Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

ok, ok --If Obama wins the nom, I want Edwards to be his Cheneyveep.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:03 PM
Original message
ok, ok --If Obama wins the nom, I want Edwards to be his Cheneyveep.
I like it!

I concede that Obama has The Mojo. His character and narrative have captivated our stupid, way-too-powerful media gatekeepers and they will let him pass on, unlike Dean and Gore.

They're making Edwards wait in customs while the gatekeeper finishes reading that old Weekly Standard. To the media, Edwards cannot be served. Not only are they on direct orders to sink Edwards to the bottom of the rundown, they don't like him. They think he's a smartypants and stuck up and too rich for his class, a white-trash wannabe. Like Gore, they make up evil gossip about him and that's the only thing they allow on the air.

The Obama vs Hillary movie is the only one they want to watch.

Whatever. Obama's a smart guy and I can get behind his platform. That he borrowed from Edwards, apparently. I don't care where he got it, it's a great platform. It's "our" platform, anyway, as Dems.

Hillary will be metaphorically beaten and raped by the RW punditry, and I get the feeling that's not a popular scenario among even the meanest of them. After all, she's practically a Republican at this point. The gatekeepers are letting her pass through, but only to be hassled to death on the main stage.

Even Buchanan and Will are speaking rationally about Obama. If that's the way our strength is flowing, I'm there. Besides, how great is it to hear O BA MA! O BA MA! screamed out by 80,000 people?

But we really really need a smart, battle tested trial lawyer warrior to roll back corporate privileges.And that is Edwards. If Edwards doesn't win the nom (and I predict he won't. Despite his telegenic good looks and silver tongue he remains invisible to the tv cameras. It simply doesn't make sense except as a direct order from executives to keep him off camera. Why, I don't know. It's an outrage, even more for Kucinich who got dumped for being short.

what a great Cheney Edwards would make! Just imagine the sort of sweeping programs they could nudge through, together with a Dem congress. Rollback of Corporate tax breaks, checks on outsourcing, Universal Healthcare, out of Iraq, return of Habeas, repudiation of torture --How ironic it would be if Cheny's bizarre theories could lead to a reversal of all the evil he did with them!

I bet he would even shut down the executive powers he wields while acting as Cheney-veep--right at the end of his second term. So others like Cheney couldn't abuse them again, later on.

We need Edwards. Obama's knowledge is wide but a bit shallow. He needs Edwards to be his Cheney.

At least, IMHO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Sarah Ibarruri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
1. I think Obama has Oprah and for some reason, Oprah controls many women's minds
I don't know if I want Edwards as his veep, but I will tell you this, whatever is not a Repuke in the White House, is fine with me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I like Oprah but she doesn't tell me how to vote. Ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sarah Ibarruri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. But some people do whatever she says....
Everything she has come out with, people run out and buy, do, etc. It's why she now has a financial empire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
90-percent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
2. Or vise- versa
I could enthusiastically support either combination!

I really, really want change. And I want a full ground up restoration of the Constitution to better than original condition!

And I want to know how much the next Democratic President is going to prosecute those that have ever served in the GWB White House!!!!!!!

-90% Jimmy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:10 PM
Response to Original message
5. Won't happen. EVER.
I think the last candidate who picked a primary opponent as Veep was Kennedy but I could be wrong. Still, it would make sense. Our candidates have learned NEVER to choose a VEEP with current ambitions or a disappointed following.

VEEPS have to be able to bring votes. After that, they need to be both impeachment and assassination insurance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. thanks for the depth
hadn't considered that--but hasn't the Bush team redefined the role of veep to be that of an executive partner in policymaking? It seems like following your premises would be going backward from that and once you take the genie out of the bottle, etc. Whoever is the next veep is going to have to deal with the Cheney precedent. Who do you trust to fill that role?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Labors of Hercules Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #5
14. um... actually, the last candidate who picked a primary opponent as veep...
Was Kerry who picked, uh... Edwards. :dunce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blarch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
7. won't happen
Obama needs a seasoned statesman as veep to make up for his lack of experience. That factor needs to be removed before the GE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. Yep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
8. Regardless of who wins the nomination there will be only one person considered for VP
General Wesley Clark.

That is already decided.

on
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Nope--Obama isn't going to reward that Clinton traitor.
Edited on Sat Jan-05-08 12:23 PM by wienerdoggie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sugar Smack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
9. I STILL fucking want Edwards.
Is this an echo of run-Al-run?:cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
10. He doesn't need Edwards as VP--Obama has more experience
as an elected official and policy-maker than Edwards does. Edwards would be a good AG.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flarney Donating Member (512 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #10
17. The thought of Edwards as AG is almost as exciting as having him as President....
He would have a lot of power as AG to focus on breaking down corporate power and exposing corruption.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Yep--he is a dogged fighter, and ethical. Perfect AG.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HamdenRice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
13. Or his GoreVeep
Gore was deeply involved in the Clinton administration but in a legal, sane way!

At any rate, that would be a great role for Edwards!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
15. Uh, sorry, he voted for the IWR
He can't have anybody on the ticket who voted for that or supported it in any way. I don't know who that exactly leaves for him to choose from. Richardson is so anti-war now, it might be okay. Wes Clark. I don't remember what Gary Hart said before the war, but he's been for getting out fairly consistently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brazos121200 Donating Member (626 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
16. What about Al Gore for Obama's running mate if he gets the
nomination. Doubt Al would take it since he has already spent 8 years as Clinton's veep, but who knows? Gore would bring his vast experience and integrity to the ticket. Could Gore be Obama's Cheney?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PADemD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
18. Obama/Biden
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krabigirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
20. Fine. but I think he'd pick a Republican VP (unity) or Lieberman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. Lieberman? LOL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustABozoOnThisBus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 01:06 PM
Response to Original message
21. Obama / Clinton?
:popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
90-percent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
22. Gary Hart
didn't he make some extremely correct predictions and warning about TERRORISM in the late 90's that were both right on the mark and completely ignored?

That gives him a lot of credibility in my book. Would love to see him serve the country where his talents could help the USA get back to high moral and competent ground!

-90% Jimmy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-05-08 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. I love that idea--
(I'm from Colorado--gotta love Gary!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 12th 2024, 03:20 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC