Who should replace Biden on the ticket in 2012?

[Radical Activist]

Poll question: Who should replace Biden on the ticket in 2012?

Well, this is GD: P isn't it? This is at least as interesting as speculation about cabinet appointments.

I think Biden will be a one-term VP. In four years Barack won't have to worry about picking someone with foreign policy experience. Who should Obama pick to replace him on the ticket in 2012?

Name your "other" if you have one. I think he might choose a woman so I've included more women than men.

[hlthe2b]

1. I'm not ready to kick Joe off the ticket before he even starts...

[Radical Activist]

2. Boring!

We're talking about three years from now. This isn't about how much we like Biden for term one.

[hlthe2b]

8. Guilty as charged, I guess.

On the other hand, I'm guessing loyalty is not a particularly important trait to you....:shrug:

[Radical Activist]

10. How do I know Biden even wants to serve two terms?

The question is about who Obama would pick if he wants to set the future direction of the party.

[trueblue2007]

44. Yeah...this is a dumb poll.

Gooooooooooooo Biden!!!

[Lucky 13]

3. This is stupid.

That is all.

[Radical Activist]

5. If GDP is anything more than an idle distraction to anyone

then they don't have their priorities in order. This is for fun.

[demwing]

80. Ditto. Doubly so.

Maybe my priorities are not in order.

Maybe they are :)

[WI_DEM]

4. No, Joe Biden will serve eight years with Obama. Obama is not the type who would dump a person

if they are doing a good job, and I'm sure Joe will do a great job.

[Radical Activist]

6. You don't think Obama will want to set the future direction of the party?

By choosing a successor? I don't see why not.

[WI_DEM]

16. Nope, I still don't see it. Not Obama's style.

[totodeinhere]

126. No, let us in the party decide our future. n/t

[AZ Criminal JD]

129. Give that BS story to Rev. Wright

The guy who married Obama and provided spiritual advice to him for 20 years. Under the bus when he was not needed.

[azmouse]

7. Dude. Waaaay to soon.

How about we at least get through the inauguration before we 'throw Joe under the bus'....

[Radical Activist]

9. Maybe he doesn't want a second term?

How do you know? This is speculative. Its not about whether you support Biden.

[azmouse]

12. You expressed an opinion and so did I.

Ain't life grand. :hi:

[Radical Activist]

13. yes. n/t

[Bucky]

28. It's not a "bus toss" -- just an innocent & perfectly fair question.

I think Biden ought to be around for 8 years... at least. But the question is hardly out of place in GDP

[Eric J in MN]

11. Was anyone on that list against the Iraq War before it started? NT

NT

[Radical Activist]

19. Good question.

Patty Murray and both Udall's voted No. Cantwell and Clinton voted yes. I don't think the rest were in Congress at the time so I don't know.

[Hippo_Tron]

14. Keep Biden, if Obama picks a successor it will create a lot of resentment within the party

Particularly in the Senate where everybody at some point flirts with the idea of running for President. Having an open primary is healthy for the party.

[WI_DEM]

17. That is another good reason why Obama wouldn't dump Biden, why cause unnecessary friction

when he's running for a second term?

[Radical Activist]

20. That's a fair point.

And I do enjoy wide open primaries. I think this one went well for us.

[Ozma]

15. Hmm, so many good choices, including Biden himself. I ask

why rock the boat? Maybe to have an incumbent VP in 2016 to get to be elected Prez ???

But it's up to Obama, for sure.

[Radical Activist]

23. That would be the idea.

And Biden will be 70 in 2012. Maybe he'll want to retire. Who knows?

[cemaphonic]

87. I'm not so sure having an incumbent VP is such a big advantage.

Other than Papa Bush, the last sitting VP to be elected to the Presidency was Van Buren.

[Inspired]

18. Are you bored or something? How absurd! n/t

[Radical Activist]

21. Yes.

[Inspired]

22. OK then! Keep Joe around. He's one of the good guys.

[TheKentuckian]

24. I'm voting to continue the O and Joe show

if for no other reason, its way too early to even think about such a move. Seriously, the guys haven't even been formally elected.

[LWolf]

25. Better question:

Who should replace Obama?

I'd like to go with someone a little to the left of center next time around. ;)

Unless Obama somehow evolves into a leftist during the next for years.

What are the odds of that?

[Ozma]

26. Got any names to suggest? I don't ! of course, 8 years ago...

I had never even heard the name Barack H Obama...............never!

So... well, there you go!

[LWolf]

29. Here are some:

Boxer
Feingold
Sanders
Kucinich
Barbara Lee
Stephanie Tubb-Jones


I'd say Cynthia McKinney, if the party could win her back. I don't see that happening, though.

[Bucky]

32. Um , one of your candidates is dead

The much missed Stephanie Tubb-Jones left us last summer at the too-young age of 58. She was a champ.

[LWolf]

37. You're right.

I was thinking of some other departed Democrats while I was typing, and forgot that she is now one of them. :(

She joins a great group, topped by Barbara Jordan, that I'd like to see reincarnated in Congress today.

[Radical Activist]

36. I was thinking of someone a little younger than most of your list

with the idea of him/her being the next President.
Patty Murray seems liberal, as well as the Udall's, to the best of my knowledge. I'd like to see someone who's a little more substantive and accomplished than the people who play the "more liberal than though" games and grandstanding. I grew tired of that at some point. Dick Durbin proves you can hold to liberal values and still accomplish something. Kucinich, Lee and some other popular liberals would do well to follow his example.

[LWolf]

38. Younger people have time, while Obama is in office,

to establish their credentials as far as "liberal values" go. I'd be happy to consider all who step forward.

Meanwhile, I am all about supporting those who represent me.

[davidinalameda]

53. win McKinney back?

she's a freaking nut case

the Greens got exactly what they deserved when they nominated her

[LWolf]

96. I disagree, obviously.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0619-12.htm

[davidinalameda]

102. if you want to try and get an anti-Semitic bigot back in the party

I'd say go for it

[LWolf]

104. Do you mean her father, or her?

I don't think she's made any anti-semitic statements. Criticism of Israel does not equal anti-semitism. Just as criticism of McKinney does not equal racism.

Her father is another story, of course. What SHE said, though, is this:

<snip>

"I absolutely abhor any form of racism or anti-Semitism, be it from Louis Farrakhan or Khalid Abdul Muhammad or John Mitnick or Billy McKinney."

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_/ai_18856983

[davidinalameda]

106. for someone who according to you isn't anti-Semitic

she certainly has surrounded herself with plenty of people who are

makes you go hmmm?

[LWolf]

123. We don't choose our parents. nt

[Hippo_Tron]

113. I'm not wild about those comments she made about Al Gore's "Negro Tolerance Level"

Do you have anything that refutes that?

[LWolf]

124. Refutes the statement, or the content?

She certainly made the statement. I don't know enough about Gore's relations with people of color to comment either way on the content. The statement? I've heard it many times, about many people, from those who've experienced racism or other forms of bigotry, unfortunately. Since I usually haven't walked in their shoes, I try not to judge.

[Bucky]

30. Here's a suggestion

Amy Carter. I feel we were robbed this last time in terms of establishing an American dynasty and her liberal creds are impeccable.

[Radical Activist]

31. Kind of the same question.

Since Obama has a career-long and life-long record of being liberal and ran on a liberal platform, I don't see where evolving is needed. I only hope he doesn't evolve into a Clintonian moderate.

We just elected a left-wing movement activist President for the first time in US history. Didn't you notice?

[Bucky]

34. I didn't notice

I don't doubt President Obama will be adequately liberal. But he's not exactly a "left-wing movement activist President." I'll settle for "sane and pragmatic" after the last 8 years, but he's not appointing what you'd call a leftist administration.

[Radical Activist]

41. His background

as a community organizer and civil rights attorney is unquestionably that of a left wing movement activist. You can argue that he has moved to the center over time but dismissing his past is inaccurate and unfair.

Anyone who has done left wing community organizing work will recognize the echoes of that movement in Obama's speeches from unity to "Si Se Pueda." We'll see what happens but I don't think taking a cynical attitude helps anything.

[LWolf]

35. No, I didn't notice that.

I saw that we elected a conservative Democrat, who is eager to "bring together" centrists from both sides of the aisle.

The conservative Democrat who, last year, praised Ronald Reagan for "changing the trajectory" of American politics, moving us away from the "excesses of the 60s and 70s." The same conservative Democrat who I just heard praising Ronald Reagan again, in the weeks since his election.

I've yet to find anything liberal or left-wing about his policies.

[Radical Activist]

39. I'm sorry that you're so eager to see a conservative

that you don't recognize Obama's comments about Reagan as a signal that he's going to change things dramatically in a leftward direction, in the same way that Reagan dramatically took us in a conservative direction. It should be obvious to those who have an open mind that doesn't turn off as soon as they hear the name "Regan."

I guess you don't know that the first step in any community organizing or union organizing drive is to bring people together by uniting them in their common interests against powerful corporate interests. That's how change happens in mass people's movements. Or don't you know that from the history of progressive movements? Or maybe you just don't want to hear the echoes of leftist community organizing in Obama's words. His New Deal-esque jobs program is a good first indication of his liberalism.

You don't see anything liberal about supporting the right to organize, opposing the Iraq war from the start, voting against funding, and calling for a reasonably quick withdrawal? Or an aggressive environmental and clean energy platform?

I guess you'll see what you want to see. Cynicism is a sad thing. It saps energy from the movement. I don't think someone has to be marxist to be called "left-wing."

[LWolf]

47. I'd be happy to think that's where Obama's "trajectory" will head,

if I could find any indication of a leftward trend in his positions, in his policy papers.

I don't. "Against the war from the start" is a great campaign tool when you didn't have to back it up. He voted to fund the war he was "against" from the time he got to the senate until the primaries heated up, when he ran, not on his real record of support, but a comment he made about the war before he got to Washington.

Obama's "aggressive" environmental and clean energy platform leaves nuclear power on the table; I'd like it off. I do appreciate his attention to waste storage issues. I don't appreciate the "clean coal" nonsense.

I'll be happy if he achieves a relatively "quick" withdrawal from Iraq, but not if the whole point of the withdrawal is to send those troops into afghanistan and pakistan.

I hope he'll support a new-deal-esq jobs program; I'd rather see that than a multi-billion dollar corporate bail-out, anyway.

The biggest question is this: just WHO is he bringing together, to unite in their common interests? It looks like he's bringing corporatists together to form his cabinet, from where I stand.

Also from where I stand: the grass-roots on-the-ground groups that I've worked with for the last 6 or 7 years, opposing the Bush administration's education policies, ARE gearing up for action. We're picking our battles, noting which issues we've automatically lost under Obama, and which he might be open to suggestion on.

For example, we know that Obama will not work to retire NCLB and high-stakes testing, which is a primary goal. We can hope to compromise in the kinds of tests, and how they are used, but high-stakes testing will still be part of policy in the Obama administration.

Another big question: can we derail the push for merit pay? Probably not, although we're not giving up on that one just yet.

What about reducing the push for privatization? Another uncertainty, since Obama supports Charter schools, which is privatization-lite brought to us as a pre-privatization step on the way to vouchers by conservatives.

I'm sure there are other groups gearing up to try to move their agendas, hoping that it will be easier under an Obama administration. The only other people I'm personally paying attention to at this point are those working to pass HR 676.

Those two issues, public education and health care, are enough to keep me busy.

We will be working against the tide, since Obama's positions aren't aligned with ours.

[Radical Activist]

111. Having been a victim

of cruel, bitter teachers who should have retired to make room for newer teachers who wouldn't have hated the job, I don't share your view on merit pay.

Accusing Obama of favoring high stakes testing is inaccurate.

"Obama and Biden believe teachers should not be forced to spend the academic year preparing students to fill in bubbles on standardized tests."
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/education/

"The goal of educational testing should be the same as medical testing - to diagnose a student's needs so you can help address them.
Tests should not be designed as punishment for teachers and students, they should be used as tools to help prepare our children to grow and compete in a knowledge economy. Tests should support learning, not just accounting."
http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/ObamaNCLB_3.htm

"We also need to realize that we can meet high standards without forcing teachers and students to spend most of the year preparing for a single, high-stakes test,"
http://choosingdemocracy.blogspot.com/2008/05/obama-v-mccain-on-nclb.html

Your putting a lot of spin on Obama's positions on education.

Could you explain how charter schools in the Chicago public school system are private-light? I don't see it that way. Claiming that his position on privatization is "uncertain" is completely untrue. He has been perfectly clear.

"The ideal of a public education has always been at the heart of the American promise. It's why we are committed to fixing and improving our public schools instead of abandoning them and passing out vouchers."
http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/ObamaNCLB.htm

Obama's requirements for "safe" nuclear power effectively does take nuclear off the table. They can't be built safely at a profit. He pledged to halt construction of new coal fire power plants, which is exactly what we need to stop global warming. His proposed funding for clean coal research is far less than that proposed by John Edwards, while his plans for clean energy and efficiency are massive. He's absolutely liberal on energy issues and has had an excellent environmental record for his entire career, including the Illinois state Senate.

Why are you so eager to put a negative spin on Obama's positions? If you start out with the belief that no Democratic President can possibly be liberal then I'm sure you'll have no trouble convincing yourself that Obama isn't, whether its true or not.

And frankly, I find your criticism of his war stance ridiculously unfair. Its not Obama's fault he wasn't in the US Senate when the vote happened. Not many had the guts to attend an anti-war rally and speak out against it publicly before it began. Howard Dean never spoke at an anti-war rally. Kucinich and Sharpton have, so that puts Obama in good progressive company. He was the only Democrat in the US Senate primary in Illinois to take a clear stand against it. To discount his consistent opposition because he didn't vote to cut off funding twice is setting up pointless purity tests. Its the kind of thing Kucinich uses as a gimmick so he can claim he's the only "real" liberal running again. Bullshit. A symbolic vote to cut off funding was never a realistic strategy for ending the war anyway. That's a weak measure to judge him by.

I really don't think the standard Green/far left talking points about how the Democratic Party is never liberal apply this time. Obama isn't Bill Clinton. If you want to play "more liberal than thou" games and put a nitpicking spin on every position Obama holds then I'm sure you can convince yourself he's not liberal no matter what he does in office. You'll be working against the tide because your outdated, cynical viewpoint keeps you from seeing what's in front of you.

[Bucky]

27. I imagine that after 3 1/2 years, Biden will be too integral to the team to replace

I could be wrong and he's not without his health history, but Biden is probably in for the full 8. He's smart and he's a lock as "senior elder statesman". Given the big personalities that will be contending for face time with President Obama, I can see how picked a midstream replacement could lead to a pretty unseemly pissing contest.

[Radical Activist]

45. Good point.

Picking someone will anger everyone who wants to run in '16 and doesn't get picked for VP. Not picking an heir apparent will keeping everyone sucking up to Obama and doing him favors.

[mwei924]

33. I think Obama likes Joe, and they'll be great together...

..so unless Biden has some serious health issue or wants to retire, Obama won't be the one to kick him off.

[Cha]

40. You shoulda had an "other"...

Funny!

[Radical Activist]

43. Name your other!

My pet peeve on DU is polls where "other" is most of the votes.

[Cha]

46. I did name my other.. it's

"Funny!" but I voted for "I'm boring/uncreative. Keep Biden." :)

[ecstatic]

42. Howard Dean. Going back to my roots :) nt

[ObamaKerryDem]

48. Keep Biden! Why mess with a good thing? n/t

[rucky]

49. This is a shark-jumper. n/t

[Radical Activist]

60. huh

Biden will be 70 in 2012 and has a history of health problems. Its a real possibility that he could choose to resign.

[Jennicut]

63. Actually since his aneurysms were operated on in the late 80's he has had

a clean bill of health. Now if it was McCain we were talking about, with the skin cancer eating up his face...

[Clintonista2]

50. Why change a winning ticket?

[AtomicKitten]

51. Obama-Biden 2012.

[AZBlue]

134. Ditto!

:hi:

[Jennicut]

52. Dumbest poll ever. Why would you kick someone off if they end up being one of your main

advisors? Obama may look for someone who has no political interest to give it to him straight-you know, how Cheney was supposed to do for Bush? Why would you put a rival in place in 2012, when you need to worry about governing the country as well?

[Caretha]

54. Damn!

I didn't get to vote. Where is the I'm insecure & love attention so I put up this BS poll?

[Radical Activist]

64. wow

You've been on DU since 2002 and have posted less than 600 times. Either this name is a sock puppet for another user or I should be honored to get one of the few comments from a rare poster. Thank you. You've eased my massive insecurities and fed my love of attention. :toast:

[Sebastian Doyle]

55. Flamebait.

We know exactly who this was aimed at

[Radical Activist]

58. ummm...

Really? Who?

It hasn't turned into a flame fest.

[salguine]

56. Brian Schweitzer? How does fronting the Stray Cats make him qualified to be VP?

[Radical Activist]

59. Stray Cats?

Was he in a band or something?

A lot of people like him and he expands Democratic support in the mountain west. He wouldn't be my pick but he gave a great convention speech.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

57. Interesting.

Of the people who think Biden needs replacing, the large plurality of them are Clinton fans.

[Radical Activist]

85. I'm surprised

at the votes for Kaine. I barely included him.

[vanderBeth]

61. Obama/Biden 2012

[RagAss]

62. Well, we've officially run out of topics here.

[Radical Activist]

66. lol

More fun than cabinet speculation, imo.

[1corona4u]

65. There's only been ONE president that changed VP's in the history

of the US. I HIGHLY doubt Obama will change VP's.

Stupid topic.

[Morning Dew]

67. Lincoln had two

FDR had 3, I believe.

[Jennicut]

71. Here is the complete list

http://www.presidentsusa.net/presvplist.html

I see some presidents had no VP at times! How weird. I guess the position has really grown in importance, its not "worth a bucket of warm piss" anymore.

[Radical Activist]

79. My favorite is Adlai Stevenson I

who's still the only Democrat to be a VP nominee with two different Presidential candidates. Only one became President.

[Jennicut]

81. Very strange. VPS have a strange history compared to presidents

Its like no one cared about them or something. Maybe that explains Cheney's power hungry moves, he just wanted VPS to get more respect? On second thought, Cheney thought he WAS President.

[Radical Activist]

83. Dubya was always a figure head

for the Cheney/Rumsfeld/Kissinger crowd that ran foreign policy in the Nixon, Ford and Reagan administrations. Putting Cheney in as VP was insurance in case Bush started getting ideas of his own and strayed off course. McCain was never part of that crowd and neither was Palin. That's why they didn't get much help from the Republican establishment and failed miserably.

[1corona4u]

93. That's who I was talking about.

Last time I looked at Wiki, about 3 months ago, they said there had only been him. I'm too tired to look for it now, but I will.

Besides, people are just whacked if they think Obama will ditch Biden. And if he does, I won't vote for him again.

On edit; Here it is;

Only one president (Franklin D. Roosevelt) had more than two different Vice Presidents
John Nance Garner
Henry A. Wallace
Harry S. Truman



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice_President_of_the_United_States

[Morning Dew]

68. link here, there's more.

http://americanhistory.about.com/library/charts/blchartpresidents.htm

[Radical Activist]

69. That's not exactly right.

Several Presidents had more than one VP before the constitution was changed to have them run as a ticket. Since then Lincoln, Grant, Cleveland, McKinley, and FDR ran and won with different VP candidates. Others have run and lost. So its not that unusual in American history.

[ShadowLiberal]

70. How about we wait for Biden to screw up as VP first before we talk about replacing him

[Radical Activist]

74. I'm not assuming he's going to screw up.

Just a speculative poll should he not be on the ticket next time.

[Clio the Leo]

72. BLASPHEMY!!!!!

DO NOT SPEAK AGAINST THE SILVER FOX!!!! :spank:

Just STOP IT! lol

[Jennicut]

73. LOL..that picture.

[Clio the Leo]

75. I wonder what his tie says....

.... looks like there's writing on it.

[Jennicut]

77. It says...keep me as VP please!

[Clio the Leo]

88. or ... "GET UP CHAMP!!! JUST GET UP!!!" NT

[Jennicut]

90. Literally

[Radical Activist]

76. hah

Looks like that's how most people feel. No fun at all.

[Clio the Leo]

89. You dont mess with our boy, I'm tellin' ya. A good idea? Not so much. :-) NT

[tabbycat31]

97. that pic screams for a caption

on pundit kitchen.

[oldmant]

78. 2012, You need to get a life! n/t

[Radical Activist]

82. You're right. Let's go back to arguing about Hillary.

ugh. :hurts:

[adoraz]

84. he won't be kicked off... so I guess that makes me boring.

[Breeze54]

86. WTF?! We won't have any issues in Foreign Policy in 4 years?

Sorry, Radical Activist, but I disagree on that and I don't like any of your choices.

Here's a few suggestions:

Senator Barbara Boxer(D-CA)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-9)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-3)

and...

there's a woman in Texas (State Senator?) that is a spit fire and right up your alley, ideologically.

I can't remember her name right now though. :(

[Radical Activist]

91. I didn't mean that we won't have foreign policy issues.

After four years as President Obama will have foreign policy experience so he won't need to pick a fp expert like Biden to compensate for his lack of experience like he did this time. That's what I meant.

Schakowsky is good but she's from Illinois which would make the ticket unconstitutional. She'll have to be Speaker of the House instead. I eagerly await the day when we have President Obama, Speaker Schakowsky, and Majority Leader Durbin. Illinois will run it all. mwahahahaha!
:evilgrin:

[Breeze54]

92. OK...

:P

[blondeatlast]

94. Jennifer Granholm; but I'd rather keep Biden in the position, actually. nt

[Sebastian Doyle]

127. Jennifer Granholm can never be VP

The VP must be Constitutionally eligible to become President (should it be necessary)

Granholm was born in Canada, eh?

[TexasObserver]

95. That idea really backfired on you, didn't it? 80% PRO JOE.

[Radical Activist]

99. Backfired?

It gauged the view of the lounge. Therefore, it served its purpose. I see that people don't like the idea of thinking about possibilities down the road. Check your suspicious conspiracy theories about this thread at the door.
:eyes:

[TexasObserver]

100. Yes. Backfired. Your choice of "I'm boring/uncreative. Keep Biden." betrays you.

Your editorializing in the choice implies your lack of approval of that choice, a choice that 80% have chosen.

Your poll backfired.

[Radical Activist]

108. Oh no! What will I ever do?

My plan failed! And I was trying so hard to be subtle! :cry:

Don't be so suspicious and melodramatic. Yes, my editorial opinion is that the poll is no fun if people cheerlead for Biden out of knee-jerk loyalty instead of speculating on an idle question about the future.

[TuxedoKat]

I voted for Joe

and this is very premature, but if Joe wanted to leave after four years, I'd probably pick Mark Warner.

[TuxedoKat]

98. I voted for Joe

and this is very premature, but if Joe wanted to leave after four years, I'd probably pick Mark Warner.

[lame54]

101. And if he does a good job?

[Radical Activist]

109. Its not really about the job he does.

[No Elephants]

103. NOT Jean Shaheen. I am glad she won, but she supported Bush on Iraq and on his tax cuts for the

rich. Her ads bashed Sununu for supporting Bush--but his ads did the same with her, showing films of her saying she stood with Buh on Iraq and Saddam and that she supported Bush's tax cuts.

[fadedrose]

105. If you had instead proposed a different SOS in 2012...

assuming that Sen. Clinton becomes SOS, I bet there'd be a lot of name-calling and fighting under this thread...

Us Biden people just say, thanks but no thanks...

[KamaAina]

107. What's wrong with Joe the VP?

:shrug:

[Radical Activist]

112. He may not want to run again. This isn't about making judgements of Biden.

[jberryhill]

110. How about replacing Michelle?

It makes as much sense.

[akbacchus_BC]

117. Oh, you have ulterior motives, LOL. Kidding!

[jberryhill]

120. I was going to say that they were being pressured to replace Sasha with Chelsea Clinton, but...

[BlooInBloo]

114. If it ain't broke, don't fix it...

In other words, this poll is stupid.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

115. BIden's great. Why do I constantly see speculation to can him in '12?

Hell, I could easily get behind a Biden run in '16 if it came down to it

[akbacchus_BC]

116. I voted for Biden, he is very effective in foreign policy. Why would

PE Obama want to change him?

[polichick]

118. Why would Biden be a one-term veep?

[dailykoff]

119. Biden is about the only Democrat he's appointed and you want to replace him?

Troll poll, fail.

[question everything]

121. Other: stupid poll (nt)

[GoneOffShore]

122. Bullshit push poll.

No one's been sworn in yet.

And Biden is going to do just fine.

[Lorentz]

125. Drop the frickin' 2012 shit! The election just ended. Talk about ADD.

[saltpoint]

128. My first expectation and hope is that Joe Biden serve as long as he

humanly can, which I predict will be both terms of the Obama administration.

Tucked into that response is my wish that Obama does indeed serve 2 administrations. That would suggest 8 consecutive years of responsive government, a restoration of good will among our allies, citizen-directed initiatives at home, responsible and progressive judicial appointments, and complete sentences spilling out of the Oval Office.

In other words, a galactic change from the present administration.

Biden's name has been less evident since the election but his strengths remain exceptional. I'm eager for the morning when Obama meets with Biden to discuss his role for the next 8 years. I've said on DU that I consider Biden to be one of the Great Democrats and I am very pleased that he will be in vivid attendance at the meetings of our new government.

[democracy1st]

130. You guys are as nutty as freerepublic what a BS post

[Freddie Stubbs]

131. How do you know Obama wants to serve more than one term?

Perhaps it will be Biden picking the next VP.

[WinkyDink]

132. SARAH PALIN!!

See? My priorities are in proper order.

[Doughboy71]

133. I don't see a reason or point...

To even begin this discussion. Biden hasn't even been able to prove himself as a VP yet and already you are picking his replacement. Maybe he won't want to run for President in 2016, maybe he will if Palin is the top of the Republican ticket. One would think that would be an easy win for the Democrats.

Shouldn't there be a waiting period before you are allowed to start this discussiion like 2.5 years after someone is elected to see how they have handled themselves in office? Or at least ask them first what they want to do in the future before you decide it for them?