Maybe, maybe not. It all depends on whether Jill Long Thompson (D) can defeat the Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) in November.

If she does (and it's not looking good), then she'd get to appoint the Senate replacement for Vice President Bayh.

It's not entirely clear to me what kind of VP either Obama or McCain is looking for. For better or worse, Cheney's tenure has shown the benefits to an administration of having a VP who can manage a large portfolio on their own (though to be fair, Gore actually started the trend.)

Obama has shown he has real managerial skills in picking the right people for his campaign positions and keeping them focused, but what kind of VP is he looking for--somebody to go to funerals and send the fruit baskets or somebody to exercise real authority in shaping policy? Anybody have insights?

McCain has shown much less acumen in managing his campaign, which is something to bear in mind when deciding whom to vote for. Whether McCain's pick is a strong policy wonk (as many mistakenly perceive Rice) or a glad-hander (like Huckabee) would probably have a much greater impact on his eventual administration's operations than Obama's VP choice would, because Obama seems more likely to pick a strong, competent cabinet and then to manage it effectively on his own.

I have no idea if the respondents to your survey represent Democrats or even the Democratic base, but it's interesting that there's not a single veep candidate who gets more than 11%. There's no fave coming in, which one can interpret as good or bad news.

Good if you think that there will be no constituency badly flustered by a snub (cough Hillary cough).

Bad if you consider that the vast majority will feel snubbed.

I for one plan to vote McCain if Obama doesn't go Sebelius. I mean, that's obvious.

Whether McCain's pick is a strong policy wonk (as many mistakenly perceive Rice)

Well, I hardly consider Rice a "policy wonk" (at least not a very "strong" one), but I've been placing my bets that she'll be McCain's pick because I think the campaign would believe that it could shave off a few points of African-American or woman voters, and inoculate it against charges of racism in their anti-Obama ads during the rest of the election season. Any time they ran something slimy, they could point to their VP selection and say they're not racist or sexist.

It could sure go a long way toward burnishing McCain's tarnished "moderate" image with people who may not have been paying close attention.

I don't necessarily think it would be a winning tactic, but for strategists who live and die by identity politics like the GOP's, I can see how it would appeal.

Kaine on Rose:

Kaine: Keep Roe, Hussein Needed to Go ... In an hour-long interview with PBS's Charlie Rose Wednesday, Virginia Governor Tim Kaine outlined his views on national and international matters including abortion and the war in Iraq. ... While saying that he supports Roe and that he does not want to criminalize abortion, Kaine voiced support for three abortion restrictions. ... Governor Kaine also discussed the 2003 U. S. invasion of Iraq, describing the Bush administration's case for military intervention as "very, very flimsy" and "maneuvering the vote in Congress around an election cycle." Kaine said he agreed with the Bush administration that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein should be ousted but disagreed with the U.S.-led invasion.

Of course, that's what he's saying now. Two strikes, so far as I'm concerned.

Here's a third:

Kaine: Lieberman for President ... But before everyone gets ready to anoint Tim Kaine as Obama's VP, consider this startling fact, which has some of the liberal blogs up in arms: Tim Kaine endorsed Joe Lieberman for president in 2004—over both John Edwards and John Kerry. Here's what Kaine said then, according to a story in the Richmond Times-Dispatch: "Joe's record as a state official and senator shows he has the qualities necessary to lead our nation, strengthen our economy and promote a safer world," Kaine said. "Joe is the right person to revive the Harry Truman wing of the Democratic Party, which has traditionally been strong for national defense, strong for the economy and strong for equal opportunity."

That's the Joe Lieberman of 2004 -- the post-invasion, Bush-hugging, hell-bent for Iraqi devastation Joe Lieberman who's gone on to endorse John McCain -- he's endorsing there.

Favoring (more) restrictions on abortion. Supportive of regime change but lacksadasical about the problems of actually effecting said change. And someone who thought (like the perenially-wrong New Republic) that Joe Lieberman would be a great choice for the Democratic party as president.

But he apparently talks real good to Charlie Rose (the same guy who chuckled at Thomas Friedman's "Suck on this" speech back in 2003).

Yeah, that was snark upthread. Since it's mid-August, we focus intently on the veep pick; in October we'll barely care.

<h2>Well, the GOP side of this is completely blown out of the water. I think I should get a half point for picking Condi Rice, though.</h2>