Reply #43: It's good to see someone else -- and very knowledgeably -- make the case for Boxer as VP

[cloudythescribbler]

I still want to highlight a few other points.

First, don't forget her central role on the Greenhouse Effect. This should clearly be among the top priorities of any intelligent incoming Administration. I am concerned that politicians AND MOST ACTIVIST ORGANIZATIONS ON THIS ISSUE in the US are not demanding ENOUGH change, that what is being sought (80% reduction in net emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG's) by 2050 is CATASTROPHICALLY GROSSLY INSUFFICIENT. Boxer is the kind of figure who is both electable and more likely to at least bring the new sense of urgency from experts like Jim Hansen to the public. This is one of the more important qualifications she has.

Her resolute position on the Iraq War is very important and rightly highlighted. We should remember that, relative to almost ALL the people being considered for VP, INCLUDING HILLARY CLINTON, Barbara Boxer has a MUCH longer and stronger resume on foreign policy. Her position on Iraq is FIRST OFF, VERY much now the current feeling of the OVERWHELMING majority of Americans. It is one of Obama's strong suits -- and this is the USA: if you've got it, flaunt it, especially in the GE. SECOND, almost any candidate who EVER supported the Iraq War Resolution, or whose track record on the issue (eg Wes Clark) at the time is truly murky, would be a target of constant focus in the media at this point. In 04, there was the excuse (which I didn't share even then) that the public wasn't ready for a full-throated opponent of the war, like Dean. I think that was bullshit -- pardon my French -- but today there isn't even a fig-leaf of plausibility to this position. Obama is likely to lose more votes if he fudges on the war, including in choice of VP nominee -- after he made a central issue out of his 'judgment' on Iraq in his primary campaign -- than if he takes and maintains a CLEAR position on the war. THIRD, being against the war opens the ticket (more than a hawkish policy does) to CLOSER scrutiny of the foreign policy credentials of the candidate(s). This is arguably perverse, but it IS REAL. In this context, there is really a very small class of people, and an even smaller class of women, with Boxer's foreign policy credentials and credibility AND her track record on Iraq. I know this is just restating and underlining a lot of what the OP said, but these extra nuances are very important.

There should also be more attention to Boxer's appealingness as a candidate. She is REALLY REALLY popular in CA, and not just among a narrow spectrum of voters. She isn't "charisma deficient". And ABSOLUTELY -- winning is ABSOLUTELY crucial, and is a VERY good reason for supporting one possible VP against another. Focus on a left-right spectrum, assuming that only by picking someone like Clark or Strickland or whoever to appeal to the "center" misses the total picture that makes MOST people vote the way they do. Most ideologically oriented voters are already committed liberals or conservatives. The other voters are NOT in the "middle" mostly, but making judgments on other bases, like personal impression.

I would be interested in someone putting out the kind of knowledgeable review that the OP has done on so much, with a focus on Boxer's appeal to various constituencies -- especially older voters. It isn't just that she's somewhat older than Obama, but that she has a really strong APPEAL to the boomer generation and older. That general observation needs some more knowledgeable backing. CA Sen Boxer, second perhaps only to Bob Graham (who also has a very strong resume and voted no on IWR) would be very helpful in trying to win Florida. She should also help with certain other "swing" demographics, like suburban women. And having a woman on the ticket means not that HRC supporters will end up 90% going for Obama anyway, but that there will be real ENTHUSIASM. Boxer is a candidate that people -- including many NOT enthusiastic in support of Obama -- can GET enthusiastic about, and that might not just influence how they vote, but how much they get their FRIENDS to vote for Obama too.

I heartily recommend this post -- and urge others who feel the same way about Barbara Boxer to make their feelings known, as Clark and other supporters do a lot -- at this site and elsewhere.