IamFry vs DonkeyDude
Ed Rendell can and will be Obama's running mate.
IamFry said 06/14, 12:54 PM
He's a great compliment to Obama. He A) Has "executive experience", B) Was a prominent Clinton supporter, C) Has that "conservative look" that some voters need to see.
DonkeyDude said 06/14, 11:11 PM
1) Rendell has stated repeatedly that he isn't interested in VP. He has said he would prefer the Secretary of Transportation slot, noting that if Obama wants to carry the Clinton banner, he should put Hillary on the ticket instead.
2) Rendell is not popular in PA (at least outside of Philly). His gubernatorial approval ratings have been as low as 40%. In fact, he is very unpopular in many of the same counties in which Obama struggled in the PA primary. Rendell's pull is primarily in Philadelphia, where Obama is likely to do very well even without him on the ticket. Obama will win PA either way once Dem voters coalesce around him as the nominee, as Democrats in the state have a massive and growing voter registration advantage. In fact, some polls actually indicate that Rendell could cost Obama a few points of support in PA.
3) Rendell really adds nothing to the ticket outside of PA.
4) He has no foreign policy experience.
5) In the long run, he's too old. If were to be VP he would be 73 on Inauguration Day 2017. He would not be a viable successor to an 8-yr Obama presidency (or perhaps even a single term).
All he brings is executive experience, but so do other potential picks.
IamFry said 06/16, 02:11 PM
1) Yes, I recall hearing a clip of Rendell saying he wasn't interested in the job, but I remain unconvinced. Don't all these guys say they don't want the job up until they accept?
2) Rendell not being popular outside of Philly is a non-issue. As you say, Obama will win PA anyway. McCain's allegations that Rendell is unpopular in PA won't even **** the camp's armor.
3,4) These points are moot. VP cadidates seldom bring automatic votes with them. McCain's camp will be attacking OBAMA's lack of foreign policy experience; no VP candidate with any amount of f.p.e. will dissuade them from doing so.
5) This point is moot as well. Rendell is too old to become Obama's successor? Hopefully, the DNC realizes that the whole concept of VP-as-heir-apparent is over.
One thing that's still true of a VP candidate, he's supposed to be an "attack dog". This is the role that Rendell will fit nicely. Look at him! Look at those fierce eyes! That barking voice! Those gnarling teeth!
McCain's steadfast support of many crucial Bush policies needs to be called into question, and Rendell is the guy to do it.
DonkeyDude said 06/16, 09:54 PM
1) No. See Clinton, Romney and numerous others who say they are open to it. He said he's not interested, and that's the only evidence we have to go on.
2) You concede both Rendell's lack of popularity outside of Philly, as well as the likelihood that Obama will win PA without him. So what, pray tell, do you claim Rendell's draws are?? You have not put forth much of an affirmative argument here, and the burden is on you...
3, 4) You concede my points again, but you dispute the notion that a VP pick can shore up a presidential candidate's foreign policy weakness. OK, you've just contradicted the political analysis of just about every pundit out there. And still, you have yet to advance an argument why Rendell would be a good pick.
5) Moot, fine.
6) Yes, McCain needs to be taken to task for his support of the Bush administration's failed policies. But Bush is such an unpopular president that the role of "attack dog" is not quite as relevant now as it has been in the past. Obama has clearly voiced his disapproval of McSame; indeed, "change" is his platform.
Your position is that Rendell is an old, white guy with exec. exp. who can attack McCain as Bush III. Many ppl fit that bill.
IamFry said 06/17, 05:28 PM
You make a good point, DD; I haven't made/supported much of an affirmative case, so here goes:
1) A VP doesn't DO very much...
2) The amount of foreign policy experience brought to the table by a running mate is irrelevant.
3) His ability to succeed the candidate is irrelevant.
4) VP candidates will not bring additional votes in based on where they come from (see John Edwards).
Considering this, Rendell will be a strong candidate. Why? Because he will be extremely effective in 'the theatre' of politics. He's an old, strong-looking white guy with a gruff voice. He hails from a large, marginal state.
You could argue that Biden has the same attributes, but Biden has some crititical flaws that Rendell doesn't have.
1) As a high-profile Dem, Biden is already seen as a liberal (thus is to be distrusted) by the somewhat ignorant masses.
2) Biden's refuted claim that his grandfather was a coal-miner contributes to his untrustworthiness.
3) Rendell looks and sounds tougher.
4) In spite of being old, Rendell will be somewhat of a fresh face on the national scene.
5) He's Jewish (not that the Jewish vote will be particularly tough for the Dems to secure...).
Rendell is the man!
DonkeyDude said 06/17, 06:07 PM
You spend the first half of your last argument continuing to simply minimize the role of VP, rather than explain why Rendell "can and will be Obama's running mate."
You spend the last half discussing Biden, who has nothing to do with this debate.
...
To sum up:
- Rendell does not add any regional value to the ticket.
- Rendell does not shore up any of Obama's weaknesses, except for his being an old Caucasian.
- Rendell says he does not want to be VP, which substantially undermines your argument that he "will be Obama's running mate."
You have not presented any evidence that Rendell will be selected.
Comments
Add Your Comment
Cnd raises another good point - some Hillary supporters will potentially be put off by Obama's selection of a Clintonite but not Hillary. It could be seen as a cheap ploy to attract her base.
DonkeyDude | 06/14/08
Report Offensive Comment
Emotionally I really don't want Hillary as a VP, not only do I dislike her tactics in politics, but i disaprove of a few of her policies. Though I think if she is the VP, it would appease many Clinton supporters, especially those who want to vote for McCain now that Obama is the nominee.
theyoungdem | 06/15/08
Report Offensive Comment
I think a lot of Obama supporters are political prostitutes. All hate Hillary but would give her the VP job just to get their hands onto the 18 million voters. You all forget that Clinton's support does not only end at 18 million, it stretches way beyond that, and they will make their voices heard in November. You also forget that Hillary wants to be President not VP, this means that wherever she is now, she is hoping that Obama fails to get the White House so that she can have another go at it in 2012. I think that you underestimate the Clinton factor. For now, all of this works for us Republicans, while people like youngdem explore their emotions about Hillary.
dirtythoughts | 06/15/08
Report Offensive Comment
Oh, I will vote for the Fry guy coz I would have to die before I support that homo donkey dude.
dirtythoughts | 06/15/08
Report Offensive Comment
Dirty, first of all, your comments (as usual) have nothing to do with this debate. Neither of us advocate putting Hillary on the ticket, although I would argue that some Obama supporters who would put her on the ticket are (misguided) "realists" rather than "prostitutes." Or perhaps they like her as well. And I find it pathetically amusing that you insist on repeatedly calling me a "homo" simply because I believe in equal rights for gays. FYI, my girlfriend is also a member on this site. I must give you credit though: your second-to-last comment, while irrelevant, was coherent - and I agree with most of what you say. You usually just mutter stupid, offensive, childish bullshit (like your last comment).
DonkeyDude | 06/15/08
Report Offensive Comment
Yeah, DD i think you should be thanking DT for not voting for you, at least that eliminates any need to try and refuse it. now Iam has to(unfortunately for him) accept that DT's vote is a part of his tally. Your girlfriend is here, cool. i hope she's voted against you at least once, otherwise that just wouldn't be fair to the rest of us who don't have a voter bloc ;). watch this would be way too perfect if she's a conservative ;).
MorgMcA | 06/15/08
Report Offensive Comment
Okay? I'm not exactly delving deeply into whether or not Hillary should be VP. I'm just saying I wouldn't want her to be the VP, even though she would be a great asset.
theyoungdem | 06/15/08
Report Offensive Comment
No, she's not conservative. That would be funny though. She hasn't logged into this site since all the craziness of a month or so ago.
DonkeyDude | 06/15/08
Report Offensive Comment
While Fry's arguments could certainly be elaborated upon, DD undermines his otherwise convincing argument by throwing in Rendell's age. If I remember correctly, McCain was born on August 29, 1936 and he has done quite well in amassing the confidence of the country. True, McCain is not slotted to be the successor, but few really look at the VP as the future president. In the aftermath of Cheney, I think voters are used to looking at the VP as the secondary (at times) president. Maybe DD thinks this will be different if Obama wins because there is a greater threat of assassination, but I don't think Obama's base wants to go there. On the other hand, while Fry is very correct in stating some voters (the additional voters Obama needs now) are looking for that "conservative look," this selection may indeed look like a cheap ploy to get the Clintonites. I could go on, but it is late and this is the first debate I am reading on this site. To me, this one is a tie.
thurgood | 06/15/08
Report Offensive Comment
Thanks for the (quasi-)support, Thurgood. But keep in mind, McCain's age is being discussed as an issue for voters, and Rendell would be 2 years older than McCain will be this November. Obama's VP should ideally be a potential successor in 2017, because ... well, that would be great for the DNC. Not sure how much Obama himself cares, though. I'm not saying that is the definitive reason he won't be selected, but it is potentially a factor somewhere in there. Don't see why its inclusion would preclude a vote for my argument as a whole.. ;-)
DonkeyDude | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
Maybe, maybe not. After the fate of the young and electable former VP Gore, I don't think VP as successor is (or should be) a concern for the DNC. Just get Obama elected and get a VP who can get Hillary's (read Bill's) base. And DD, keep in mind: while Obama has brought out the folks who usually never vote, the polls are filled with geriatrics who believe age means a candidate has paid his dues. (Otherwise McCain would not be his party's clear nominee.) And most voters don't worry about two years when it comes to age. We live in the age of appearances. If the ailing, tales-from-the-crypt looking Cheney didn't kill it for Bush, an older, more youthful looking VP wont kill it for Obama. And while I doubt an aged VP will turn Obama's base against him, I do think such a selection might give him the additional voters he needs. I am not saying the choice should be Rendell. You are right in stating that his foreign policy experience is basically zero, etc... However, I am saying Fry is right when he says Rendell has the "conservative" (read old white dude) look that many voters need. Your argument dismisses this crucial fact.
thurgood | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
Good points, T. I think, however, that this "conservative look" is found in numerous other candidates as well - candidates who offer more than just executive experience and very local, ineffectual popularity.
DonkeyDude | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
Ha! I guess I should have said "Achilles heel"; the site's software thought that I uttered an ethnic slur...
IamFry | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
I should have said, "McCain's allegations that Rendell is unpopular in PA won't even Asian-American the camp's armor. "
IamFry | 06/16/08
Report Offensive Comment
It's true, he might actually decline an offer. That's why I skipped around that part of it. In retrospect, I've decided that I should've framed it as Rendell (presuming he'll accept) vs. ___________.
IamFry | 06/17/08
Report Offensive CommentPost A Comment
Please keep it clean. Bad words will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.
Only Axl Rose remains in the group, but since 1987 GnR has been rocking with fury
More than 50 years of cover stories about the 35th President
So he was a Clinton supporter, does that mean the 18,000,000 clinton voters will sprint over to the Obama camp? NO. i think they want to see the best candidate for VP, Hillary Clinton.
Cnd | 06/14/08
Report Offensive Comment