Veepstakes - Why not Bonior?

by: Englishlefty

Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 09:03


(Why Not? - promoted by Paul Rosenberg)

The Democrats have plenty of strong VP picks this cycle. Amongst those who get a lot of blogosphere attention I'm particularly partial to Sherrod Brown, Brian Schweitzer, John Edwards, Chris Dodd, Kathleen Sebelius and Bill Richardson.

Nevertheless, the blogosphere doesn't make the decision. And we have less influence than the media. The conventional wisdom in the media is that Obama needs to pick a moderate elder statesman with defence and foreign policy credentials. A lot of people seem to be backing Sam Nunn.

This would be a truly appalling choice. He's been good on nuclear non-proliferation issues and is no doubt a dab hand at negotiating with banana republic despots, but he's terrible on economic issues and routinely favoured regressive social policies.

He supported the Iraq war and he mulled an independent run this year. The only saving grace is that he's too old to run as Obama's successor.

Thankfully such a choice appears unlikely at present. Obama's decision to interview Patty Murray suggests that he's not fooled by the beltway consensus that Unity 08 was a great idea.

Nevertheless, there's still an outside chance that Nunn, or similar wastes of space like former Indiana congressmen Lee Hamilton and Tim Roemer. And even if that doesn't happen, this kind of media discourse pushes the Overton window leftward, so figures like Feingold are not perceived as remotely plausible candidates.

To that end, I have a solution: David Bonior.

Englishlefty :: Veepstakes - Why not Bonior?
David Bonior was a Democratic representative from Michigan for more than two decades and was the Whip of the Democratic Caucus from 1991. In 2002 Republican redistricting divided up his district, so he ran for Governor instead, losing in the primary to Granholm. This cycle he was John Edwards' campaign manager and has since become a forceful advocate for Barack Obama.

He's got close ties to labour and has been an opponent of all manner of free trade agreements. He'd probably be able to bring Michigan out of McCain's reach and his background would be helpful in the Rust Belt and parts of Appalachia.

I won't pretend he's a perfect candidate. His base is white union members, which is not a demographic Obama has problems with, and it's far from certain he could also help in non-union households. Also, he's pro-life.

Yes, this is a major problem. Ordinarily, I'd say it disqualifies him. Except he's not going to succeed Obama, the judges he'd name would be economic populists more than they'd be pro-lifers and, most importantly of all, we're not trying to make him get the nod.

I don't think David Bonior should be VP. We have a lot of good candidates already and we should pick someone who can carry on after Obama. But putting him forward as an acceptable elder statesman is the best counter to Nunn. If change must be balanced with experience, let's have someone on the side of the working man. Let's have an opponent of the Iraq war. Let's stop pretending that sitting on Intelligence and Defence committees automatically makes you an expert on national security.

Why not David Bonior? There are good reasons why not, but all of them should move the narrative in a more progressive direction.

Poll
Is it worth pushing David Bonior as VP?
Yes
No

Results


Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
I love Bonior (0.00 / 0)
He will make a fantastic Sec of Labor. But not VP.

Nunn opposed the Iraq War to his credit but outside of that he would be a horrible pick and since he is also anti-choice and anti-gay he will never be picked. The man is 70 years old. He would be 78 at the end of Obama's term. He will not be VP. If it's going to be a elder statesmen it will be Biden.

John McCain: Beacuse lobbyists should have more power


I've thought about pushing an elder statesman type (4.00 / 3)
I don't think there's anyone out there who feels right to slot in as VP for Obama: The Sequel in 2016.

One name that I've floated has been Bob Graham.  He read the full NIE before the AUMF vote unlike Hillary Clinton and he voted against the war, unlike Clinton or Edwards (the latter even going so far as to sponsor the resolution).

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both


Graham would be acceptable, given his war record (4.00 / 1)
Perhaps George Mitchell, too?  Mitchell is now seen as essentially the ideal non-partisan elder statesman type.  The baseball steroid report even went over relatively well (in contrast to the disastrous Congressional hearings).  He has foreign policy cred.  And since he was a Majority leader, he might be helpful in dealing with Congress.

I'd much rather have a Sherrod Brown, Russ Feingold, or John Edwards, or someone in their vein, but if we're going to go for an elder statesman type, something stupid like Nunn needs to be avoided at all costs.


[ Parent ]
George Mitchell has sold out!!!! (4.00 / 1)
Go to http://www.commondreams.org/ar...

You will find that George Mitchell has lobbied for big tobacco; protecting GE from having to clean up PCBs in the Hudson River by the EPA; and hired by chocolate companies so that candy that was produced by child or slave labor would not be labelled as such.


[ Parent ]
I like Graham.... (4.00 / 2)
Unless McCain picks Crist, he'd probably make Obama very competitive in Florida, which he's not likely to be otherwise.  I recall thinking he'd be a good VP pick for Kerry four years ago, or for Gore eight years ago -- either of those tickets would almost certainly have beaten Bush-Cheney where Gore-Liebershit and Kerry-Edwards failed.

Actually, for Gore delete the almost -- there's not a snowball's chance in hell the Bush brothers and that loathesome harpy Katherine Harris could have kept Florida close enough to steal against a Gore-Graham ticket.  With the state's general rightward trend over the last eight years, and Graham being both older and out of office, it's less certain he could deliver the state this year, especially against a McCain-Crist ticket, but he'd surely make it closer than it will be for any other possible Democratic ticket.

"A fantasy is not even a wish, much less an act.  There is no such thing as a culpable or shameful fantasy."  -----Lady Sally McGee


[ Parent ]
I'm with you! (0.00 / 0)
Bob Graham is an elder statesman from the Intell Committee and a great campaigner. He originated (probably didn't, but it's the first I heard of it) working alongside an ordinary constituent one day a month. It gives him a better feel for regular people, lots of anecdotes for speeches, knowledge of what needs to be done, and always plenty of local media attention. Folksy Southern white guy, but progressive.  

[ Parent ]
anti-choice = no (4.00 / 12)
Bonior is a courageous politician who would likely be an effective candidate. But anti-choice would be a near-disqualifier under even normal circumstances... and in a year in which Obama is trying to reach out to Hillary Clinton's supporters, it's a non-starter.  

ding ding ding (0.00 / 0)
You are correct sir.

[ Parent ]
Yeah I love Bonior (0.00 / 0)
But being anti-choice would just be a distraction and would be seen as a slap in the face to many people. Unfortunately, Edwards would be the perfect replacement for Bonior, but he's getting more and more solid with his VP refusals.

If only Sherrod Brown was in his 8th year in the senate instead of his 2nd. sigh......


[ Parent ]
You are100% correct (0.00 / 0)
It would be better if you had said YOU oppose him because he's anti choice...not just that Hillary's supporters would be furious.  

That choice would just be thumbing your nose at women...it would undercut any idea that Barack Obama has good judgement. Indeed anyone like Hagel, Nunn, or Bayh...all with anti choice records and now Bonior would just be a way to insure losing in November

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller


[ Parent ]
Please be careful (0.00 / 0)
Whether or not I would support Bonior personally isn't the issue I was addressing in my comment. Not everything has to be personal.

And I don't oppose all anti-choice candidates. I oppose the anti-choice position viciously, but I would have voted for Bob Casey against Rick Santorum, for example.  

And to the extent your comment questions my pro-choice "bonafides"... well, that makes things personal. Probably my proudest achievement in life, as pathetic as this might sound, occurred when I was named one of the "volunteers of the year" for Planned Parenthood of SE Pennsylvania.

Let's team up and work together, even with those like David Bonior who are great on so many issues and who just need a little more persuasion on the matter of reproductive choice.  


[ Parent ]
And I'm still furious (0.00 / 0)
with Rendell and Schumer for forcing this choice on us in a year we had two progressive candidates eager to run for the Senate and Santorum was so despised I could have beat him. Casey's a nice guy; I've met him and chatted. But in the Senate he still voted against stem cell research.

[ Parent ]
I agree completely (0.00 / 0)
It wasn't just risk-averse behavior... Casey was a "serious" guy from a "serious" political family. And as this site reminds us often, Democrats are not necessarily progressives.  

[ Parent ]
I agree (0.00 / 0)
That why I don't support him except as a method of shifting the Overton window of that one.

Now if he was to promise not to appoint judges who'd overturn Roe vs. Wade, then there might be a chance, but otherwise it is a dealbreaker.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog


[ Parent ]
Apologies, in part. (0.00 / 0)
I didn't read carefully enough, and I didn't respond to you carefully enough.

Even pushing Bonior is a bad idea, in my opinion. But I apologize for "straw-manning" your post somewhat.  


[ Parent ]
Conventional Wisdom and the Media (4.00 / 1)
"Nevertheless, the blogosphere doesn't make the decision. And we have less influence than the media. The conventional wisdom in the media is that Obama needs to pick a moderate elder statesman with defence and foreign policy credentials."

I hope that here in the netroots, we don't have to accept these premises as inevitable - that Conventional Wisdom changes, whether by force of specific personalities and groups, or through the Gramscian hegemonic war that Paul Rosenberg writes about around here.  

We have shown in many situations that the Netroots tail can wag the Media dog, so let's not accept "having less influence than the media" over the VP Conventional Wisdom as inevitable.  

I posted a diary earlier this week with some statistical analysis of media CW, and some first thoughts on changing it.

Of course, it's just as likely (as you suggested, Englishlefty, re Patty Murray) that neither the media nor the netroots will necessarily affect Obama's decision, and that he'll keep his own counsel - not much we can do about that I'll admit!


Couldn't we move the overton window... (4.00 / 4)
simply by suggesting Russ Feingold? His name has been conspicuously absent from most discussion.

Other than the fact that he's pro-life (which I just now learned) I don't have anything against Bonior, but he just doesn't strike me as the right fit. Forgive me for thinking with my gut. :)

If the only reason to suggest him is to reframe the debate, let's cut out the middle man and start talking Feingold.

Also, Patty Murray... no. Same reasons.


Feingold isn't perceived as plausible (0.00 / 0)
The media is obsessed with centrists and old guys. Feingold is too forthright for his supporters to be viewed as anything more than DFHs.

My reasoning in putting Bonior forward is to sabotage the discussion on old white guys, allowing a swift move to "But Bonior's pro-life! Why not, say, Sherrod Brown?" Because they have few grounds to turn Bonior down, except obsession with places on the Defence and Intelligence committees, which can be riposted by discussing Iraq and the votes of committee members. And once seniority and committee places are removed as qualifications, our guys suddenly seem plausible.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog


[ Parent ]
David Bonior is fantastic (4.00 / 1)
Although unfortunately I think he's not in the top tier for V.P., I would love to see him there or anywhere else in the administration. He is honest and courageous and a tremendous asset to the economic progressive fight. Probably more likely to get Sherrod Brown or Brian Schweitzer as Veep, but Bonior would be fantastic at Labor, State, Treasury, Justice or U.S. Trade Representative.

VISA is Hungry! http://www.funnyordie.com/vide...

If Obama picks an elder statesmen (0.00 / 0)
it will be a four year deal only.  They may not make that public knowledge, but it would make more sense to be able to pick a successor assuming a second term.  Also, a pro-life VP would be a complete disaster.  I don't care how you justified it.

Why would a pro-life VP .. (0.00 / 0)
be a disaster? .. we already have a pro-life Senate Majority Leader

[ Parent ]
Because one of the major things we need to do (0.00 / 0)
is make women less skeptical of Obama after that primary fight.  Picking a pro-lifer probably isn't a help with that.

[ Parent ]
I know that ... (0.00 / 0)
but I guess I don't see a Democrat(no matter what there personal feelings) .. voting against a pro-choice judge .. I mean just as an example .. say Obama does nominate Hillary to be a Supreme .. is Harry Reid going to vote against her just because he is pro-life?  Hopefully I am not being obtuse .. I am just curious is all .. because Bonior would be a good pick except for that one issue

[ Parent ]
Unity '08 .. (4.00 / 1)
Thankfully such a choice appears unlikely at present. Obama's decision to interview Patty Murray suggests that he's not fooled by the beltway consensus that Unity 08 was a great idea.

Last time I checked the website(before it shut down to become a draft Bloomberg thing) .. the two leading vote get'ers in the poll on their site were Obama and Feingold .. by a pretty wide margin too .. no wonder they shut it down .. it didn't go exactly as they had planned   ;-)


I wish I did ... (0.00 / 0)
is there any way to search the way back machine? .. I mean .. I am sure I could find the main site .. but I wonder if the way back machine could find those pages

[ Parent ]
I just searched the way back machine .. (0.00 / 0)
it seems they either prevented the way back machine from archiving anything .. or they had it scrubbed after the fact  :-(

[ Parent ]
Bonior is pro-life? (0.00 / 0)
Hm, surprising. I wasn't too into the politics of 2002, seeing as I was, uh, 13 years old. :)

But anyway. He's anti-choice and anti-consumer (anti-free trade) and those combined completely sour him to me, as those are two of my biggest issues.


Not hugely surprising (0.00 / 0)
There's a fair amount of Midwestern Democratic politicians who oppose abortion but who would be considered solidly progressive on pretty much everything else.  

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both

[ Parent ]
"Free Trade" Is Not Pro-Consumer (4.00 / 2)
Unless you like your falling living standards with a side of toxic goodies.
    "Would you like a bridge with that?"


"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

[ Parent ]
How about being pro-worker? (0.00 / 0)
Is having cheap shit from Wal-mart always the most important thing for you? How about having stuff made in a country that actually has manufacturing standards so we don't kill our pets and poison our children with lead?

How about trading with countries that actually pay their workers well and don't try to depress global wages through a race to the bottom?

Being pro-fair trade does not make one anti-trade. Bonior has no problem trading with the EU, Canada, many many countries where workers are treated as more than machines that run cheaper than the ones in the US.

I also assume you've never had to deal with plant closings that destroy whole communities simply because the company could make 5% more in profits. Maybe you think it's OK. Just tough luck I suppose. Sounds kind of like John McCain.


[ Parent ]
OpenLeft is not the place, but... (0.00 / 0)
Is having cheap shit from Wal-mart always the most important thing for you? How about having stuff made in a country that actually has manufacturing standards so we don't kill our pets and poison our children with lead?
Or we could make a law that says "no lead in our toys and food", and not punish me, a law-abiding citizen, with higher prices.

By the way, Wal-Mart goods are mostly from China, a country we do not have free trade with.

How about trading with countries that actually pay their workers well and don't try to depress global wages through a race to the bottom?
They pay their workers very well, compared to subsistence farming. Stop trying to take opportunities away from the third world.

Being pro-fair trade does not make one anti-trade. Bonior has no problem trading with the EU, Canada, many many countries where workers are treated as more than machines that run cheaper than the ones in the US.
So he wants to trade with countries that don't need the money, while shafting the third world and American consumers. Great guy.

I also assume you've never had to deal with plant closings that destroy whole communities simply because the company could make 5% more in profits.
Haha, you have no idea. No idea at all.

I'm just not so dense as to blame Mexico for all of my woes. We're shifting to a technology and service-based economy, and the people here in Michigan just don't get it. American cars are big, bulky, expensive, and have a reputation for being of lower quality than foreign cars.

It isn't Toyota's fault Ford sucks. It's Ford's.

If someone thinks they can build a better car than Ford or GM, then they should build a prototype, get a loan, and start a business.

The young people get it, and they're leaving in droves, mostly for the Sun Belt. Smart cookies.


[ Parent ]
Wow (0.00 / 0)
Your arrogance and naivety would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad.

I think the saddest thing is that I know that people like you are the ones that start out as Democrats but end up as Republicans by the time they're 30. Oh well, we'll miss you.

Try learning some history before you go though, it might broaden your perspective a little.  


[ Parent ]
Oh.. (0.00 / 0)
and by history, I mean the history of this country and every country that has gone through industrialization. Psst...it wasn't the industrialists that created the middle class.

[ Parent ]
the solution for Detroit (0.00 / 0)
Universal single-payer health insurance would certainly improve the health of the auto industry.  

[ Parent ]
Do me a favor. (0.00 / 0)
Dear Lefty-Bloggers:

Quit participating in Veep-hype by trying to be so smart that you figure out who it will be when you don't know.

Why are we pushing Obama? McCain's been his joke of a party's nominee for months and no one is pressuring him.

Signed,
Me


well (4.00 / 2)
There's some speculation on conservative blogs. But there's less because of the whole "arranging deck chairs on the Titanic" thing.

[ Parent ]
Because if we don't push him (4.00 / 2)
It could be Sam fucking Nunn.

Obama owes his victory in no small part to progressive activists, but he's not beholden to them and we have to counter the centrists and the media, or we never get what we want.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog


[ Parent ]
Patty Murray (0.00 / 0)
I have not followed her Senate career closely but she seems to have some attributes worth considering:

She voted against the Iraqi war resolution;

She would not undercut Obama's change message, not being a long-term D.C. insider;

She is a woman, and an ardent supporter of Hillary; and,

She might help in the west, say in Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, Oregon (in case it is needed) and maybe even Montana.


I think (0.00 / 0)
people overestimate the influence of senator's outside of their home state (or even in their home state). Unless the person has regional message potential (like Edwards or Sherrod Brown), there's really not much to offer outside the senator's home state base of support. Especially when that senator's home base of support is Seattle Washington.

[ Parent ]
regional message potential (0.00 / 0)
Remember that Edwards didn't carry North Carolina as VP candidate.

[ Parent ]
I view him as anti-choice (4.00 / 8)
Also, he's pro-life.

Those who respect a woman's right to choose are pro-life, as well.

John McCain doesn't care about Vets.



Yes (0.00 / 0)
One of the most important and simplest things we can all do on the issue of choice is to relegate the horribly inaccurate term "pro-life" to the trash heap.  

[ Parent ]
He is a non-starter (4.00 / 1)
There is no way he can pick someone who is not pro-choice.

Actually, Sam Nunn opposed the Iraq war (0.00 / 0)
He also opposed the first Persian Gulf war.  

Obama, Axelrod, and Plouffe aren't dumb (4.00 / 1)
Please have more faith in the Obama team. They know better than to validate all the concern trolls in the press by picking a Washington insider graybeard as veep. Picking somebody like Nunn would just let the press run wild with stories about how Obama lacks experience and foreign policy cred and needed Nunn to hold his hand. Obama will pick somebody relatively young who represents the same change and judgment that he does.

Hope you're right (4.00 / 1)
I hope you're right.  In the meantime, I think this is a version of "run like you're 10 points down."  Maybe Obama's team is recognizing the BS of the conventional "balancing" choice, and I hope they are -- but it can't hurt to create a lot of buzz for the idea of a reinforcing choice, can it?

Besides which, if the buzz becomes great enough in the blogosphere, it has a (slight) chance of jumping to mainstream media -- in which case, the narrative when Obama announces his reinforcing choice could potentially be more positive, rather than "Obama messed up and went with an 'inexperienced' ticket."

... because up till now, I have seen virtually nothing in the corporate media besides "Obama needs a balancing VP."  Two DEMOCRATIC talking heads were on CM a couple of weeks ago and both agreed that HAGEL would be the best VP choice, for f***'s sake!  Give me a fricking break!

I don't necessarily agree with Bonoir, but I do agree with englishlefty's assertion that it's important for us to try to change the narrative.

Republicans can't fix our country; they're too busy saddlebacking.


[ Parent ]
again, allow me to suggest Bob Graham (0.00 / 0)
I'm thinking he contrasts sharply with Obama on the outside, as an older folksy white Southerner and a balancing VP, and inside he's a reinforcing choice.

[ Parent ]
Gary Hart, the anti-Nunn (0.00 / 0)
Folks,

If there's a real concern about Sam Nunn as VP, I think the right alternative is Gary Hart.

The conventional wisdom in the media is that Obama needs to pick a moderate elder statesman with defence and foreign policy credentials. A lot of people seem to be backing Sam Nunn.

Hart brings the same credentials listed -
- elder statesman
- moderate
- excellent credentials in Defense matters, a little less so in Foreign Policy.

And to me, Gary Hart is a philosophical forefather of the kind of change Obama is pushing.


VP (0.00 / 0)
The VP choice will be a window into the Obama decision making process for those that haven't yet decided whether or not they will vote for him.
I have a few candidates but as of now I will defer to Obama and others on this issue, although I do believe the VP must have been against the war and most likely pro-choice. That doesn't pick a winner but certainly it does eliminate some I have seen on short lists recently.

Donate to Open Left









QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.


blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search