Napolitanomania

When I wrote this morning that "it would make perfect sense for Obama to try to re-enforce his message of change and transcendence by picking a red state woman governor like Kathleen Sebelius or Janet Napolitano as his running mate" I hadn't realized that Napolitano was gearing up to endorse Barack Obama which presumably helps strengthen the case.

Chris Bowers, incidentally, agrees with me that a VP pick should re-enforce the candidate's message not balance the ticket, but sees Napolitano as a "balancing" choice. Maybe the fact that Chris sees her as a balance pick while I see her as a re-enforcement pick means she has the best of both worlds. Now, though, is probably a good time to admit that I don't actually know a great deal about Governor Napolitano and maybe she's terrible on some key issues or something.

Comments

She reminds me too much of Geraldine Ferraro; I mean, visually, and with the Italian name and everything. Plus, she's single, which apparently violates some sort of clause in the thirty-ninth amendment to the Constitution.

If we're going to go in that direction, I'd rather have Camille Paglia, myself.

Posted by lampwick | January 11, 2008 3:05 PM

She's single, never married, and doesn't seem to have much of a romantic life, so she gets the same closeted-lesbian rumors that dog (fairly or un-) other never-married woman politicians like Condi Rice or Babs Mikulski.

Posted by Steve | January 11, 2008 3:05 PM

"Now, though, is probably a good time to admit that I don't actually know a great deal about Governor Napolitano and maybe she's terrible on some key issues or something."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
At minimum she probably has illegal immigrant landscapers and a nanny smuggled into the country from Cambodia.

Posted by steve uncan | January 11, 2008 3:07 PM

Also, if McCain is the Republican nominee, then that trumps any Arizona/Sun Belt cred she would bring to the table. The endorsement is a big deal, though.

Posted by pjs | January 11, 2008 3:07 PM

Obama can't send out a ticket with too much change for the average joe to swallow...

A black man/white stogie woman? Nah...

I agree he needs to reinforce the message. I wouldn't be surprised at someone like Webb or someone outside politics altogether with some foreign affairs cred...

Interesting to watch.

Posted by G Davis | January 11, 2008 3:11 PM

I think Sebelius would really be the optimal reinforcing choice. She transcended partisan divisions in Kansas, turning a former state GOP chairman into her Democratic lieutenant governor.

In entirely shallow political commentary, I also really like looking at her.

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | January 11, 2008 3:12 PM

She's my governor. As a red state governor, she's awesome. As a VP candidate, not so much.

(1) She position forces her to be an obstructionist and a triangulator. She vetoes a bunch of stuff and is forced to be pretty conservative on tax issues.

(2) She's pushed immigration off the table as much as possible, saying it's a federal issue. This is in stark contrast to governors like Schwarzenegger who tried to do something (no matter how stupid) about it. Immigration may be a big issue in the general

(3) She's not an amazing public speaker like Obama and she's not amazing in interviews.

(4) She's a butch old single woman.

(5) There's a couple of mini-scandals running around her administration related to the state agencies handling of a few issues.

Posted by ben | January 11, 2008 3:14 PM

If Obama is the nominee and wants to think outside the box for VP, I would lean toward someone like Brian Schweitzer, a progressive governor with genuine red-state cred. (Not to say Napolitano isn't, but she would seem to have some hurdles to surmount in winning over a national audience.) I also wouldn't mind his thinking inside the box and going with a safe, solid pick like Mark Warner.

Posted by John E. | January 11, 2008 3:15 PM

I have some lesbian friends who say the rumors about Janet Napolitano's sexual orientation are more than just rumors, but who knows.

Sebelius would be a great choice. But wouldn't a Democratic ticket of a black guy and a woman remind everyone of the 1980s? Maybe not those of you who don't remember Ferraro and Jesse Jackson, but the 1984 election was the first thing I thought of when I read this post. We didn't do very well that year.

Jim Webb would be great.

Posted by DCRumorMonger | January 11, 2008 3:18 PM

I hadn't realized Napalitano was single (or Mikulski for that matter).

I agree Schweitzer or Webb would be great picks. I doubt Mark Warner though as he is trying to win a Senate seat. Schweitzer is also up for re-election I think, which probably takes him out of contention.

If Obama defeats Hillary to win the nomination (as he obviously must), doesn't he almost need to choose a woman as his VP? In this sense, Sebelius seems like the most obvious choice. Not to mention that with both of their Kansas roots they might pick up a few spare electoral votes.

I also have this fear that he might pick Jane Harman...

Posted by moreaxe | January 11, 2008 3:25 PM

Obama should go with Johnette Napolitano.

Posted by Peter K. | January 11, 2008 3:25 PM

I wouldn't be surprised at someone like Webb or someone outside politics altogether with some foreign affairs cred...

Obama/Clark 2008

:)

Posted by Tractarian | January 11, 2008 3:31 PM

An Obama-Sebelius Heartland ticket would be great, but this is way, way, way ahead of the game. HRC's still likely to be the nominee.

Webb seems temperamentally unsuited to be a VP, and might well overshadow Obama with some voters, which would make Obama seem weaker. Furthermore, I don't think reaching out to the South will work all that well for Democrats right now. I just don't see him picking up all that many votes for the Dems over someone like Sebelius.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | January 11, 2008 3:35 PM

Here's how I see it: Napolitano makes sense if immigration is going to be the key GOP issue in 2008--which is to say, if anybody but McCain gets the nomination. Napolitano has a lot of experience with the subject (as a border governor) and frames it very well. I remember an interview a while back when she called out the Tancredo "deport 'em all" types by saying that that's not possible, and that they supported a "silent amnesty" in which illegals would still be around to work for cheap. She also had a pretty good immigration a few years back that even a lot of Republicans praised. So she's good on that particular issue.

Kathleen Sebelius is more appealing in a number of ways, admittedly. Nevertheless, having an immigration expert on the ticket would certainly be helpful if that issue becomes a big deal. If McCain gets the nod, I'd say that Jim Webb makes more sense, as everyone thinks McCain is liberal as hell on this issue, and it probably wouldn't be too difficult for Obama to move to McCain's perceived right without pissing off Latinos.

Posted by Lev | January 11, 2008 3:40 PM

Yeah, I see that Schweitzer is running for re-election, so he should probably stick to that. Webb might be a good choice; I don't really see him overshadowing Obama. Or Sebelius, sure.

All very premature wonk wanking, at any rate.

Posted by John E. | January 11, 2008 3:42 PM

I'm kind of tired of cautiously sending out tickets with the average joe in mind. We've had exactly one person who wasn't a white guy on one party's ticket in fifty-odd presidential elections. A ticket with no white guys kind of says "we're serious about change." (Doesn't necessarily mean it, but this is my trouble with Obama to begin with.) A single woman whose personal life invites rumors might be going a little too far--besides, I want her to bump off McCain later--but Sebelius would be a superb choice.

Clinton would do well to choose Obama but would probably go with Clark or Schweitzer, who would have their pluses. I'm disturbed by the people who keep boosting Warner; you'd throw away a Senate pickup that cavalierly?

Posted by Mike B. | January 11, 2008 3:44 PM

The greatest torrent of illlegal immigrants come across the border south of Tucson --because Governor Janet Napolitano refused to have state law enforcement do anything to stop them or arrest them once they were in Arizona.

Posted by Don Williams | January 11, 2008 3:47 PM

Sebelius has another advantage; her father was governor of Ohio, the key to the last election.

Obviously, Webb would also be a great VP choice. He puts VA into play, and he's got the mean streak Edwards lacked.

Posted by AWC | January 11, 2008 3:49 PM

lev,

Janet Napolitano isn't that strong on immigration. She's the governor of a border state but has tried to avoid the issue like the plague (for good reasons). She would have a hard time running on this record.

Meanwhile, several sheriffs and police departments in the state have already started enforcing immigration policy, including the media darling Sheriff Joe Arpaio and there's an employer sanctions law that just started being enforced.

Posted by ben | January 11, 2008 3:53 PM

This graphic shows how Arizona has been the primary corridor for illegal immigration in recent years:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20060722/images/border.pdf

Note that advocacy groups supporting illegal immigrants are putting well-marked water caches out in the desert south of Tucson --and north of Sasabe at the border -- and distributing maps to those caches in Mexico. What does governor Napolitano do? Well, nothing that I can see.

Posted by Don Williams | January 11, 2008 4:02 PM

Don,

Most illegal immigrants come through the border south of Tucson because that's where the wholes in border enforcement (by the "Border Patrol", a federal agency) are. It used to be mostly in California and Texas, but crackdowns by the Border Patrol pushed in the immigrants towards Arizona.

Now, if you have an army of highway patrolmen to scour the vast deserts of southern Arizona to catch illegal immigrants, feel free to send them in. Janet sure as hell doesn't. She doesn't even have many National Guard to deploy because THEY'RE ALL FUCKING IN IRAQ. If we did start arresting everyone we thought was an illegal immigrant (you carry your birth certificate/passport on you at all times, don't you?), there would be a big backlash against the police from the immigrant community. This would result in a huge increase in unreported crimes against and within the community of illegal immigrants. Also, there's the issues of racial profiling (not that you care about a little of that).

Lastly, as a proud patriotic American, I'm sure you refuse to benefit from the services of illegal immigrants. For that reason, you probably don't eat fruit or vegetables from the vast majority of farmers or eat meat from a meatpacking plant.

A

Posted by ben | January 11, 2008 4:06 PM

If Obama is the nominee Jim Webb should be the pick for VP. He'd be perfect. He was swept into Congress in the '06 elections, so that would reinforce Obama's change message. Like Obama he is a gifted writer who knows how to give a speech. He's got the good foreign policy credentials, so that would help shore up any of Obama's perceived weaknesses on that issue. Like Obama he was opposed to the Iraq War from the beginning. The village press regard him as some kind of not normal against the grain Democrat (they love that sort of thing), even though he had tremendous support from the netroots. And he could play the traditional role of the VP nominee as the campaign's attack dog very, very well.

Posted by Matt12 | January 11, 2008 4:08 PM

She doesn't even have many National Guard to deploy because THEY'RE ALL FUCKING IN IRAQ

In the future, I recommend that you instead use the expression 'THEY'RE ALL IN FUCKING IRAQ.' It is less ambiguous, though also less comical.

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | January 11, 2008 4:17 PM

In the future, I recommend that you instead use the expression 'THEY'RE ALL IN FUCKING IRAQ.' It is less ambiguous, though also less comical.

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | January 11, 2008 4:17 PM

Thanks Neil.

Posted by ben | January 11, 2008 4:20 PM

Both Webb and Warner would lose a senate seat (one existing, the other presumptive). That'd be terrible.

Clark's endorsed Clinton, so that might enter into any VP consideration by Obama. You could do a lot worse than Clark, though, for shoring up one's sensible/skeptical militarism cred.

Posted by phil | January 11, 2008 4:21 PM

Re "Now, if you have an army of highway patrolmen to scour the vast deserts of southern Arizona to catch illegal immigrants, feel free to send them in"
-----------
Actually, you don't have to do that. Merely send some on patrol along the few roads leading up from the border --and pick up the coyote vans.

Plus put some officers with night vision goggles around the water caches and on mountain peaks on either side of the valleys, with radios to intercept units.

Plus tighten up issue of state id cards, drivers licenses,etc.

But ,hey, if your Governor is winking and nodding at the Hispanic Lobby, everything becomes difficult, doesn't it?

And require id for employment within the state.

Posted by Don Williams | January 11, 2008 4:22 PM

What Neil said. Youth and unity; blue and red; Obama-Sebelius.

Sebelius' shiksa looks aren't going to hurt, either. (It's horrible that this is politically relevant, but I'm afraid it is.)

Posted by Joe S. | January 11, 2008 4:24 PM

Re "Now, if you have an army of highway patrolmen to scour the vast deserts of southern Arizona to catch illegal immigrants, feel free to send them in"
-----------
Actually, you don't have to do that. Merely send some on patrol along the few roads leading up from the border --and pick up the coyote vans.

Plus put some officers with night vision goggles around the water caches and on mountain peaks on either side of the valleys, with radios to intercept units.

Plus tighten up issue of state id cards, drivers licenses,etc.

But ,hey, if your Governor is winking and nodding at the Hispanic Lobby, everything becomes difficult, doesn't it?

And require id for employment within the state.
Posted by Don Williams | January 11, 2008 4:22 PM

Done, done, and done.

Everything that is constitutionally in the power of the governor has been done, besides rounding up all the Hispanics and putting them in cages.

Posted by ben | January 11, 2008 4:27 PM

Who is out there for the Democrats that may not have held elective office but have foreign policy experience? ie, are there any Democratic 'Condi Rices' or 'Colin Powells' out there who might make good VP choices? Are any of them women?

Posted by moreaxe | January 11, 2008 4:27 PM

If Obama gets nominated, he'll pick Al Gore as vp.

Experience!

Posted by Kyle | January 11, 2008 4:28 PM

I know we have been strong in VA lately but isn't choosing Webb as VP kind of a risk ? George Allen lost by only a few votes and is still around to cause trouble ? I seriously doubt Obama would pick another Senator to run - no need to create a new empty seat for one and that would reinforce the whole senator curse a little too much to my taste

Posted by Benjamin | January 11, 2008 4:28 PM

Keep in mind that VA has a Democratic governor. If Webb leaves the senate, his post should be filled with another D.

Unless they do things differently around here, I dunno. I may be a political news junkie but I have my limits.

Posted by El Cruzado | January 11, 2008 4:30 PM

PS: I always have been a big proponent of Obama-Sebelius but isn't the fact she is staying neutral kind of a downside ? I can understand staying neutral to protect future influence but it is not like there is any chance of a Clinton-Sebelius ticket !

Posted by Benjamin | January 11, 2008 4:30 PM

Both Webb and Warner would lose a senate seat (one existing, the other presumptive). That'd be terrible.

I believe Jim Webb's senate seat would be appointed by the Dem governor of Virginia, Tim Kaine, so that shouldn't really be an issue.

Posted by Moonlight | January 11, 2008 4:32 PM

For what it is worth, here is a slightly dated, fluff profile of Napolitano from the Santa Clara University Alumni Magazine (Go Broncos!):

http://www.scu.edu/scm/winter2004/napolitano.cfm

Posted by Tiparillo | January 11, 2008 4:37 PM

She's fine on the issues, but there's a hobo graveyard behind her house.

Posted by aleks | January 11, 2008 4:47 PM

Re ben's comment "Done, done, and done.

Everything that is constitutionally in the power of the governor has been done "
-----------
Oh bullshit. bullshit. bullshit.

1) From http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/07/us/07arizona.html?ei=5088&en=3853b8c56957978a&ex=1307332800&adxnnl=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1190208046-xTEq5ECC01vtoHZb+DzZ1g

"Gov. Janet Napolitano of Arizona has vetoed a bill that would have punished employers who hire illegal immigrants and authorized the police to arrest illegal immigrants on trespassing charges merely for being in the state."

2) Napolitano also opposed Proposition 200 --passed with 56 percent of the vote by the people of Arizona -- that requires individuals to produce proof of citizenship before they may register to vote or apply for public benefits in Arizona.

Posted by Don Williams | January 11, 2008 4:51 PM

Oh bullshit. bullshit. bullshit.

1) From http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/07/us/07arizona.html?ei=5088&en=3853b8c56957978a&ex=1307332800&adxnnl=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1190208046-xTEq5ECC01vtoHZb+DzZ1g

"Gov. Janet Napolitano of Arizona has vetoed a bill that would have punished employers who hire illegal immigrants and authorized the police to arrest illegal immigrants on trespassing charges merely for being in the state."

2) Napolitano also opposed Proposition 200 --passed with 56 percent of the vote by the people of Arizona -- that requires individuals to produce proof of citizenship before they may register to vote or apply for public benefits in Arizona.

Posted by Don Williams | January 11, 2008 4:51 PM

Don Williams, you ignorant slut:

(1) Janet vetoed one version of the bill and signed another. The veto can sometimes be used as legislative tool (not just to deprive millions of poor children of healthcare).

(2) Prop 200 is just another voter ID scare tactic of the right. It would also introduce more paperwork hurdles for poor people trying to get government services.

(3) You still haven't answered whether or not you've sworn off the products of industries dependent upon illegal immigrants like fruit, vegetables, and meat.

Posted by ben | January 11, 2008 5:13 PM

AZ resident here. I know when I was researching her record prior to the 2000 primaries, there were Republicans that had more liberal positions. They didn't win their primaries, of course; she did hers.

I'm kinda "meh" on her, myself, but she might be just the thing to balance out a more leftist presidential candidate.

Posted by biff3000 | January 11, 2008 5:16 PM

fwiw, napolitano was elected under AZ's 'clean election' law ie, voluntary public financing. obama has co-sponsored durbin's public financing bill. i'm just saying.

Posted by benjoya | January 11, 2008 5:17 PM

Obama's message of "change and transcendence"???

Have you been talking to Ezra again?

Why not Obama's immanentizing the eschaton?

Are you ever going to read Obama's autobiography?

By they way, I've discovered the identity of Obama's half-brother whom Obama cut off ties with because this Stanford physics student wasn't ethnocentric enough for him:

http://isteve.blogspot.com/2008/01/ive-discovered-obamas-estranged-half.html

Posted by Steve Sailer | January 11, 2008 5:19 PM

Here in AZ Napolitano should be called Saint Janet. She has almost single-handedly held off the Republican whacko's who control most of the government here. Most of them think John McCain is a liberal. They even think Barry Goldwater was a liberal. They are hysterical about immigration. I hope Napolitano runs for senator in 2010.
Reinforce Obama's "change" theme with Bill Richardson for VP. Experienced, Western Governor and Hispanic.

Posted by Andrew March | January 11, 2008 6:21 PM

I second what Andrew Marsh said. Whoever the nominee is, they should try to avoid tapping too many Democratic elected officials. We need them where they are, if there's to be any chance of moving forward.

I nominate Michael Bloomberg for VP. Put him to work coopting all this center-left unity nonsense.

Posted by Jalmari | January 11, 2008 6:55 PM

If either Obama or Clinton is the Democratic nominee, they have to select a white Anglo- Saxon Protestant male for VP if they hope to win the general election . This is still the USA and not some liberal utopia full of folks anxious to vote for female and/or minority candidates. It might be a good idea if the candidate is from the South, too.

Posted by stonetools | January 11, 2008 8:09 PM

I agree stonetools. There are a ton of average joes out there that don't read blogs all day, get all their info from the T & V. ;0

Webb as VP, Edwards as AG, Samantha Powers as SoS. Youth, power and zeal!

Isn't it interesting that HRC doesn't generate the sort of dreaming that Obama does...in something so simple as the VP selection?

Vote hope, not fear. Vote vision, not divide and conquer.

Posted by G Davis | January 11, 2008 8:42 PM

As best as empirical evidence can demonstrate, your VP doesn't have much effect on your electability. Even the narrative bonus is minor.

The biggest thing the VP brings is... top shot at being the nominee 8 years from now if they want. Handpicking the head of the party (in the case that you win two terms, and a decent boost even if you don't) seems giant.

So I think more fruitful normative speculation would be: who would you want to be the Dem nominee in 16?

Posted by Tony V | January 11, 2008 8:59 PM

In addition to thinking 8 years down the road for the VP, you'd also have to consider who's winning the Repub race. If McCain is in the lead I think Obama would need someone like Webb to help balance the experience and foreign policy "credentials" McCain has. Romney or Huckabee and a popular Governor like Sebelius would be a nice match.

Posted by tom.a | January 11, 2008 9:50 PM

Tom A:
You are right. That's probably the Decider's biggest legacy right now. The Republican race is in chaos because of Darth Vader picking himself to be VP when he probably knew he'd never get elected President and of course George Allen's "Macaca" moment.

Posted by Joe Klein's conscience | January 12, 2008 12:17 AM

Napolitano is awful. She's a triangulator.

She also recently went on a trip to Iraq. Upon return she announced "the surge is working."

Ugh.

Posted by debutaunt | January 12, 2008 2:20 AM

She turned me into a newt.

I got better.

Posted by Njorl | January 12, 2008 3:26 AM

If Obama wins the nomination he should pick a lefty to be VP. (Assuming he is going to run a hope/unity/bi-partisan general election campaign)
If he is facing McCain, he may run to the left and then would probably go with a 'wise old foreign policy hand.'

Posted by static | January 12, 2008 3:42 AM

She's a great Governor in a tough political climate. For idle speculation, though, I'd guess, with absolutely no basis for doing so, with U.S. Attorney General before VP. She's a former Arizona Attorney General and U.S. Attorney for Arizona with a lot more legal talent than any AG we've had for a decade or two.

Posted by CT | January 12, 2008 10:41 AM

She's a great Governor in a tough political climate. For idle speculation, though, I'd guess, with absolutely no basis for doing so, U.S. Attorney General before VP. She's a former Arizona Attorney General and U.S. Attorney for Arizona with a lot more legal talent than any AG we've had for a decade or two.

Posted by CT | January 12, 2008 10:41 AM

Obama's best picks would be Joe Biden or Kathleen Sebelius. Biden if he wants to reinforce his credibility on foreign affairs and Sebelius if he wants to promote the "change" perspective even more fully.

Chris Dodd could also be effective, but might be a bit too "Northern" for effective balance.

Tom Daschle might actually enter into consideration, given that he's close to Obama and much of his staff now works for Obama. He also maintains continued close relations with Hill Democrats. Still, he reeks of Washington insider-ism and his '04 loss is still fresh.

I'd think that Jim Webb would be difficult to manage -- he wouldn't like playing second fiddle and could end up being a headache for the campaign.

Posted by Andrew | January 12, 2008 10:58 AM

What about Bill Richardson? He's a southwestern governor, he signals the same identity-politics of change, he's got foreign policy experience but he's not seen as a creature of Washington.

Posted by Anthony Damiani | January 12, 2008 11:28 AM

I would advise Obama to take Warner as the Veep nominee. It's a safer pick than a woman. But, it would be a very nice play on Virginia, and the South.

And Obama-Warner ticket would merit a 50 state strategy and ultimately I think the Obama ticket wants and needs such a strategy to back-up the overall message of his campaign.

Posted by Gregor | January 13, 2008 6:50 PM