My First Convention Column: Okay, so I was wrong
I still think Joe Biden should have been suggested for possibly the Secretary of State role; not Veep.
All right, okay; so many of my blog-detractors are happy today: since I was wrong about Barack Obama’s vice-presidential nominee. But am I? Am I really?
Almost four months ago I said that he should (and would) select Kathleen Sebileus, the governor of Kansas; this morning he officially did not. Barack Obama picked Senator Joe Biden of Delaware, and text-messaged that fact to millions of his supporters, at almost exactly 3:00 am. Touche!
I am disappointed with this selection; but not enough to make me want to desert the ticket. The alternative to Obama/Biden is not an option for me. I still think that Joe Biden is better suited for a role as Secretary of State -should Barack Obama become the next president of the USA. Biden is a foreign policy expert. He is also a domestic policy wonk and a brilliant intellectual. However, he brings many downsides to the ticket. And since I don’t want to arm Republicans any further, let’s just say that we who support Obama will have to cross our fingers on this one for quite a few reasons.
The McCain camp is going to overplay the Biden smack down of Obama during one of the presidential debates amongst democrats, where he bluntly stated (reiterated) that Barack Obama was not experienced enough for the presidency; and that were he to win: it would be tantamount to “on the job training”. Ouch! Touché! Game, set, match?
Out of this selection there will be some gems for republican talking-heads. They will glean nuggets from Biden’s plagiarism of a British Member of Parliament many years ago, and they will wait with bated breath for another “clean, smooth, articulate” Biden-moment. To Biden’s defense (and Obama’s), the democrats will now get an expressive pit-bull campaigner, who has the ability to kick McCain in his balls with subtlety -and without breaking a sweat, or his boyish grin.
Joe Biden is one tough cookie who speaks his mind; he says what he means and means what he says. He also has a tendency to suffer from “foot in the mouth” disease. He needs to pray that the good Lord makes his words very sweet and tasty: just in case he has to eat a few over the next month or two, or three. I will be pleasantly surprised if he doesn’t.
I still think that Barack should have chosen a woman (preferably Kathleen Sebileus). Governor Sebileus would have been a much safer choice than Biden on so many levels. Plus the biggest factor that Barack missed is the set-up for a female president. If the Obama/Biden ticket were to be successful, it gives Biden a four to eight year inside track (as a democrat) to becoming the favorite for the next presidential slot: not a woman. So then we will see another white male having a leg up on the presidential pathway. We will have to possibly wait for another four to eight years further (thus eight to sixteen) to see if they might just select a female veep (nominee) -who could be set up in order to be groomed for the presidency. This selection does nothing for female empowerment and it doesn’t harbor well for future gender inclusion. It’s a man’s world: and even more so now.
It has been two dozen years since the Geraldine Ferraro disaster; do we have to wait another twenty four years for a woman to head up the ticket, or be given the second-spot again? We know that the Neanderthal Republican Party won’t even go there anytime within the next millennium; so what does this say for empowerment and inclusion? What does this say about the state of feminism today?
Haven’t white men held the reigns of power for too long without including women, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and people from other races, ethnicities, cultural and national heritage(s)? Haven’t they demonstrated that they need help in making the big decisions that affect us all in this world? Shouldn’t there be more input in decision-making from others? Especially in a post-nine-eleven world where we are now all terroristically affected by policy decisions made over the last couple centuries. This is no longer just a country for old white men; this should be a country for power-sharing amongst equals: men and women.
If you agree with me in principle, then you will have to admit that the best way to really, dramatically and seriously change things would be through a relay system. Remember the Olympic games of last week (in China); the male USA running team dropped the baton and they all lost. Anyone who gets to be the vice-president today gets a leg up on obtaining the presidency, no matter what the success ratio has been over US history: it’s as simple as that. The vice-president’s almost daily attention alone -given today’s high tech media strategies- would be proverbial in worth. It would also yield an almost insurmountable lead in terms of name recognition, fundraising and exposure. Barack should have made it a two member relay team; he should have selected a woman. He could have transitioned women for a smooth baton hand off. That would have been a winner; this selection is “so-so” at best.
All this talk about real change is just talk if you don’t want to walk the walk. If you don’t want to sacrifice “business as usual” for real change then you start to become suspect (at best). Barack Obama is putting his “change” message at risk with this selection. Biden has been in Congress for over thirty years. If you remove Hillary Clinton from the picture, tell me the woman with the inside track to be president four to eight years from now. And I am talking a female from both Democrat and Republican parties (forget Independents, or those affiliated to some other political party). Look, by now I would think that we all know Hillary Clinton is more problematic a selection for democrats than her fanatic supporters want to admit; so who as a female, is warming up in the bullpen: so to speak?
You become president through being a governor, senator, congressman/woman, cabinet member (especially a high ranking one), an army general, a war hero, or such. There aren’t too many avenues for success in this area. There aren’t too many women positioned to get a leg up on the presidency: go check it yourself. Beating Hillary in the primaries was a major accomplishment for Barack; not selecting a woman as the vice-presidential nominee, could be something major that he may not be able to surmount. I wish him lots of luck in November. I will still be voting for him though.
Stay tuned-in folks.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
2008 Elections | Democratic National Convention | Barack Obama | Joe Biden
Sorry, Rock
Submitted by sidnora on 24 August 2008 - 12:44pm.
I have to agree with Dan on this one, though I, too, look forward to reading everything you put up here. I even have a couple of points to add to Dan's argument, and I rarely think of anything he hasn't thought of first.
I know you'll probably blast me for this first point, but speaking as a woman, I think that putting up a ticket made up of the first-ever African-American nominee and the second-ever woman nominee would have been too heavy a lift even for a Democratic base as energized as we are this year. As soon as it became evident to me that Obama was going to be the nominee I assumed that the running mate would be either a youngish white guy with a military background, or an old white guy. And that's what we've got. Not a bad choice for an old white guy, either, though I agree that I'd have preferred to see him as Secretary of State. You can accuse me of being timid or cynical, and you may be right, but I can live with that. I feel like I've got my work cut out for me just getting Barack elected, without having to deal with latent sexism, on top of it. Clinton came so close to winning that I feel hopeful that I will live to see a woman president.
Second, if Barack wins and has a successful first term, I suspect he'll choose a different running mate for his second campaign, with Biden's blessing. Biden knows he'll be too old to run in 2016, and in four years Obama will have proven himself to those who worry today about his relative youth and inexperience. Obama will be able to choose a running mate with a better chance of carrying the party forward when his term is ended. I'm sure he and Biden had this discussion, too.
Dan, as to Ferraro's candidacy, it's easy in retrospect to say that they should have let her loose, but if you could put yourself back into the mindset of that time, there was a lot less "women kick ass" and a lot more "goddamn bra-burners wanna take over the world" than there is today. As the first woman on a national ticket ever, it was a fine line she had to walk. Also her effectiveness was pretty much neutralized by the fact that she hadn't been sufficiently vetted. She ended up spending all her political capital dealing with her husband's history.
More thoughts
Submitted by Dan Jacoby on 24 August 2008 - 4:55pm.
The idea of Obama choosing a different running mate in 2012 is fascinating; I hope we'll be able to talk about it as that election approaches.
An added benefit of choosing Biden is his record on women's issues. Specifically:
He led a charge in the Senate to put violence against women on the docket as a specific, separate issue, at a time when very few people in the spotlight was doing so (the Violence Against Women Act, 1994).
NARAL's press release on the choice of Biden as running mate is self-explanatory.
NOW seems to feel similarly, although they originally preferred Clinton.
Basically, if Hillary (and Bill) Clinton get out there on the campaign trail, most of the Clinton supporters should end up voting for Obama/Biden.
A couple of differences
I've always found your columns to be thoughtful and intelligent, so when I disagree with some (only some) of what you write here, it is a respectful disagreement. It is, however, still a disagreement, so...
First, I believe that Governor Sibelius would not have been a good running mate. There were two problems with the Mondale/Ferraro ticket, and both were strategic problems. The first was the Mondale backed off his statement that both he and Reagan would raise taxes; he should have followed it with a list of taxes Reagan had already raised. The second (and this is where I find Sibelius to be a problem) was the decision to tone down Ferraro during her lone debate with George H.W. Bush. They should have "let Ferraro be Ferraro," after which she could have been the one to boast of kicking a little ass. Kathleen Sibelius is naturally soft-spoken, and that's a problem in a running mate. Would she make a fantastic Vice President? Quite possibly. But as a running mate her style would have been detrimental to the ticket, and the Obama campaign cannot afford to make those choices.
Regarding Biden's plagiarism of Neil Kinnock (such as it was), that won't be an issue. First, he actually did credit Kinnock almost every time he used Kinnock's words; it just happens that the one time he failed to do so was caught on videotape. Second, as they pointed out on MSNBC, if the McCain campaign tries to bring it up he can just respond with the Keating Five scandal, which broke a couple of years later. I don't think McCain wants to go there again; even though he was officially cleared of criminal activity, the taint of that scandal would hurt him, especially as he was officially found to have exercised "poor judgment."
Next, the odds that Joe Biden would run for President in 2016 (assuming a two-term Obama presidency) are slim. He would be 74 years old on January 20, 2017. Even if he did run, he probably would not have nearly the inside track most Vice Presidents have. The truth is that we probably have no idea who will be the leading contenders eight years from now. Meanwhile, don't count Hillary Clinton out; after all, she'll only be 69. But if you want other women who could be considered at this point to be legitimate contenders, look at Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano or Alaska Governor Sarah Palin (one Democrat, one Republican).