It's that rare combination in politics that can make the difference for a successful campaign. The perfect combination of contrasts in running mates. Conventional wisdom is that the lead candidate--for governor or president--should pick someone with appropriate contrasts, either in political philosophy, regional identity, or experience. And if that person brings a certain bloc of voters along for the ride, all the better.
Occasionally, there's the rare winning combination of people very alike--think Stan Stephens and Allen Kolstad in 1988. (Both conservative High Liners who served together in the Senate.) More likely, though, a running mate brings something the lead candidate doesn't have and should appeal to people not necessarily in the lead's corner.
This year, we have seen a remarkable use of those contrasts. Skin color. Hair color. Gender. Age. Geography.
Of course, visual symbolism can only go so far. Ideas do matter and a candidate's words and deeds can make or break a campaign. As September opens, I think about the teams that will be competing for Montanans' votes in November.
Schweitzer and Bohlinger. This team still plays on what it considers the ultimate contrast--a life-long, if moderate, Republican playing second-in-command to a fiery, passionate, Democrat. Bohlinger the avuncular gentleman with his shock of white hair and bow ties, running with the youthful, jeans-and-bolo-wearing Energizer bunny. Together, they seem to delight in the harrumphs that their partnership has drawn from people in both parties who just don't approve. And they seem to have more fun than any other chief executive team ever.
Brown and Daines. In the limited times I've seen them together, Roy Brown represents thoughtful solidity, while Steve Daines presumably brings the energy and restlessness that every campaign needs. Brown seems to move and speak slowly. And to eye and ear, he's not typical. The hair is nearly a pompadour, the voice in an upper range that is hardly commanding.
Daines offers a more standard look and sound, and I'm sure Brown & Co. hope that--and his link to the electronic world that today's youth inhabit--will be an asset to younger voters who will turn out to vote for president but who aren't sure about the governor's race.
McCain and Palin. This is a picture we've never seen before. The aging and scarred warrior whose face and story we all know, backed by the young and, let's face it, attractive female confidante who bursts on the scene from nowhere. This is not Mondale-Ferraro. It's something different. Radically different, coming from the Republicans. Putting aside what each half of the team represents in policy and potential voter appeal, the picture of McCain and Palin together must make political cartoonists drool. Even if it's just the older man, younger woman stereotype. And the combination of two such iconic western states--Arizona with its Grand Canyon and Alaska with Mt. McKinley--should give satirists and campaign image-makers alike a lot to work with. Add in all the news about Palin in the last few days, and cartoonists must be dizzy.
Obama and Biden. Youth and energy head the ticket, age and wisdom back it up. Black skin and white skin--a first. Close-cropped black hair next to thick white hair. Winning smiles, both, with attractive spouses, also with contrasting hair and skin. Cartoonists may eventually portray this team in ways similar to Bush & Cheney, with the elder and more experienced VP controlling the man in the Oval Office. Rather than showing Biden as puppeteer, though, the satirical image I see is the coach driver holding the reins, not choosing the direction, but rather making sure his powerful horse doesn't run off the road or fly out of control while charging ahead towards his destination.
Friday, August 29, 2008
WOW!
Just when you thought the presidential campaign could not be any more ground-breaking, McCain picks his running mate. A woman! A first-term governor! Younger than Obama! Photogenic as heck! From Alaska no less!
Immediate first impression: on symbolism alone, it's an incredibily astute, bold move. For the short term at least, Sarah Palin may give a lot of women voters pause to think. And by choosing a running mate who also represents the far west of America, McCain could make western voters take notice. (You can bet the calls are coming in from state party organizations all over the Mountain and Pacific time zones, wanting Palin to visit.)
Of course, Palin's record and experience (or lack of it) will be extolled, bemoaned and generally dissected over the coming days. And by November, her appeal to female voters, especially those who are not conservative, may diminish as they learn more about her.
It's also possible that over the next two months, Americans' unvarnished values and beliefs about race and gender will show themselves in ways that aren't pretty.
But for the moment, it's hard to look at what the American political system has shown the world in recent days and not say, "Wow!"
Immediate first impression: on symbolism alone, it's an incredibily astute, bold move. For the short term at least, Sarah Palin may give a lot of women voters pause to think. And by choosing a running mate who also represents the far west of America, McCain could make western voters take notice. (You can bet the calls are coming in from state party organizations all over the Mountain and Pacific time zones, wanting Palin to visit.)
Of course, Palin's record and experience (or lack of it) will be extolled, bemoaned and generally dissected over the coming days. And by November, her appeal to female voters, especially those who are not conservative, may diminish as they learn more about her.
It's also possible that over the next two months, Americans' unvarnished values and beliefs about race and gender will show themselves in ways that aren't pretty.
But for the moment, it's hard to look at what the American political system has shown the world in recent days and not say, "Wow!"
Thursday, August 7, 2008
FAREWELL TO THE DOG DAYS
The dog days of August are over now, and with the national convention scene almost to the halfway point, there are some things to talk about.
SCHWEITZER THE CHEERLEADER
Brian Schweitzer sure made an impression at the Democratic National Convention on Tuesday night. Too bad the major commercial networks condensed their coverage so much that we missed the fireworks. NBC's Tom Brokaw, who certainly knows Montana, helped steer his network's coverage toward Schweitzer's rallying, call-and-response, address. By the time NBC cut to the podium, the Montana governor was wrapping up. Brokaw and Brian Williams spoke a bit more about Schweitzer afterward, but the country missed quite a show. (I wasn't tuned in to public television or radio, but apparently, Schweitzer's entire appearance was broadcast live on those stations.)
Put simply, Montana has never had a governor who was in a position to make that kind of speech. Nor have we had a governor capable of pulling it off and bringing everyone in the arena, including Bill Clinton to Michele Obama, to their feet.
THE BROWN RESPONSE
How will Roy Brown & Co. respond to that kind of performance? My guess is that we'll start hearing the "work horse vs. show horse" theme on a regular basis, as Brown asks voters whether they really want a celebrity governor who performs for national audiences and television cameras or whether they'd prefer a quiet, thoughtful governor who stays home and tends to business. Expect a lot more of this theme if the Democrats' national organization puts Schweitzer on the campaign trail for Obama.
Brown also may go after Schweitzer in another way, by pointing out small issues, magnifying them and then hoping voters turn them into larger issues of character and trustworthiness.
SCHWEITZER THE CHEERLEADER
Brian Schweitzer sure made an impression at the Democratic National Convention on Tuesday night. Too bad the major commercial networks condensed their coverage so much that we missed the fireworks. NBC's Tom Brokaw, who certainly knows Montana, helped steer his network's coverage toward Schweitzer's rallying, call-and-response, address. By the time NBC cut to the podium, the Montana governor was wrapping up. Brokaw and Brian Williams spoke a bit more about Schweitzer afterward, but the country missed quite a show. (I wasn't tuned in to public television or radio, but apparently, Schweitzer's entire appearance was broadcast live on those stations.)
Put simply, Montana has never had a governor who was in a position to make that kind of speech. Nor have we had a governor capable of pulling it off and bringing everyone in the arena, including Bill Clinton to Michele Obama, to their feet.
THE BROWN RESPONSE
How will Roy Brown & Co. respond to that kind of performance? My guess is that we'll start hearing the "work horse vs. show horse" theme on a regular basis, as Brown asks voters whether they really want a celebrity governor who performs for national audiences and television cameras or whether they'd prefer a quiet, thoughtful governor who stays home and tends to business. Expect a lot more of this theme if the Democrats' national organization puts Schweitzer on the campaign trail for Obama.
Brown also may go after Schweitzer in another way, by pointing out small issues, magnifying them and then hoping voters turn them into larger issues of character and trustworthiness.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
ENTERING THE DOG DAYS
Yes, it's been awhile since I've posted. But it's summer, darn it. Time for vacations, baseball, enjoying the pre-forest fire season heat and the long days. Definitely NOT time for partisan politics. Nonetheless, there are some things worth mentioning, if for no other reason that they're so...well...amusing.
"JOHNNY NO-COAL"
Democrat John Driscoll, who faces incumbent U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg in November, told fellow Dems at last weekend's platform convention in Miles City that he'd pull the plug on coal if elected. Not exactly the thing to say in coal country, or to an audience that has hopped on Gov. Schweitzer's coal train. But could it win votes from the global warming crowd? It certainly got him quite a bit of free media. (The only kind he's willing to get.)
It's really too bad Driscoll isn't campaigning more. Is he eccentric? Sure. Impolitic? Absolutely. I don't always understand whence his views come. But he's still one of the most interesting politicos I've ever met.
CRYING FOUL
Republican Senate also-ran Patty Lovaas of Missoula continues to rail at the admittedly unexplainable victory of Bob "Eyebrows" Kelleher in the GOP's June Senate primary. (Can't we just do the obvious and question the intellect and political knowledge of this year's GOP voters?)
Lovaas believes Kelleher won by fraud, based on her empirical observation that she hasn't met a single person who voted for him. Under the law, Lovaas (or anyone) can go to court to challenge an election, as long as it's filed within one year. So far she hasn't done that, but she has asked the Secretary of State for an audit comparing voter registration records with polling place logs.
Lovaas says she never met a Kelleher voter during her petition campaign to put herself on the November ballot as an independent. That effort also has gone nowhere, since state law doesn't provide for it. Now, Lovaas is banking on a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision and a federal ballot access lawsuit by Montana environmentalist Steve Kelly.
Put simply, Lovaas' name is becoming a household word at the Secretary of State's office, where she's taking the "gadfly" role to a whole new level.
RALPH'S BACK!
As in Nader. Yes, The Man Who Gave Us Bush is back on the ballot in Montana in the race for President. What's more remarkable is his organization claimed to have gathered twice as many petition signatures as they needed to put him on the ballot. Maybe they signed up all the Ron Paul voters who had nowhere else to go.
GUNS VS. DRUGS
Democratic nominee for Attorney General Steve Bullock should write a really nice thank-you card to the Missoulian for its recent series on prescription drug abuse. That subject is a centerpiece of Bullock's campaign. It's always nice for a candidate when a major newspaper decides your issue is relevant and compelling. Meanwhile, Bullock's opponent, Republican Tim Fox, was recently in the Missoulian, too. With an Op-Ed advocating guns in national parks. I don't think I've ever met a statewide candidate who has made Second Amendment issues such a hallmark of his campaign.
With August heat still ahead and the national Presidential conventions a month away, I hope the only political stories I see in the next 30 days are amusing ones. Summer just ain't the time to be serious about anything except pennant races and forest fires.
"JOHNNY NO-COAL"
Democrat John Driscoll, who faces incumbent U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg in November, told fellow Dems at last weekend's platform convention in Miles City that he'd pull the plug on coal if elected. Not exactly the thing to say in coal country, or to an audience that has hopped on Gov. Schweitzer's coal train. But could it win votes from the global warming crowd? It certainly got him quite a bit of free media. (The only kind he's willing to get.)
It's really too bad Driscoll isn't campaigning more. Is he eccentric? Sure. Impolitic? Absolutely. I don't always understand whence his views come. But he's still one of the most interesting politicos I've ever met.
CRYING FOUL
Republican Senate also-ran Patty Lovaas of Missoula continues to rail at the admittedly unexplainable victory of Bob "Eyebrows" Kelleher in the GOP's June Senate primary. (Can't we just do the obvious and question the intellect and political knowledge of this year's GOP voters?)
Lovaas believes Kelleher won by fraud, based on her empirical observation that she hasn't met a single person who voted for him. Under the law, Lovaas (or anyone) can go to court to challenge an election, as long as it's filed within one year. So far she hasn't done that, but she has asked the Secretary of State for an audit comparing voter registration records with polling place logs.
Lovaas says she never met a Kelleher voter during her petition campaign to put herself on the November ballot as an independent. That effort also has gone nowhere, since state law doesn't provide for it. Now, Lovaas is banking on a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision and a federal ballot access lawsuit by Montana environmentalist Steve Kelly.
Put simply, Lovaas' name is becoming a household word at the Secretary of State's office, where she's taking the "gadfly" role to a whole new level.
RALPH'S BACK!
As in Nader. Yes, The Man Who Gave Us Bush is back on the ballot in Montana in the race for President. What's more remarkable is his organization claimed to have gathered twice as many petition signatures as they needed to put him on the ballot. Maybe they signed up all the Ron Paul voters who had nowhere else to go.
GUNS VS. DRUGS
Democratic nominee for Attorney General Steve Bullock should write a really nice thank-you card to the Missoulian for its recent series on prescription drug abuse. That subject is a centerpiece of Bullock's campaign. It's always nice for a candidate when a major newspaper decides your issue is relevant and compelling. Meanwhile, Bullock's opponent, Republican Tim Fox, was recently in the Missoulian, too. With an Op-Ed advocating guns in national parks. I don't think I've ever met a statewide candidate who has made Second Amendment issues such a hallmark of his campaign.
With August heat still ahead and the national Presidential conventions a month away, I hope the only political stories I see in the next 30 days are amusing ones. Summer just ain't the time to be serious about anything except pennant races and forest fires.
Friday, June 20, 2008
GOP CONVENTION--READING BETWEEN THE LINES
I spent part of the morning at the Republican state convention in Missoula, talking with statewide candidates and other GOP leaders. One of the things I wanted to know was what party leaders think of the idea that some candidates--from John McCain on down to GOP state legislators--aren't "Republican" enough.
On the subject of the presidential race, former U.S. Senator Conrad Burns (wearing a McCain button) only said that both the Democratic and Republican parties had "the most diverse groups of people running...than we've seen in many, many years. People coming from different positions and taking different positions." In other words, diversity is good. (Even if Republicans have to hold their nose when they vote.) Then, without mentioning McCain, he said the next president will be a Republican who will follow the party platform and "stay within the Republican bounds." One wonders if there will be an effort to force McCain either to step to the right or else yield to someone else who will.
In the race for U.S. Senate, GOP primary winner Bob Kelleher was relegated to a meeting room for an hour Friday afternoon, while second-place finisher Mike Lange was given a table and wall space in the lobby to promote his write-in campaign. That's a pretty clear message.
Finally, I asked House Speaker Scott Sales (R-Bozeman) if he was taking a position on fellow Bozeman Republican Roger Koopman's successful efforts to unseat a trio of GOP legislators considered too liberal. Sales said "absolutely not" and said the party has always had people who fit on different parts of the political spectrum. But when I asked about the need to groom new leaders in the legislature, he specifically mentioned two of the GOP challengers who unseated the "liberal" incumbents, saying they had potential for leadership.
On the subject of the presidential race, former U.S. Senator Conrad Burns (wearing a McCain button) only said that both the Democratic and Republican parties had "the most diverse groups of people running...than we've seen in many, many years. People coming from different positions and taking different positions." In other words, diversity is good. (Even if Republicans have to hold their nose when they vote.) Then, without mentioning McCain, he said the next president will be a Republican who will follow the party platform and "stay within the Republican bounds." One wonders if there will be an effort to force McCain either to step to the right or else yield to someone else who will.
In the race for U.S. Senate, GOP primary winner Bob Kelleher was relegated to a meeting room for an hour Friday afternoon, while second-place finisher Mike Lange was given a table and wall space in the lobby to promote his write-in campaign. That's a pretty clear message.
Finally, I asked House Speaker Scott Sales (R-Bozeman) if he was taking a position on fellow Bozeman Republican Roger Koopman's successful efforts to unseat a trio of GOP legislators considered too liberal. Sales said "absolutely not" and said the party has always had people who fit on different parts of the political spectrum. But when I asked about the need to groom new leaders in the legislature, he specifically mentioned two of the GOP challengers who unseated the "liberal" incumbents, saying they had potential for leadership.
Friday, June 13, 2008
SAY WHAT?
Just whose fault is it that Bob Kelleher and John Driscoll are their party's nominees for U.S. Senator and U.S. Representative, respectively? Following the concept that the simplest explanation is probably the right one, voters simply didn't pay attention to who was running in those primary races and did what voters often do when they have no idea: they voted for the names they recognized from past campaigns or past news stories.
On the Democratic side, Driscoll won the right to face Denny Rehberg with a non-campaign that practically was strenuous in its inactivity. Driscoll has vowed to do the same in the general election season--he will raise no money, will do no self-promotion and make no campaign trips. The only thing he hasn't said is that, if elected, he'll refuse to serve. (Now THAT actually could be a vote-getter in Montana.)
Ironically, we may actually see a debate between Driscoll and Rehberg, but only because organizers are working to schedule the debate at a time and place convenient for the candidate's summer trip into the Bob Marshall wilderness. Even if we only get one Rehberg-Driscoll debate, that may be one more than we get in the U.S. Senate race.
Driscoll's win was a slap in the face to Jim Hunt, the Democrats' presumptive nominee. But Hunt has taken the disappointment, at least publicly, with class. He's not claiming dirty tricks or hoping to somehow salvage a spot on the ballot for November.
Compare that response with Republican U.S. Senate also-rans Patty Lovaas and Mike Lange. One week after the votes were counted, Lovaas announced that she'll gather petition signatures to endorse her candidacy as an independent. The only problem with that is that state law doesn't provide for anyone to petition themselves onto a ballot once the March filing deadline has closed. Lovaas considers that unfair and illegal. So, assuming she gets any signatures and turns them into the Secretary of State, she'll be refused, leaving her with two choices: go to court or ask to the 2009 legislature to change the law.
In making her argument, Lovaas essentially told me that Democrats had crossed over in the primary to hand the GOP race to Kelleher, who has switched party affiliations more than once in recent years just to get attention. The result, she says, is that Republicans didn't get a Republican candidate and deserve another choice on the November ballot. To illustrate her argument, she points to Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, who lost the 2006 Democratic primary (because of his support of the Iraq war) and then was able to get on the November ballot as an independent and win, thus keeping his Senate seat.
Lovaas told me she's taking on this fight because the other Republicans in the race have too much baggage. Meanwhile, the guy with the most luggage of all, Mike Lange, says he may mount a write-in campaign for November. That kind of effort doesn't involve the legal issues that Lovaas' does, but it also won't do much to unseat incumbent Democrat Max Baucus. All it would do is give Lange a soapbox (a small one) he could drag around the state in one last attempt to be relevant. The question for journalists is what to do if Lange shows up at their door asking for coverage. Those with a highly developed sense of fairness (or a slow news day) may give Lange another 15 seconds of fame. Others may well say they're limiting coverage to candidates who actually are on the ballot (and actually won a race) and put the onus on Lange to promote himself.
On the Democratic side, Driscoll won the right to face Denny Rehberg with a non-campaign that practically was strenuous in its inactivity. Driscoll has vowed to do the same in the general election season--he will raise no money, will do no self-promotion and make no campaign trips. The only thing he hasn't said is that, if elected, he'll refuse to serve. (Now THAT actually could be a vote-getter in Montana.)
Ironically, we may actually see a debate between Driscoll and Rehberg, but only because organizers are working to schedule the debate at a time and place convenient for the candidate's summer trip into the Bob Marshall wilderness. Even if we only get one Rehberg-Driscoll debate, that may be one more than we get in the U.S. Senate race.
Driscoll's win was a slap in the face to Jim Hunt, the Democrats' presumptive nominee. But Hunt has taken the disappointment, at least publicly, with class. He's not claiming dirty tricks or hoping to somehow salvage a spot on the ballot for November.
Compare that response with Republican U.S. Senate also-rans Patty Lovaas and Mike Lange. One week after the votes were counted, Lovaas announced that she'll gather petition signatures to endorse her candidacy as an independent. The only problem with that is that state law doesn't provide for anyone to petition themselves onto a ballot once the March filing deadline has closed. Lovaas considers that unfair and illegal. So, assuming she gets any signatures and turns them into the Secretary of State, she'll be refused, leaving her with two choices: go to court or ask to the 2009 legislature to change the law.
In making her argument, Lovaas essentially told me that Democrats had crossed over in the primary to hand the GOP race to Kelleher, who has switched party affiliations more than once in recent years just to get attention. The result, she says, is that Republicans didn't get a Republican candidate and deserve another choice on the November ballot. To illustrate her argument, she points to Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, who lost the 2006 Democratic primary (because of his support of the Iraq war) and then was able to get on the November ballot as an independent and win, thus keeping his Senate seat.
Lovaas told me she's taking on this fight because the other Republicans in the race have too much baggage. Meanwhile, the guy with the most luggage of all, Mike Lange, says he may mount a write-in campaign for November. That kind of effort doesn't involve the legal issues that Lovaas' does, but it also won't do much to unseat incumbent Democrat Max Baucus. All it would do is give Lange a soapbox (a small one) he could drag around the state in one last attempt to be relevant. The question for journalists is what to do if Lange shows up at their door asking for coverage. Those with a highly developed sense of fairness (or a slow news day) may give Lange another 15 seconds of fame. Others may well say they're limiting coverage to candidates who actually are on the ballot (and actually won a race) and put the onus on Lange to promote himself.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
SURPRISES AND SPECULATIONS
Do Montana voters have a sense of humor or what? Bob Kelleher as the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate? John Driscoll for Congress? What a slap in the face of the major parties' leading candidates for those offices. Democrat Jim Hunt must hurt terribly that an eccentric former Public Service Commissioner beat him in the Congressional primary without lifting a finger to campaign. And what does political journeyman Bob Kelleher's victory in the Republican Senate opener mean for the state GOP? For one thing, it may lead to deafening silence from Mike Lange. Can you spell "repudiation"? It also may mean that the state party has to start grooming statewide candidates immediately.
Then again, Tuesday's results may only mean that, without overwhelming advertising, Montanans will vote for names they know over names they don't know. Say what you will about Driscoll and Kelleher, but they've on the ballot enough times over the years that voters without other frames of reference will mark the names they recognize.
WHAT NOW, BARACK?
Now that Barack Obama is headed for coronation at the Democrats' national convention in Denver, who will be his choice for V.P.? And what will that person bring to the ticket? Could Hillary be his choice, with her 18 million voters? (And would she settle for #2?) How about Bill Richardson, who would appeal to the Hispanic voters who turned out for Clinton in droves? Even Brian Schweitzer's name has come up, although I doubt the party would ask him to give up his own race for governor, considering his popularity and his value as the "blue governor in a red state." I think Schweitzer would be more valuable as an Obama campaigner in the midwest and Rocky Mountain states. (I've also talked with fellow observers about Schweitzer getting a Cabinet post in an Obama administration. It sounds plausible on the surface, but would the national party be willing to elevate John Bohlinger to governor? I doubt it.)
It seems to me that Obama's first and biggest task between now and the convention is to reach out to women--a contituency that is hurt, angry and wondering what they have to do to get a female nominee. Naming Clinton as V.P. is not necessarily the answer. While she brings voters, she also brings the family baggage and triggers blind rage in many Republican and independent circles, incuding those who set their political compass by talk radio. Obama doesn't need to wave more red flags in front of those bulls.
What he needs is a woman with national credibility and name recognition who brings something to the electoral map. How about Dianne Feinstein? As senior senator from California and former mayor of San Francisco, she has the pedigree, the legislative experience and could put the ticket over the top in Electoral State #1.
Meanwhile, John McCain also should consider choosing a woman for V.P. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine would be an attractive choice. I've known women (especially minority women) who are smitten with Condoleeza Rice.
Half the country is waiting.
Then again, Tuesday's results may only mean that, without overwhelming advertising, Montanans will vote for names they know over names they don't know. Say what you will about Driscoll and Kelleher, but they've on the ballot enough times over the years that voters without other frames of reference will mark the names they recognize.
WHAT NOW, BARACK?
Now that Barack Obama is headed for coronation at the Democrats' national convention in Denver, who will be his choice for V.P.? And what will that person bring to the ticket? Could Hillary be his choice, with her 18 million voters? (And would she settle for #2?) How about Bill Richardson, who would appeal to the Hispanic voters who turned out for Clinton in droves? Even Brian Schweitzer's name has come up, although I doubt the party would ask him to give up his own race for governor, considering his popularity and his value as the "blue governor in a red state." I think Schweitzer would be more valuable as an Obama campaigner in the midwest and Rocky Mountain states. (I've also talked with fellow observers about Schweitzer getting a Cabinet post in an Obama administration. It sounds plausible on the surface, but would the national party be willing to elevate John Bohlinger to governor? I doubt it.)
It seems to me that Obama's first and biggest task between now and the convention is to reach out to women--a contituency that is hurt, angry and wondering what they have to do to get a female nominee. Naming Clinton as V.P. is not necessarily the answer. While she brings voters, she also brings the family baggage and triggers blind rage in many Republican and independent circles, incuding those who set their political compass by talk radio. Obama doesn't need to wave more red flags in front of those bulls.
What he needs is a woman with national credibility and name recognition who brings something to the electoral map. How about Dianne Feinstein? As senior senator from California and former mayor of San Francisco, she has the pedigree, the legislative experience and could put the ticket over the top in Electoral State #1.
Meanwhile, John McCain also should consider choosing a woman for V.P. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine would be an attractive choice. I've known women (especially minority women) who are smitten with Condoleeza Rice.
Half the country is waiting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
