by Damozel | I can't imagine that progressives will jump for joy at some of the names being bruited about, but Obama's list of reported candidates seems consummately pragmatic, given the tension between Democrats and Republicans. The pragmatism comes in when you consider McCain's---and the media's---attempts to stoke fears among their constituents and swing voters about the consequences of a Democratic landslide.
If the Democrats win sweeping majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate as well as the White House, conservative voters could feel alienated from every branch of government. The McCain campaign is already playing up fears of a Democratic landslide to persuade Republicans and independents to back their man.(Times of London)
As is the Wall Street Journal.
An editorial in The Wall Street Journal last week warned of a coming “liberal super-majority”. It is possible Democrats could win a filibuster-proof 60-seat majority in the Senate, enabling them to pass whatever legislation they wanted, from higher taxes to greater union rights.
“Though we doubt most Americans realise it, this would be one of the most profound political and ideological shifts in US history. Liberals would dominate the entire government in a way they haven’t since 1965 or 1933,” the newspaper commented. (Times of London)
That's The Wall Street Journal for you: constantly misunderestimating the ability of the average American to perceive the obvious, just as reliably as it regularly misoverestimates the intelligence, common sense, and integrity of members of the rich guy's club, such as George W. Bush.
One of Bill Clinton's former advisers offered this comment on Obama's potential presidency. " “I don’t think Obama is going to give Republicans much on substance, so he would be well advised to give them some satisfaction on personnel.” As a progressive, I am very much afraid that he'll give them as much on substance as Bill Clinton did, which was way, way more than any member of the GOP has ever had the grace to acknowledge. I think Obama has the common sense to see the danger in solutions that are pushed onto the public without the support of the Republicans.
So anyway, Obama's apparently looking at a set of wannabes which includes a few names I suppose might placate some Republicans, though they won't do much for the rabid fringe of the base.
A host of well-known figures, including some Republicans, have indicated they would be willing to serve in some capacity as Obama begins to acquire a winner’s glow. From Senator John Kerry, the 2004 presidential candidate with hopes of becoming secretary of state, to Larry Summers, a former US Treasury secretary under President Bill Clinton, and Chuck Hagel, the Republican senator who has been tipped as defence secretary, there are plenty who have signalled their availability...
A persistent question for Obama is how to make the most of Hillary Clinton’s talents in government after she has helped to swing women and blue-collar workers behind him....[M]embers of Obama’s inner circle believe she would be tempted to accept an offer to become health secretary, which would give her the historic opportunity to devise and implement the policy. “That’s very possible. Senator Clinton would be terrific as health secretary,” said Congressman Patrick Murphy, a leading Obama supporter....
One of the names in the frame for Treasury secretary is Paul Volcker, the chairman of the Federal Reserve under President Ronald Reagan, who brought inflation under control in the early 1980s....
Admirers admit his age is against him – Volcker is 81 – but suggest he could oversee a financial rescue package before passing on the baton. Glenn Hubbard, the former head of the Council of Economic Advisers under Bush, said: “I can’t think of anyone else with the same stature.”
Volcker endorsed Obama back in January when Clinton was still the Democratic front-runner. “He would provide the confidence necessary to stabilise the markets and put together an economic plan to get the country moving again,” an Obama adviser said. “This is the man who solved the last economic crisis.”
Another leading candidate for the Treasury is Summers, who has been guiding Obama through the Wall Street melt-down....At a conference at Harvard Business School last week, Summers defended Obama’s plans to tax the wealthy by pointing to the huge rise in inequality over the past 30 years between the earnings of the top 1% and bottom 80% of the country. “It is immense compared to any discussion of changing the tax system here or there,” he said...(Times of London)
Kerry, Baxter speculates, may be doomed to disappointment.
“Frankly, how many senators do you want in the cabinet?” wondered one Obama adviser. If he wins the presidency, Obama has to beware of countering his message of “change” on the campaign stump by appointing too many Washington insiders.(Times of London)
According to the article, Obama is considering bringing back Colin Powell, news that won't exactly be greeted with elation by of those who still blame Powell for his role in bringing about the Iraq War:
All eyes were on Colin Powell, the former secretary of state under President George W Bush, to see if he would declare his support for Obama in an interview on Meet the Press, the flagship political television programme, today.
Powell is unlikely to return to the cabinet after the mauling he received over the Iraq war, but could serve as a special envoy abroad. He is regularly consulted by Obama on foreign policy and military matters, and said last year: “I always keep my eyes open and my ears open to requests for service.”(Times of London)
In the meantime, he's had plenty of endorsements by high profile Republicans (including Christopher Hitchens and Christopher Buckley), as well as a number of newspapers that have always in the past leaned to the GOP. Even conservative commentator Michael Smerconish has braved opprobrium to come out for Obama.
And plenty of Republicans seem to be throwing in the towel. Last night on Bill Maher, Republican pollster Frank Luntz said he expects Obama to win.
Others say the same.
With little more than two weeks until polling day, some leading Republicans suspect McCain is doomed. Peter Wehner, a senior White House official under Bush, said: “The Obama campaign is terrific. They’ve got boatloads of money and they’re using it well. I don’t think the race is over, but I always thought Obama would win. I’m a realist and I can read the polls and the electoral map as well as the next guy."...
“There will be a lot of talk about bipartisanship and a honeymoon period, but that will disappear if the economy is stagnating or gets worse,” he said. “The public is very pragmatic and will make its judgment on results rather than optics. The acid test is how the country is doing.” (ToL)
Yeah, Mr. Senior White House official under Bush, who knew?
The article discusses the enthusiasm for Obama as opposed to the anger and defensiveness of McCain's current stance and the apparent willingness of the public to trust him.
Senator Jim Webb, the Virginia Democrat and former marine who served as navy secretary in President Ronald Reagan’s administration, personally vouched for Obama’s integrity. “You can trust me and I trust him,” he told the rally in Roanoke. He cited the refrain from a country and western song to disparage McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin as a running mate: “I know what I was doing but what was I thinking?”
Well, we'll see. I ain't breaking out the champagne till the results are IN and unequivocal. I remember 2000.
RECENT BUCK NAKED POLITICS POSTINGS
The McCain Campaign: "Real Americans, Represent!"
Obama Questions Justice Dept.'s Objectivity in Going After ACORN Again
Fall-out for "The Axis of Diesel" from Falling Oil Prices---and for the Rest of the World
Meanwhile, Bush Administration Commits to Firmer Deadlines for Withdrawal from Iraq; Also: A Note on Afghanistan
More Media Endorsements for Obama
Secessionist-Friendly Sarah Palin Visits the Pro-America Part of America
Tribune Company to Drop Associated Press but Doesn't Cite Questionable Quality?
With all the talk of Obama picking a cabnet, He would be wll advised to look back on History at 1948 upset of Truman over Dewey!
What poles show, is not alway's what people are going to do at the Voting booth.
Posted by: Eugene | October 19, 2008 at 11:47 AM