Comments on: Let’s see the vice-sausage being made

By: Debate Mapping Obama’s VP choice… : Open to persuasion…

Debate Mapping Obama’s VP choice… : Open to persuasion… — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 09:45:32 +0000

[...] a subsequent post, David called for transparent debate about Barack Obama’s choice of vice-presidential running m…, noting [...]

By: James Robertson

James Robertson — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 02:54:27 +0000

You have no problem with that? Ok, here’s what I call it: raw, unadulterated cowardice. He didn’t think he could win an open race, so he sued to close it.

By: dbt

dbt — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 19:24:56 +0000

The vetting process needs to be private — it’s the process of finding all the nasty private problems that could explode in the campaign’s face. Necessarily private.

I also think the process of saying these are the 5 people we’re considering, and then publicly dissing 4 of them, isn’t … politic.

James Robertson, I have no problem with that. It’s just part and parcel of politics. I hope he has no problem knocking Nader or the GP off the ballot too.

By: James Robertson

James Robertson — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:00:27 +0000

Ah yes, the open Obama. You might consider how he won his initial race in Chicago: by suing to get all 4 other candidates off the ballot so he could run unopposed.

I suspect that center left types are going to be the most disappointed and angry people around when it finally dawns on them that Obama is just a typical politician.

By: davidw

davidw — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 22:56:03 +0000

Mark, I certainly am erring on the side of pendulum-pushing. But a veep isn’t just a team member, and isn’t just an employee being hired. A veep is also a public official, one who might have to become president one day. So, while much of the vetting would be kept private, having some public discussion and involvement still seems to me like a good way to push the pendulum.

By: Mark Federman

Mark Federman — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 17:12:34 +0000

David, I think you’re pushing the pendulum too far here in your suggestion. Even though democratic processes benefit from transparency, an individual choosing the closest members of her/his team is not democratic. Americans get to (more or less) make their choice of ticket.

It’s the same for cabinet posts – this is creation of a team, not an exercise in so-called democracy, which, given all the conflicting interests and race, gender, class, etc. prejudices that remain rife throughout many Western societies, is not all that democratic anyway.

By: With Nomination in Hand, Obama Obfuscates and Panders « John Bracken

With Nomination in Hand, Obama Obfuscates and Panders « John Bracken — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 11:58:04 +0000

[...] Obama’s inconsistencies on transparency a few months ago.) NBC’s Chuck Todd shoots down David Weinberger’s hopes for an open vetting process, and suggests maybe it’s not so [...]

By: David S. Isenberg

David S. Isenberg — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 11:03:29 +0000

Good point. I think it would be to our credit if we made our best suggestions. It would be to Obama’s credit if he would engage, e.g., X would pull the Hispanic vote, but Y would be a stronger ally in pushing [legislation], and Z, well, uh, I owe Z a favor because [s]he delivered [state] in the primary. In our dreams. But, gotta admit it ain’t a bad dream.

By: links for 2008-06-05 (Jarrett House North)

links for 2008-06-05 (Jarrett House North) — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 22:33:53 +0000

[...] Joho the Blog » Let’s see the vice-sausage being made We’ve had open campaigns, how about open VP selection? (tags: 2008 election veep obama) [...]

By: Who watches the hope man? « Andy on the Road

Who watches the hope man? « Andy on the Road — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 20:02:35 +0000

[...] intense scrutiny that my favorite blogs give McCain. One great example of that comes today from David Weinberger: Obama has declared that he will remove the walls of secrecy around the executive branch, and will [...]