VP choice prediction: Obama wants running mate who didn't support the Iraq War.

The Goldman Blog


I believe Governor Tim Kaine is at the top of Senator Obama's short-list for VEEP, indeed, as I will show, the list may only have two people on it.

Here is the logical deduction, or at least an attempt at it. Unfortunately, to do the math right, it takes many steps, there is no way to do it in a few paragraphs and give the logic.

1. Senator Obama's 2002 opposition to the Iraq War was fundamental to his primary candidacy, and he continues to make his 2002 opposition to the war vs McCain's 2002 vote for the War a fundamental litmus test for November, using the same successful construct - Judgment vs Experience - that worked brilliantly against Senator Clinton.

By November, the Economy, not the War, is likely to decide the election based on historical analysis. But right now - and that is when the decision is being made - it is the Peace Issue, not the Prosperity Issue, that is dominating the Obama vs McCain battle.

And at this moment, the battle is less one of specific issues and more of defining them in a broad way with the general public. This is normal at this juncture of a campaign, at almost any level really.

2. Thus, Senator Obama has to ask himself one fundamental question at the very start of his VEEP decision-making:

Do I want to run with a Vice-Presidential nominee who is on record as having supported going to War with Iraq, either voting for the 2002 War Resolution or having voiced support for the invasion at the time?

To be sure, the 2002 Joint Congressional Resolution authorizing the President to invade Iraq if he thought it necessary to protect America's national security left the decision to Mr. Bush, so in technical terms a vote for the Resolution was not, per se, a vote to go to War. 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, and 2004 Democratic vice-presidential nominee John Edwards made that point repeatedly in that year. But it didn't wash politically, even though it is legally true.

Politically, it was a vote for war, and the American people are not fools.

3. Obama's answer: No, unless I have no other viable option. HE KNOWS THAT if he chooses a pro-war running mate, THIS WILL be what the media use as the defining dimension to the selection, it will dominate the press conference held to announce the choice.

And Senator Obama knows this too: In the final analysis, his choice of a VEEP will be a big defining moment for him in the eyes of the public.

4. Accordingly, I think any pro-war voting Senator is out. This eliminates Bayh, Biden, and Clinton.

5. Here is the list of all the anti-War votes on the Iraq War Resolution: .


Akaka (D-HI)Bingaman (D-NM)Boxer (D-CA)Byrd (D-WV)Chafee (R-RI)Conrad (D-ND)Corzine (D-NJ)Dayton (D-MN)
Durbin (D-IL)Feingold (D-WI)Graham (D-FL)Inouye (D-HI)Jeffords (I-VT)Kennedy (D-MA)Leahy (D-VT)Levin (D-MI)


Mikulski (D-MD)Murray (D-WA)Reed (D-RI)Sarbanes (D-MD)Stabenow (D-MI)Wellstone (D-MN)Wyden (D-OR)
Among the Democrats, you have, in theory, potential running mates in Bingaman, Boxer, Conrad, Corzine, Durbin, Levin, Murray, Reed, Stabenow, and Wyden, under the anti-war analysis. If Obama were from any state but Illinois, I believe Durbin would be the pick.

The two Michigan Senators - Levin and Stabenow - come from one of the key states this year, but there are various reasons why they are not likely to be selected. Truth is, none of the anti-war Senators is considered a good fit for Obama, with Senator Jack Reed probably being the top pick here, followed by either Kent Conrad or Patty Murray. But the latter two are long-time Senators and thus they seem to have been eliminated by Obama saying he doesn't want a Washington insider, or at least someone who could be painted that way.

In that regard, Senator Reed, although a Congressman before moving up the Senate, is the best choice, having served in the military.

Net, Net: But for Reed, no anti-war Senator is likely to get to the final round.

6. Senator Jim Webb was on a paper a great VEEP fit, as he was not in the Senate in 2002, but as strong anti-war credentials yet was also President Reagan's Secretary of the Navy and a decorated military guy. Besides, Webb is super-smart, the anti-politician image, the whole package. But Webb said he didn't want in an almost Shermanesque way. As soldier, Webb would no doubt do his duty if asked, but when a guy says he doesn't want the VEEP thing, then Obama is going to respect that.

7. Senator McCaskill arrived in the Senate along with rookie Webb. She has proven to be a very effective pro-Obama campaign leader, she is savvy, good speaker, sharp on the issues and comes from the key state of Missouri. But she is not apparently under consideration.

8. So if you take out the sitting Senators, then you say: What about former Senators, former Governors, former top officials? A guy like former Governor and Senator George Mitchell, super-respected, savvy pol, would be a perfect choice if he wasn't a big time lobbyist now, the same for several other high profile former top DEM elected officials. Obama can not go there, and he knows it.

9. ERGO: Unless Senator Obama goes with an anti-war Senator like say a Reed, then logical deduction gets us to the sitting Governors. Moreover, it might be that Obama calculates that he should not go with either an pro-war or anti-war Senator, since this gives him maximum political flexibility, avoids a lot of questions, and as Emerson says, events are in the saddle and they ride mankind, in political strategy, having room to maneuver on the tough issues is worth more than all that Internet fund-raising.

10. Net, net: Senator Obama, by the process of elimination - the usual thing for VEEP choices historically - arrives at needing a sitting Governor, who has no 2002 position on the War, someone from a key state, someone he likes, you do the math.

Of course Governor Tim Kaine of Virginia is at the top of the short-list: he is likely the only one on the list except perhaps for Rhode Island Senator Reed. But it is better to go South or West, or even Midwest for Obama, the Northeast is the most reliable Democratic bastion in the country, the "Solid North" really, since except for New Hampshire, it has been as solid as the South in the last two presidential elections, indeed solid twice for Clinton.

Yet Reed has a great resume.

He is a Harvard lawyer though, so whether it be Kaine or Reed, it is Harvard Law ticket all the way.

Hillary is Yale and that might be a big problem too!

If the War is indeed the fundamental Colonel Travis line in the sand on the VEEP decision, then that leaves Kaine and Reed as perhaps the last guys standing.