Kathleen Sebelius, Tim Kaine, Bill Richardson, Ted Strickland, Brian Schweitzer, Ed Rendell, Janet

[Stop Cornyn]

Napolitano, and Tom Vilsack are all outside-the-beltway VP choices who have interesting qualifications who would reionforce the "change" message and who would help Obama win.

Wes Clark, Anthony Zinni, and James Jones are all very interesting VP candidates with military experience, and while I don't think the 2008 election will be about milirary experience -- at least I hope it isn't because that's not how we want to frame the election if we want to win -- I do like that the military experience is non-political, non-beltway, and non-business-as-usual.

If Obama had to pick a VP candidate from the Senate (or Congress), at least Claire McCaskill, Bill Nelson, Tim Roemer, Evan Bayh, and Tom Daschle are from potential swing states and would help with the electoral college map.

[Jackpine Radical]

1. The argument in favor of a VP candidate with the military thing

is that McNutso is running so heavily on that theme that it woud be useful to have a military attack dog with credentials. I liked what Wes Clark said about McNutso's POW esperience a few weeks ago, even though Obama figured he had to distance himself from it.

[gateley]

2. The "change" message appeals to US -

It scares many voters who we need, though, so it can't be too much change. The world's longest journey begins with a single step.

I'm becoming nervous about the Russia situation -- They've issued a "them or us" statement to the U.S., they're talking about changing their views on Iran... I know it's part of the game, but from someone who grew up during the Cuban Missle Crisis and the Cold War, it's discomfiting.

So I'm thinking a military presence on the ticket might be a good thing.

The problem is (strategy-wise), we don't know if this will escalate into something greater, in which case I'm for the military presence, or whimper away into nothing, in which case I agree that we don't necessarily want to frame the election that way.

[Stop Cornyn]

7. I agree that some voters want change and other's fear change, but we have chosen a change nominee

-- which is good because more voters want change than those who fear change -- and it serves no purpose to chose an anti-change VP when we have a change candidate at the top of the ticket.

[global1]

3. If He Picks A Dem From The Senate It Would Have To Be From A State That Has.......

a Democratic governor. Otherwise - we might wind up losing a senate seat.

[Stop Cornyn]

4. Are you sure? I thought some states had rules requiring the governor to appoint a replacement from

the same party as the Senator being replaced notwithstanding the governor's party affiliation.

[global1]

5. Not Sure Now - Maybe It's Different For Each State? At Any Rate.....

seems like we need some clarification on this. I'm sure the Obama Team will take this into consideration when choosing the VP.

[Stop Cornyn]

6. I agree. I really like Jim Webb, but I'd hate to lose him from the Senate (even though he'd be

replaced by a Democrat).

[Independent_Voice]

8. It depends on the state

And when the vice-president-elect is Inaugurated vs. when the new governor of a state is sworn in.