Why not Dick Lugar? He has been cited by Obama along with Nunn as an advisor, and he backed Obama over McCain in every question put to him today by Blitzer.

Because, like Nunn, he's too old. Besides, Bayh will swing Indiana anyway.

A watched Nunn never boils.  

Latest from the Obama campaign on the imminent (7 days now) VP announcement.

"Vice President?"

"We don't need no stinking Vice President!"

:-)

Why are the tea leaves not pointing Nunn's way? And if not, does that matter? Isn't Obama better off with a surprise, and what better surprise than someone of his stature?

Nobody cares about #2 at this point. If he's really good (eg Biden), he outshines young Obama. If he's nothing special (eg Nunn, Bayh), he brings nothing.

Yeah, tep, Obama should thank the maker that Biden didn't jump into the race for the nomination, where he would have completely outshone young Obama. Oh, wait ...

But to Crowley: The "Nunn Watch" series could do to with some straightforward explanation of why you, or anyone else, thinks that Nunn would be a good choice. You know, maybe list the elections he's won since 1990, or his effect on polling data nationwide, or his general name recognition. Except, well, he hasn't won an election since 1990, there is no polling data that demonstrates any national Nunn benefits, and his name recognition is as low as you'd expect from a senator who's been out of office for two terms. I'll be generous and assume there is some rational basis for the Nunnophilia, something that can be supported by appeals to evidence of some kind. Please, cards on the table: Demonstrate why the Nunn promotion makes any sense.

Agree with Rhubs on Nunn, not Biden.  The logical flaw is using the Dem primary voters (and pretty much the kingmakers that are Iowa and New Hampshire at that) to represent the general electorate: *no* moderate was going to do well in the Dem primaries this year.  In 1988 Lloyd Bensten would not have done well in a primary but he was a great veep (I know, look at all the good he did Dukakis, but you could argue that but-for Bensten/Quayle the loss would have been worse).  

lymon, I'm a huge Biden fan. Honestly, if I had the power at any time in the last 12 years to elevate any living American to the presidency, my top-three list would have been, and would still be, Joe Biden, Joe Biden, and Joe Biden.

But I've also seen the man campaigning for president several times over several decades. Just over half a year ago I saw Biden campaigning in Iowa, and the man couldn't even "outshine" the hot dog vender across the sidewalk, judging by crowd response. As long as McCain doesn't pick Huckabee, Biden will probably outshine any GOP VP in a one-on-one setting, which is a key part of any Democratic VP nominee's job. But the question of whether Biden will "outshine" Obama has already been answered, and there's just no arguing with facts. Joe Biden is just not a very good presidential campaigner. If he were a national campaigner of even middling talents, he would already have been president.

As to the specific argument about the Dem voting public, in fact a "moderate" did do very will in the primaries, nearly winning, and from the beginning participation in open contests was historically high, such that the "moderate" candidate's campaign frequently campaigned that independents and disenchanted Republicans were stealing the race from "real" Democrats. Which is to say, this year's Democratic primaries were a perfect opportunity for a candidate like Biden to prosper. That he didn't tells us more about Biden than it does about the voters.

Rhubarbs is right. Biden is a wonderful guy, but he talks way too much and a lot of the time some things he says are extremely goofy.

Why does Obama need a VP candidate who has never attracted any votes outside a tiny Eastern state that will vote Dem no matter what, makes him look even more like a green kid than he does already, and will likely create endless distractions with gaffes?