The Veep Thread

Doc, I missed the one post on page 4 and the one post on page 5 that mentioned Hagel. My apologies.

I must admit, that does intrigue me. It would be a much more inspiring, daring pick than someone like Strickland, which would be more a nod to the Clintons and the electoral college process -- and that's not the way to go for a candidate whose campaign theme is change.

 

Hagel would indeed be an inspired choice. But aren't he and McCain pretty close personally? (read a recent profile of McCain that mentioned that). Would seem to be a hard thing for him to run.

 

Hagel is a very conservative Republican who thinks the Iraq War stinks. If one believes that Obama is going to pull out the troops, Hagel becomes a huge problem the day after Obama is elected. Why have a vice president who disagrees with your entire philosophy of government?
The fact Hagel is principled makes it worse. He will feel honor bound to disregard the Vice-President's first job: To STFU.

 

Is Lieberman going to be McCain's VP pick?

 

Thus the reason I still like a McCain-Lieberman ticket.

 

I'll bet anything that he won't, for the same reasons MG outlined above. Leiberman is a run of the mill liberal, who happens to be responsible on foreign affairs.

 

Knowing that Lieberman won't be the choice, althoughhe would likely get a cabinet spot - Sec. of State or Defense - I would be happy with either Mitt Romney or Sarah Palin. Preferably Palin.

 

What the hell does "responsible on foreign affairs" mean? Would you use that phrase to describe the president?

 

Not the time or the place.

 

Oh boy . . . can of worms is now open.

 

I'm not sure what the problem is. I'm questioning a political assertion made on a political thread.

 

Not the time (I'm here procrastinating because I have work that needs to be done in a minimized window), nor the place (general partisan bickering would clutter a focused political discussion).