With all of the talk of Obama announcing his running mate, I think I know who it’s going to be: our governor, Tim Kaine.
The schedule has him in Martinsville Wednesday morning (with our next Senator Mark Warner) and in Lynchburg Wednesday afternoon (with Senator Jim Webb). Thursday there is supposed to be an event in Richmond. And I’m hearing that there will be an event in Chesapeake sometime Thursday as well, likely Thursday evening.
Yes, Virginia is a battleground state. And yes, the Obama campaign has opened up in excess of 30 offices here. But it is the timing of the appearances, the number of them, and the various locations, that lead me to believe that Kaine will be the choice.
There is another factor here that I’ve been considering. It just makes no sense to me for Obama to pick Evan Bayh or Joe Biden. If the Democrats had 65 Senators, such a choice would make sense. But with the Democrats barely hanging on to a majority (and that’s only because Joe Lieberman (I-Lieberman) is counted as one of them) and the big push to pick up more seats this fall, removing two Senators make getting to 60 impossible. And that would make life for President Obama much more difficult.
I think Kaine’s the guy.
UPDATE: I forgot to include this tidbit regarding the hiring of Kaine’s 2005 advance man.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Is this the appropriate thread to discuss why the Federal Bureau of Investigations should open a file on J. Tyler Ballance in accordance with the USA PATRIOT act for suggesting that the appropriate and expected response to electing a Democrat as President would be murdering him? Or should I wait for a post on that specific topic?
I’m in shock from reading J. Tyler’s comment.
Nice tidbit about the advance man change.
I also think Kaine is the VP choice and Biden is a headfake. Obama may have decided selecting a VP with heavy international experience underscores, rather than solves, a perceived weakness. By selecting a trusted adviser VP (which is what he said he would do) Obama may be signaling he intends to play the lead on inernational affairs rather than outsourcing that role to his VP. What a refreshing change that would be.
JT Ballance. Wow.
JT,
I’ve got to agree with those who are criticizing the beginning of your post.
darn…when i’m not the object of scorn and consternation, there’s something seriously wrong.
I’m still awestruck by the earlier comments from Ballance. After a man shot up a church in Tennessee because he thought it was “too liberal” and after another man in Arksansas assissinated that state’s Demcoratic Party Chair, that sort of statement simply doesn’t qualify as tasteless and ill-concieved political rhetoric. That right there is supporting and suborning terrorism. I appreciate that Salem Republicans took the time to voice his shock because we should all as Americans find this sort of attitude repugnant an unAmerican.
Let me join the chorus of those who are denouncing the comments of JT. I’m speechless.
well, if it can’t be Hillary, I just as soon it be someone I know! Kaine for VP!
Vivian’s speechless?
“Given that the election of Obama will signal the world that America is weakening, we can expect assassination attempts on the President and more terrorist attacks, both here and abroad.” — J. Tyler Ballance
“Is this the appropriate thread to discuss why the Federal Bureau of Investigations should open a file on J. Tyler Ballance in accordance with the USA PATRIOT act for suggesting that the appropriate and expected response to electing a Democrat as President would be murdering him?” — Silence Dogood
As you see, Mr. Balance did not suggest that assassination attempts would be appropriate if Obama were to be elected, only that they should be more expected.
What’s the problem with that?
However, I do disagree with his assessment. The terrorists would love for us to have an inexperienced appeaser as POTUS.
Sorry, I meant to say that I do not agree with Mr. Ballance’s assessment. With an inexperienced appeaser in office, the terrorists would have no reason to assassinate him.
I’m sorry, I guess I just have a problem with anyone believing that if a Democrat wins the majority of the popular vote and the electoral college in a Presidential race, the logical response would be for an American citizen to kill him. That is not the sort of ideal this nation was founded upon, and it is to this country’s credit that at the times when we were most deeply divided politically over the policies of a President that 4 out of 5 people disapproved of, we availed ourselves of the Democratic process our forefathers enshrined for us in our Constitution. Even the “wacko” Democrats who want to get rid of that President and Vice President now wouldn’t even think to breath the word “assassination.” You’ll never hear Code Pink express an opinion like that; they just want to impeach them. Likewise it is to the credit of the vast majority of Republicans that they wouldn’t even contemplate something this loathsome and unAmerican regarding a Democrat. If Obama is elected President, they’re not going to grab their guns, they’re just going to keep voting against him and his policies. Which is the way the system is supposed to work–it’s why we have a system in the first place.
…perhaps it’s wrong of me to expect understanding on the matter from someone who thinks half the people here are, themselves, socialists. This has been a shocking and painful reminder that for a tiny but potentially dangerous minority of Americas, the only enemies they see are other Americans.
“The terrorists would love for us to have an inexperienced appeaser as POTUS.”
As Bush’s mama would say, it’s worked out very well for them so far. Come November, of course, that will change.
Without daring to touch on the touchy topic discussed so well by silencedogwood, let me just add that Vice President Cheney has proven an effective insurance policy against the current President’s impeachment, at the very least.
“I’m sorry, I guess I just have a problem with anyone believing that if a Democrat wins the majority of the popular vote and the electoral college in a Presidential race, the logical response would be for an American citizen to kill him.”
But that’s not what Mr. Ballance said, was it? In fact, from the context of “more terrorist attacks,” and in light of the foiled plot to assassinate former Pres. George H. W. Bush in Kuwait, it is a real stretch to assume that Mr. Ballance was talking about an American citizens as potential assassins.
Furthermore, Mr. Ballance said nothing about a “logical response,” only and expected response. People do illogical things all the time. If you know of an event that is likely to set off the lunatics (such as winning or losing a basketball championship), then one may logically expect a certain response to that event (such as rioting in Detroit) without saying that the response is logical. When dealing with lunatics (i.e., Islamo-fascists) it can be quite logical to expect an illogical response.