The Veep Thread

[Boom_70]

Having only skimmed the first 3 pages, I apologize if this has already been suggested, but how about we open the choices to include people who aren't professional politicians?

Wasn't that the premise at the founding? That we'd each set down our hammer or plow or stethoscope and serve our neighbors for 2 years or four years or six?

How about Beyonce?

 

[Ben_Hecht]

Alas, carpenters, farmers, and/or doctors with sufficient foreign policy backgrounding are in short supply.

 

[jgmacg]

Not a bad idea, except that the VP has to have at least nominal name recognition.

Why? Honest question, not snark.

And to Boom: How much worse could she be than Cheney (or Gore)?

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

Kodos is not interested.

 

[Dangerous_K]

I'm a little surprised none of the republicans have thrown out the Huckster as a candidate. Is it just not happening?

I thought Huckster was a likely choice, too, given he'd win over the social conservatives. Perhaps too liberal with his economic stances?

 

[jgmacg]

Alas, carpenters, farmers, and/or doctors with sufficient foreign policy backgrounding are in short supply.

How much good has our aggregate professional "foreign policy background" done us in the world the last 25 or so years? And shouldn't the VP be limited to shining the spittoons and emptying the ashtrays in any case?

 

[Chi City 81]

Alas, carpenters, farmers, and/or doctors with sufficient foreign policy backgrounding are in short supply.

How much good has our aggregate professional "foreign policy background" done us in the world the last 25 or so years? And shouldn't the VP be limited to shining the spittoons and emptying the ashtrays in any case?

Well, there's the whole 25th Amendment thing to take into consideration.

 

[jgmacg]

I'm not saying you don't pick someone smart and level-headed - like Beyonce - I'm just asking why we've abandoned our government to the politicians.

 

[alleyallen]

Not a bad idea, except that the VP has to have at least nominal name recognition.

Why? Honest question, not snark.

And to Boom: How much worse could she be than Cheney (or Gore)?

Didn't take it as snarkiness at all...certainly not from you. You'se good people.

Pretend for a moment that the CEO of Coca Cola (Norville Isdell) were tabbed as Obama's running mate. Most people would scratch their heads and say, "Who?" What's worse, it would be hard to sell many voters on him, or someone like him, since they may not have as visible a track record in public policy, etc.

Also, there's this thought. Think about how Ross Perot was viewed by some as being hideously unqualified, despite having had massive success as a businessman.

The third potential sticking point would be a CEO's success, and the company's track record. If he took millions in bonuses but the company laid off employees, a candidate like that would be cashiered. Or if the company had some issues with shady deals, pollution, etc.

Just a thought. Look how Cheney is lambasted for Halliburton.

 

[JayFarrar]

this says that Huckabee is the top choice

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/5/12/source-huckabee-tops-mccains-veep-list.html

Much like JG, I wonder why a Veep or even a Prez has to be an expert in everything. Gore was, and all it got him was a win in the popular vote and a chapter in the eventual history book.
Of course those people who think you need experts, probably think the candidates write all their own speeches.
People have staffs. People have high-level experts with decades in their fields to give advice and counsel.
What you really need is someone with a sharp mind, someone who can take a bunch of different things and put everything together for something cohesive.
Along that line, a business executive wouldn't be that bad of a choice, the only problem is they wouldn't know how to work the political infighting that comes inside the Beltway.

 

[jgmacg]

I think we could pick folks at random and they'd do just as well. Seriously.

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

Not Kodos.
He's had enough of you people.