2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumJust tossin' this out there ... but what about Samantha Power for SoS?
Her name hasn't been mentioned much, but she has the experience and would be a great advocate on the international stage.
I think she would make a fantastic choice.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Women just made major gains in all contests this year.
Forward means not going back.
Good choice if Susan Rice ends up being lynched would be Samantha Power or any other female candidate.
Long as they are NOT a sitting senator/governor/etc. at this point.
Here's a thought- why not nominate Teresa Kerry for the position? If the Kerry people want a Kerry in the office, let's nominate Teresa. (only being 1/2 ironic here).
If it's going to be a male- I suggest former senator/governor Bob Graham from Florida who was ready,willing,able to serve any President at any time in any job called for.
And he is not a current senator/governor and is much loved, and powerful.
Why not Bob Graham?
(yes, indeed my board name is a tribute to one of the finest men who are in politics the last 40 years who could have won Florida in 2000,2004 and many years earlier too had he been chosen as someones VP).
karynnj
(59,510 posts)That is idiotic - so after Hillary becomes President, only women should apply? I have been eager to see more women succeed in high government, but this is the silliest thing I have ever heard.
I also think that words like lynched and swiftboated should not be used for things that do not reach that level.
I take back the comment on your first sentence being the silliest thing I have read. Nominating the wonderful Teresa is far sillier.
Bob Graham was born in 1936, so he is 75 years old and one thing that may have stopped him in 2004 was health. Didn't he have heart issues?
As to the op, I like and respect Powers, but I wonder if she could get confirmed as she really is more to the left than most of the Senate Democrats. (Also wasn't there a huge fight between her and Hillary in 2008? Though Hillary has worked with her, would the Clintons support her?)
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)in 2004, now 8 years ago, Bob Graham was younger than John Kerry who is what, 70?
and they said he was too old for Kerry's vp and they nominated a fraud(later proven)
who got haircuts worth more than my car.
Why is Bob Graham too old, But John Kerry isn't?
Same like people who say Hillary is too old, we need Elizabeth Warren, yet she and Hillary are just about the same age.
Maybe we should nominate Quvenzhané Wallis. Certainly you cannot say she is too old for the post.
MH1
(17,635 posts)a) Graham is older than Kerry
b) Kerry has been athletic and fit his entire life. Has Graham? I don't know, but there are many younger people who can't keep up with John Kerry, even as "old" as he is.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/03/politics/campaign/03health.html?pagewanted=print&position=&_r=0
October 3, 2004
On Kerry’s Journey to Health, Stops for Shrapnel and Cancer
By LAWRENCE K. ALTMAN
Senator John Kerry, a lean athlete who is the picture of health as he skis, skates, cycles and windsurfs, is in robust condition, he and his doctors said in their first extended interviews discussing his medical history.
Mr. Kerry, 60,(in 2004) the Democratic presidential nominee, and his doctors discussed in great detail his health, particularly the surgery to remove his cancerous prostate gland in February 2003. It was one of two operations that disrupted his campaign. The second repaired a painful shoulder injury last March.
Mr. Kerry could become the first "cancer survivor" to be elected president, but he rejected the term as creating an unfair stigma. He is free of any vestiges of the cancer and characterized it as a nonissue in an interview in Las Vegas on Sept. 16. "I am cured," he said. "I am cancer-free, and the percentages of me being cancer-free 10 years from now are about as good as they get."
...(more at link)
karynnj
(59,510 posts)My point was that the real I heard in 2003 for him dropping out almost before the preprimaries started was health. I also did NOT say it ruled him out, but suggested that that might be something that would make it unlikely.
Have you heard anything on his current health or even his current activities.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)He was well at VP time, just not at the specific time months earlier to run for President(which unfortunately anyhow, he would not have succeeded.
The irony of Bob Graham was (vs. Dick Cheney as vp candidates) was that Graham was one who kept diaries every single day, whereas Cheney of course was the single most secretive vp ever, keeping his own schedule and never when possible releasing any info of what he was up to,unless he wanted to further his own goal.
Bob Graham also knew what was going on prior to 9-11 and what Bush/Cheney knew and didn't know with regard to classified, and what they did not do they could have.
as he was on that specific committee.
karynnj
(59,510 posts)In 2004, Graham had just had heart surgery in 2003. I don't think he was ever on the short list for VP, but Kerry did a great job NOT leaking who was considered. From all accounts, both the party (Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy included pushed for Edwards)
I have heard nothing from or about Graham for years - and if Obama nominated him, I would have no problem supporting him - though maybe you should be angry that he dropped out of the Senate, giving a seat to the Republicans. That would also mean you are consistent.
I don't have a problem with either Warren or Clinton. I think it may be that people, have seen HRC under the pressure of a Presidential campaign in 2008 and as SOS - and she has looked exhausted at points. Warren has NOT been seen under that pressure which is daunting at any age.
