Hagel would ‘consider’ joining Democratic ticket

In late March, Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), the co-chairman of John McCain’s 2000 presidential campaign, raised a few eyebrows when he said he hadn’t endorsed McCain this year, and didn’t have any plans to do so. “When I endorse someone, or when I work for someone, or commit to someone, I want to be behind that person in every way I can,” Hagel said. “I’ve obviously got some differences with John on the Iraq war. That’s no secret. I want to understand a little more about foreign policy, where he’d want to go.”

While conceding different visions of foreign policy, though, Hagel added that his discomfort with McCain “certainly doesn’t put me in Obama or Clinton’s camp.”

That seemed like a pretty clear indication of Hagel’s state of mind. He’s a conservative Republican who agrees with McCain in general, but rejects McCain’s entire foreign policy worldview. That hardly makes him sympathetic to the campaign of a left-leaning Dem.

And yet, the rumor mill keeps churning. This won’t help.

Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel said Friday he would consider serving as Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s running mate if asked, but he doesn’t expect to be on any ticket.

Hagel’s vocal criticism of the Bush administration since the 2003 invasion of Iraq has touched off speculation that if Obama were to pick a Republican running mate, it might be Hagel. Hagel said in an interview with The Associated Press that after devoting much of his life to his country — in the Senate and the U.S. Army — he would have to consider any offer.

“If it would occur, I would have to think about it,” Hagel said. “I think anybody, anybody would have to consider it. Doesn’t mean you’d do it, doesn’t mean you’d accept it, could be too many gaps there, but you’d have to consider it, it’s the only thing you could do. Why wouldn’t you?”

This strikes me as wildly far-fetched. Hagel has been terrific on the war, and has been an articulate critic of the Bush/McCain foreign policy. Dick Cheney loathes Hagel, which makes me like him even more. If a President Obama were to make Hagel the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, it’d be fine with me.

But talk of an Obama-Hagel ticket strikes me as misplaced.

Mike Madden had a good piece in Salon the other day about Hagel, how he’d become a McCain circa ’00 maverick, and what he might bring to a national ticket.

While Hagel is a long shot for the job, what seems to be stirring some interest in him is less a question of electoral math than of political metaphysics. Running with a Republican would reinforce the message that Obama is serious about changing the way things are done in Washington, and that he really does aim to move the country past the partisan battles of the last couple of decades. At the same time, Hagel’s very public split with Bush and the rest of the GOP on the war in Iraq bolsters Obama’s case about foreign policy — that the administration has America on the wrong track vis-à-vis the rest of the world.

But Hagel may be a more attractive candidate in theory than in reality. The buzz about him seems to overlook the fact that he is, despite how much he may like to criticize his own party, a conservative Republican, especially on issues that don’t involve foreign affairs. Politics, the saying goes, stops at the water’s edge. So might the Obama-Hagel ticket.

If we start and end the analysis at foreign policy, Hagel would be a reasonable choice. Indeed, Hagel probably wouldn’t even be a Republican. But on practically everything else, Hagel isn’t just conservative, he’s voted with Bush across the board. Over the course of his career, Hagel has earned an 85% rating from the American Conservative Union, which makes him among the chamber’s most conservative members of the last decade.

Hagel and Obama, in other words, disagree about almost everything. It’s not exactly a recipe for a ticket, no matter how much they agree on Iraq.

Sam Stein recently noted that Hagel is “quickly becoming Barack Obama’s answer to Joe Lieberman.”

If Hagel wants to fill that role, I’d be thrilled. In fact, Hagel certainly seems estranged from his party, and he has publicly suggested that he can no longer relate to today’s GOP.

But before anyone gets carried away with VP talk, maybe Hagel could, I don’t know, endorse Obama? It’d be a helpful start.

His wife has donated money to the Obama campaign.

But, NO Hagel, please, on the ticket. We have more than a few REAL Dems to run with Obama.

Let Hagel serve in the Obama cabinet.

  • It would be a real tragedy to see Chuck Hagel become another Joe Liberman. We already have enough party hacks in government.

  • A lot of us still worry about Obama’s religiousity. Does he support science and civil rights when it conflicts with his religious ideology? Does he support the constitution except for the part about not establishing a religion? The last thing we need is a social conservative on the ticket.

  • Hagel would be in a strong position to run for president as a Republican next election. I can’t see him ever doing this because it would destroy that option.

  • From one concerned citizen of U.S.A,

    Dear American Voters, reporters, media. professionals, political parties, and presidential Nominees,

    Hon. Senator McCain and Obama, besides each having many attributes and characteristics.
    The critical differences between the two of these presidential presumptive nominees in my opinion are as under:

    1. Presidential “Temperament and Caliber”.
    2. Little Washington “insider Versus outsider” experience.
    3. “Vision and mission” for our nation future rather than past.
    4. American policies, ” first U.S.A Centric” than any other country [ ies ] centric.

    In my professional opinion Senator Obama leads in all above qualities and attributes.

    Senator Obama and his administration along with congress will address all the critical current and future domestic and foreign issues, challenges, and opportunities in coming years.

    Let us remember and recite following concepts:

    ” Family, Friends, Fellows, Faith, Funds, Foundation [s], Fun, with Freedom & Fairness and without Fear, Favor, & Failure” . It applies to every citizen of our Greatgrand Nation.

    Please stay involved, stay engaged, and stay informed. Please do not allow any seduction, deception, and or confusion by some partisan media and leaders effect your vote [ Psychological Terrorism ]..

    Yours truly,

    COL. [retd] A.M.Khajawall
    Disabled American Veteran
    Forensic psychiatrist, Las Vegas

    PS: Please talk about the ” Presidential Temperament And Caliber ” of our presumptive presidential Nominees. We do talk about the “Judicial Temperament” of our Supreme Court Justices nominees and so far we have failed to talk about the ” Presidential Temperament ” of our presumptive presidential nominees. The ” Presidential Temperament ” is the ultimate and in my opinion only requirement of our president as that effects every living soul here and around the world.

    Thanks again.

  • Fuck Hagel and everyone else with an R after their name. We can’t even trust our Democrats how in the hell can we trust a Republican.

  • Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)
    Rated 100% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-life stance (190 members). (Dec 2006)
    Voted NO on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes. (Jun 2002)
    Voted YES on loosening restrictions on cell phone wiretapping. (Oct 2001)
    Rated 0% by the HRC, indicating an anti-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006)
    Rated 11% by the NAACP, indicating an anti-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)
    Voted NO on repealing tax subsidy for companies which move US jobs offshore. (Mar 2005)
    Voted YES on reforming bankruptcy to include means-testing & restrictions. (Mar 2005)
    Voted YES on restricting rules on personal bankruptcy. (Jul 2001)
    Rated 87% by the US COC, indicating a pro-business voting record. (Dec 2003)
    Voted NO on reinstating $1.15 billion funding for the COPS Program. (Mar 2007)
    Voted NO on $1.15 billion per year to continue the COPS program. (May 1999)
    Voted NO on shifting $11B from corporate tax loopholes to education. (Mar 2005)
    Voted NO on making oil-producing and exporting cartels illegal. (Jun 2007)
    Voted NO on factoring global warming into federal project planning. (May 2007)
    Voted NO on including oil & gas smokestacks in mercury regulations. (Sep 2005)
    Rated 100% by the Christian Coalition: a pro-family voting record. (Dec 2003)
    Voted YES on requiring photo ID to vote in federal elections. (Jul 2007)
    Voted NO on adding 2 to 4 million children to SCHIP eligibility. (Nov 2007)
    Voted YES on building a fence along the Mexican border. (Sep 2006)
    Rated 22% by the ARA, indicating an anti-senior voting record. (Dec 2003)
    Fund welfare via churches & block grants to states. (Nov 2002)

    Here’s more.

  • If Obama wants an ex-Republican, why not Lincoln Chaffee? I wouldn’t make him my first, second, or third choice only because we have a lot of good people out there — and mostly because I want him back in the Senate as a Democrat once Obama appoints Sheldon Whitehouse as AG. (A much better choice than Edwards — take a look at him.)

  • I like Hagel a lot, but there’s no way he should be on the ticket.

    Or considered for Defense Sec’y, either. That only reinforces the bullshit notion that Republicans are better suited to foreign policy issues.

  • Sen. Chuck Hagel got his Senate seat initially by having his own company’s computerized voting machines “count the votes.” Not even a bogus paper trail. It was “trust Chuck.” Republicans have been stealing elections electronically since Chuck Hagel started back in 1996. A simple web search will yield all sorts of information about GOP electronic election theft. 2004 was the high point: seven million Kerry votes were electronically flipped in Bush votes on Election Night.

  • Thanks Danp for laying out all the reasons Hagel is NOT a viable candidate for Democratic VP. You beat me to it. 😉

    The war in Iraq is the only thing I respect about Chuck Hagel. He is a fine man in that regard. The rest of his positions..disgusting.

  • he really does aim to move the country past the partisan battles of the last couple of decades

    First, did he notice that the source of those partisan battles is the Republican fascist attacks. And I’m wondering how Obama can do any more than the Democrats who have been giving the Republicans everything they want anyway even after we got a majority.

    Fake issue.

  • I’m with you, Dale. While do the weak kneed Dems always have to be bipartisan while the Rethugs, even in the majority, stick it to them? I hope to see NO MORE Rethugs in the executive branch. And Dems with the balls to act like Dems would be a plus.

  • “the message that Obama is serious about changing the way things are done in Washington…”

    Hello!!!!!

    Obama just showed us all yesterday with his support for the FISA “compromise,” (and the immunity for the telecoms which will result from the “compromise.”) that he is, in fact, not serious about changing the way things are done in Washington.

    I’ll vote for him, or more precisely against McCain, but I am no longer fooled by that bullshit; and Mr Benen should not be either.

  • Veep Discussion

    A June 23 Newsweek article notes that three senators are interested in the Secretary of State position in an Obama administration: John Kerry, Christopher Dodd, and Joe Biden.
    All serve on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden as Chairman.

    Rarely have we seen more qualified candidates, and ones with such language skills. Kerry speaks fluent French, Dodd speaks fluent Spanish, and Biden speaks effluent English.

    homer http://www.altara.blogspot.com

  • Please Google Chuck Hagel, ES&S, or Chuck Hagel, American Information Systems, or Chuck Hagel, Election Systems & Software.

    More disturbing still than the idea that this is the second presidential election in a row that has raised a trial balloon of putting a Republican on as running mate for a Democrat (This was raised in 2004 as the possibility of Kerry choosing McCain, but abandoned after the public rebuked that idea) — but yet more disturbing is that a guy who had up to $5 million in ownership of the nation’s biggest voting machine company, who had been on its board of directors and was its CEO up until 2 weeks before announcing his run for Senate, would even be discussed as a potential running mate for anyone without saying, in the same breath, “that is, if you want the voting machine industry in bed with the candidate.”

    Oh, and by the way, look hard for Chuck Hagel’s disclosure of his position as CEO of the voting machine company (which counted about 80 % of his own votes) — on his personal financial disclosure documents. He failed to disclose it.

    Details, citations here:
    http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-3.pdf

    Information on the tamper-friendly nature of the machines made by the Hagel-related company:
    http://www.bbvdocs.org/ESS/EVEREST-ESS.pdf

    Bev Harris
    Founder – Black Box Voting
    http://www.blackboxvoting.org

  • Comments are closed.