MyDD :: I Think It's Kaine

I Think It's Kaine

by RandyMI, Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:24:28 PM EST

For better or worse, it looks like Obama's running mate is Gov. Tim Kaine. According to [Politickerhttp://www.politickermd.com/editormd/3026/virginia-gov-tim-kaine-cancels-appearance-baltimore-fundraiser], Kaine suddenly had a "scheduling conflict".

Due to a "scheduling problem," PolitickerMD.com has learned that Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine will not attend tomorrow night's Unity '08 Fundraiser for the Maryland Democratic State Central Committee as previously planned.

The State Democratic Party learned of Kaine's cancellation earlier today.

Kaine's appearance at the Baltimore event was announced on July 11, just as speculation over his vice presidential prospects were ramping up. Some believed he would be in a secret meeting with presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama earlier today, but Kaine has insisted otherwise.

Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, Washington, D.C., Mayor Adrian Fenty, along with Gov. Martin O'Malley, the Democratic congressional delegation and state legislative leaders are still slated to attend the event at the Iguana Cantina. Over a thousand people are expected, with admission starting at $50.

Looks like we have our veeo.

Tags: Tim Kaine (all tags)

Permalink :: 116 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: I Think It's Kaine (none / 0)

No McCain hasn't picked yet.

Without Hillary its a whole new race.

by dtaylor2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:25:17 PM EST

Re: I Think It's Kaine (none / 0)

Not true at all.

Hillary has all but disappeared from the scene, and the way voters are responding to Obama, it's clear she's not missed one bit. This is Obama's nomination and Obama's campaign. Hillary is a defeated foe and is back in the Senate. Putting her on the ticket will not shake up the race dramatically. Leaving her off of it will not do so either. she's inconsequential.

by southernman on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:28:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I Think It's Kaine (2.00 / 2)

I think you are wrong.

I would guess 1 million votes wrong.

But the kicker is you are wrong in the states that you can least afford to be wrong.

by dtaylor2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:30:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I Think It's Kaine (none / 0)

I'm not wrong. I've been doing this for a while and I'm a student of politics. I'm not wrong. Hillary Clinton has all but disappeared from the national stage. other than a small band of whiny wimps, there's been no movement towards placing Hillary as V.P.

Her own chairman, Terry McAuliffe, even stated his preferred candidate today. and guess what, it wasn't Hillary.

Her absence or presence on the ticket won't make one bit of difference.

by southernman on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:33:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I Think It's Kaine (none / 0)

Ohio
PA

If Obama carries both he wins.

If he loses Ohio its grey

If he loses both he loses.

Hillary helps more than anyone else there.

by dtaylor2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:36:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Except (none / 0)

he's already ahead in both states...even the Republicans have him up 9 in Pennsylvania.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:38:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

he's down in Ohio (none / 0)

just look. He is not winning in Ohio. he is tied in Florida, and he's not ahead by much in Pennsylvania.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:03:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

WRONG (none / 0)

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/0 7/29/strategic_vision_obama_leads_in_pen nsylvania_washington.html

For Strategic vision to have Obama AHEAD by 9 in Pennsylvania is really good news.

Is he really tied in Florida? Well that's good news since so was Clinton. Remember when she was the only one who COULD make Florida competitive? What happened there?

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:05:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary was NOT tied in Florida (none / 0)

and she was ahead by a decent amount. She was also ahead by 11 in Pennsylvania opposed to Obama's 9, and who is Strategic Vision anyway? Learn the facts before lying about Hillary. She is better in the swing states.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:19:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary was NOT tied in Florida (none / 0)

I don't know why I feel compelled to point out your blatent silliness, but 9 and 11 are well within the margin of error with the polls.

Learn math before lying about Obama.

McCain = bad Obama = good

by CAchemist on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:21:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary is better in Pennsylvania. (none / 0)

and if anyone wants to deny that, they are bullshitting themselves. The demographics of that state do not help Obama. And she polled indisputably better in Florida too. It was not tied most recently with her v. McCain in polls there. She would carry that state, or help Obama there if she were the veep.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:29:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It doesn't matter (2.00 / 1)

and Obama is better in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Washington, and Oregon, which have more EVs than Pennsylvania. It doesn't matter, either would carry any of the above states. Can we stop this crap about who's stronger where and work to win?

I mean, please, the demographics of this country are drawn for McCain against either of them...so maybe we should've just thrown in the towel after the New Hampshire Primary.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:36:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: he's down in Ohio (none / 0)

538, pollster, RCP, and fucking Karl Rove disagree with electoral votes which changes color based on singles results instead of averages (like here).

Thanks for the concern.

McCain = bad Obama = good

by CAchemist on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:06:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I Think It's Kaine (2.00 / 1)

He's leading in both states. He's up on McCain with 323 EV's at last count.

You have no idea how November is going to play. It does not come down to those 2 states. And if it does, so be it. Obama is winning both of them. PA by 9 and OH by 6 at last look.

you have no idea how one V.P. would help over another. You saying Hillary would be better than Rendell in PA? Or Bayh or Gephardt in labor rich OH and PA?

You have no idea. Don't talk unless you know what ur talking about. Making assumptions that she's the only one that can do well there simply b/c she won both those primaries is completely inaccurate.

by southernman on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:39:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You need to update your reading material (2.00 / 1)

polls change, they have changed. McCain is closing in, and even pulling ahead.

The expensive campaign apparatus is starting to hurt Obama, he looks high-maintenance.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:52:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You need to update your reading material (none / 0)

of course polls change. McCain is not closing in. Not by a long shot. In ONE generic national poll, he's gained ground.

State by state, he's getting absolutely obliterated.

by southernman on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:56:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You need to update your reading material (2.00 / 1)

The poll is actually a fun read. Obama is winning by 4 in registered voters but is losing in "likely voters". The poll was only 950 people so they had to eliminate about 160 people from his side to get the necessary poll result. Good stuff.

McCain = bad Obama = good

by CAchemist on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:02:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary doesn't help in PA (none / 0)

Not against McCain. She won because it's a machine state, and Rendell had his goons out. He'll have them out for Obama.

by Neef on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:16:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

why is he gonna work harder for him (none / 0)

than he would for her? He'd work MUCH harder for her, being that he endorsed her. For all the machine, more people in Pennsylvania, white working class, white working class women and older voters, who are teeming in that state would be way likely to vote for her than Obama. Hillary gets those voters to come out for her ticket. YES some of them would be voting for her, but it would be the Democratic ticket. She helps Obama a lot keep the middle of the state margins smaller, and in the western part of the state, in Appalachia. She has name rec in Pennsylvania, and that carries a long way. he needs her.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:28:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No he doesn't (none / 0)

he does fine in Pennsylvania without her. He has never trailed in that state since the primaries ended. and btw, he won the populated parts of the middle of the state in the primary, Centre and Dauphin Counties.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:02:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

he got demolished (none / 0)

in nearly every other part of the state in the primary. And that includes the middle of the state, the western part of the state even east enough they're out of the way of Harrisburg and Rendell's vicinity, and the northeast of the state. he only won in the southeast, the hardcore Democrat counties in the GE anyway. He doesn't bring Democratic turnout up in the western part and central like Hillary would. She clearly motivated Reagan dems to come out, and would do so on the ticket, top or bottom.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:12:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yeah, she did versus the black muslim dude (none / 0)

She wasn't running against the grandfatherly war hero. Those rural areas where she utterly crushed Obama, you can bet they're not voting for a woman if they have a choice.

by Neef on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:19:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

she got more registered Dems (none / 0)

to come out and vote, gaining interest in the election. In a GE, no she won't win the middle of the state, but she would drive up turnout enough to keep the margins low there, and keep the east and west of the state.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:27:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: he got demolished (none / 0)

She also motivated Republicans to come out by the end of the cycle, because the GOP primary was uninteresting. I'm from GA, and I do cross-party primary voting myself. I am proud to say I helped end Ralph Reed's political career at the very beginning.

Besides that, when I was in grade school and we had a field trip, you could pick between the PB&J lunch and the Cheese sandwich lunch. I preferred PB&J, but if it wasn't available, I took the cheese sandwich. Primary voting isn't the same as in the GE.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:21:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Pennsylvania was a closed primary (none / 0)

meaning Democrats and only Democrats get to vote. primaries do matter in terms of turnout, as when voters vote in the primary, they are more likely to come out in the general election, due to the high interest. That is why that she winning so big in the other parts of the state matter. No, she won't win the middle of the state, but she'd have kept the margins low in the middle, and win big on the east and west sides of the state. And she did not motivate Republicans at the end of the cycle.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:25:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Pennsylvania was a closed primary (none / 0)

No, I understand that part, but there were a lot of people that switched parties. If I'd had to switch parties temporarily to vote against Reed, I'd have done it, I promise you.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:37:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

you have no fucking proof (none / 0)

that operation chaos did shit to help Hillary. What about people who switched parties to support Obama?

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:43:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you have no fucking proof (none / 0)

Not even Operation Chaos, there's people who think Obama is a Muslim, people who think he's working for Bin Laden, even people who think he is the ANTICHRIST. Even more (on the GOP side, in particular) that would vote against a black man. Those people would switch without any need for a movement.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:46:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

how do you know they switched? (none / 0)

maybe some of those people were DEMOCRATS who were always registered Dems.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:48:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: how do you know they switched? (none / 0)

There probably were, but not enough to produce record turnout. And again, if they're dems, they'll think harder about their vote when the opponent is McCain.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:52:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary would make sure (none / 0)

they nearly all don't have to "think hard" to vote against McCain, as those voters also trusted her as Democrats, as they know her. Many of those voters would say "Hillary is on his ticket, he can't be that bad."

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:54:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary would make sure (none / 0)

I completely agree, and I support her on the ticket, I really do. And this is not something I thought would be a good idea a few months ago, I just think it would be a nice gesture demonstrating he's serious about bringing people together and forgiving old woes.

But I don't think they'd vote against him more because he brought on a VP nominee who was a bit more conservative than she is. I think he might actually hit trouble in Ohio, but if it can get him Virginia, then it might be okay.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:09:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you have no fucking proof (none / 0)

And yes, there were people in places like Alabama that voted against Hillary to Obama's benefit. But if you'd agree that those people wouldn't vote Dem in the fall, then you have to admit there's a lot of people who voted for Clinton in the PA primary (particularly since the GOP one was over) to keep Obama out. The Rev. Wright thing raised a lot of issues, plus I think a lot of people in Alabama didn't think Obama could actually win.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:49:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So what (none / 0)

she got demolished in Wisconsin, but you'd still argue she would've won that state.

The fact is he's running ahead of where both Kerry and Gore were in Pennsylvania right now, so either he's winning a lot of crossover votes, or Hillary supporters are backing him.

He will hold his own out west, even if he doesn't do as well as past Democrats, take the Philadelphia area by a wide margin, the Poconos and Lehigh Valley, Centre County and decrease Republican margins in Chester and Dauphin Counties...with or without Hillary.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:29:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

actually Kerry was doing better there (none / 0)

this point in 2004.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:41:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Rendell is all about Rendell (none / 0)

He will work not one smidgen less hard for a potential President Obama than he did when he thought that potential President was Hillary.

Not to mention, I suspect it's a matter of pride for him. Rendell is a product of the Frank Rizzo administration (Phila's mafia-linked ex-mayor) and he learned the Rizzo lesson "You don't let people f**k with you".

Ed's not letting anyone pee in his wheaties, or take "his" state. You can bank on that.

by Neef on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:17:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Study harder (2.00 / 1)

I've been doing this for a while and I'm a student of politics. I'm not wrong. Hillary Clinton has all but disappeared from the national stage. other than a small band of whiny wimps, there's been no movement towards placing Hillary as V.P.

Her own chairman, Terry McAuliffe, even stated his preferred candidate today. and guess what, it wasn't Hillary.

McAuliffe knows that Kaine is the best choice to seal the slow-burning bitterness and leave no question that Obama does not care about women or Democrats. He's positioning Hillary for 2012, or earlier. Democrats don't run the same candidate twice. Obama is done. In five years look for his mug on People magazine, for their annual "Where are they now?" issue.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:50:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I doubt it catfish (2.00 / 1)

for all of your demands and bold declarations of doom, you've yet to answer the most obvious question.

How the hell is a woman who couldn't win the nomination, the only one who can save us from the Republicans?

It makes absolutely no sense. if Hillary were the strongest, she'd have won. There was no thievery or backstage shenanigans. She lost. So why is she the only one who can get the ticket to win. it makes absolutely no sense.

by southernman on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:55:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She won more votes (2.00 / 1)

Delegate proportion is not representational. She won the votes, Obama won more delegates and superdelegates.

How is Obama going to save us from Republicans, when he toys with the idea of choosing a Republican veep? Of siding with Republicans on the death penalty? He wants to join them, not beat them.

Hillary is the strongest in with the general electorate. The granola peacenicks in Oregon do not represent the general electorate.

And study harder - if you knew anything about politics you wouldn't say things like "it doesn't make sense." In politics, it doesn't have to make sense.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:59:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She won more votes (1.50 / 2)

In politics, the winner is the nominee, something you seem to have trouble embracing.

In politics, the nominee selects his running mate.

In politcs, the losing candidate is NOT the strongest with the general electorate. if she was the strongest, she would've won.

Situations don't have to make sense. But arguments should. Your arguments don't. In fact, they border on the absolute absurd.

by southernman on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:01:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're being too literal (none / 0)

The consent of the governed matters. Legitimacy matters. The swiping of four Michigan delegates from her column matters.

She won the second half of the primary, so she was the stronger candidate by the end of the primary. It is a very unusual pattern, few politicians have that tenacity.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:05:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're being too literal (2.00 / 1)

Doesn't matter if she won the second half. Both halves count. That's not a tie, it's a defeat. She couldn't win the nomination.

Setting aside that it was her own foolish strategy to disregard thousands of Democratic voters in caucus states that cost her the nomination, you can't possibly argue with a straight face that she's the stronger candidate. She's not.

If she was, she'd have won. she was rejected by the Democratic primary voters. she's a wonderful Senator, but she's not gonna be President in 2009.

by southernman on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:50:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're being too literal (none / 0)

Maybe you can be an pr person for sports teams --
But they won the second half!

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:01:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Politics and sports are different (2.00 / 1)

they are similar in a lot of ways, but he is NOT WELL LIKED by a GIANT PORTION of this party. And it's getting worse by the way he handled his "victory." If he had such a shakey "victory" you would think he'd be less of a sore winner.

Go back to your cyber war room and cash in your trolling points. You guys don't want to get it because you don't care if he wins. Your hearts are not in this.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:10:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Politics and sports are different (none / 0)

Happy New Year's everyone! I can't wait for the primaries to get underway. I'm predicting an Obama win in Iowa but a Clinton comeback in New Hampshire. Now where did I put that parka?

The future is unwritten

by Strummerson on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:35:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Excited about November 5 (2.00 / 1)

I used to be excited about November 5th so I could call all my Republican friends and rub it in.

I am beginning to relish the idea of November 5th so I can rub it in to you. Its going to be sweet.

McCain = bad Obama = good

by CAchemist on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:59:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Good! (none / 0)

You should be excited. I signed up for Intrade because if I buy now, before the veep is final, I can maximize my earnings.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:06:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Excited about November 5 (2.00 / 1)

Hmmmm. Let's see now. Obama is winning the electoral vote 292 to 195 and we're supposed to be worried ... why exactly? Unfortunately the doom-and-gloom crowd will disappear after Obama wins. We will never hear from them again.

"As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where-where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border."

by fugazi on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:19:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Study harder (2.00 / 1)

McAuliffe knows that Kaine is the best choice to seal the slow-burning bitterness and leave no question that Obama does not care about women or Democrats

Do you really think so little of McAuliffe, Hillary, and the Democratic Party?

IF that were true....it would only be evidence that neither nor McAuliffe nor Hillary should be welcome in the Democratic Party.
Thankfully, and obviously, it is NOT true.

Sometimes you really are just WAY too far out there to take seriously.

by Kysen on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:07:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Study harder (2.00 / 1)

It's hard to tell whether they think that Clinton is earnest and honorable or dishonest, conniving and backstabbing. I think the qualities are mutually exclusive, myself. I guess some Clinton supporters do not.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:26:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

if its Obama/Kaine '08, (2.00 / 1)

then 2012 will be Clinton/(somebody) '12 against McCain/Romney '12. Obama/Kaine is gonna be painted as the "least experienced ticket in 55 years" as Stevenson had less than 4 years as governor by the 1952 election, and his running mate John Sparkman had 6 years as senator from Alabama. Obama may want to lose this election so he and his cohorts can blame the Clintons and tarnish them more. He almost doesn't wanna win if he really wants Kaine as his veep.

by Lakrosse on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:13:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: if its Obama/Kaine '08, (none / 0)

I used to check out NQ for paranoia - but why - when here I can find out that Obama wants to lose.

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:02:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: if its Obama/Kaine '08, (none / 0)

I really, really hope it's Biden.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:55:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I Think It's Kaine (2.00 / 2)

Last I checked there were 18 million votes just waiting to run screaming from the party. What happened to the rest of you?

McCain = bad Obama = good

by CAchemist on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:34:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

1 million votes (none / 0)

is not all that much...probably less than a percent.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:35:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 1 million votes (2.00 / 1)

How many votes did Gore lose by?

by dtaylor2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:36:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're an idiot (2.00 / 2)

he won by about 600,000.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:37:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If he won by even more, he'd be president now. (2.00 / 1)

If he won by a million, it might have put him over the top.

Who's an idiot?

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:00:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Providing those votes (2.00 / 1)

were in Florida and not elsewhere. Like in the primaries, popular vote doesn't mean shit. It's a state by state race. Something you don't like and understand. Only a million votes? He can make that up in states that matter.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:03:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Providing those votes (none / 0)

Which brings me back to my main point that the votes Hillary brings are in Florida, Ohio, Pa EXACTLY where they are most needed.

And 1,000 votes in Florida would have won Gore the election.

If you think there aren't 1,000 votes in every single swing state that you lose dropping Hillary than you are foolish.

by dtaylor2 on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 02:07:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 1 million votes (2.00 / 1)

He actually won.

McCain = bad Obama = good

by CAchemist on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:38:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not calling you a troll (2.00 / 1)

...but only a republican would make such a remark.

Ooops. Time to find a new sockpuppet.

by duende on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:10:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I Think It's Kaine (2.00 / 1)

You are going to find out just how wrong you are. Your arrogance is already clear. This is a running sore as must be apparent from the number of diaries on this subject that pop up on here.

by ottovbvs on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:08:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

In 2004 (2.00 / 1)

Gephardt, Edwards and Bob Graham all had scheduling conflicts and cancelled events right around the time of Edwards selection.

Same in 2000, with Kerry, Lieberman, Edwards and Bob Kerrey. All this proves is that Kaine is on the shortlist, which is an obvious secret anyways.

Personally, I don't think it's him. I think this hype is a fake to guarantee more attention when the nominee is unveiled.

by southernman on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:30:10 PM EST

Re: In 2004 (none / 0)

I think Obama is leaking names in the center so he can pick left-center and everyone will be happy.

I want Clark but I think it is not to be.

McCain = bad Obama = good

by CAchemist on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:33:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Pointless (none / 0)

On Sunday Pawlentry cleared his whole Monday schedule. Everyone said, "oh its Pawlentry and McCain is announcing tomorrow".

Did this happen? Nope.

McCain = bad Obama = good

by CAchemist on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:30:14 PM EST

Oh, really? (none / 0)

MSNBC First Read says you're wrong...

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2 008/07/29/1232209.aspx

And really, who cares? We have more important things to do. Just sayin'. ;-)

We shall overcome!

by atdleft on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:33:35 PM EST

My schedule is clear tomorrow too! (none / 0)

Sweet! I get to be Vice-President! That makes my housing search a lot easier...

Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

by mistersite on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:48:48 PM EST

Re: I Think It's Kaine (2.00 / 1)

I hope not.
I don't see what he brings to the ticket.

He's unknown nationally and has no experience on the international stage. I just don't see any enthusiasm for a Kaine announcement.

by Radiowalla on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 08:49:14 PM EST

is this (none / 0)

person anti choice? If so... forget about it!

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:05:07 PM EST

No (none / 0)

he's not...his position on the abortion is the same as most Democrats.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:07:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"Just Say No" ? (2.00 / 1)

Promote abstinence; ban partial-birth abortion
I will reduce abortion in Virginia by enforcing current Virginia restrictions, passing an enforceable ban on partial-birth abortion, ensuring women's access to health care (including legal contraception), and promoting abstinence-focused education and adoption. We should reduce abortion in this manner, rather than by criminalizing women and doctors.
Source: Campaign website www.kaine2005.org, "Issues" Nov 8, 2005

I have a faith-based opposition to abortion
I have a faith-based opposition to abortion. As governor, I will work in good faith to reduce abortions by:

1. Enforcing the current Virginia restrictions on abortion and passing an enforceable ban on partial birth abortion that protects the life and health of the mother;
2. Fighting teen pregnancy through abstinence-focused education;
3. Ensuring women's access to health care (including legal contraception) and economic opportunity; and
4. Promoting adoption as an alternative for women facing unwanted pregnancies.

Too often politicians are interested in scoring political points, rather than in reducing the number of abortions. Many of the legislative proposals introduced in the General Assembly, like the ones to require unnecessary building standards for doctor's offices that perform abortions, are just political grandstanding. They encourage division and lawsuits rather than contributing to the goal of reducing abortions.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Governor/Tim_ Kaine_Abortion.htm

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:11:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So? (none / 0)

Jimmy Carter, Mario Cuomo, Al Gore, John Kerry, even Bill Clinton had the same stances. All Democrats work to reduce abortions while keeping it legal and safe. Perhaps you missed this line;

"We should reduce abortion in this manner, rather than by criminalizing women and doctors."

where in that sentence is the anti-choice part?

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:16:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Where (none / 0)

does he state ANYWHERE that he is "Pro-Choice"?

He is "pro-life" which means anti-choice.

http://www.democratsforlife.org/index.ph p?option=com_content&task=view&i d=373&Itemid=2

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:18:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Where (none / 0)

"We should reduce abortion in this manner, rather than by criminalizing women and doctors."

Right there, he's endorsing a woman's right to choose.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:21:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Is Kaine member of DFLA? (none / 0)

'Democrats for Life of America' whose mission statement reads:

"Democrats for Life of America exists to foster respect for life, from the beginning of life to natural death. This includes, but is not limited to, opposition to abortion, capital punishment, and euthanasia. Democrats for Life of America is one of over 200 member organizations of Consistent Life: an international network for peace, justice and life."

This what DFLA wrote about a Kaine VEEP prospect

The Boston Globe recently ran an article analyzing Senator Obama's options for his Vice President. The candidate they were the most concerned with was pro-life Democrat Virginia Governor Tim Kaine. Heralded as a man with a Harvard degree who is fluent in Spanish and a devout Catholic, Governor Kaine's attributes are praised as assets that would help balance out Obama's ticket. The most important of which are the governor's strong pro-life beliefs. Senator Obama and Governor Kaine have a standing friendship and Obama was quoted as saying that in politics you don't have too many friends, "...but the governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia is my friend."

Because of Governor Kaine's pro-life beliefs, the article argued that he is affable and electable to Republicans as well. This is critically important for balancing out Senator Obama's ticket. DFLA is excited to see the possibilities that Governor Kaine could bring to the table and urges its memebrs to read this interesting article.

http://www.democratsforlife.org/index.ph p?option=com_content&task=view&i d=373&Itemid=2

Read a Catholic Deacon writing about the possibility of Tim Kaine candidacy..
http://deacbench.blogspot.com/2008/07/ca tholic-running-mate-for-obama.html

by louisprandtl on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:42:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I still (none / 0)

do not see "the words".

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:46:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

nrafter is anti-choice, he said in another thread (none / 0)

he also sees polls that contradict his opinion and says he doesn't believe the polls.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:22:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: is this (2.00 / 1)

Nope. He's pro-choice but personally opposed to abortion... just like those centrist DINOs Mario Cuomo and John Kerry.

Join the Matthew 25 Network and help Democrats win the next generation of evangelicals.

by mistersite on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:07:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Is this like saying (none / 0)

"just say no"?

2. Fighting teen pregnancy through abstinence-focused education;

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:12:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What's wrong with that? (none / 0)

I was brought up being educated "You're better off just waiting, but should you have sex, use protection."

and I grew up in Brooklyn and Queens.

I don't know, abstinence-focused education worked fine for us in liberal New York City in the 1990's...nobody bitched about it.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:18:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What's wrong with that? (none / 0)

Agreed. There's nothing wrong with abstinence based education IF... and ONLY IF... birth control is available and sex is actually taught. Kaine supports that. We should have MORE pro-life people who support choice for health reasons and want to reduce abortions by giving the means to avoid pregnancy.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:33:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: is this (2.00 / 1)

Like many Democrats he is personally pro-life (religion) but understands that religion should not get dragged into the constitution. In his political and governmental life he is pro-choice.

McCain = bad Obama = good

by CAchemist on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:14:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

He is (none / 0)

a "pro-life" (anti-choice) Democrat. The repugs like him!

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:17:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

says who? (none / 0)

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:19:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: says who? (none / 0)

Read my links above.

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:47:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I guess I'm biased (none / 0)

as a member of DFLA myself, whom by the way were praised by Paul Begala (a member) and James Carville, you know Clinton-folk, in their 2005 book "Take It Back: Our Party, Our Country, Our Future"

It was DFLA who promoted and passed the Pregnant Women Support Act, which you probably don't support, but that's ok. Among those who supported our bill was Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, Mike McNulty of New York, both very progressive Dems...and oh, that neocon woman-hating bastard Martin Sheen.

I'm sure you'll be asking Hillary Clinton to admonish Carville and Begala now after finding out they praised us anti-choicers.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:00:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why did you join DFLA (none / 0)

are you Catholic or something? Abstinence-based education is code word for abstinence only education.

What you got was not abstinence-based education.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:24:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

As a matter of fact (none / 0)

I left the Catholic Church because of their policies toward gays.

If my education is abstinence only education, why we were taught how to use condoms, while at the same time, implored to not have sex?

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:31:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I Think It's Kaine (none / 0)

At this point, I'm really hoping that Obama will surprise everyone and pick someone nobody is talking about - because all the choices that are being talked about don't thrill me, to say the least.

Still, I don't think any of them are flat-out terrible, so that's something, I guess.

by Angry White Democrat on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:15:54 PM EST

Just say NO to Kaine! (none / 0)

I am sorry.... he does NOT pass the smell test!
http://www.democratsforlife.org/index.ph p?option=com_content&task=view&i d=373&Itemid=2

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:16:52 PM EST

Re: Just say NO to Kaine! (none / 0)

Being personally opposed to abortion does not mean pushing to ban it. He made his feelings clear in 2005 but also made it clear that he recognizes a woman's right to choose.

This is why I loathe NARAL and other groups as much as I do. Does a candidate have to throw a confetti party to celebrate abortion? And just because one has an X and a Y chromosome, does it mean he is not allowed to have an opinion about the procedure in general?

by RandyMI on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:36:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sorry..the answer is a resounding Yes.. (none / 0)

we expect the Democratic party's top 2 candidates to defend a pro-choice position..

by louisprandtl on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:43:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry..the answer is a resounding Yes.. (none / 0)

Define pro-choice? Does it mean letting the procedure go unfettered? No one supports that, not even Obama supports late term abortions unless it's absolutely necessary.

by RandyMI on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:46:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sorry this one proves your statement that (none / 0)

no one supports is wrong..please don't use rightwing frames like partial birth abortions..you know and I know it's misnomer..it's called extraction and dialation..

by louisprandtl on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:13:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

if you're gonna be pedantic (2.00 / 1)

you should get it right. It's dilation and extraction. You know, because one comes before the other.

by JJE on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:07:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks for the correction ... (none / 0)

I'm not being pedantic..there is a big difference in the technical term and the term rightwing extremists used to frame the debate..it is not right to use the same rightwing term on a progressive blog...

by louisprandtl on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 12:43:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Fair enough (2.00 / 1)

by JJE on Wed Jul 30, 2008 at 10:19:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

This is what keeps me (none / 0)

from really endorsing the right to choose. In high school, I knew two girls who had multiple abortions. A friend of mine had one, went back to having unprotected sex and when I implored her to use protection, she flat out told me "I can just have another abortion, they don't take long"

Now I know most women aren't like that, but my first reaction, at the age of 16, was "well, maybe you shouldn't be allowed to have another one."

In the years since, I've cooled on my anti-abortion views as I have become more understanding of why women do it; rape, incest, health, financial strain, emotional strain. I knew a girl who got pregnant, but her boyfriend left her and she lost her job. She felt she couldn't go through with the pregnancy and decided to have an abortion and I remember how distraught she was over the whole experience. Almost like one of those "I wish I didn't have to do it, but I had to" looks. Later on, she confessed that if there was some way for her to bear the costs of the pregnancy and birth, she might have decided otherwise, unfortunately it wasn't there and part of the reason it wasn't is because pro-choice groups do not want to promote ANY OTHER OPTIONS other than abortion, and Republicans just don't want to promote anything but women barefoot and pregnant whenever master says so.

I still oppose it, but the decision is not one she took lightly, even if it was for the girl I knew in high school.

Having an abortion because you don't want a baby to interrupt your partying schedule is not a good reason for it and frankly ruins it for women who have abortions for legitimate reasons, and yes there are girls and women who do that...not many, but there are.

Have said that, if what it takes to keep the theocons out of power is to keep abortion legal to the extent in which some girls can do what my high school friend did, then so be it, but don't ask me to be proud of it and celebrate it.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:51:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Because of his weak stance, he will lose (none / 0)

the election. You have to take a stand for people's rights.

If we could just toss your rights out of the window to win an election, so be it.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:27:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Because of his weak stance, he will lose (2.00 / 1)

You are such a phony. You're voting for McCain and you're lecturing people about protecting reproductive rights?

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:30:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

In your dreams. I'm a Dem. (none / 0)

But if Dems toss out women and gays in hopes of getting the faith-based vote I'll be a voter without a party for quite a few years as the two camps realign themselves.

by catfish2 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:46:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Toss out LGBT (none / 0)

by signing DADT and DOMA?

by JJE on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:06:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Will you condemn Clinton then (none / 0)

for signing DOMA?

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 11:23:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

We can (none / 0)

toss people's rights out the window to win elections...Clinton did it with the LGBT community.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:33:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

WOW (none / 0)

The PUMAS are out in force tonight.

by RandyMI on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:32:10 PM EST

Re: WOW (2.00 / 1)

Yeah. I go back and forth between not caring and feeling the need to defend Mydd from all the bullshit and lies that we keep getting hit with.

Craziness.

McCain = bad Obama = good

by CAchemist on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:34:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WOW (2.00 / 1)

I guess it works both ways. The McCain people come here and talk silly and I'm sure some Dems try to stir things up on the GOP sites.

"As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where-where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border."

by fugazi on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 09:43:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WOW (none / 0)

Yes, but I hope Dems are smarter in their covert Ops.

It's quite clear to me that when someone makes a comment like this, and thinks that Gore lost, they have a republican mindset.

by duende on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:11:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WOW (none / 0)

True. The caliber of their arguments is not high.

"As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where-where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border."

by fugazi on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:15:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WOW (none / 0)

It's kind of like that Wisconsin delegate who lost her delegate status because she was going to vote for McCain if Obama were the nominee, who then complained about the "Democrat" party.

As Jake Tapper aaid:
Anyone who calls it "the Democrat party" -- the pejorative used by Republicans -- seems halfway to GOPville anyway.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/ 2008/07/ousted-wisconsi.html

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:33:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WOW (none / 0)

Tapper also nailed it with this:

've been hearing from a lot of Democrats that if Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, picks a woman other than Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, to be his vice president, then it will be disastrous for him. Clinton supporters will flock to Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in droves, it will be perceived as a tremendous insult to her, it's a horrible idea.

So tough luck Gov. Kathleen Sibelius of Kansas, Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Gov. Janet Napolitano of Arizona and all the rest!

Here's my question -- isn't this attitude completely antithetical to the notion of breaking glass ceilings? Didn't she run not just so she could be president, but so it would be easier for other women to do so?
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/ 2008/07/clintonism-and.html

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 10:35:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.