Edwards/Webb 2008?

[ellisonz]

I'd trust Webb to let Edwards do his thing but act as a firm check against Clintonesque escapades in both policy(healthcare/welfare) and private lives. Webb has the steady foreign policy hand that Edwards struggles with elucidating (i.e. the real hard stuff) that Webb can help Edwards on as a mentor. I mean we all don't want a Dick Cheney type President but would we accept a good mentor? John Edwards is 53, Jim Webb is 60, the Vietnam gap. I mean I'm still holding out for Gore/Obama but I'm just not sure how far Obama is going to make it on his own without Clinton Co. trying to lure him into a political deathtrap (For shame! For shame! Why is she running?). I want to win 2008 bad. Oh, and Clark for the Pentagon!

:shrug:

[illinoisprogressive]

1. Webb strikes me as one who would not want to be trapped in an exective job.

He strikes me as a guy who would like the freedom the senate gives him to do change and not be trailed by tones of secret service. He also seems to be one who'd want to be one of those really powerful senators.

[ellisonz]

4. Perhaps but in order to be effective at your job in this case you need to win elections.

It is one hell of a platform for an executive, especially a warrior poet politician type like Webb. He'd revel in it, and besides who's going to shoot Jim Webb. I'd trust him to manage the Secret Service entrapment. Plus VA has a Democratic Gov.

[babylonsister]

2. Fageddaboudit! nt

[The_Casual_Observer]

3. Webb/Webb he could handle the whole thing by himself.

[ellisonz]

5. Draft Webb 2008?

[Auntie Bush]

6. No and No

Edwards isn't tough enough to be commender-in-chief

Webb is too important in congress and we need him there.

[FrenchieCat]

7. You mean, kind of like Bush/Cheney?

But I thought Voters don't vote for VP...which is why Edwards didn't help Kerry in the south last time around? :shrug:

[illinoisprogressive]

8. I really like him but, he is not one who would want his freedom stifled.

He seems like a guy who likes to just go and do as he wants and not be hemmed in by security dogging him.
I don't think he'd like that.

[JNelson6563]

9. I could live with that

I think the most fun combo, as far as watching a certain group of somewhat obnoxious posters' heads explode, would be Edwards/Clark. Every thread I'm clicking on where Edwards' name is mentioned I'm seeing some ugly ass swarm action. Interestingly, the first time I've heard mention of Clark in the RW was yesterday and it was in the form of an Edwards/Clark ticket.

Personally I'd rather see Gore/Just About Anyone but if that doesn't happen I can at least hope for some amusement in what does come to be our ticket.

:toast:

Julie

[Leilani]

10. Webb is too talented to be a Veep

And knowing what I do about him, I doubt he'd be anyone's second banana.

[1932]

11. Who here has read American Theocracy by Kevin Phillips?

I read it and it convinced me that the Democrats need a Californian on the ticket. Phillips doesn't make this argument. But he does explain why the Republicans put Texans on the ticket and it left me wondering why Democrats don't harness the progressive symbolic and economic strength of California by having it represented somewhere on the ticket.

I think Democrats need to figure out who fits well on a ticket with Barbara Boxer.