Virginia Sen. Jim Webb just issued a statement from his Senate office saying that -- "[u]nder no circumstances" -- does he want to be considered as Obama's veep. "Last week I communicated to Sen. Obama and his presidential campaign my firm intention to remain in the United States Senate, where I believe I am best equipped to serve the people of Virginia and this country. Under no circumstances will I be a candidate for vice president.But it's interesting to see whose stock is trading upward at Intrade as a result of Jim Webb's Sherman Statement today. These people have gained ground:
Bayh +2.0
Schweitzer +1.9
Reid +1.9
Warner +1.7
Hagel +1.7
Biden +1.3
Kaine +1.3
Edwards +1.0
Sebelius +0.6
Clinton +0.5
...about an even mix of Moderate White Dude and Foreign Policy Tough Dude, with a few Virginia Is For Lovers candidates thrown in. Webb crossed over all three constituencies, which is why he seemed like such an obvious name for the short list.And yes, that's Harry Reid, which ought to put to bed any notion about the efficiency of betting markets. Maybe some overseas punters heard some buzz about Jack Reed and got the two confused? I cannot explain this one away.
The overall favorites for the Democrats' VP slot according to Intrade, translated loosely to Vegas-style odds, are as follows:
Clinton 9-2
Sebelius 9-1
Bayh 10-1
Hagel 10-1
Rendell 12-1
Richardson 12-1
Biden 12-1
McCaskill 15-1
Edwards 15-1
Kaine 15-1
Reed (RI) 20-1
Schweitzer 20-1
Clark 20-1
Gephardt 20-1
Gore 20-1
Nunn 20-1
Bloomberg 25-1
Webb 30-1
Zinni 30-1
Warner 35-1
Reid (NV) 50-1
Jones 60-1
Wexler 80-1
Nelson 100-1
Napolitano 100-1
Daschle 100-1
Easley 100-1
Field 40-1
Has a VP field ever been so completely wide open? And I don't have too many betting tips for you, but in general find it easier to identify people who I'd want to short (Gore, Hagel) than long (Bill Nelson is intriguing at those odds, and Tim Kaine probably is too).Update: You know who else I might long? Evan Bayh. Bayh would certainly not be my first choice, but that's not what matters here. I'm trying to think about this from the standpoint of the Obama campaign's paradigm, and in general the Obama campaign has tended to be very risk-averse. Bayh is polished, if not overly articulate; he's a brand name, but not one that will overshadow the nominee, and he would be acceptable to most moderates as well as most ex-Clinton supporters. There's a bit of an always-a-bridesmaid concern about Bayh that can become something of a self-fulfilling prophecy -- if he wasn't good enough for Bill Clinton, Al Gore or John Kerry, what makes him good enough now? -- but then again, Indiana has never before been a swing state, nor has the Midwest in general been so important.
91 comments
I'm shorting Clinton and Gore. All of the others either have a non-negligible chance of getting the nod, or aren't worth shorting (ie their odds are too low). If I was just slightly less conservative (in betting terms, that is, not politically), I'd short Sebelius as well; and until this afternoon Clark was also on my thumbs-down list, but I decided to cash in some profits.
I still think Obama and Klobuchar look great together.
Anyway, the markets are not predictive. At all. They just follow the latest news and rumors.
I'm sure it's gonna be Edwards~take that to the bank and cash it!
I'd short all of the pro-lifers:
Bayh
Hagel
Nunn
and Bloomberg (because serious sexual harassment allegations don't play well in a general).
And, long the "field." I'm somewhat surprised there isn't more conversation about Sharrod Brown.
It should be noted that that Reid's movement was a bump from 0.1% to 2.0% and the volume over the last few hours has been fairly low. So I think it's fairly reasonable that "penny stocks" like that are going to be less reliable so it's unfair to focus on that.
It's gonna be a governor, not another Senator, and especially not a high-profile Senator. We've got a lot of legislation to jam through in the next four or eight years and we need all the good Senators we can get.
I'd bet on Schweitzer, Sebelius, or Kaine, roughly in that order, with John Edwards a good possibility mainly contingent on whether he got the job.
Al Gore 20-1? Yeah, I'll short that, too. Czar of Environment and Energy, maybe. Veep again? Nope.
I read a piece a while back on Reid possibly getting Veep. Theory was he's get the number 2 spot as compensation for losing the Senate majority leader spot to Hillary. Hillary would get that spot as an alternative to being VP.
The piece went on to argue that Reid would deliver Nevada and help secure states in the Southwest.
I think Nelson is out as a member of the New Democratic Coalition/DLC. I don't think the VP slot goes to an actual member of the NDC/DLC because of internal party politics. Howard Dean and Obama have been working too hard wrestling control of the party from them to hand the VP slot and presumptive nomination after the Obama administration back to the DLC.
On top of it I don't think they give up Bill Nelson's senate seat. Gov Christ is a Republican and once the special election comes around it's a tough race for a non incumbent Democrat here in Florida.
NDC/DLC politicians will end up in the cabinet and in other high ranking positions in the administration, so long as any Senate seat is safe.
Clinton atracts a lot of optomists. There are times when I remember how knowledgable she is and how loyal her supporters and I sort of think maybe. But not a chance. She is too agresive for Obama and as for Bill - He could never keep zipped at ether end. Sell.
Sebelius & Obama are soul mates. Buy.
Ooooh, a VP guessing game. I'll throw in my wild speculation as to who it will be without providing any justification.
I'd bet on Sebelius or Kaine.
I'd definitely 100% short on Clinton, Hagel, Rendell, Bloombeg, and Gore.
@such sweet thunder:
What makes you say Bayh is "pro-life?"
From Wikipedia (admittedly not a perfect source, but still...)
Abortion
Bayh is generally supportive of the pro-choice position. He ultimately voted in favor of banning partial-birth abortions in 2003, but he did vote for substitute measures supported by Democrats. His stance on other issues relating to abortion have been mixed also. He voted with mainly Democrats against Laci and Conner's Law, but voted with mainly Republicans in 2006 to crack down on abortions performed on minors that involve crossing state lines.
The "Field" contract is trading at 30.3 though. Doesn't that make it closer to 2-1 odds than 40-1?
My money ( if i had any ) would be on Bill Richardson, because he's got a resume twice as long as anyone else... congressman, energy secretary, governor ( of a swing state ), U.N. Ambassador.
Executive experience? Check
Foreign Policy Experience? Check
Energy Experience? Check
I'm also not aware of any serious dirt on him, besides that James Carville compared him to Judas, which may actually play well in the general.
"Has a VP field ever been so completely wide open?"
I dunno, it seems to me that the difference is more that people have some idea of the possibilities. Arguably it was more "wide open" in 2000, for example, when nobody had much of a clue who Gore would pick.
We've gone from the era where the VP was an important political alliance (the smoke-filled-room era) through an era where the VP made almost no difference electorally or in office (the early 'primary' era), and are now in an era where it's presumed that the VP will have some serious duties (based on Gore & Cheney) and thus there's actually a reason to care.
If intrade took credit cards, which it doesn't apparently because the cc companies think its gambling and so ... ya... anyway if they did, i'd have bet a few weeks ago on...
Brian Schweitzer.
I went onto youtube and watched his speeches, and his charlie rose interview.... very interesting man.
*NRA actually endorsed him, so he could defuse the NRA's $40M plans against obama.
*A liberal who managed to become the governor of red Montana.
*He's a scientist. a soil scientist to be exact. he spent almost a decade working in Saudi Arabia to teach them how to farm, and now for the first time, they don't need to import so much grain.
*he speaks arabic, from being over there, and understands a people who will be part of our future, like it or not.
*he has a lot of very interesting alternate energy ideas.
*he understands that only 15% of the population, the "low info" voters, are really the ones who make the decisions, in most elections, and he knows how to talk to them.
He just seems to FIT with Obama more than the others. correct me if you think i'm wrong.
Anon@5:23,
I like Richardson too, in a lot of ways, but there is this little gem:
"In New Mexico, Gov. Bill Richardson, a man said to have presidential aspirations, suffered a political setback last December when Lt. Gov. Diane D. Denish told an Albuquerque Journal reporter that she tried to avoid him at events because: “He pokes me. He pinches my neck. He touches my hip, my thigh, sort of the side of my leg.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/23/fashion/sundaystyles/23touch.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
I'm sure we'd all hear more about that one if Richardson were chosen -- it's the sort of mini-scandal that even journalists understand!
@ Gavin.
Oddly, there are two different sets of VP contracts in Intrade, one that has a "Field" slot but lists fewer candidates and one "new" version with many names listed. I'm going off the new list.
Anon said: "My money ( if i had any ) would be on Bill Richardson, because he's got a resume twice as long as anyone else... congressman, energy secretary, governor ( of a swing state ), U.N. Ambassador.
Executive experience? Check
Foreign Policy Experience? Check
Energy Experience? Check"
Add: Womanizer? Better check.