Lets Hear Your Dream Cabinet Picks


David Potts - Posted on 27 May 2008

The days finally here, I'm taking advantage of my position at BSB to indulge my own curiosity. The only real surprise is that it took so long to happen.

After my post on the possibility of Joe Biden being tapped for Secretary of State last night, I started thinking  a lot about the cabinet. And now I have a question I'd like to throw out to you:

What are your dream picks for cabinet level positions?

Keep in mind that reality isn't a factor here. This isn't about who would accept or be confirmed, just who you'd like to see in the role. You can also up as many picks as you want, you don't need to fill out the whole thing.

For reference, here's the current cabinet and cabinet rank offices.

I'll start things off in the comments with my pick for Secretary of Defense.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

For Secretary of Defense I'd propose Colin Powell. I think this office is way to important to be lead by a yes man, but having someone of a moderately opposing view would force a President to at least consider other options before making decisions.

Also remember that if the current administration had listened to Powell we wouldn't be in the situation that we are now.

Wasn't it Colin Powell who made the case for the invasion of Irag to the U.N.? So, didn't Bush etc listen to Powell about invading Iraq? Gen. Wes Clark for Secretary of State.
But now it seems pretty clear the Powell was the leader for those in the White House opposed to the war behind the scenes.

Attorney General- John Edwards

Secretary of State- Bill Richardson

Secretary of Defense- Gen. Wesley Clark

Secretary of Agriculture- Patty Judge (IA) or Ron Sparks (AL)

Secretary of Veteran Affairs- Max Cleland

Secretary of Energy- Hilda Solis (CA)

Secretary of Health and Human Services- Dr. John Kitzhaber (OR)

I still have to research some of the other cabinet level positions, but those are the ones I have picks for as of now. In addition, as far as the position of VP, I hope Obama picks Sen. Jim Webb.

I really don't think Webb would be a good pick for VP. I'm not convinced he's the best option for attracting more voters to the ticket and it might lose us his Senate seat. I like the rest of your picks though.

I think Webb is without a doubt the best possible VP choice. Here are the reasons:

1. He brings military experience to the ticket. Webb served 2 tours in Vietnam, Assistant Sec. of Defense under Reagan, and Sec. of the Navy under Reagan. His experience is equal to, if not exceeding that of McCain.

2. He is a former Republican. Who better to speak about the promise that Barack brings as a uniter and post-partisan candidate.

3. He is from Appalachia, the backwoods of Southern Virginia (where I would be remiss if I did not mention my family comes from as well). Webb would help Obama relate to the people of Appalachia.

Those are my three main points. However, let me tell a story to reinforce these reasons. I have recently sat in on a few focus groups and the results of these groups have only reinforced my long held belief that Webb should be the VP choice.

In these focus groups, of people from Appalachia and the Midwest, they almost unanimously did not support Obama, as most were Clinton supporters. They almost all also said they would not support Obama in the general election, even though they were all Democrats. One would assume this is because of Obama's race. However, most in the room said that they would vote for Colin Powell. This results leads me to conclude that the problem is not Obama's race, but that they think he is different than them, in the sense that he does not share their culture or values. They do not have this same fear of Powell, because he served in the military, which they value.

With all of this being said, I think the best chance Obama has of winning Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Virginia is if he adds someone who comes from the Appalachian culture. He will never convince people of this region that he is one of them on his own, that he shares their values. However, by picking a VP from Appalachia, that VP pick can vouch for Obama's values, which means we could make some headway with white, rural, Appalachian voters. Given Jim Webb's track record, his military service, his work on the topic of Scotts-Irish, and his roots in Virginia, I can think of no better choice.

In short, it is almost too good to be true that there exists someone so perfect to be Obama's running mate. If you were to ask me to sit down and come up with the qualifications for Obama's running mate, I would say they need to be Southern/Appalachian, have military/foreign policy experience, and could win us a state we do not normally win. He helps us win Virginia and would go a long way towards shoring up support in southern Ohio.

Finally, just let me say that while I have been to these focus groups, I do not really need to go to them because my family is my own focus group, as they represent almost perfectly the bloc of the party Obama has yet to win over. They all voted for Hillary and are hesistant to vote for Obama, even though no one in my family can remember the last time any of them voted for a Republican. For crying out loud, I have a Great-Uncle named after FDR. Anyhow, in short, in my conversations with them, they all have said they would be willing to vote for Obama if someone like Webb was on the ticket. If its not Webb, the only other person I could think of would be Wesley Clark. Any other suggestions?

My memory's real vague on this, but wasn't there something bad between Clark and the Clintons? Would this cary over to Obama? (I'm assuming that fellow Dems stood behind Bill at the time, but that always has a way of going away over time).

Clark initially endorsed Hillary, but it was rumored later on (and eventually denied) that he asked Clinton to drop out.

The memories I had were related to Clark's "forced" retirement. According to rumors at the time, Clark was forced out due to a series of embarrassing situations as NATO commander in Kosovo.

 

I put "forced" in quotes as the stories were never 100% confirmed.

AG: John Edwards

Labor: Dick Gephardt

Defense: Gen. Wesley Clark

Ambassador to the UN(slightly tongue-in-cheek): George Voinovich

 

I see Agriculture, Energy, Education, and HUD being filled by policy wonks, with at least two of the four being women. If he doesn't want to be VP or Mayor for Life, Bloomberg is a possibility with the Treasury. I think Chuck Hagel may be somewhere in the cabinet. Obama is going to have multiple Republicans. The obvious choices right now are Powell and Hagel, but I think people like Voinovich and other moderates are always possibilities.

"I am a fashion god."-former FEMA Director Mike Brown
dpotts, think it makes Powell worse than Bush and Cheney if he didn't believe going to War was the right thing to do, but still went to the UN and sold the war to the world.
The idea here is to have someone that the President wouldn't always agree with to argue the opposing view, while not so extreme as to cause serious problems.

This war probably would have happened without Powells UN presentation, but at least he had the guts to try and talk sense to the president when it could have made a difference. 
I think Wes Clark would be the ideal SecDef - it would continue to bring credibility to an organization that, prior to Sec. Gates, was brutally mismanaged by the civilianista hands of Don Rumsfeld. My choice for SecState would be Bill Richardson - he's got the brains to do it. AG should be John Edwards, the only question is whether he'd accept. SecTreas - I haven't the foggiest idea.
Edwards would accept without a doubt. It is the only other position besides president that he wants, as he can use that office to tackle labor issues, poverty, and corporate abuse. I am sure him and Obama have already discussed it. In fact, when I was out in Nevada, I heard it was already a done deal between the two, as a condition for Edwards to drop out. I guess we shall see, but if Obama is elected, I would bet good money on Edwards being AG.
for AG in an Obama administration. What gives?
I'd have to go with Kathleen Sebelius, though I'm hardly set in stone on that. It would be a good step towards bringing the women vote over from the Clinton campaign.
My only concern with Sebelius is that picking her could create some backlash. I am worried that Hillary supporters will see it as a slap in the face to pick a woman who is not Sen. Clinton. It could be viewed as Obama choosing a less qualified woman, just to pander to women voters. If he picked someone else to be the first woman VP, I think it may do more harm than good amongst the Hillary crowd, who thinks she has earned the right to be the first woman president or VP. Personally, I think a case could be made that Sebelius is more qualified than Hillary, but I think its important for the Obama search committee to test the potential for backlash. 
There might be some backlash at first, but it would probably kill the claims of sexism. You definitely raise a point that would need to be looked into though.

Recent comments

Add to Technorati Favorites