« Harry The Overrated | Main | The Trouble With Gersonism, Again » The Case For Obama-Webb, Again14 May 2008 09:48 am
Via Andrew. The purple swathe represents areas where Hillary earned more than 65 percent of the vote. It runs across states like Pennsylvania and Michigan, Ohio and Missouri, all of which we can expect to be battlegrounds this fall. And if you overlaid this map with an ethnographic map showing the concentration of Webb's beloved Scots-Irish, I suspect that it would probably be a pretty close match. (I hear Webb's Virginia might be a battleground, too ...) TrackBackTrackBack URL for this entry: Comments (26)
I like Webb, but I've been lukewarm to the Webb-for-VP idea. If we want to pass as much progressive legislation as possible we need as big a margin in the Senate as possible, and his seat would be tough to keep if he stepped down. That said, really putting VA in play and winning over Scotch-Irish voters in Ohio and PA (most of those other states won't really be in play) is tempting. Still, on balance, I think Webb needs to stay in the Senate. Obama has other swing state and white working class options for VP (Ted Strickland, Ed Rendell, John Edwards, Tim Kaine maybe? etc); he's probably gonna win no matter what, given the climate this year; and Webb's a little too big and loud for the Number 2 spot. 
If you read the HIll yesterday, you know Jim Webb is REALLY not interested.
Your case would be stronger if a lot more of that purple was actually in Virginia. Considering how those same areas are also areas where Clinton has been doing better in part because of her advantage with Appalachian Irish Catholics, I'm not sure having a Scots-Irish guy would help.
I haven't read the Hill article, so I don't know if that's sarcasm or not, but I would suspect Webb would gladly take the veep nomination if asked. That prospect worries me. As things stand, I'm not as pessimistic as Ross about the GOP's chances, but this would change all of that.
I haven't read the Hill article, so I don't know if that's sarcasm or not, but I would suspect Webb would gladly take the veep nomination if asked. They asked all 100 senators (except Clinton, Obama and McCain) if they'd accept an offer to be the VP nominee. Webb said: I’m not really interested. That’s all I want to say. Then again, if you actually would take the offer it might make sense to say that you wouldn't. First of all, to look more statesmanlike; second of all, to put yourself in a better position to bargain with the presidential candidate over exactly how much responsibility you'd get in office. Best response: Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho)
JB quoted the Hill appropriately but I would argue that knowing how much Webb likes to campaign (THAT is sarcasm), it is quite clear that a statement as harshly clear as the one he made is as definitive as one can be in that situation.
I dunno JB, there just doesn't seem to be a lot of percentage in the kind of tea leaf-reading you're doing. Maybe Webb's genuinely disinterested, maybe he's posturing here. Who knows? Lord knows the Obama camp isn't letting slip who they want for VP. I think too many of these rotisserie VP discussions dramatically overestimate the impact running mates actually have. I like John Edwards a lot, but he didn't deliver much electorally for Kerry in '04. Ditto Cheney for Bush, Lieberman for Gore, Bush for Reagan, etc. Gore amplified Clinton's strengths in '92, but not in any decisive fashion. Regardless of who Obama picks, he's still gonna be the guy at the top of the ticket, and voters will be making their judgements based on what they know about him. And given the beshatted and besmirched state of the post-Bush GOP this year, Obama's probably gonna win no matter who his VP is.
Re: And if you overlaid this map with an ethnographic map showing the concentration of Webb's beloved Scots-Irish, I suspect that it would probably be a pretty close match. Not so much in Michigan: the purple parts of that state are note for Scandinavian ancestry, especially the "Yoopers".
No. It will be Obama-Hagel. Would be ground-breaking to put a Republican on the ticket, which is what Obama is all about, and Hagel wants to join him in changing the Washington culture. Hagel is an honored veteran, experenced in foreign affairs and intelligence, has Senate experience, private sector experience, and has worked on humanitarian issues. Was an early critic of Iraq war. He would be a tremendous asset on the ticket. He and Obama are perhaps the two most decent men in public service today. OBAMA-HAGEL '08!
They Ofayim won't vote for Obama, period. It won't matter how much of a Born Frothing, Scots-Irish, Real American Tuff Guy is in the veep slot.
Michigan doesn't count ... it's settlement patterns are different and Obama wasn't on the ballot. I suspect that smalltown Michigan would have voted somewhere in between smalltown Wisconsin and smalltown non-Southern Indiana -- some towns going for Obama by five, some going for Clinton by five, etc. But otherwise the point remains. That said, there are only three states in this region that are truly in play: Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Virginia. And in Pennsylvania, the Philly suburbs give Obama enough of an offset. Not so in Ohio, and in Virginia it looks like the loss in Appalachia and McCain's Navy background would make it tough without Webb or Kaine.
Nicholas: what about Missouri? I know I've made the case for Webb too many times already. But compare him to the competition. Here's my back-of-the-envelope list of 25 serious and semi-serious VP contenders for the Democrats: Bayh Assuming they could develop good personal chemistry (no idea where they're starting from on that score, but Gore didn't have good chemistry with Clinton until after he was picked, and they worked extremely well together after that until impeachment), I'm hard-pressed to see who on that list works better than Webb in terms of narrative, geography, demographics. He's narrative-reinforcing, nad yet he can go more places where Obama has a tough time getting traction than pretty much anybody else on the list. Most of the other choices either are one-state game-changers (e.g., Rendell) or plug one particular hole but not multiple holes (e.g., Biden). There are a bunch of names on the list that would be positive for the ticket, but I can't think of any others that would be as potentially game-changing without also being higher-risk. What do you think, Nicholas?
"But otherwise the point remains. That said, there are only three states in this region that are truly in play: Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Virginia. And in Pennsylvania, the Philly suburbs give Obama enough of an offset. Not so in Ohio, and in Virginia it looks like the loss in Appalachia and McCain's Navy background would make it tough without Webb or Kaine." Barring something happening that requires Obama to give Clinton the nod (i.e., she wins in OR or does so well in KY and PR that she overtakes him in the popular-vote-without-Michigan), doesn't Strickland seem like the overwhelming favorite at this point? He gives OH to Obama, and probably helps significantly with PA. Heck, if Clinton is serious about supporting the Democratic nominee, she and Strickland could just ride around Appalachia and the rest of Ohio campaigning for Obama for the entire fall.
I agree with above comment, Obama-Hagel would be an awesome shock to the entire electorate and a real indication of Obama's intention to reform the political status quo. I do like JIm Webb, Ross, but agree with comments above that he's showing lack of interest. Not that uninterested personalities can't be persuaded for "the good of the party, the good of the nation." Hagel would assure Obama's election...although so would several others IMHO. West V. was a big win for HIllary. It points up a problem for Obama with those kinds of voters, and also shows the "poor Hillary" surge that we've seen before in NH and elsewhere. I still believe it's a no-biggie come November. Democrats, other than racists and other tiny minded folk, will rally against McBush behind Obama. Hillary's run such a flawed campaign, only sentiment and her unwillingness to yet be a team player is keeping her going.
Noah's comment sounds right on, except for this, which I'd consider before picking Webb: Lost Soldiers: "A shirtless man walked toward them along a mud pathway. His muscles were young and hard, but his face was devastated with wrinkles. His eyes were so red that they appeared to be burned by fire. A naked boy ran happily toward him from a little plot of dirt. The man grabbed his young son in his arms, turned him upside down, and put the boy's penis in his mouth."
"Appalachian Irish Catholics" Whaaa? Virginia actually has an "Orange County".
dgj, you need some therapy.
As an Independent, my personal dream ticket is Obama-Hagel. Here in Virginia, I don't think Webb would put VA into play (as much as we like him)--so much as Obama, himself, would. The same people who voted for Webb already (and previously, for the African-American Doug Wilder, as VA Governor) are already well disposed toward Obama. While the Scots-Irish in the Appalachian west of the state (who went for George Allen in 2006) will be no more likely to vote for Webb in 2008, if he comes packaged with Obama. Virginia needs Webb in the Senate -- I hope Obama looks elsewhere!
Holy Appalachia ! That's an interesting map. It's scary that I grew up in the Upstate NY end of it. Glad I left the rednecks back in the sticks.
Take a pause from the gamesmanship over the vice presidential nomination and simply ask yourself: if Barack Obama somehow could not be president, who should it be? The answer will resolve a lot of questions for you. For me, it's John Edwards, because I would have voted for him in the primary if Obama had not been running. I like Webb, but I wouldn't have voted for him for president if he had run this time. And that ought to tell me a lot.
I dunno JB, there just doesn't seem to be a lot of percentage in the kind of tea leaf-reading you're doing. Maybe Webb's genuinely disinterested, maybe he's posturing here. Who knows? Lord knows the Obama camp isn't letting slip who they want for VP. I actually agree--I'm not saying he's interested, I'm just saying that his "strong denial" doesn't necessarily mean anything. I'm a bit biased in that I think Webb would be a great VP pick for Obama. The wild card is that I have no clue if Webb actually wants to be on the ticket. I suppose I'll defer to Benjamin, who seems to know more about Webb's personality/persona than I do.
That's only a case for Webb if you actually believe people vote based on the vice presidential nominee. Since the number of people who vote that way is vanishingly small, selecting Webb wouldn't really help Obama win Kentucky and West Virginia in the general.
I can't speak for the other states, but Montana's Irish population is concentrated in Butte, which votes consistently Dem anyhow.
Webb also brought more women into the navy than any one else. He helps both on the McCain and Clinton fronts.
The generally accepted term is Scotch-Irish not Scots-Irish as many think. Scots-Irish is attempt to correct the term that was used historically.
|
Search
Subscribe to this blog by Email Books by Ross Douthat
Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
Categories
E Pluribus NixonThe Atlantic, May 2008 The Return of the Paranoid StyleThe Atlantic, April 2008 
|
Copyright © 2008 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
| 
Grand New Party: How Republicans Can Win the Working Class and Save the American Dream
Privilege: Harvard and the Education of the Ruling Class
Don't forget that Clinton ran unopposed in Michigan. So it may not really count. After all, Wisconsin went Obama. Are the two states really so different? Does Michigan more resemble Ohio? Southern Ohio at that!
Posted by freddiemac | May 14, 2008 10:12 AM