Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
NO, NO, NO!
Kevin Drum takes issue with Matt Yglesias' argument that Joe Biden shouldn't be considered as VP because he supported the war initially and so would muddy Obama's clean record on the issue:
Once he leaves the cozy confines of a primary where the anti-war base is enough to win, Obama is going to enter the chillier territory of a general election where he'll need to draw a bunch of votes from the ranks of people who once supported the war. He needs a good way to signal these folks that he doesn't consider them tainted forever by their erstwhile support, and what better way than by choosing a moderately hawkish senator who once favored the war but has since changed his mind? The opposite tack — insisting that he'll associate only with the pure of heart who opposed the war from the beginning — would be something of a disaster. People won't vote for a candidate who tacitly seems to be calling them idiots.
Don't underestimate voters' capacity for hypocrisy. We're all more than capable of holding other people to far higher standards than we hold ourselves. Kerry thought he could win by echoing the muddled nature of public opinion at the time, and look where that got him. If voters are confused (and I think, at least in regards to what we have done) they are all the more open to someone who offers a simple, clear, compelling narrative. That's why Republicans are focusing like laser on the supposed success of the surge -- it may be wrong, but it's a simple easy to understand story.
Picking Biden is a bad idea because it undermines Obama's core message on foreign policy -- that he has the judgment not just to lead us out of Iraq, but to make good decisions in the future -- is undermined by picking someone who publicly exhibited the bad judgment he's been criticizing for months.
--Sam Boyd
COMMENTS (4)
I agree, Sam, plus Biden is a long time Washington insider. Obama couldn't make the argument that voters should reject McCain because he has been in Washington forever and therefore is part of the problem not the solution if Obama himself chose a longtime Washington insider as his veep. Plus Delaware is not a swing state. Richardson would be a better choice to bring experience to the ticket if that's what Obama is looking for.
Posted by: Ron | April 10, 2008 9:38 AM
If Obama's campaign theme is "change", then he cannot pick Biden. Biden has other liabilities, as well, particularly with the Democratic base that Obama will need to turn out in large numbers for him.
Over and over again, Obama is going to be hammering on McCain's "judgment". He cannot do this with someone on the ticket who had similar judgment problems for far too many years.
Posted by: PaulB | April 10, 2008 10:42 AM
Don't underestimate voters' capacity for hypocrisy.
It's not hypocrisy to support a candidate who was right when you were wrong. Our leaders are supposed to be experts in foreign policy - voter aren't.
Most Americans gave Bush and Congress the benefit of the doubt over the Iraq war, because they believed Washington insiders knew things the rest of us did not. It didn't help that Democrats like Bill and Hillary Clinton were on Bush's side.
And polls showed Americans only tepidly supported the war in 2002 and didn't understand why we were rushing to war at the time.
Posted by: Jinchi | April 10, 2008 5:39 PM
I think that many believe Obama needs a party elder or a military/foreign policy expert. Who would you recommend? If Obama is going to choose Biden, I'd much rather see him as VP than Secretary of State. He has a hawkish record, but as VP Obama can assign him to whatever domestic tasks he chooses then choose a more progressive Secretary of State. As Secretary of State Biden would be dealing with foreign policy/military policy. I also think he'd be helpful in securing more white males (40% of the electorate), though I don't think Obama has the white male problem that the media has created. Obama has a lot of whites under 65 and can continue to draw on his white family narrative. Jim Webb is a bad idea. Rule #1 for choosing VP's is that you never pick someone who is a liability...they can be uninteresting but never a liability. Obama needs to heal the rift with Clinton supporters and Webb is VERY sexist. He also doesn't have much experience as a politician. I'd also like to see someone like Kathleen Sebelius, who can bring some white males along and will definitely bring female voters. The problem is that she doesn't enhance his image on foreign policy. The black vote is going to be unprecidented and Obama already has a good number of white voters under 60...and Latino support will be there. It's going to be an interesting pick...but I think Webb is the worst idea that's been proposed.
Posted by: Jeremy | May 9, 2008 2:20 PM