I think Obama can win New Mexico but that could happen with or without Richardson. He could swing some Hispanic vote his way I suppose. I think he adds more because of his Foreign affairs experience.

Obama is taking a white man for is VP. Guaranteed.

#2

and those who think it still will be Hillary..........

Obama has included Caroline Kennedy on his VP search committee.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/0 ... 05230.html

WASHINGTON — Barack Obama named a three-person team including Caroline Kennedy to lead his search for a running mate Wednesday while expressing confidence that the Democratic Party would soon unify after a bruising battle for the presidential nomination.

"I'm very confident of how we're going to be able to bring the party together," Obama said after a brief conversation with Hillary Rodham Clinton, his vanquished rival.

Campaign officials said Kennedy, who is the daughter of the late President John F. Kennedy, as well as former Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder and longtime Washington insider Jim Johnson have already begun compiling information on potential running mates. They disclosed no names.

I think Obama can appease Hillary and her fanatics by offering her as high profile and respected a cabinet position as possible, but what would that be?

Maid?

Im sure his staff would love having bill around too if you know what I mean

why not Health Care, that is like her life long mission.

that she failed at once already

worked real the last time she did it

Supreme Court justice. Highly prestigious and takes her completely out of the daily political realm.

I was going to say the same thing. That is the perfect job for her and it is very important.

In defense of Hillary, that was nearly 15 years ago. Times have changed and health care costs have continued to skyrocket beyond reason. The Republican message of "if you want health insurance, poor people, then you shouldn't have been born poor" isn't going to fly anymore. And their old mantra of small government and less spending is now a pathetic joke.

This is one of the issues I mentioned before that people side with Democrats on. And they side with Democrats even MORE when they don't know the party affiliation, winning over Republicans as well.

That said, it still has to be played smoothly, and I'm not sure that plopping Hillary right away into that role will be all that productive until Obama has really made the case to the American people.

Universal Health Care is nice in theory. At this moment and probably for the next four years it's not possible.

I guess you're not aware of the fact that EVERY SINGLE industrialized country in the world has universal health care, except the US. Their people are healthier, live longer, and pay far less per person in health care costs than we do here in America. UHC is not just a theory. It's been put into practice all over the world and has succeeded. It is not, of course, a perfect system, but it beats our system by a mile.



I think Obama is cautious about such a plan, which is why he's proposing the reforms he's proposing in order to lead America eventually to UHC.

I keep hoping McCain will pick Crist, from Florida, and then a few weeks before the election, a bunch of his former lovers come forward with irrefutable evidence and force him out of the closet, thus pissing off all the right wing nuts who will stay home rather than vote for him.

Wow you love taking anything anybody doesn't agree with you and just run it out of context don't you. The government is so far in debt that adding more government programs that will cost even more money makes me cautious. Balancing the budget should be the first major concern of the which ever administration wins. I think there needs to be government programs deleted before being added to help control cost. The Federal government already has too much control, so as I said, I am cautious about Universal Health Care. And as I said, it's nice in theory for America but there are several things that need to happen before hand before implementing anything is ever possible.

In context? Can you point me to the part in this thread in which you mention anything about budget or deficits as your reason for objecting to universal health care? Or where you refused to vote for Bush after he ran up trillions of dollars in debt? If you can do that, I'll take back my comment. Why is that conservatives only realize that they're for fiscal responsibility when it comes to helping out poor people?

The health crisis has to be dealt with NOW. We can't wait for however long it takes for Congress and the new president to fix Bush's mess. And if McCain is president, the mess won't get fixed at all. And more and more people will become uninsured or underinsured.

The case for Brian Schweitzer for VP:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/06/ ... as-vp.html

Truth is though Universal Health care would be a fiscal disaster considering the fiscal situation now.

For it to work, the govt has to been in good fiscal order like back in Clinton's time.

so instead of getting us out of debt, u want to run up more? Doesn't sound very fiscally responsible.

well, when you not unloading billions in iraq, youll have a bit fo extra cash...

i'll agree with that and you won't hear me argue that.

Consider that with UHC, you'd effectively get rid of the entire Medicare and Medicaid entitlement programs. That's half-a-TRILLION bucks right there. You're also saving money on veterans health care. With everyone covered, you'd bring down overall medical costs and drug costs, which would probably be regulated anyway. End the war in Iraq and you're saving another hundred billion a year. And lastly, businesses would no longer be in the health care business, freeing up write-offs that would result in cost-savings and more tax revenue.

I do agree that spending has to be managed overall, and the implementation of UHC has to be done with careful planning, but this really is a crisis and it's only getting worse.