Obama has picked a Cheney when he needed a Gore

Dawn

Biden is NOT Cheney. He's Lyndon Johnson.

thinksix

Hello James. I disagree with you.

In a post all of two days ago ('VP Watch: Buy Bayh') you quote a quote of Obama. He says - in effect - that he will pick a VP who he thinks will help him do the job well.

By choosing a VP with the kind of experience which Obama knows he lacks, isn't he doing just that?

Surely *that* is a confident campaign - picking a VP they know may leave them prey to attacks, but who is the best choice?

An unconfident campaign means going with the choice which will just help Obama get elected.

By the way, this is a super blog.

Verity

Desperation seeps through even Obama's iron-clad ego ... Nothing can save Obama and he knows it.

Sam Bowman

Also, the strength of Cheney was that the "weakness" of Bush's that he was covering wasn't, in fact, a weakness at all – his outside-the-Beltway, non-Washington experience. Any time the press contrasted the two, Bush's outsider credentials would be reinforced.

On the other hand, the foreign policy weakness that Biden covers is quite serious, and the contrast between him and Obama will never be favourable to Obama.

marbury

I don't think it's such a bad pick, James. Seems odd to me that in a time of war you should choose someone with LESS national security cred. The 'handholding' thing will only hurt if Obama fluffs foreign policy in the debates - I don't think he will. And there is no way this takes Obama's opposition to the Iraq war off the table. That's quite easy to finesse (Joe and I have disagreed in the past, but I'm running for president - and anyway he tried to pass a better resolution). Stuff about what 'the political classes' think is fluff - they didn't really know anything about the Obama campaign's decision-making process on this as far as I can tell. Biden will do a great speech next week, and he will kill in the debates, especially if he faces Romney. Finally: you neglect the most important question of all: who's the best person to help Obama govern in the White House? I think Biden's experience, chops, and ability to get things done make him the best choice available by some measure on that score.

DC Cat

No one votes for VP. People are going to decide on Obama not his number two.

Craig Strachan

When Bush picked Cheney he was known as a taciturn fixer who preferred to operate in the backrooms. He also had a ton of executive experience.

Biden is no Cheney.

Now the Democratic ticket can be caricatured as "two talkers". Not a great pick IMO.

TGF UKIP

Brilliant McCain ad over on Guido, order-order.com, that says it all.

Lucky, lucky Old John! Biden even looks the quintessentially slimey beltway politician. I also seem to recall hearing him say on FNS when Iranian Guards activity was especially hot in Iraq "If I find out that if they've been pursued just one yard over that border I'll have that President impeached."

Just got to hope now that McCain doesn't do anything too weird in his pick. Outside Washington, for sure.

ndm

James Forsyth writes:

The Republicans are already pushing the message that America can't have a president at time of war who needs his hand holding during a crisis.

The obvious and correct response to this is that America can't have another President who was wrong and remains wrong about the most important foreign policy disaster of the last fifty years.

Forsyth continues:

Obama would have been better served by emphasising his change message. He could have done this by picking a Republican like Chuck Hagel ...

The idea that Obama choose a Republican would merely support the Republic claim Forsyth alluded to earlier. From an electoral standpoint it is pretty clear that Obama is change enough while Biden provides good old-fashioned American bedrock.

Forsyth then writes:

Perhaps, the most interesting thing about the Biden pick is the question of whether the Obama campaign is now acting out of nerves or fear - most of the political class don't think Obama would have picked Biden if the polls weren't so close or if national security hadn't so dominated the debate in the past few weeks.

The primary reason the polls are so close, although Obama remains consistently ahead, is that there are many people who are concerned about change - which for too many Americans (Appalachians - I'm mean you) means voting for a black man.

And Forsyth concludes with:

One other thing worth noting is that Obama picking Biden, strengthens the case for McCain picking someone with executive experience - something that neither Obama nor Biden have - and someone from outside the beltway.

Which probably means Romney who has turned himself into one of the least authentic characters to grace the American political stage. Many liberal commentators thought Romney would have been a formidable general election candidate had he run as a technocrat as he did in Massachusets. Instead, he pandered to the religious right even as everyone knew he was not even a Christian. A debate between Biden and Romney is a debate about authenticity and that is a debate Romney can never win.

Augustus

I think it's both nerves and fear. One talks about the current president's approval rating, but what about Congress? Less than 10%, the lowest in history.

Now for the race. If McCain choses Mitt Romney for VP there's a good chance for another Republican president in the White House.

Rosie

I'm disappointed, I thought a Obama-Clinton ticket would've been dynamite. How can Obama be the 'change candidate, bringing a new politics to Washington', Biden has been in Washington as long as John MCain. Also it has cancelled out MCain biggest negative which is his age, as Biden is not that much younger.

Verity

Rosie - Obama-Clinton was never an option. Hillary is a canny, experienced politician. That's why she stepped back and kept her powder dry. 2012?

Obama is so panicky, he has just thrown out his ace - if such it was - but his "youth" (at 47 years of age, but that is how he was playing it), by bringing in Bloviator Biden, 35 years talking his brains out in the Senate - the ultimate Capitol Hill insider - and the man who copied Neil Kinnock's speech word for word back in, I think, '88, and never attributed it.

Biden's been in Congress - a DC insider - for 35 years! He ran in '88 and failed. What happened to "change you can believe in"?

Even eight hours ago, they were starting to be referred to on American right wing blogs as Obama bin Biden.

You could not make this up.

Rupert Eden

I could not disagree more with this sloppily written opinion article which equates Joe Biden with Dick Cheney. The difference could not be greater - Biden strongly opposed the Iraq war and policies and self interests of Washington and opposes the reliance on foreign oil and the stranglehold which oil companies have on the american people and dependancy on hostile nations. Quite the contrary Biden is the perfect choice for Obama. A strong Catholic, a proved statesman and expert on foreign relations and somebody who is far closer to Al Gore than in his common sense policies.

Roy

As much harm could be done by a new US administration being too tentative in its decision making as would be a too confident one. It would surely be a mistake to be forever hostile to past judgments that will make for a dithering leadership frightened to death to make strong bold moves. Some of the western world admired Bush’s war against terror, but could not stand the long bloody affair in Iraq. None it seems can ever forgive its involvement although many would have ridden any bandwagon if it had been a roaring success.

Dr No

Biden is NOT Cheney. He's Neil Kinnock.

The Laughing Cavalier

No one needs a Gore.

George

So much for 'change': a Delaware lawyer who is part of the Washington machine.

Ann

"about the most important foreign policy disaster of the last fifty years"

Not bad, as a message from planet Zog. But it's still wrong. There was no such foreign policy disaster. There are only carping appeasers.

King John

I disagree with this, it's not Cheney that Obama has picked; rather it is a Lyndon B Johnston. A strong Washington insider, with good foreign policy experience, someone who could easily assume executive power if that was needed and someone who bring working class white votes. It's all actually quite a logical pick.

Ian C

Two Senators running for presiidential office at the same time? Not a recipe for success since the War. Poor move tactically.

But the election is about Obama and this is simply one aspect that has exposed him, as uncertain and calculating, a litle bit more.

Frank Pulley

The fact that Obama (and later Biden himself) had to play the heartstrings of domestic tragedy and personal adversity to divert attention away from Biden's lack of real political achievment, shows just how weak both Democratic Presidential manques are. I have faith in the common sense of greater America that will see through this latest layer of flim-flam.

Another straw in the wind: the Chicago-Scranton connection may indicate another dimension: it makes me wonder whether the WiseGuys have a string or two attached to these plastic puppets. Reminiscent of the Kennedy fix?

As for plagiarising Neil Kinnock? Perhaps McCain should spend the rest of his campaign money having a selection of the speeches of Kinnock and his harpie wife replayed to the American public with a voice-over at the end intoning, "These are the kinda people Joe Biden held in high esteem." Followed by the ripest rants of the Rev Wright captioned thus; "And your Democratic Prsidential candidate spent many years voluntarily soaking up that kinda shit."

On second thoughts, Tony Blair was generally considered to be articulate and intelligent by my American friends, so belay that, as mellifluous bullshit does seem to appeal to many of Uncle Sam's citizens for whom in other ways I have very high regard.

Frank Pulley

Rupert Eden

"A strong Catholic, a proved statesman and expert on foreign relations and somebody who is far closer to Al Gore than in his common sense policies."

I'm not sure that that sentence makes grammatical sense; it is certainly 'sloppily written'. Moats and eyes, Wupert!

keeneye

McCain and his supporters know that a McCain victory in the presidential race is impossible. The distressed look on McCain's face as it incessantly appears on TV screens tells the story. McCain and his supportes, realising this, are using their ultimate weapon - character assasination-and they are using it with abandon as some of the comments herein indicate.The problem about such a weapon however is that it backfires. Joe Biden is capable of making the backfire electorally more lethal.

D Day

Why are Br "Conservatives" so enthralled by Obama? He is the most 'progressive' nominee since McGovern, with less political experience than Carter, who's main work experience has been as a "community organizer" for left wing causes.
For chrissakes, the Sunday Telegraph practically endorsed him yesterday.
Now he has chosen a typical northeastern liberal as VP. And you are worried it blunts his message of 'Change". Don't you think it blunts Obama's other major message of "Hope" as well?

Ian C

"Biden was rated by the National Journal in 2007 as the third most liberal member of the Senate. Mr. Obama was rated the most liberal. Neither has a record of bucking the wishes of liberal interest groups or promoting bipartisanship." WSJ Online.

So we have the most, and the third most, 'liberal' members of the Senate as running mates!

Another reason that they are unlikely to succeed without excpetional reasons.

Callie

Well the agent of change has been hiding in the Senate for the last 35 years. Who knew????