step of selecting a woman as his running mate, Hillary Clinton would be a far superior choice.
I'm not sure. Sebelius has executive experience and is popular in a Red state. If Obama intends to really change the map then she, or Schweitzer, makes sense.
not at this point, at any rate. Still it is a good start!
and there is scant evidence of a candidate being able to carry their home state as VP aginst prevailing political environment. Edwards failed to carry NC. Gore failed to carry TN even as Presidential candidate. If Romney were McSame's VP no way would he carry MA and MI would be a stretch.
Obama is already up five in Montana.
Aren't we trying to be gender-blind in this? Why is it "couragious" go hire a woman when it's perfectly clear that a woman could go the distance and that people largely don't care about it (as evidenced by the Democratic primary)?
You're welcome to debate the merits of Sebelius in comparison to Clinton, but you should open it up to Richardson, Clark, and all the other potential candidates, too.
The fact that we still consider gender to be an issue in the VP selection does not speak well of us.
for the first African American candidate from a major party to select a woman as his running mate then you are being naiive. We might be trying to be gender-neutral, but the country is certainly not.
That is the political reality whether we like it or not.
I'm pretty certain that we could nominate a potted plant as VP and our chances of beating the Republicans wouldn't change.
And we elected the village idiot to another 4 years after seeing just how bad the first 4 were. So let's not make it easier for them.
I acknowledge that we can be pretty dumb on occasion.
Sebelius is a governor - Clinton a Senator. Sebelius was an early advocate of Barack Obama's - Clinton was his opponent. Sebelius has an executive type demeanor, Clinton a wonkish one. And on and on.
People don't treat men this way: "well if you're going to pick Bayh, you may as well pick Clark" because recognizing them as individuals is automatic.
As the first major party African American nominee, Obama has to view female candidates (and other minority candidates) differently. In a perfect world this would not be the case. But it's political reality.
The more challenging choice for Obama would be "picking a woman", rather than a specific woman. There is some risk in him picking a woman.
Among women candidates, Clinton would be a far superior choice to Sebelius. If they were both men, Clinton would be a far superior choice. Clinton has higher recognition levels, a proven donor list, foreign policy experience (beyond sniper fire in Tuzla), a signature issue (health care), and demonstrated grit and tenacity. The fact that she wasn't an early advocate of Obama's will help party unity. If Obama picks an early loyalist, he further shuts out the half of the party that didn't support him. If he expands the tent by picking a Clinton supporter (including Clinton herself) or a clear neutral party, he helps the healing process. As a woman who supported Obama early, Sebelius is especially unattractive and divisive as a choice. There are a number of other women who backed Clinton or who remained neutral who would be better choices - if Obama had the courage (the audacity?) to go with a woman in the number 2 slot)
as you're right about the "woman" thing. There was an article about it, and you're right about Obama shutting out Hillary voters and supporters by picking a loyalist like Sebelius. Hillary is the only real choice.
That POV can be argued much more effectively that the one which says Hillary is the only woman who can be chosen as Obama's VP.
People who keep repeating this are unaware of the hostility that Hillary stirs up in the electorate. One of many things going well for the Dems in this election s ambivalence among conservatives. Hillary on the ticket would definitely be a motivator for those presently indifferent voters.
No one's unaware that conservatives don't like the Clintons. I just think this is overrated. When Bill was running in 96, I heard they wouldn't let her speak at the convention because her presence "riles up the base". Hillary spoke and Bill won easily anyway. In 00, i heard how she would ultimately lose the senate race because she "riles up the base." She won anyway and then they could't even find a decent challenger next time. I think the GOP is so disspirited right now that even Hillary hatred, which does exist, won't be near enough to save them.
I just think what she adds to the ticket might be canceled out by what she might take away. A wash.
