No Dem Senators for Dem VP nominee. Period.

[countmyvote4real]

We're already losing one with Senator Obama. We need to get more (and better) Democratic Senators to break the GOP obstruction.

[mikelgb]

1. thank you

no webb
or clinton
i'd love Fiengold but no

[Barack_America]

2. What about Dem governors?

Who are currently serving?

[Catch22Dem]

17. Gov. Brad Henry (D-OK)

Obama supporter and VERY popular governor in a VERY red state.

[featherman]

29. Oklahoma is unwinnable IMO. The only state besides Utah in which not a single county

voted Dem in 2004. Even Idaho and Wyoming had counties that went Dem but not OK or UT

[countmyvote4real]

25. Governors don't serve in the Senate and are not part of my argument.

:banghead:

[Barack_America]

39. We need Democratic governors to block GOP obstruction too. nt

[jwirr]

36. That does not hurt our majority so it is okay.

[Va Lefty]

3. I agree

hope he picks Wes Clark or Bill Richardson

[featherman]

4. It will not be a Washington insider - makes no sense

Look for a Governor or private citizen

[DevonRex]

12. I agree with the no insider thing. nt

[Ashy Larry]

5. If a senator leaves office, a replacement is appointed by the governor.

At least that's how it is in VA. Our Governor is a democrat so he would appoint a democrat.

[DevonRex]

13. I wonder if that's true in every case. Sure would be nice.

[Catch22Dem]

21. That's not how it is in every state (n/t)

[jwirr]

38. Your Senator would be fine then - what we are after here is keeping

the whole congress a Democratic as possible.

[11 Bravo]

41. Correct, and Mark Warner is about to hand Jim Gilmore his ass in November.

My beloved Old Dominion is, at long last, beginning to see the light.

[Recursion]

52. They won't even have to change the stationary

Replace the bad Warner with the good one. Though as republicans go, Warner is one of the more human.

[goldcanyonaz]

6. Other than RIchardson and Edwards who do you choose?

[featherman]

Keeping my eye on Gov. Schweitzer (MT) and Gov. Ritter (CO)

Both Catholic western governors of the right age. Unfortunately I doubt it can be a woman because of the "too much change" problem. I could be wrong about that. But those two fit the bill for now. I also like Wes Clark but have heard that Richardson can't pass the vetting and Edwards simply does not want it and is quite firm about this.

[insanity]

7. amen

One seat is one too many. We need all the majority we can get.

[sfam]

8. K&R. Agree. Lets go OUTSIDE of Washington...nt

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Raksha]

24. You mean a Democratic governor.

You're a newbie, so try not to use the Newtism "democrat governor," using the word "Democrat" as an adjective. It may just be a habit from hearing it so much, but people on DU won't trust you if you do that. We HATE being called "the Democrat Party" and we don't have "Democrat governors." We have Democratic governors.

[lidem]

28. thanks

for the heads-up. i'm aware of the negative connotation of "Democrat party" and "Democrat senator." i was typing quickly...

[cbayer]

10. I trust Obama to make the best decision and would not try and second guess him. nt.

[Toucano]

16. That's no fun!

Of course I trust him, but he speculation and arm chair speculative odds picking is fun!

[DevonRex]

11. And maybe losing Kennedy, although we hope and pray he's

good as new in no time flat.

[crankychatter]

14. I couldn't agree more - no text

[papapi]

15. Tim Kaine for VP!

[Barack_America]

40. Seconded.

And can I go ahead and "Third" that as well? ;)

[JVS]

18. RFK Jr.?

washington outsider

brings in an HRC person

[Catch22Dem]

20. Heroin bust

Doesn't bother me one bit, I fucking love him, but would be in the media non stop.

[newmajority]

19. About time someone else posted this.

I've said so in hundreds of threads. Two senators is simply political suicide. Even McCain knows this, and he's talking to governors for that very reason. Obama's selection team should be doing the same.

Richardson
Schweitzer
(my current top two choices)

Sebelius
Warner
(not my favorites, but there are strategic reasons to consider them)

Some senators.... Joe Biden, for instance, might be chosen to be in the cabinet later on. But in that case, the Delaware governor's mansion is an open seat, so we won't know what the situation is there until after November anyway. A Democratic governor would certainly be favorable if they had to replace Biden because he was picked to be Secretary of State.

[MadBadger]

22. I disagree because I want Jim Webb.

[MiniMe]

32. Virginia is definitely off limits

Remember, Webb wouldn't have won if George Allen hadn't had his Macaca moment. Also remember, Webb was recently a republican. I think the only reason he became a dem was because of the horror of the Bush administration.

One thing that didn't really come up in the Senate race is that Webb wrote a paper when the military academies started letting women in about how bad it was, and that women didn't even belong if the service. Webb thought they should just shut down all the academies rather than let women in. I don't think he feels that way anymore, but it certainly wouldn't play well with the diehard Hillary supporters.

[Faygo Kid]

33. That did come up in the Senate race. I like Webb, but that would be a concern.

I'm not sure "diehard" Hillary supporters are coming back, anyway, but Webb brings a lot to the table - and probably Virginia to the electoral column, too. Plus, Gov. Kaine is a Dem.

[Faryn Balyncd]

35. & With Dem. Gov. Kaine, Webb's Senate seat would STAY Democratic.

Webb's essay on class (in the WSJ), and on the way working people have been screwed by Wall Street & the GOP, is a textbook study in how to confront power with truth.

He published this right after he was elected, and we learned quickly that Webb was much more than a powerful antiwar voice.

Class Struggle

American workers have a chance to be heard.

by JIM WEBB

The most important--and unfortunately the least debated--issue in politics today is our society's steady drift toward a class-based system, the likes of which we have not seen since the 19th century. America's top tier has grown infinitely richer and more removed over the past 25 years. It is not unfair to say that they are literally living in a different country. Few among them send their children to public schools; fewer still send their loved ones to fight our wars. They own most of our stocks, making the stock market an unreliable indicator of the economic health of working people. The top 1% now takes in an astounding 16% of national income, up from 8% in 1980. The tax codes protect them, just as they protect corporate America, through a vast system of loopholes.

Incestuous corporate boards regularly approve compensation packages for chief executives and others that are out of logic's range. As this newspaper has reported, the average CEO of a sizeable corporation makes more than $10 million a year, while the minimum wage for workers amounts to about $10,000 a year, and has not been raised in nearly a decade. When I graduated from college in the 1960s, the average CEO made 20 times what the average worker made. Today, that CEO makes 400 times as much.

In the age of globalization and outsourcing, and with a vast underground labor pool from illegal immigration, the average American worker is seeing a different life and a troubling future. Trickle-down economics didn't happen. Despite the vaunted all-time highs of the stock market, wages and salaries are at all-time lows as a percentage of the national wealth. At the same time, medical costs have risen 73% in the last six years alone. Half of that increase comes from wage-earners' pockets rather than from insurance, and 47 million Americans have no medical insurance at all.

Manufacturing jobs are disappearing. Many earned pension programs have collapsed in the wake of corporate "reorganization." And workers' ability to negotiate their futures has been eviscerated by the twin threats of modern corporate America: If they complain too loudly, their jobs might either be outsourced overseas or given to illegal immigrants.

This ever-widening divide is too often ignored or downplayed by its beneficiaries. A sense of entitlement has set in among elites, bordering on hubris. When I raised this issue with corporate leaders during the recent political campaign, I was met repeatedly with denials, and, from some, an overt lack of concern for those who are falling behind. A troubling arrogance is in the air among the nation's most fortunate. Some shrug off large-scale economic and social dislocations as the inevitable byproducts of the "rough road of capitalism." Others claim that it's the fault of the worker or the public education system, that the average American is simply not up to the international challenge, that our education system fails us, or that our workers have become spoiled by old notions of corporate paternalism.

Still others have gone so far as to argue that these divisions are the natural results of a competitive society. Furthermore, an unspoken insinuation seems to be inundating our national debate: Certain immigrant groups have the "right genetics" and thus are natural entrants to the "overclass," while others, as well as those who come from stock that has been here for 200 years and have not made it to the top, simply don't possess the necessary attributes.

Most Americans reject such notions. But the true challenge is for everyone to understand that the current economic divisions in society are harmful to our future. It should be the first order of business for the new Congress to begin addressing these divisions, and to work to bring true fairness back to economic life. Workers already understand this, as they see stagnant wages and disappearing jobs.

America's elites need to understand this reality in terms of their own self-interest. A recent survey in the Economist warned that globalization was affecting the U.S. differently than other "First World" nations, and that white-collar jobs were in as much danger as the blue-collar positions which have thus far been ravaged by outsourcing and illegal immigration. That survey then warned that "unless a solution is found to sluggish real wages and rising inequality, there is a serious risk of a protectionist backlash" in America that would take us away from what they view to be the "biggest economic stimulus in world history."

More troubling is this: If it remains unchecked, this bifurcation of opportunities and advantages along class lines has the potential to bring a period of political unrest. Up to now, most American workers have simply been worried about their job prospects. Once they understand that there are (and were) clear alternatives to the policies that have dislocated careers and altered futures, they will demand more accountability from the leaders who have failed to protect their interests. The "Wal-Marting" of cheap consumer products brought in from places like China, and the easy money from low-interest home mortgage refinancing, have softened the blows in recent years. But the balance point is tipping in both cases, away from the consumer and away from our national interest.

The politics of the Karl Rove era were designed to distract and divide the very people who would ordinarily be rebelling against the deterioration of their way of life. Working Americans have been repeatedly seduced at the polls by emotional issues such as the predictable mantra of "God, guns, gays, abortion and the flag" while their way of life shifted ineluctably beneath their feet. But this election cycle showed an electorate that intends to hold government leaders accountable for allowing every American a fair opportunity to succeed.

With this new Congress, and heading into an important presidential election in 2008, American workers have a chance to be heard in ways that have eluded them for more than a decade. Nothing is more important for the health of our society than to grant them the validity of their concerns. And our government leaders have no greater duty than to confront the growing unfairness in this age of globalization.

Mr. Webb is the Democratic senator-elect from Virginia. (Published November 15, 2006)


http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009246

:kick:



:kick:



:kick:

[Ashy Larry]

42. You don't know what you're talking about.

Webb would have won even without the whole "macaca" issue. It was not a surprise to Virginians that George Allen is a racist. It didn't swing any votes. Webb was very clear about his political evolution (from democrat to republican back to democrat). You can read about it in his books.

As for the article he wrote 30 years ago (the language of which he has apologized for), it was brought up in the campaign constantly. The Allen campaign held a press conference with female naval academy graduates who attacked him. They ran tv ads about it. It backfired. One of the women who participated in the press conference ended up endorsing Webb.

Hillary Clinton did a big fundraiser for Webb and said the article was a non-issue. She praised Webb for opening up opportunities for women when he was Secretary of the Navy.

Webb's wife, daughters, and even his ex-wife campaigned for him. His campaign manager, finance director, and communications director were all women.

[MiniMe]

46. And he didn't recently change political parties?

He wasn't a neocon, but he was a repug until *co disgusted him that much. He was St. Ronnie's secretary of the Navy. I like Webb too, but he is pretty conservative.

[Qutzupalotl]

23. Wes Clark!

[Hutzpa]

26. You not giving up on Wes Clark... are you

is he paying you? :shrug:

[Qutzupalotl]

31. You have me confused with someone else.

I've just TODAY come around to accept him. I've been hoping for Biden mostly.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6300912&mesg_id=6301127

[Hippo_Tron]

27. If their state has a Dem Governor they get to appoint another Dem Senator

Obama will be replaced by Blagojevich allowing us to retain that seat.

[Bluzmann57]

34. Is Blagojevich going to be Gov for very long?

This guy is about as dirty as they come and it sounds like there is a huge movement to replace him and quickly.

[Hippo_Tron]

44. His term isn't up until 2010

[Bluzmann57]

49. The talk of impeachment has begun anew though

And Blago is so dirty it might just take hold this time around. I have talked to some downstate Illinois Democrats who just don't like him and that can't bode well for him.

[Mme. Defarge]

30. Excellent point ...

Executive experience is what is needed to complement Obama.

RICHARDSON.

[MercutioATC]

37. Brian Schweitzer - Governor of Montana

Great possibility

[barack the house]

43. Yes, this is what makes it good for Sebelius as a govenor. It's meaningless without senate seats.

[Spider Jerusalem]

45. Illinois is not likely to elect a Republican.

There are several other states where a Republican replacement for any Senator is not likely. And the electoral math means an almost certain increased Senate majority. This is not a zero-sum game.

[Pablo Suarez]

47. I agree

We need the votes.

[tekisui]

48. Agreed. We need all the Senators we can get, to kick Lieberman out.

And reach a filibuster-proof majority.

Obama/Clark 08!!!

[JoFerret]

50. Don't be faint hearted

.

[tokenlib]

51. another VP thread..another plug for Schweitzer...

The country seems to like rancher types like Reagan and Bush (yeah I know neither one is a rancher though they lived on a ranch)

So lets give them the real thing--Schweitzer would be a fascinating pick....