Do you think that selecting Biden to be his running mate was a good choice or a bad choice by Obama? (strictly from Obama's perspective)

I would say no, but I can't think of a better choice for Obama. I'm not sure he had a good fit with any of his potential running mates.

I'm interested to see what Mxy has to say, but to me, Biden was a good (but risky) choice by Obama because it really diffused the "lack of foreign policy experience" line of attack.

but I can't think of a better choice for Obama.

Joe Biden did...

and he'll be the first to tell you

"Make no mistake about this, Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States of America. Lets get that straight."

"She's easily qualified to be vice president ... and quite frankly, might have been a better pick than me."

Stating the obvious, really.

This election could've been over a month ago.

Hillary has no baggage and is insightful.

As long as Biden continues to do what every VP should (disappear) he's a marginal pick.

This election could've been over a month ago.

Who says it wasn't?

I don't have a problem with Biden's thoughts there, he's right she "might" have been a better pick (assuming that Obama could have effectively worked with her, which is a big assumption).

I think Obama just decided that the campaign against Hillary was just too heated to bring her onto the ticket and pretend that none of it ever happened. In going a different direction with Biden, he eliminated that constant reminder that people would always have (real or imagined) that Obama and Hillary didn't like each other.

Another theory, one that I'm still unsure about, is that Hillary would have been the pick had she wanted it.

the question wasnt who was the best choice. it was whether he was a good one, imo yes.

No, I don't think it was a good choice. I think it was a neutral choice, given that he had to choose first and didn't know who McCain would select. I think he could've done better with either Schweitzer or Richardson.

Hillary has no baggage and is insightful.

As long as Biden continues to do what every VP should (disappear) he's a marginal pick.

There's Bill, Whitewater and the fact that some people (mostly men, IMO) quite simply just don't like her.

I would say that more people had a negative opinion of Hillary than they did of Biden, although that's speculation on my part.

Obama didn't need any unnecessary negativity in his campaign, especially since it was built on having a positive message/hope.

There would have been positive elements to having Hillary's groundbreaking story on the ticket, but would a black man/woman ticket be less palatable than a black man/old white dude ticket? In some circles, I think so.

It's interesting to think about how a Obama/Clinton vs. McCain/x campaign might have been different.

I'm guessing that 99% of us would still not know who Sarah Palin is.

Glenn, I think it's a safe bet to say more people hate Clinton than Biden. Very safe.

Which is unfair, because she has no baggage.

She's also insightful.

In addition to Whitewater and Bill, I'd consider her early support for the Iraq war as baggage, but in her defense, outside of Obama, you'd be hard pressed to find many that weren't dragged down that road by both the fraudulant administration and shoddy intelligence.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUKNOA23858720070122?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0

http://rlv.zazzle.com/no_baggage_shirt-p235654461119467108bt_400.jpg

So you're voting "bad choice", then?

Sorry that "no baggage" is not a poll option.

I voted yes because it wasn't a bad choice.

I voted yes because it wasn't a bad choice.


View Poll Results:
Was Biden a good choice for Obama?

Yes
Codename V, Glenn, MoTown 3 60.00%

No
Uncle Mxy, Wilfredo Ledezma 2 40.00%

I'm glad to see you V and that Minnesotan agree with me.

Hillary has no baggage and is insightful.
<laughs> Riiiigggghhhtttt....

Hillary's national approval only exceeds 50% when she's humiliated.

As for foreign policy, I'd stand by my choices. Richardson is like Biden on the foreign policy front. Schweitzer's actually lived all over the world and can say "I've negotiated energy matters with the Saudis -- in Arabic", so would not be a net negative. It turns out that with the economy, foreign policy is almost incidental. Picking someone who's balanced a tough budget would have gone a long way.

Has no one read the Palin thread?

Has no one read the Palin thread?

That went over my head, but I got it now.

http://www.ecobusinesslinks.com/images/Scooter/honda_insight.jpg (http://www.ecobusinesslinks.com/images/Scooter/honda_insight.jpg)

I'm glad to see you V and that Minnesotan agree with me.

I'm still up late every night working on ways to regain your approval.

I'm so cold inside now.

I think it was a good safe choice. He effectively ended McCain's experience attacks with that pick. All you hear now is distributing the wealth and socialism. You would have heard that with whoever he picked because Obama's economic policies would have been the same.

My pick was Edwards before the scandal, but I quickly picked Biden after Edwards said he wouldn't take the job if asked (before the scandal still).

I think Hillary would have got him the win also, perhaps even by a wider margin. However, I think Hillary would have cramped his style a little in the White House.

I wonder if he wins, if Richardson might run with him in 2012. It would give him a good leg up for his own run at the White House in 2016. I guess it depends on what Biden wants to do (but he seems like he'd do whatever is best for the cause).

Obama didn't have very many good choices, honestly.

Bill Richardson has more of a tendency to shoot off at the mouth than even Biden does, and his gaffes are waaaay dumber. I'd like to see him as a potential SecState, but nothing with a huge public speaking gig. I wouldn't put him at the UN.

Picking Hillary just invites all of the old Bill gang into the campaign, which would have been a huge mistake. That's her baggage - wherever she goes, she brings the old Blue Dog advisers with her. Unacceptable.

Picking Dodd would have been a massive flop, as much as I like him. It would have generated exactly 0 excitement.

Picking Edwards would have turned out to be a disaster, of course, considering his affair. But I think it would have been an immediate dis to the Hillary supporters, because it would have been interpreted as excluding her specifically. Think about it: there were 3 people in the top tier of the Democratic primaries, and one of them was a woman, and that would have been the one who got left out. Bad idea.

Schweitzer was kind of fun, but let's be honest here: we're talking about Obama making a Palin kind of choice, but marginally smarter. It would have been kind of gimmicky.

Harry Reid is too old, and too old-school. Nancy Pelosi is a joke. A well-placed joke, but a joke.

A supremely principled person like Feingold is awesome, but he wouldn't have had the ability to campaign at such a high level, and he's regarded by some on the right as an extremist.

Tons of other prominent Dems - Webb, etc. - didn't want the job.

Biden, however, is pretty well known for what he isn't as much as what he is. He's a seasoned professional. He doesn't have a bunch of baggage. He's dynamic (for better or for worse). He wouldn't have been viewed necessarily as anti-Hillary. He's not a yokel. He's not tightly wound up with the Blue Dog people. He's not as much of a one-note, one-issue clown as some other Dems. He's got the balls to put himself out there and campaign. He's a good debater. And he was willing to take the job.

Joe Biden did...

and he'll be the first to tell you

thats kind of funny

Its better than the Palin pick, imo. Its hard to say it's 'not' a good pick when he's winning the election.

I have to admit, I'm a little nervous about being on the opposite side of Mxy on both of these.

That's why Fool hasn't voted yet, btw.

I have to admit, I'm a little nervous about being on the opposite side of Mxy on both of these.



Well, maybe it's possible to be wrong and learn something.

I have to admit, I'm a little nervous about being on the opposite side of Mxy on both of these.

That's why Fool hasn't voted yet, btw.

Incorrect. Look at the last couple weeks of polls.

Schweitzer was kind of fun, but let's be honest here: we're talking about Obama making a Palin kind of choice, but marginally smarter. It would have been kind of gimmicky.
Obama's campaign didn't need Viagra, though. I just think he would've been better paired with a Western governor, especially given where he's spreading the map the most. Biden's got a big break because Palin was spectacularly awful down the stretch. I remember what it was like at first, with Biden soft on the offensive against his friend John. Bleah. I just have a hard time with Biden being "good" when Obama has to run ads defending him the week before an election.

The first time I read this, I thought you were saying that Schweitzer was only marginally smarter than Palin. Schweitzer's razor sharp. If Obama wins, I'd love to see him tap Schweitzer as VP in 2012 (because I don't think Biden will be a good Presidential choice at 73).

Obama's pick was geared more towards finding someone he could work with for four years than someone who'd deliver votes leading up to november. I think he believed he could win the election on his own strength as far as that goes the vp pick just had to not fuck it up for him (phew, glad it wasn't Edwards). The pick was safe, competent and probably foreshadows the kind of cabinet appointments he'll make.

Hillary would've been a disaster in the white house as vp. She'd have her own agenda and push it relentlessly. It doesn't matter that the position is constitutionally ceremonial, as a political matter she'd compete with him every day trying to be co-president. And we haven't even gotten to Bill "kiss my ring" "loose cannon" Clinton yet. In his smooth, passive-aggressive way, he'd be there trying to cement and secure his own legacy and if that conflicted with Obama, tough.

One actual and two wannabe presidents under one roof. LOL@that. Obama is smart enough not to pick people who won't respect that he's in charge.

I have to admit, I'm a little nervous about being on the opposite side of Mxy on both of these.

That's why Fool hasn't voted yet, btw.
Had you phrased the poll question negatively -- was Biden a bad choice -- we would have agreed. I just have a hard time seeing him as really "good" versus "neutral".

I just re-read this and was surprised that nobody mentioned Biden being from Pennsylvania as a factor.

Apparently, there are several areas of the state that are swinging significantly from 2000/2004 red to 2008 blue.

Hillary would've been a disaster in the white house as vp. She'd have her own agenda and push it relentlessly. It doesn't matter that the position is constitutionally ceremonial, as a political matter she'd compete with him every day trying to be co-president. And we haven't even gotten to Bill "kiss my ring" "loose cannon" Clinton yet. In his smooth, passive-aggressive way, he'd be there trying to cement and secure his own legacy and if that conflicted with Obama, tough.

One actual and two wannabe presidents under one roof. LOL@that. Obama is smart enough not to pick people who won't respect that he's in charge.
I dont believe that's a realistic scenario for two competent adults(which believe both Obama and Hillary both are). I understand why he didn't pick Hillary, but I highly doubt she'd not play ball on a chance to have VP under her belt 8 years down the road for another run. I think people are taking her bitter loss a lil' too much to heart.

I just re-read this and was surprised that nobody mentioned Biden being from Pennsylvania as a factor.
Pennsylvania is 3-4 points bluer than the nation as a whole. Given its broad mix of people, I think it's useful to think about it relative to the nation as a whole -- came to that conclusion in 2004. The 3-4 points blue thing was true for Gore and Kerry, and polls show that to be roughly the case for Obama thus far. This trend was running true before Biden was on the ticket.

Biden's familiarity with Pennsylvania doesn't hurt. It's not so much that he was born there, but that Delaware is in the west Pennsylvania media market so his face has been seen for decades. Obama was likely to win Pennsylvania without Biden, though. I don't think Biden locked the state the way Palin had locked Alaska (where I'd seen a 5 point poll before Palin was picked).

I'd argue that Biden was most helpful in Florida, if anywhere.