The following convention themes have been unveiled:
Monday: One Nation
Tuesday: Renewing America’s Promise
Wednesday: Securing America’s Future
Thursday: Change You Can Believe In
Globe sez Michelle O and Nancy P will speak Monday. Hillary will speak Tuesday (but will not be the keynote*). VP speaks Wednesday, and Gov. Bill Ritter and the Man Himself will speak Thursday.
The VP’s night suggests a national security theme- ergo, it would not be surprising if Obama picks someone particularly qualified to speak that night. Theme’s title turns out to be the name shared by Wes Clark’s PAC.
Please share widely!
that i have absolutely no clue as to who the vp pick will be. i just get no vibe.
<
p>i think it’s a smart move to have pelosi and m. obama as featured speakers monday. i like to think it’s not just a calculated suck up to hillary supporters, but a real show of commitment to removing barriers to women.
<
p>i look forward to thursday’s “change you can believe in” including a statement of support (with timely plan of action!) for true equality for lgbt americans. now that would be real change, and if stated by obama at the convention, i might actually believe him. that would be a change too.;)
I shrugged Clark off as a gaffe prone, poor speaking, unengagin, one time loser and presidential wanna be in my last post on VP selections.
<
p>But honestly Clark wouldn’t be as bad as I portrayed him and I am starting to re-evaluate him. Remember the three things he needs to bring to the ticket-a state or region, resume or ideology balancer, and security that he wont do any harm.
<
p>Well on the first question I still have my doubts. Ak, Clarks homestate, seems pretty red no matter who we put up, and I don’t see him having that appeal in other southern states. The midwest is concerned about economics so I dont think his background will help in OH, IN, or MI.
<
p>But I do see Clark helping in VA, nearly as much if not more so than the lackluster Kaine would. VA is full of a lot of affluent moderates who might hedge McCain on security, I think picking Clark neutralizes that as an issue and convinces people their in good hands with Obama.
<
p>Clark also excites the base, now I still say the base won’t give us OH, VA, IN, or FL. In fact it might make it harder to win those places. But an excited base brings in money and volunteers and that will make a big difference in the overall picture. Even though Bayh is safer, and arguably a better pick electorally, he might provoke a base backlash. Clark brings in the lefty blogosphere and many disenchanted Clinton supporters.
<
p>Also Clark would make a credible attack dog against John McCain on the issue of national security.
<
p>That said I would still argue that a Sebelius, Richardson, Webb, or Bayh would be better than Clark. But he definitely is not as bad as I initially thought and Id be happy with him on the ticket. I would prefer however, that he get DoD in the Obama administration and put his talents to good use as opposed to wasting them as a VP.