other than outright sexism in general (which shouldn't be placated any more than racism) and PUMA-esque resentment in particular (which also shouldn't be placated), what are Sebelius' problems, exactly?
Beyond the SOTU address, she is a very solid but unexceptional speaker who is uncomfortable personalizing herself with the audience, and is likely to be as good as McCain or any of his top VP prospects on the trail. She is strong and sharp on interview shows, which makes me think she would also be a good debater, though I haven't found any footage. She is reasonably charismatic and warm in interviews. Her track record suggests a tremendous level of managerial ability.
I have to think that if she were a man and therefore Clinton was not in the picture, she would win the race against the profiles of the other VPs pretty handily. The more I think about this, the more it bothers me. Sebelius will make it take longer to shore up the base, but I think she could mend bridges with any upset feminists by November. The Clinton supporters I have talked to have no idea who she is or what her ability level is.
I have always believed that Obama wants to take Sebelius, and that he is now weighing whether there are too many disadvantages against the ultra-safe Bayh. Although knowing me, that means Kaine will be the VP pick tomorrow.
agree, i see no downside to sebelius but hillary. in fact, when hill gets even less enthused it will make the arty unite even more behind obama.
sebelius, genius pick.
When the Kaine buzz started to spike a couple days ago I turned to some friends and said, "well, it's not Kaine". They were astonished and said "how do you know?!"
Because it's never the guy(gal) who gets all the sudden buzz right before an announcement is pending - it's a total head fake.
I'd love it if it were Sebelius, but I'm also warming to the idea of Bayh. But as someone else noted....this Kaine buzz got me imagining that it was him, and I suddenly realized I was not pleased with the idea.
""I have always believed that Obama wants to take Sebelius""
I have too. If the only concern were simply who he wants as his partner, and political, demographic, and gender concerns be damned, I think he'd have had a VP list of one all along.
As for the conspiracy theory, I think it was certainly down to Bayh/Biden/Kaine/Sebelius to start the week. I think that Biden is not really what Obama needs, especially after last week's trip, and that Kaine has talked himself out of the job. (Or maybe that's just my opinion - there is something about him that really irritates me.) I'm sure the Obama campaign can't be too displeased with the way things have worked out. Bayh and Sebelius are both great choices. I would be quite happy with Bayh, and Sebelius would be well suited to a cabinet post.
jakam speaks of Hagel "running the State Department or the Pentagon, and I suspect he'll almost surely end up doing one or the other."
That's interesting to me, because I've only heard his name in connection with SecDef, and I think he would be much much more valuable in State, really perfect (better than Biden for sure) for the world situation right now. Does anyone else think this is a possibility or something that has been widely contemplated?
Test
The rational for picking Sebelius is OHIO. Sebelius is the daughter of the former Governor of OHIO- Jack Gilligan- she has roots in OHIO. Her father in law is a former Republican Congressman from Kansas. Sebelius is deliver Kansas to Obama but can give Obama - Ohio and Missouri.
The rational for picking Kaine is Virginia- (a must win battleground state for Obama assuming he loses MI but picks up CO,IA,NM,and NV. Because Kaine speaks fluent in Spanish- He can help in CO,NM,and NV.
The rational for picking Bayh is appealing to Clinton Supporters and winning Indiana and OHIO.
OBAMA's 270 ev strategy is winning all of the Kerry/Gore states plus Virginia= 277 ev. Obama is in danger of losing MI and NH assuming (Romney is McCain's VP runningmate. 256 ev. Obama needs to win Colorado and Nevada- two Southwestern states with strong Hispanic populations to reach the 270ev. (Pennsylyvania is safely in the Obama collumn.)
I know I shouldn't feed the troll, so I apologize in advance, but,
"MCCAIN (no changes)
Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K -tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $31,250
OBAMA (reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)
Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 125K - tax $38,750
Under Obama your taxes will more than double! How does this affect you? No
explanation needed."
I'm sorry, but in none of the tax comparisons shown here is the "Obama" number "more than double!" (or even exactly double) the "McCain" number. Sweet Jesus, few things bother me more than blatantly wrong arithmetic!
I have to confess that I don't get all of the enthusiasm about Sebelius. Granted, the only time I've really seen her was on the response to the SOTU, but it was an entirely unremarkable, even dull, speech. She is an unknown, in a state that is far out of reach; she does not bring foreign policy "creds" to the ticket, etc. (And appearing with the odious T. Boone Pickens does nothing for me as well ...)
Could someone explain for me? Is it really Ohio? I have a very hard time imagining that her father's having been a one-term governor in the early 1970s is going to deliver any votes there.
Granted, not many of the possible picks inspire me very much (Biden, Nunn, Bayh? ugh), and Obama's VP pick has nothing to do with inspiring people like me who were always going to be voting for him anyway. But even in terms of pure pragmatism, I don't get why Sebelius is the best pick.
-- Stu
I hope he doesn't choose Sebelius. Tim Kaine is the best person for the job, except John Edwards of course.
tomthress, it isn't just bad arithmetic, the figures that the troll gives are almost entirely false. See the factcheck.org link that Laura in WA put up above.
-- Stu
"tomthress, it isn't just bad arithmetic, the figures that the troll gives are almost entirely false. See the factcheck.org link that Laura in WA put up above."
sdf,
Oh, I have no doubt about that, too. I just really have a pet peeve about people who think that $38,000 is "more than double!" $31,000.
@ Stu:
If no VP pick is overwhelmingly and convincingly more likely to deliver a demographic than any other (which at the end of the day I think is more or less the case), then the choice comes down to whom Obama himself would feel most comfortable with in the position. That alone makes her the best pick.
Um, as much fun as this speculation is, and as brilliant as the Obama camp would be for trying it, aren't we really placing way too much value on high-information voters? The masses out there will likely not pay attention to any fake buzz or factor it into their decision-making, despite the brilliance of the strategy (which I also started to believe last night with the blatantness of the press "leakage").
I think the target "masses out there" are the PUMAs who might be faked into supporting a Sebelius.
It's kind of akin to the teenage boy who comes home to his parents and announces that he just killed somebody, and after they get into a froth of upset, he tells them he just kidding...he's only gay.
It's the fakeout to take the edge off.
Sebelius is one of the most popular governors in the country, in spite of being a Dem in a deep red state (see SUSA governor approval ratings). I came to like her when she went off on the Bush administration for comandeering all of their national guard troops and equipment so much so that it limited her state's ability to properly respond to the tornados that hit the state a couple years back.
Off the topic a bit, but as a fiscal conservative, I am appalled at so called "conservatives" that argue for "no new taxes" but are unwilling to cut spending. Our $9 trillion dollar deficit equals $30,000 for each man, woman and child in this country. Unfortunately, the only places one can make cuts that will have any significant consequence are the military and social security and medicare. Everything else is so insignificant in the grand scheme of things. John McCain was right about one thing, comparing federal spending to drunken sailors is an insult to drunken sailors. I'd imagine slashing the miliary wouldn't go over well in some circles nor would cutting social security benefits, so there is only one choice left, raise revenue to match spending. Hey, if we actually paid for our military with real money, seems that would be a much better way to show we support our troops than buying one of the Made in China yellow ribbon car magnets.
That tax cut post is crap anyway. Obama's plan is only to repeal the Bush cuts for those over 250,000.
For others it would go down further.
Yes, this high volume ramp-up to a Kaine selection is not Obama style. So if Sebelius is selected it makes sense that way.
I don't know how a woman that is not Hilary plays with the petulant Clintonista, but it won't take long to find out.
Talk about change. A black man/woman ticket, glass ceilings shattering everywhere.
Tyrone
Very impressive analysis of the proposed tax code of Obama and McCain...except that your numbers are completely wrong. I'm guessing the source was a republican campaign site??
As has been somewhat pointed out above, we know that in many ways Obama did a favor for Dodd by putting him on the shortlist, when we know that of course he was never seriously considered. Why couldn't a gambit to help raise the national profile of Kaine be something of the same sort. Not a serious move, but allowing rumors in order to give him more national exposure.
Obama has run a very tight media ship, so if Kaine's people are leaking, it's either with permission, or it's the kind of thing that would count against him in the Veepstakes.
Hope you don't mind my a point-by-point response...
"The only time I've really seen her was on the response to the SOTU, but it was an entirely unremarkable, even dull, speech."
You can see her on a TV interview on youtube now. Good to watch all of them in different settings to get a feel. I thought she compared favorably during my viewing to Bayh (who did well, but did not quite get to the best point sometimes) and Biden (who killed a foreign policy question, then followed it right up with a major gaffe). She needs a little time getting used to the teleprompter, sure, but she is certainly no more robotic than Bayh or Warner or Pawlenty or Portman.
"She is an unknown, in a state that is far out of reach"
Somewhat known in Missouri and Colorado, I think. Not clear to me that Bayh or Kaine will take their states over the top either. And I don't think Joe Average even knows who Biden is right now. Don't forget the flipside issue, that Bayh absolutely costs us a senate seat in IN. Sebelius is term-limited and has no prospect of winning a senate race.
"she does not bring foreign policy "creds" to the ticket"
If you subscribe to the "counterbalance" strategy, Bayh is your man. I think Obama cleared the bar last week on foreign policy, and the economy will be the top issue in the fall. Sebelius was a turnaround artist in KS.
"Could someone explain for me?"
I think she has a tremendous amount of raw ability and is exceptionally savvy. I think she has an incredibly good character. I basically got on Obama's bandwagon before the 2006 elections for the same reasons after watching several interviews with all of the leading candidates. Also, watching the two of them on stage, the body language is extremely friendly and positive.
Maybe I've gone completely over the top here, but this is my honest feeling as a longtime Obama backer who has been quietly scrutinizing all of the candidates since February...
What do people think about Condi Rice for McCain?
sdf:
As someone who lives in the DC area and as someone who is from Kansas, I can talk a little about both Kaine and Sebelius.
Kaine is a decent Gov.. but right now, isn't the most popular governor in the world.
Sebelius is a two-term Gov, elected by HUGE margins in one of the reddest of red states.
I like Kaine but there are issues there, like can he REALLY deliver VA?
Mark Warner being on the ticket for Senator and with Webb talking BHO up in the rural part of VA, I believe may do more to help get a win than Kaine as VP.
nkpolitics points of Kaine helping in the SW is well taken, but I also think having gov Richardson stumping there will help a lot.
That brings me to Kathleen.
Yes, her SOTU speech was far from electric... but the substance was very much what BHO likes. About putting the OLD POLITICS behind us and forging ahead... working across party lines, which she has proven to be quite effective.
KS has also done interesting things in KS...
An energy company wanted to build a coal plant-- she basically told them to go f*ck a rat... that coal was dirty, even "clean" coal and she wanted her state to stay clean.
He being with T Boon also makes sense-- Kansas would be perfect for his plan of wind power-- since the state is flatter than a pancake and has a huge nat gas reserve.
And KS is a woman. 51% of the US is made up of women. Add up every black and hispanic in this country and that still can't come close to the # of women.
And Nate, that's for your original post.
When I saw all the Kaine hoopla, my first thought was, this is a head fake and it'll leave Sebelius with the ball and an open lane to the basket. [ok, I'm from Kansas. I HAD to make a basketball reference at some point.]
Yes, the tax cut post is nonsense that Tyrone got from viral email:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/taxes.asp
It is false and refuted there.
What evidence is there really that a large scale number of PUMAs even exist?
I remember the big protest they planned at the DNC rules meeting. I used to live in DC. I know DC protests. I've seen hundreds of thousands of people on the mall on several occasions. This time, about 400 people showed up.
I'm convinced the PUMA is just a Republican halloween costume. Its always better to get somebody else to take the blame for an attack. Who better than the Democrats? Pretend to be a Hillary supporter and say you hate Obama. Then real Republicans can say "Look half his party hates him too".
I know plenty of people that supported Hillary in the primaries and not one single one of them is a PUMA.
His numbers among Democrats are no worse than Kerry, Gore or anyone else. It should be a given that any candidate will lose at least 10% of his party.
Even if disgruntled Hillary supporters are out there, we're supposed believe they'd vote for Obama/Kaine but not Obama/Sebelius because feminists aren't interested in any woman breaking the glass ceiling, it has to be the right woman.
Gimme a break!!
Sebelius might be the right candidate. She might not be. I wasn't on the vetting team and obviously they have access to far more info than we do. I just think this decision should be made separately from any PUMA related calculation.
Jeffrey...you're probably right.
All the more reason not to throw Sebelius aside because of the "PUMA"s.
I think Obama will win regardless of who his VP is, within reason.
So why not go for the BIG THING---the first ever female Vice President? But NOT Shrillary. Kathleen Sebelius is a great choice. We are decades past the time a woman should be VP or President in the supposed greatest country. Of course women are the majority of the population.
So Sebelius isn't as great a speech deliverer as Obama. Nobody prominent is. That's what speech coaches are for. An easy fix.
As Obams's first four year term winds down, Sebelius should decide if she wants to run for President in 2016 as a 68 year old. If not, Obama could set a younger Democrat up for running in 2016 by replacing Sebelius with that person as VP in 2012.
Nate, you are good at reading tea leaves. Kaine has been so open and forthright in talking about the Veep selection that I would be surprised if he was picked. Obama probably told Kaine he was going in a different direction but would like to show him some support and get him some publicity. Its a thank you for his early support when Obama was unknown. We could be off base but I agree with your assessment.
I always felt Obama wanted Sebelius. If he had his choice he'd probabley take Sebelius. If the Hillary crowd would accept her, she could be a big bonus. She has 3 major strong points as I see it:
1. CHANGE - That would be the ultimate change ticket.
2. Values - If Barack has a problem as not being "One of us", a soft spoken, grey haired, mother from Kansas is as American as apple pie.
3. Bi-partisan - A democrat from a very red state.
I still believe Biden would be his best. But Sebelius does fit the mold perfectly. If she could bring the women over 40 back into the fold for Barack as sort of a Hillary replacement, she could be gold. They may resist her at first, but they'd come around.
My guess is that this is payback for the MCain campaign's antics last week with Kaine, a friend who'll be needing a job in the not too distant future, sucking up as much additional coverage as he reasonably can for the Democrats for as long as the media is willing to play. I won't be totally surprised if Obama announces his choice before he arrives at the convention, but he really has nothing to gain at this point by not waiting until then.
A comment on Hagel,
I love the guy. I know the netroots and pro choice crowd would have a seizure, but he is the most honest politician I have ever heard, the guy really wants whats best for the country. After the dishonesty of the last eight years of Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld, Hagel would be a welcome change as SecDef.
I really do hope it's Sebelious. I don't have an intellectual reason - I just think she'd be a great fit for the job. You're right about the mega change with a woman VP and an AA Pres. but I think Hillary has already cleared a path.
BTW, I think in an Obama administration, Hillary could be the next Supreme Court justice.
Nate,
I love your site, but you're overanalyzing this point. There's NO upside to Obama announcing his VP pick until close to the convention, and in a best case scenario for Democrats, McCain will make his pick first.
Also, it's exceedingly likely that the Obama campaign has not decided on a choice and won't even decide until just before the choice is announced.
Granted, IF Kaine can deliver Virginia, he'd be a good choice, but why in the world would choosing a female VP cost Obama votes of women? It's ludicrous. Sure, some diehard Hillary supporters might be ticked off -- for a few minutes or a few days -- and then they'll realize that they have a chance to elect a moderate, politically adept, 60 year old woman to the second highest office in the land. Undecided, older, and moderate women would FLOCK to such a ticket in unprecedented numbers.
Indeed, I think that one of the few ways that Obama can lose is if McCain chooses a woman for VP and Obama does not . .. .
nkpolitics said "The rational for picking Sebelius is OHIO. Sebelius is the daughter of the former Governor of OHIO- Jack Gilligan- she has roots in OHIO."
nkpolitics,
Please don't feel that I am ragging on you, but that is as bad as our right-wing guests who keep asserting that Romney would deliver MI to McCain.
Sebelius will not have any positive impact in OH beyond the impact she would have in other states. A VP candidate having a father who was a former governor of a state will not make many people in that state (either MI or OH) change their minds about who to vote for at the top of the ticket.
VP candidates often have trouble delivering their home states in the election, so to suggest that someone will have an impact in a state where they once had roots has no credence.
Obama has a higher likelihood of winning OH than McCain has of winning MI, and that will not be affected significantly by either candidate's VP choice.
Wow, i lliked the Sebelius idea, but Kaine is kicking butt on PBS right now. Very good advocate for Barack. Not arrogant.
Still like the woamn pick better, but this is not a bad pick.
Here's some video of Sebelius to see what you guys think:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nHp90Z2NJk
Haha, I'm glad someone else thinks he's using Kaine as a decoy (albeit from a Schweitzer supporter). :) I agree, but I think he's going to settle on Wesley Clark. Another reason for the delay could be to put as much distance between his selection and the "McCain shot down/qualified to be president" "scandal." But I think there's a serious problem in that there are no truly inspirational vice presidential candidates. Sebelius has a good record, but when I've seen her speak (and I haven't seen her speak that much) she's been very flat and boring. I think Wesley Clark is as close as you can get to inspiring via his truly inspirational military record. I recently posted on The Fix as to why Clark should be chosen. Cillizza chose my response as one of many to feature in his post today. Here is my argument for choosing Wesley Clark as VP:
Obama will pick Wesley Clark. The only criticism that McCain seems to make of Obama that actually sticks in the media is criticism on the security front. Wesley Clark, four star general and Supreme Allied Commander during the Balkan war takes away this line of attack before he even opens his mouth. Aside from that, he's popular in the south, is well respected elsewhere for his service, and commanded a war without a single American casualty (an important distinction given the Iraq mess). He fits very nicely with Obama's description of what he wants in a VP. They fall in the same part of the political spectrum, Clark is not a Washington insider, and he's certainly not going to be afraid to tell Obama what he thinks. He compliments obama in that his area of expertise is one that Obama lacks a lot of experience in, and his advice would be essential seeing that Iraq and Afghanistan are delt with properly in over the next four years. He's also not afraid to be the attack dog the VP needs to be, and he was a Clinton supporter as well, which extends an olive branch to that faction of the party. He's a catholic, which was a group Obama had trouble winning over in the primaries. He's also 64, which will appeal to older voters, another group Obama has had trouble with. Quite simply, all the pieces fit.
I think loner struck upon a good point - this might just the Obama effing with McSame in payback for the Novak "announcement this week!" media steal of last week.
God knows all the veep speculation has sucked the oxygen out of the room, and my completely anecdotal armchair analysis is that BHO's veep choice "analysis" is getting something like 2 to 3xs the airplay of Mcwhatever.
I think the main asset of Sebelius is likability. The theory being that if a fairly progressive Democrat in blood-red Kansas is popular then she can be popular anywhere. She is not a polarizing figure the way a Hillary Clinton is. Love her or hate her ....well, that's just it, Hillary is generally loved or hated.
Cugel,
Completely off-topic, but would you email me please. You can find my address in my Blogger profile.
I am a Medicaid Planning attorney, and I am always looking for good Estate Planning attorneys.
Thx
Kaine could also be cover for another unexpected pick, like your guy, Brian Schweitzer!
I've read your touting of him, and the associated praise for his fellow Montanan, Jon Tester.
My blog partner has gone on a bit of a limb by predicting Tester will be the guy.
I think Schweitzer is off the table because he is running for re-election this year and the Dems want a sure thing in that gubernatorial race.
Barack won't pick someone he's not very comfortable with, that eliminates Evan byhe. Kaine really showed well on Charlie Rose tonight but he's missing something. He's too principled. Too Catholic. Lacks that ruthless edge you need at times. Obama has it, Sebelius has it, Biden has it. Kaine doesn't. I don't know if others get the same feeling. He seems untarnished by politicking. To pure. He's got a lot of Russert in him. I really like the guy but I don't see him on the Obama ticket.
I agree with most others that Sebelius would be a big boost with women, rather than a drag. Admittedly this is anecdotal, but in calling voters during the primary for Obama, I often reached middle-aged and older women who really wanted to see a female president in their lifetime. Many supported Clinton, but even those who preferred Obama for whatever policy or political reasons felt a strong emotional pull for Clinton on a gut level. Living to see a woman president was something that was VERY important to many on a gut level. I'm totally convinced the idea that Clinton supporters would withhold support for Obama because of a Sebelius VP pick is complete BS. Even on pro-Clinton blogs like MyDD, I read only a handful of comments against Obama picking a female VP other than Clinton (and they were posters who were advocating a Clinton VP pick). Whatever else Sebelius's pros and cons are, I simply cannot believe that angering female voters is one of them.
Don't forget the flipside issue, that Bayh absolutely costs us a senate seat in IN. Sebelius is term-limited and has no prospect of winning a senate race.
Borwnback has already announced that he will not run for re-election in 2010. Given Sebelius' popularity, I don't see why she couldn't compete for this seat. Also, if the Democrat wins the IN governor's race in November, then a Democrat would replace Bayh if he were elected VP.
Kathleen Sebelius, from the state of KS, is going to lay the KaiboSh on the republican hacKS. Finally, K-Street will lose some influence!
OBAMA/SEBELIUS '08!
You know, I hadn't formed a strong opinion on who Obama should pick, but the more I think about Sebelius, the more I like her as VP. I think I'm rooting for her now! (And if the theory about Kaine being a decoy is correct, it's a great one -- means Sebelius will primarily be compared to Kaine instead of Hillary.)
If the Democrat wins the IN governor's race in November, then a Democrat would replace Bayh if he were elected VP.
Not looking good for this one. Daniels is not exactly well liked but is up +18 in the last poll I saw. How Obama is competitive in this state is beyond me. Must be the Midwest effect.
I'm surprised how many people seem to be taking these Sarah Palin rumors seriously. I assure you John McCain is not.
1) Like Jindal, she hasn't been governor long enough to have any record, or any claim of preparedness to be a 71-year-old's heartbeat from the presidency.
2) Her whole State party is mired in scandal, and she's under investigation by the Republican legislature.
3) She's younger than Obama, and looks 28.
4) She's from Alaska. I'm sorry, but imagine Obama had returned to Hawaii after law school instead of Chicago. Would any of us know his name?
5) More seriously, she's got a four-month-old with Down Syndrome. I know she's a politician, but do you honestly think she wants this now?
Palin, like Jindal, is a token floatee in an effort to make the GOP base look stronger than it is.
Sebelius will be Obama's VP. Kansas borders Missouri and Colorado -- which are both tipping point states -- and her father was former governor of Ohio. It's geographic triangulation.
obsessed: "Here's some video of Sebelius to see what you guys think"
just watched it. I'm on board.
So...
if Obama was likely to announce Kaine this week on the peak of media interest... wouldn´t it be likely according to this theory to announce Sebelius right next week while the contrast between Sebelius and Kaine is still fresh?
It could in fact happen on the last day before the Olympics, or even, if McCain is planning to do the same, the day before that.
I think Sebelius would be a great choice. Here's an easy way to smooth things over with angry Hillary supporters who think if it's a woman it can only be HRC. When Obama picks Sebelius, and introducers her, Sebelius comes to the mic and says something like, "I wouldn't be here today if it weren't for Hillary Clinton, and other trail blazing women." Something along those lines. How could they object to her after she heaps praise on HRC? Then HRC can go along way by praising Sebelius, particularly on her big convention night, which reports say will be on the Tuesday night of the convention.
I'd be really happy with Sebelius, or even Biden or even to a lesser extent with Bayh. Kaine just doesn't make sense.
My not so informed opinion tells me that this was all a red herring and a smoke screen.
McCain was getting all sorts of air time with the speculation he was going to name a veep last week. We saw where that went.
Obama did the same. He got the dialogue away from not visiting the troops, for awhile, and into more positive territory.
This tells me his choice will not be Kaine.
I agree with the earlier commenters that either he will announce right before the Olympics or that he will wait to the last minute.
btw....are the Democrats/Obama ever going to start slamming McCain over his gaffes and policies? McCain is winning the war of the airwaves, and his surrogates are much more effective on the talk shows.
I agree with Jeffrey @ 10:39 -- I think there is no such thing as a PUMA and it is all made up.
I suggest that before anyone else asserts anything about any "PUMAs", "disgruntled Clintonistas," or the like, that person please provide one verifiable piece of evidence that such an animal even exists in any significant number.
Besides never having encountered one single such individual, I have another reason for thinking this. I am now going to say something crude. But I have 40+ years of life experience as a female, so I think I get to. Please read no farther if you have delicate sensibilities.
If women had really thought of it, wouldn't it be "PUYA" not "PUMA"?
I think people are going to be impressed with Sebelius as they get to know more about her? Who else has successfully stared down profiteering in the health insurance industry? Insurance Commissioner K. Sebelius, before she was even governor (and the insurance industry still hates her, btw). Compared to Senator Clinton, the #1 recipient of insurance lobby dollars in the Senate with her promise of guaranteed-profit mandates? Not even close.
BTW - on the coal, it has as much to do with inter-state politics. Colorado voters passed a carbon-emissions initiative. Rather that build renewable sources (per the will of Colorado), the electric industry started looking for another state to burn coal for Colorado. The proposal was for one of the largest coal plants in the country to be built in an area with scarce water, with 85% of the electricity permanently contracted to Colorado utilities. Sebelius fight both defended the Kansas environment and the intent of the Colorado voters.
I'd rather she was on the top of the ticket, but other than that, go Obama/Sebelius.
Kaine seems more and more like a bad choice and he has not benefited much from the publicity. The cognoscenti are all listening to UVA’s Larry Sabato who slammed him on his lack of effectiveness. Placing him on the ticket would only highlight Obama’s inexperience and further damage his credibility with voters.
Nate has posited an interesting theory regarding the end game of selecting Governor Sibelius. By running a couple of candidates through the mill it will surely look like he has made a more considered choice. A good move tactically.
But if he chooses Sibelius, he will have won the battle and lost the war. I have said repeatedly that the only woman Obama can pick this year is the doyenne of the party, Hillary Clinton. To pass over her would be a rejection of historic proportions, particularly for a no-name governor that brings nothing to the table geographically.
Mrs. Clinton is laying in wait, while her PUMAs sharpen their claws. Indeed, I suspect she has already told Obama that he can pick whoever he wants and would love to see him pick Mrs. Sibelius. She need only sit back and watch her enraged supporters leap into action, claws out and ready to slash.
The pick will be made by Tuesday. Let’s get ready to rumble!
As a postscript, I become more and more convinced that McCain will pick the talented and intelligent family man, Rob Portman of Cincinnati, as his running mate. He has a long history of national service for a man who I don’t believe is quite yet 50. He was a Congressman and Director of OMB and US Trade Representative. He can speak cogently and convincingly on the economic issues that will dominant the campaign and will provide a powerful rationale for McCain’s pro-trade bias. A bias that, by the way, is in line with the interests of one in five American workers. That he was associated with the Bush Administration is a minor distraction. His own humble Midwestern charisma and his popularity within Ohio will quell much of that.
Portman will also be aided by the coming re-assessment of Bush’s Presidency. As things have improved on Iraq (Bush spoke very well from the WH this AM on the topic), as gas prices fall due to the growing impetus to drill, and the economy continues to show signs of picking up, Bush may get a second look.
Vectors favoring republicans – fair winds ahead!
i think it's important to consider the alternate moves that are available to these two vp candidates. kaine doesn't really have one--he's term-limited as governor, and is blocked by warner and webb in the senate. sebelius has two moves in 2010, either re-election or brownback's senate seat. i think that's why you see such public lobbying on kaine's part.
bchang - Sebelius is also term-limited in 2010.
claws out and ready to slash.
I couldn't read that without laughing.
Did you really say that? Do you say it to others?
Jackson --
The psychologists call that the "laugh of recognition". You laughed because you believe it to be true, as I do.
There is agreat animus among the feminists in the party toward BO. They are not going down without a fight.
PeteKent et al,
Rather than give a blogwhoring link, I'll just copy a section from my post yesterday about Kaine/Sebelius/Clinton:
"...To me, Sebelius seems like a nearly ideal choice. She's an experienced governor with a strong record of pushing forward a progressive agenda in a red state with a Republican-dominated legislature. She reinforces all the post-partisan, Washington outsider themes of Obama's campaign. She's very popular with those who know her. She's Catholic and was raised in Ohio, and she has a good relationship with Obama. Basically, she's Tim Kaine, except a more popular and effective governor, and without the lip service to being "personally pro-life".
Her only downsides are that she's 68 in 2016 (i.e. we're not necessarily creating a ready-made 2016 frontrunner if Obama wins) and that Obama probably loses Kansas even with her. But the home-state VP effect is overstated anyway. She's not extremely exciting, either, but being seen as stable, dependable, and unexciting is actually a good thing in a VP. All in all, she's a really solid canddiate.
Well, actually, there's one more drawback, which was sort of the point of this post. Sebelius is, of course, a woman. And something I've heard a lot in discussions about Sebelius (and Claire McCaskill, and Janet Napolitano, and every other Democratic female not named Hillary) is that "Obama can't pick a woman if it's not Hillary Clinton". While I understand the political calculation behind that statement, every time I read or hear that statement it's a bit like hearing nails across a chalkboard.
My gut reaction to this idea is that it is a fundamentally sexist way of looking at the choice. Hillary Clinton, in her efforts to break "that highest, hardest glass ceiling", was not interested in carefully patching it back together underneath her. I'm fairly sure Hillary Clinton would be absolutely disgusted by the notion that VP candidates would be screened out because they share her gender. The central point of Hillary's gender argument in the primary campaign was that while she was proud to carry the banner for gender equality, she wanted to be judged as a candidate, period. With that in mind, if Sebelius is, say, a stronger overall VP candidate than Kaine without considering gender, then why should her gender be considered a disadvantage?"
You folks talking all about "geography" or "gender" have it all wrong. Nate's metric from yesterday had it just about as right as it could be.
Kathleen Sebelius will make the best running mate because she is the most talented. (Yes, more talented than Bayh or Biden or Clinton.) Sebelius fought for her constituents against the special interests of King Coal and Big Insurance, allowing her to maintain high popularity as a two-term Democratic governor in a heavily Republican state. She is an effective advocate for reproductive rights and against concealed weapons in a state where those positions would usually be considered poison. She even called out Bush for leaving the National Guard in Iraq when Kansas needed them for tornado relief, and was applauded all across her state.
The media will talk about race and gender reflecting "change", but the real way that Obama/Sebelius will bring "change" is that government will be *competent* and *progressive*.
Plus, Obama/Sebelius has a nice dactylic ring to it.
There is agreat animus among the feminists in the party toward BO. They are not going down without a fight.
I'll call.
Let's see their cards.
Matt JH -
Hagel would be a fine SecDef, although I sort of cringe at the semiotics of it. It sends the message that poor weak Democrats need to pick a big tough Republican to handle serious matters like national defense. I'm fine with Hagel as the token Republican cabinet official, but I'd prefer if it were as Secretary of Veteran's Affairs.
The real take-home message on Hagel is that he was the true nightmare OPPONENT for Obama this year. He has the social conservative credentials the Republican base requires, and unlike McCain he wouldn't have had to walk back all of his positions on foreign policy. Thank goodness he didn't run/win.
I agree with Kaine being a decoy, even if Sebelius isn't the pick.
It could be Schweitzer or someone else, but Kaine as decoy is a little bit of evil genius and I love it.
I also love this site.
Tarr-
You ascribe to much virtue to HRC, she is a Clinton after all and with her it’s all about personal ambition. She would throw the entire feminist agenda under the bus (aren't we sick of that analogy), if it meant getting elected.
While no woman but Hillary may seem sexist, you cannot discount political impact. More than that beware that such a move could backfire, making Obama appear even more mired in Democrat identity politics than he already is.
He is not interested in making history with his VEEP choice. remember, he is THE ONE. He brooks and wants no competition for the limelight. He will pick Bayh as a safe choice and trot him out where it will be helpful and to show folks he isn't scary, but the Barack Obama Superstar Tour will continue. He needs no warm up act.
Obama needs to get this done soon. I don’t think he wants to compete against Michael Phelps either!
You're right, Nate - or at least you should be, if Obama is as talented a politician as he seems. Building up hype and then choosing another candidate incites the media and voters to try to guess his intentions and think of why Obama might choose him/her - building up positives for both the VP and Obama. On the other hand, choosing an expected candidate brings little benefits, as Obama could be seen as pandering to specific voters.
This theory sounds reasonable, and I should say that I would really enjoy an Obama-Sebelius ticket, but one could argue that Obama's counting on out-of-left-field theories like this.
i think one of the most important reasons why sebelius works so well is because she wouldn't have to amend herself, or adapt, change positions, style of campaigning, or what have you, to fit in with obama. she's most effective by being herself. one of the reasons why vps aren't really effective is that once they become vps, they make changes to fit in with the nominee that undercut what was particularly attractive in them in the first place. and in this, mark warner could fit, but he'd have to change a few things, evan bayh would need drastic changes unless he focused on spelling out all the wonkish policy papers, but sebelius fits in so naturally, that i think that the only reason he might not pick her is because of her name id. not that your regular joe knows biden. but because the national media doesn't know her too well and they might be tempted to create a meme with the help of karl rove pontificating on the editorial of the wallstreet journal.
The idea that women voter's, rather than a few Hillary-lovers, will oppose Sebelius is just pure bullshit.
More discussion here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/7/30/142430/006/924/559461
and here:
http://strategy08.wordpress.com/2008/07/29/okay-i-give-in-my-case-for-kathleen-sebelius/
and here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/7/29/93220/6384/642/558702
Very interesting. I have had the exact same thought, although not nearly as articulate in all its ramifications as yours is here.
You ascribe too much virtue to HRC, she is a Clinton after all and with her it’s all about personal ambition. She would throw the entire feminist agenda under the bus (aren't we sick of that analogy), if it meant getting elected.
PK,
I agree Hillary is loaded with personal ambition. I think we both agree that she is incredibly disappointed/bitter about losing the primaries. I don't think any of us really know whether she wants the VP slot or not, which would have some impact on how angry any VP selection other than herself would make her.
My point about Hillary herself, though, was that in her heart of hearts, I don't thin she would find a Sebelius selection any more or less offensive than Kaine or Bayh or any other reasonable candidate. While her approach to her gender in the primaries was certainly politically motivated, it didn't and doesn't strike me as dishonest. She may have been willing to cast aside feminism if it would benefit her, but what's the benefit to opposing Sebelius if she's chosen? The PR hit Hillary would take in the inner Democratic circles would be far worse than any possible benefit she gets (i.e. an incridibly tiny increase in her chances of being able to run in 2012).
While no woman but Hillary may seem sexist, you cannot discount political impact.
Certainly, there will be some Hillary-related backlash - both outrage from the tiny but noisy PUMA clique, and unfounded right-wing pedantry about how the Democrats are disunited. But neither of these narratives will have much traction. There's just not enough behind them, and whatever there is would disappate when Hillary and Sebelius get the headline speeches on back-to-back nights at the convention. Moreover, both of these sources will find some reason to hate the nominee regardless.
He will pick Bayh as a safe choice and trot him out where it will be helpful and to show folks he isn't scary, but the Barack Obama Superstar Tour will continue. He needs no warm up act.
I agree that Bayh is a safe pick, but he costs the Dems a critical senate seat, barring a miracle upset in the Indiana governor's race. Obama will weigh this in his decision, because his ability to push his agenda through congress will likely hinge on just a few Senate seats.
For this reason, I think a Kaine/Sebelius/Schweitzer sort of pick is more likely.
Good point, Tarr, about the risk to the IN senate seat. I will have to mull that over. I suspect that Obama won't care since 54 seats is as good as 55, 60 being the magic number. But then there is this Schweitzer dude as to whom I know nothing. Perhaps he can fill the bill.
You analysis of Mrs. Clinton's risk here is astute and she must play her cards carefully. The movement, if it is to come at all, must come as one from below, a true grassroots desire to draft her in place of Obama in the name of party unity. She will be seen as reluctantly accepting.
The PUMA strategy depends on something of an Obama meltdown in the polls and a narrative that he is more and more likely to lose. We are not yet there, but as I have been saying the vectors are pointing down.
Obama does not want to risk the nomination on the bona fides of Gov. Sibelius or anyone else. He must pick the one boring white man with the minimal amount of credentials who will let him be him and keep being THE ONE (and only).
Well, the risk of Sebelius are not her bona fides, which are as good or better than any other selection, really. The risk is that a black man AND a woman will be a bridge too far for some folks in certain key swing states. Which is possible, I guess, but I don't think it outweighs other issues.
As far as 60 being the magic number - party discipline is not perfect. Every vote will be different. The question is how many of the Snowe/Collins/Smith/Graham/Lugar/Coleman/Specter/etc set you need to flip in order to end the filibuster. Assuming that Collins, Coleman, and Smith aren't flipped in November, of course.
Much as the false flag theory makes sense to me, Kaine still seems like the one. Lookit picture of him next to Obama. Now lookit pictures of Sebelius et al. next to Obama.
I see all the arguments against Kaine (and how the chatter makes it less likely) but damn you can just feel the chemistry between those two.
I'll be very surprised if Coleman is defeated. The demographic of Minnesota voters who are voting for Obama but also for Coleman is quite large, and includes me.
The "feminists will only vote for Hillary" is a Republican myth. I'm a feminist. My mom's a feminist. My colleagues and friends are feminists. By "colleagues," I mean academics, "Women's Studies," "Queer Theory" feminists. Like, forealz Womyn feminists. My friends grew up as riot grrrls and Lesbian Avengers and third wave feminists of every stripe. Among my cohort, those who weren't already Obama supporters from the primaries (which means most of us), are certainly Obama supporters now. If you think any real feminist is going to vote for McCain - or abandon Obama because he picks another woman as his running mate, you're either trolling or crazy.
Hey, thisniss: What you describe is scary! What planet are you from? "Womyn feminists"? I thought I heard everything.
Of course the Emily's list crowd and the movemment feminists won't go for McCain, but to many average woment HRC was a symbol and represented something deep and powerful. That she was so rudely and abruptly put in her place by the new kid on the block with the elegant swagger and the dynamic speaking ability, egged on by the male pundit class on cable news and elsewhere burns. These women won't forgive so soon, sweetie!
Tarr makes a good point: it's is a sad commentary on America that it won't except a bi-racial man and a woman on the same ticket. It also the reason why the Judas from NM need not apply.
PK,
What you're describing is, essentially, the popular notion of the disaffected Hillary supporter. Problem is, all recent national and swing state polling numbers strenuously reject the idea that there are a lot of people like this. Obama has had no difficulty uniting the party, and his percentage support among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents are already at or above historic numbers enjoyed by Kerry, Gore, et al.
The only real question, then, is whether adding a non-HRC woman to the ticket would somehow re-open this divide. My suspicion is that it would not.
Tarr,
I have seen polling indicating that Obama has more of a base problem right now than McCain does. I do recall in the ether that some of that may be among conservative Democrats who are not likely to be much affected by what Hillary wants one way or another.
I will let you ahve the last word on this, but will look for the evidence i seek supporting the notion that there is a bigger PUMA vote out there than meets the eye.
I do agree with your insight that the real risk is not whether Obama can bring the former HRC voters intom the fold, but whether they can be aggravated to the point where they bolt or pout or do whatever one does on the sidelines.
That I think is the risk of picking a woman other than Hillary.
That and the bridge too far notion you mentioned that opens up another set of compounding electoral problems for Obama.
I hope it happens!
Go Katie S!!!!!
I have seen polling indicating that Obama has more of a base problem right now than McCain does.
Firstly, I was comparing Obama not to McCain, but to historical levels of Democratic party unity/discipline.
Secondly, I'm not sure what polling you're referring to. If you are referring to polls taken before Hillary's concession speech, then yes, absolutely. Obama's "base problem" ended when the primaries ended, though.
The recent polling I've seen has had Obama losing about eight or nine percent of Democrats to McCain, which is, again, better than typical historical numbers.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/7/28/114910/877
http://field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/Rls2276.pdf
As far as McCain... well, here's a nice set of polling questions that compares levels of enthusiasm. It's pretty unambiguous.
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/893/obama-mccain-july
Bottom line - Most HRC supporters would welcome a woman on the ticket. The PUMAs are a tiny (albeit loud) clique that will not be satisfied by any choice at all, so there is no sense in trying to placate them. The only real risk in picking Sebelius is losing the sexist-but-not-racist vote, which is probably not that big.
As someone already pointed out...women - far from boycotting Obama - are his most prolific support demographic as a collective, behind only the African-American vote.
They are the reason he is leading (and sometimes even the reason he is competitve!) because Obama is having some trouble with the male vote...even trailing among men in solidly blue states. Leads of 20-30 points among women offset it, but PUMA isn't Obama's immediate problem...white men are.
jakam - Note that Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter... even JFK... lost every time, by a fair lot, among white males. Only LBJ (less than a year after Dallas) took a slight majority in that demo.
It doesn't look like Obama is going to have Clinton's advantage (lots of white men going to Perot). He needs to keep the white male vote he has. But, he doesn't need an all-out "NASCAR dad" assault, either.
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,
Post a Comment