Jump to content

McCain / Obama Worked Together Behind the Scenes


HuskyCaucasian

Recommended Posts

Via HuffingtonPost:

A senior Obama campaign official shared with The Washington Note and Huffington Post that in July 2008, the McCain and Obama camps began to work secretly behind the scenes to assemble large rosters of potential personnel for the administration that only one of the candidates would lead.

 

Lists comprised of Democrats and Republicans were assembled, sorted into areas of policy expertise, so that the roster could be called on after the election by either the Obama or McCain transition teams.

 

This kind of out-of-sight coordination is rare between battling presidential camps and provides some indication that both Obama and McCain intended to draw expertise into their governments from both sides of the aisle -- or at least they wanted to appear interested in doing so if the information leaked out about the list development process.

 

Fascinating tidbit on cooperation behind battle lines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (YASNY @ Nov 23, 2008 -> 11:03 PM)
Another prime example that you really don't have a choice. They are all peas from the same pod.

I knew someone would somehow find a way to make this a bad thing.

 

Are we all that jaded? Once in a while, here and there, are examples of politicians doing something positive. This to me is clearly one of those situations. They were helping themselves, and the transition of whomever would become President. I cannot see how that is possibly a bad thing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 07:55 AM)
I knew someone would somehow find a way to make this a bad thing.

 

Are we all that jaded? Once in a while, here and there, are examples of politicians doing something positive. This to me is clearly one of those situations. They were helping themselves, and the transition of whomever would become President. I cannot see how that is possibly a bad thing.

 

Pull your head out of the sand. Yes, I'm that jaded. I also know I happen to be right. Consider the fact that most presidents in US history have had royal blood coursing through their veins, that just says that nothing has really changed over the centuries. Serfdom is alive and well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (YASNY @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 08:09 AM)
Pull your head out of the sand. Yes, I'm that jaded. I also know I happen to be right. Consider the fact that most presidents in US history have had royal blood coursing through their veins, that just says that nothing has really changed over the centuries. Serfdom is alive and well.

I know I won't sway you on this. I just wanted to present the other side, which I find more believeable. That these two fellows wanted to make sure that their Presidency had a quick transition away from the current nightmare administration, both for their own good politically AND so that the country could move forward.

 

And that whole royal blood argument is kind of silly to me, as pretty much everyone on earth (certainly in the first world) has some royal bloodlines in their history. And I could care less what someone's great-great uncle twice-removed did anyway.

 

Most things are not black and white. Yes, there are things going on behind the scenes that we are not privy to. No, there isn't some grand conspiracy to control all things. Conspiracies become geometrically harder to maintain the more people are involved. If all the leading men and women of the country over history have been part of this supposed conspiracy, you are talking about tens or hundreds of thousands of people over time. You might as well try to hold back the tide with toothpicks.

 

And in fact, what appeared to be a continuation of a trend towards American royalty (Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton) was stopped in this election cycle. I think if anything, that is provocative evidence that fortunes at that level still have much to chance.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Royal blood could also be that it seems to take an education at an Ivy League school or a military academy to qualify.

 

I said at the beginning, and have seen much that confirmed my belief that this was the best choice of candidates in my lifetime. I would have been equally confident in either candidate. Items like this just reinforce my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (YASNY @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 05:03 AM)
Another prime example that you really don't have a choice. They are all peas from the same pod.

 

Well then, if both guys were setting up a list of the same choices for the same jobs to choose from then did Obama lie when he said that McCain would be the same as Bush for the next 4 years or did he lie when he said he would be different over the next term?????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (juddling @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 09:23 AM)
Well then, if both guys were setting up a list of the same choices for the same jobs to choose from then did Obama lie when he said that McCain would be the same as Bush for the next 4 years or did he lie when he said he would be different over the next term?????

 

It doesn't matter whether he lied or not at this point. He's been elected and he will be our next president.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 12:00 PM)
Hopefully this a sign that an Obama adminsitration will be more bipartisian that his 97% of the time voting with Democrats would indicate.

 

Oh hell, that would piss off the liberals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (YASNY @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 03:40 PM)
Oh hell, that would piss off the liberals.

I've been browsing various liberal blog comments and they're already flipping the f*** out because it's clear to them that Obama doesn't intend on governing as a leftist like they had somehow convinced themselves he was going to do. They're mad that he didn't "punish" Lieberman, they're mad that he's asked Hillary to be Secretary of State, they're mad that he's talking about keeping Gates on, and so on.

 

But when it comes down to it, what are they going to do? Not vote for him? Please. I'd call that bluff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (lostfan @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 12:47 PM)
I've been browsing various liberal blog comments and they're already flipping the f*** out because it's clear to them that Obama doesn't intend on governing as a leftist like they had somehow convinced themselves he was going to do. They're mad that he didn't "punish" Lieberman, they're mad that he's asked Hillary to be Secretary of State, they're mad that he's talking about keeping Gates on, and so on.

 

But when it comes down to it, what are they going to do? Not vote for him? Please. I'd call that bluff.

Just a quick question or two in reply...

 

When Bush made up his cabinet in 2000, he had 1 Democrat in it, Mineta at transportation.

 

He also had such wonderful figures as Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, etc.

 

Bush Also had much smaller margins in Congress and even electorally overall than Obama currently has.

 

So I ask...out of his cabinet so far, who has been named or suggested who would be even remotely as far to the left as Bush's cabinet was to the right? And if it's a bad thing for the Liberals to be mad that they didn't get any seats in an Obama cabinet...why was it ok for Bush to put together a cabinet so far to the right after a much narrower victory?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see where you're going with this. Did you fall on your head this morning and confuse me with a Bush apologist or something?

 

I just find their Chicken Little panic amusing, is all. If Obama wanted to be a Jimmy Carter-esque epic fail then he should take his cues from those blogs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 02:59 PM)
Just a quick question or two in reply...

 

When Bush made up his cabinet in 2000, he had 1 Democrat in it, Mineta at transportation.

 

He also had such wonderful figures as Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, etc.

 

Bush Also had much smaller margins in Congress and even electorally overall than Obama currently has.

 

So I ask...out of his cabinet so far, who has been named or suggested who would be even remotely as far to the left as Bush's cabinet was to the right? And if it's a bad thing for the Liberals to be mad that they didn't get any seats in an Obama cabinet...why was it ok for Bush to put together a cabinet so far to the right after a much narrower victory?

 

Ah yes, when the heat goes on, blame Bush. Its going to be a long 4 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The people have spoken. We elected a liberal president. The most liberal person in history if you ask some of the conservatives on this site. And we also elected a majority of liberals in Congress. That's why liberals are annoyed that the president-elect is creating what appears to be a not-so progressive looking cabinet.

Edited by BigSqwert
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 01:08 PM)
The people have spoken. We elected a liberal president. The most liberal person in history if you ask some of the conservatives on this site. And we also elected a majority of liberals in Congress. That's why liberals are annoyed that the president-elect is creating what appears to be a not-so progressive looking cabinet.

I don't have a problem with his cabinet being mostly centrists, Richardson, Clinton, Gates, etc. But it would be very nice if they could occasionally be challenged in their thinking from the left rather than just from the right. Things like "What exactly are our goals in Afghanistan" and "Couldn't we be even more aggressive on alternative energy mandates" and "Maybe we should give $7.4 trillion to the banks" or other nearly communist ideas like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 03:08 PM)
The people have spoken. We elected a liberal president. The most liberal person in history if you ask some of the conservatives on this site. And we also elected a majority of liberals in Congress. That's why liberals are annoyed that the president-elect is creating what appears to be a not-so progressive looking cabinet.

He's doing exactly what he said he'd do - build a team of thinkers from various viewpoints. He's said before, many times, he's a fan of the Team of Rivals concept.

 

For now, that means that certain far-left Liberals will b**** and moan about having a moderate cabinet, and certain far-right conservatives will bemoan the most-liberal-President-ever stuff.

 

Once the dust settles, if he has pissed off the extremists and made the moderates in each party happy, then I think he's probably done a great job.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 03:11 PM)
I don't have a problem with his cabinet being mostly centrists, Richardson, Clinton, Gates, etc. But it would be very nice if they could occasionally be challenged in their thinking from the left rather than just from the right. Things like "What exactly are our goals in Afghanistan" and "Couldn't we be even more aggressive on alternative energy mandates" and "Maybe we should give $7.4 trillion to the banks" or other nearly communist ideas like that.

 

Well that's my problem with this. America didn't resoundingly elect a Democratic executive and legislative branch to make incremental change. We want sweeping change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 03:14 PM)
Well that's my problem with this. America didn't resoundingly elect a Democratic executive and legislative branch to make incremental change. We want sweeping change.

Good luck with all that.

 

You're going to get change - we've already seen that. And in a modern context, I think it will be pretty darn big change. But there is no way that we will get the sort of sweeping, change all things change that the far left wants and the far right keeps predicting. Not going to happen, never was either.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 01:13 PM)
He's doing exactly what he said he'd do - build a team of thinkers from various viewpoints. He's said before, many times, he's a fan of the Team of Rivals concept.

 

For now, that means that certain far-left Liberals will b**** and moan about having a moderate cabinet, and certain far-right conservatives will bemoan the most-liberal-President-ever stuff.

 

Once the dust settles, if he has pissed off the extremists and made the moderates in each party happy, then I think he's probably done a great job.

Like I said, I just want to make sure there is an actual couple of voices from the left in there to actually piss off the moderates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 03:15 PM)
Like I said, I just want to make sure there is an actual couple of voices from the left in there to actually piss off the moderates.

Well, I am already sure there will be no lack of that. Obama himself is quite liberal, and Biden is fairly liberal as well. All the more reason for the cabinet to tend towards Obama's right. I like it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 03:15 PM)
Like I said, I just want to make sure there is an actual couple of voices from the left in there to actually piss off the moderates.

 

And I want to see his pledge fulfilled to completely ween us off foreign oil within 10 years, get us incredibly close to universal health care, and pull out of Iraq.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 03:18 PM)
And I want to see his pledge fulfilled to completely ween us off foreign oil within 10 years, get us incredibly close to universal health care, and pull out of Iraq.

You'll see significant progress towards full alternative energy use, but not enough in 8 or 10 years to be fully off foreign oil.

 

You'll see us leave Iraq (fully or almost fully) within Obama's first term. Funny thing though, same thing would have been true with McCain in office.

 

You'll see major changes to health care, though maybe not as complete as billed.

 

Those are my predictions.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 04:20 PM)
You'll see significant progress towards full alternative energy use, but not enough in 8 or 10 years to be fully off foreign oil.

 

You'll see us leave Iraq (fully or almost fully) within Obama's first term. Funny thing though, same thing would have been true with McCain in office.

 

You'll see major changes to health care, though maybe not as complete as billed.

 

Those are my predictions.

If he manages to accomplish those things while navigating the clusterf*** of a minefield he's inheriting, that will be a successful first term and and easy landslide re-election. None of those things are easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (lostfan @ Nov 24, 2008 -> 03:28 PM)
If he manages to accomplish those things while navigating the clusterf*** of a minefield he's inheriting, that will be a successful first term and and easy landslide re-election. None of those things are easy.

I think Iraq will happen pretty easily - they want us out now anyway.

 

Energy is tough, but I think its very doable to make notable progress in a few years.

 

Health care is going to be by far the toughest of those, IMO.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...