In really, really bad ideas: McCain/Lieberman?

I'll tell you what would be my dream ticket (and likely Erica C. Barnett's nightmare ticket). Obama Bloomberg.

Mark my words. It's possible. Bloomberg has been loathe to criticize Obama. And remember the two had that very highly publicized breakfast at that New York diner.

Not only would an Obama-Bloomberg ticket have the potential to win in a landslide, it strike a blow to the current culture of hyper-partisanship. More important, it would lay the groundwork for some truly progressive change in this country. And there's nothing that scares the Naderites more than truly progressive change because it undercuts their whole reason for being.

ETA: On second thought, please disregard everything I just wrote above. We probably should wait until February 5 to start fantasizing about Obama running mates.

Bloomberg's a rich New York Jew. You'd have trouble finding a less attractive option outside of a prison cell for most of America. He'd strip votes away from Obama like crazy. I don't care how much money he has; all his money is going to buy is tons and tons of more and more irritating TV ads. Most Americans are close to the breaking point with this election crap already.

How does Obama/Edwards sound? Edwards is still a young man.

Fnarf @2, thanks for showing the error of my ways. Anyway, I deserve a serious beating for merely mentioning a potential Obama running mate at this stage. (Call me superstitious, but I don't want to be the one to jinx the guy. ;-) )

No, no, Fnarf. An Illinois Senator needs a Northeasterner on the ticket if he wants to be President. With Bloomberg you'd get that perfect New York City-Chicago balance that %90 of successful presidential bids need.

Fnarf maybe right the dems havent elected someone from outside the south since kennedy

"an Obama-Bloomberg ticket [would] have the potential to win in a landslide . . ."

a. What states would they win?

b. How many new secret-service agents would be needed?

Y'know, one wonderful thing about this Slog thing is, I can make a stupid observation and get rapid and repeated confirmation of just how stupid my observation was.

OK, so Bloomberg would make a lousy VP candidate with Obama. But damn, I still admire the guy.

Actually, there's only one living political figure I can think of whom I admire more than Obama and Bloomberg. You know who it is, and no, I'm not suggesting him as a running mate. To paraphrase what Obama said about Oprah, that would be a demotion for the guy.

One of the things that seems to be missing from the Slog and just about everywhere else is the idea that you can disagree without resorting to "stupid". Your idea was not stupid, Cressona, and I very much want you to understand that I was not suggesting it was. I was disagreeing with you; I hold a different view. That doesn't make it stupid. My comment is just as likely to cross Stupid Street as yours -- more so, if the past is any guide.

Fnarf @8, distinction acknowledged. However, I do reserve the right to consider my own ideas stupid, as needed, upon further consideration.

Actually, I think a good example of ill-advised, but not stupid, would be your idea, Fnarf, of an Obama-Edwards ticket. But again, I prefer to refrain from any further VP speculation considering the possible bad karma.

Obama/Paul '08! FTW!

This reminds me. I knew this guy who created a bumpersticker for the last prez campaign, "Kucinich Sharpton 2004." And I swear he was not being ironic.

I don't see an Obama/Edwards ticket happening. Edwards is older than Barack and has run twice for President and once for Vice. It just doesn't seem likely?

Correction on "uh-oh," the economy IS fucked. The handle was pulled long ago and now we're just swirling in the bowl.

I'm holding out for Spears/Lieberman.

I don't think Edwards would go for being number two again. It would be cool though to see Obama, if he is elected, offer Edwards the next open slot on the Supreme Court. Some might criticize this because Edwards is a politician, but so what, so is everyone else on the court, and at Edwards probably knows that "24" isn't a documentary, which is more than Antonin Scalia can say.