PUMA is the most stupid acronym, ever.

Personally, I think for what Obama is trying to do with his campaign, Sebelius is the best choice there is by a long-shot.

I’m so sick and tired about hearing how Hillary was qualified.
Life is unfair, things don’t turn out as you plan etc. etc.

I think that these people are secretly part of “operation chaos” and are rethugs trying to create more tension in the dems.

hasn’t Hillary told them to STFU yet?

I think writers are rooting for the candidates with names best suited for bylines (I’m guilty of pulling out “Raising Kaine” but I did it with tongue in cheek).

Did you see that the PUMA “Conference” was an epic failure. They were supposed to get 250 people registered and in attendance so that they could meet the minimum requirements of the hotel where the RBC meeting was held. Less than 60 people showed up and they got booted to a Country Inn in Virginia. And the people who did attend were… colorful (that’s a euphemism for insane).

Karmakin, I agree. I am so sick of hearing this no-woman-except-Hillary bullshit. Sebelius would be a wonderful choice.

I’m not convinced that Sebelius adds much to the Obama thing.  I think he needs to pick somebody who is a well-acknowledged “heavy hitter” in areas where he lacks oomph.

I agree, but you need to first define where he lacks “oomph”.

Despite what people keep saying, foreign policy isn’t it.  He won the primary based in large part on his foreign policy instincts.  Picking someone who is “better” on foreign policy by the Villager metric on these things will doom his message to the seven hells of failure faster than anything McCain could do.

Obama needs to be looking for things he actually lacks - and not get convinced by the Village that he needs to do some kind of “shoring up” of his foreign policy cred when his biggest selling point is that he was right on foreign policy issues when these fools that the Village keeps propping up (like Biden and Bayh) were actually wrong.

I’ll go ahead and make this prediction - if Obama picks someone perceived as having “more foreign policy experience” than he does, he will lose.  Because the only thing he has going for him is his “vision” and if he drops that then he’s got nothing.

What will Candidate “X” - bring and detract from Obama.  Earlier on - for example - I thought that Senator Jim Webb - would add - “the military experience” + helping with Virginia - but others say he’s not a good candidate.

Sam Nunn - adds - age/experience - Military - Respect - helps counter - the “too liberal” - mindset.

Bayh - No assets I can see at all - not supposed to be a good campaigner

Sibelius - will she bring in Women? - or bring controversy - “why not Hillary?” things + -the supposed feared -  Black + Women - need more middle of the road (safe- reactionary) - Kansas and its part of the Midwest seem rather lost to the Democrats.

I don’t have “answers” - beyond - thinking Idiotic - things like: “Bayh because he’ll bring in Indiana which is a ‘swing state’ - which is simply totally ridiculous.

It would seem to me that A Democrat - who could help the Democrats - with Florida and/or Ohio or have some appeal that might draw several smaller states might be an asset, but

the VP candidate can - hurt the campaign - but really can’t necessarily be a Big Help.   

Few - really loved Cheney - though he helped the “maturity” - “tough/conservative” - base - Bush and more importantly - Anti-Kerry - really killed things in 2004 - and Karl Rove took a lot with his tactics while the Demos - fumbled and bumbled along.

Hopefully - Obama - will have good advisers and be Strong during the rest of the campaign!

Besides - RACISM (not “inexperience) as a big factor - the Demos - should mop up in November - from Obama down to both houses of Congress.  Hopefully - Obama’s message will resonate with - us “old White Folks” - in sufficient numbers to win.

Thanks!

What’s gone wrong with this blog?

Have you been vetted, Jesse?

I’m confused.  Is VP speculation unfeminist?

I’d like some evidence that Hattie ever actually liked this blog.

Meanwhile, I’m not sure how they manage this but I think PUMA actually stands for Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don’t. It’s a consistent philosophy, too - it applies to taking their existence seriously, veep picks, calling women the backbone of the party, and more.

Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if they continued to use barackobama.com as the primary URL they publicize. You’d still probably want to grab one obvious combined-names site, but since there are so many combinations (.com, .net, with or without 08), the old idea of grabbing everything to keep your opponents from using it seems pretty outdated. I’ve yet to see an effective use of that since whitehouse.com. Anyone who doesn’t know barackobama.com after this point would probably use google rather than trying to guess the URL.

Wasn’t it found out that PUMA is just a glorified organization of Republican sock puppets and concern trolls made flesh?

Why yes, Ben, it was, but your memory of facts and details is KILLING this blog.

I’m not convinced that Sebelius adds much to the Obama thing.

She reinforces him politically and philosophically, without being an obvious attempt at compensating for some kind of imagined deficiency.  I like that, personally, because Democratic insecurity (openly fretting about ‘security,’ FP, swing states, ‘experience,’ blahblahblahblah ad infinitum) is so painfully apparent and unnecessary.

I’m warming up to the idea of Biden. He would be a great attack dog. I’d love to see him tear into some lightweight like Romney or Crist at the VP debates.

Yeah, hes a big mouth. Yeah, hes too pro corporate sometimes (come on, hes from Delaware!) Still its the best of the names given. I don’t think Sebelius is really on the radar screen.

“Kathleen Sebelius, while qualified, is not nearly as experienced or qualified as Hillary Clinton.”

Well maybe that is true, but she also did not spend the better part of the year talking about how Obama is inexperienced and not ready to lead and (unlike John McCain) has not passed some shifting “commander in chief threshold.”  And then continued saying these things well after it was clear that Obama would be the nominee.

I like Clinton just fine, but I don’t know how anyone could object to Obama picking a running mate that hasn’t openly tried any tactic possible to destroy him and his chances of winning the presidency.  A bare minimum qualification for VP is a believable respect for and belief in the person at the top of the ticket.

What’s gone wrong with this blog?

I blame Pamela Anderson and her superfluous third arm.

I really like McCaskill. Its a shame shes only been in the Senate two years, otherwise she’d be great for VP. Hell, I think people should keep an eye on her for being the first woman President in the future.

Timmeh has a crappy gay rights record (as pointed out above), is lukewarm on choice, and has been a mediocre governor. I can’t believe hes even being considered.

What’s gone wrong with this blog?

Unfortunately, it’s gone blind and mad with Hillary-hatred. It’s not you, Hattie.

If by Hillary hatred you mean lack of Obama hatred and genuine desire for him to win, then I am guilty as charged.

If by Hillary hatred you mean lack of Obama hatred and genuine desire for him to win, then I am guilty as charged.

Nope—-I’ve got no problem with that.

I do find it puzzling that even as bloggers here have written about the “myth” of the PUMA, the specter of the bitter, angry, narrow-minded Hillary loyalist is still eagerly conjured up in so many posts and comment threads. Personally, I’m incredibly disappointed with Obama (for reasons well documented by other feminists and LGBTs), and I’d love to see Pandagon regularly addressing the very real concerns his campaign is raising for many of us. But when I stop in here lately—-and, to be fair, I don’t do so as often as I used to, so perhaps I’ve missed some revelant posts—-much of what I find is contempt for those of us who aren’t ready to fall into lockstep behind Obama.

I’m not asking for that to change; it’s not my blog, and I’m not a concern troll. But Hattie asked what had gone wrong, and she (I’m assuming Hattie’s a she!) got immediately shot down and personally insulted, so I thought I’d let her know she wasn’t alone and she wasn’t crazy. YMMV.

“Kathleen Sebelius, while qualified, is not nearly as experienced or qualified as Hillary Clinton.”

That’s not, you know, actually true.  She’s a two-term governor after 8 years as state insurance commisioner and 8 years in the state Legislature.  Stacks up well against a two-term senator who held no prior elective office . . .

I’m incredibly disappointed with Obama (for reasons well documented by other feminists and LGBTs)

Obama’s positions on feminist and LGBT issues are better than those of any major party candidate in my lifetime.  There as good or better than Hillary’s, unless you count the fact that Hillary’s a woman as a postion on feminist issues.

Lizard, as Ben D. said above, “PUMA is just a glorified organization of Republican sock puppets and concern trolls made flesh”. I don’t think anyone here is confusing genuine progressive/Democratic Clinton supporters with these clowns, who, yes, get real media attention. (The Schuster slapdown on MSNBC recently, where he pointed out that these idiots were not respecting Clinton or her choices, was priceless.)

The commenter quoted in Auguste’s post above was making one fuck of a lousy argument. It’s one thing to respect Clinton for her all her talents.* It’s another to denigrate another smart, tough, experienced politician like Sebelius, or to assume that her nomination would be pure tokenism—an affirmative action hire of an empty skirt, say—rather than an endorsement of an excellent candidate in her own right. Just because the PUMAs are ratfuckers, or some diehard Clinton supporters make shitty arguments, doesn’t mean that the bloggers or commenters here hate Clinton or hold all Clinton supporters in contempt. But people who make shitty arguments do get mocked. It’s the blogosphere. It’s what we do.

* (If she had won the nomination, I’d support her, even if I wondered about her weak spot, her ability to potentially bring out a lot of diehard conservatives. I think she’d be a great choice for Veep, even with the potential weakness I just mentioned, because she is so damn smart and tough—BUT she could be a real liability because of the way she explicitly and repeatedly denigrated Obama versus McCain. And, of course, Bill could be both a great positive and a great negative.)

Rea, for the record, I was disappointed with her too, and my reservations about Obama are about more than feminist/LGBT issues.

Rea, for the record, I was disappointed with her too, and my reservations about Obama are about more than feminist/LGBT issues.

Well, we run into the classic paradox of lefty politics.  As I said back in the primaries, I didn’t want a candidate who agreeed with me on everything; I wanted the farthest left candidate with a reasonable shot at winning the general, which was Obama.  I expect to be disappointed; I want to be disappointed.

I expect to be disappointed; I want to be disappointed.

I think you’re in luck.

Obama will almost certainly have my vote in November; I just wish I could be enthusiastic about it, and I’m less so with each passing day. All of which would be much easier to swallow if he hadn’t been packaged and promoted as the candidate of “no more politics as usual!”—-not that I ever believed it, but sweet Jesus, I took a lot of beatings from people who did.

Um, where the hell did I say anything about foreign policy being an area where Obama lacks oomph????

Personally, I think Webb would be a good choice, given that Dean is considered so undesirable.  What Obama could use is somebody who can get the attention of all those high-school educated working class baby boomers with and without military experience and kids in the military.

great post..thanks

I think Sebelius is a horrible choice. Frankly, this notion that “any woman will do” is the most ignorant, sexist and patronizing crap I’ve heard in a while. Kathleen Sebelius, while qualified, is not nearly as experienced or qualified as Hillary Clinton. To pick a woman who is clearly not as qualified as Hillary, nor as large an asset to the ticket as Hillary is political suicide for Obama.

Uh, right.  ‘cause there’s nothing patronizing or sexist about saying that the only thing Sebelius could bring to the ticket is a pair of X chromosomes or that the only way in which her candidacy for vice-president should be regarded is with respect to the Other Woman.  That’s real feminist of you.

Didn’t Webb state flat out that he’s not interested?  Or am I just being naïve?

I’ll be very surprised if it’s not Biden.  It’s either Joe Biden, or Obama’s having a little fun and creating the biggest smokescreen in the world, because pretty much everyone in the punditocracy - including at least two of the VP contenders speaking anonymously - thinks it will be Biden.

Obama-Biden ‘08.

Hmm.  It makes me feel… nothing at all.  Not bad, not good.  Just… nothing.  It makes me neither more nor less inclined to vote for Obama.  He’s got my vote, and this choice wouldn’t change anything about it one way or another.

I’d love Sebelius… but I just don’t think it’s happening.  Guess we’ll find out.  Watch my cellphone battery die an hour before the text goes out.

Seriously, are you stupid, my friend?

I’m neither stupid nor your friend, but thanks for asking.

I would be so sad if it were someone who’s to the right of Obama on domestic issues.  Someone with Senator Clinton’s positions but with less media-circus fodder would be ideal.  Oh hey, you know who’s been raised as a possibility and is kinda middle-of-the-road on international affairs but very progressive domestically?  Michael Bérubé.

Ben D., I still think the stupidest acronym ever is H.E.A.T.

If it’s Biden, it’s a bit of a lost opportunity, because (should we be so lucky) the party wouldn’t be grooming anyone for the next go-around.  But that might be not a bug but a feature, in that it would leave the field wide open in 2016, and make room for some new blood.  {That was my warm-up for the freestyle mixed-metaphor medley.}

I dislike Biden because of his leadership on the bankruptcy bill, which, in addition to certain “financial inovations” in the mortgage lending industry, has done so much to tank the economy.

It’s not going to be Webb- he’s said so often enough himself- I mean, yeah, attitudinally, he’s in touch with the zeitgeist, he’s demographically perfect, but he hates campaigning, has been in the senate just as long as Obama, is relativly unvetted, and has told everyone it won’t be him.

Kaine is just this dude who people in D.C. know about because the read the Washington Post- and he won.

It will be some old white dude, like we’ve allways been up till now.

I think the conventional wisdom about VP choices- they can’t help you, they can only hurt you- will be the main reason for that choice.

From…

Unfortunately, it’s gone blind and mad with Hillary-hatred.

...to…

But when I stop in here lately—-and, to be fair, I don’t do so as often as I used to, so perhaps I’ve missed some revelant posts—-much of what I find is contempt for those of us who aren’t ready to fall into lockstep behind Obama.

...in two the space of two comments. That was <strike>cool</strike> lame.

Sorry, o.o.m.p.p., I was actually trying to be reasonable and fair after making an initial comment that I decided was overly harsh. I’ll resist the urge to be a flip-flopper in the future. Awesome use of the cool (or is it lame?) strikethrough feature, though!

*vomits*

Exactly….for so many reasons…..

Oh, stuff it, TomHilton.