And, not a homophobe.

We'll know who Obama is considering for his VP when a VP is announced, and not before.  I've seen so many of these diaries on why Obama must not choose Nunn (/Hagel/Webb/whoever)--but it's only speculation that Nunn is even in consideration, nevermind on the short list.

Why are we criticizing Sen. Obama for a decision he hasn't yet made on the basis of unsubstantiated, hypothetical rumor and speculation?

Please note what Obama has said about his VP selection process:

Next time you hear from me about the vice presidential selection process will be when I have selected a vice president. And if you hear second hand accounts, rumors, gossip about the selection process, you can take it from me that it is wrong because we're not gonna be talking about it in the press

I'm honored to be front paged - Thanks!

This is exactly right.  Sam Nunn is a non-starter for me.  The man is a giant homophobe (although I hear he's moderated that view - somewhat) and wrong on too many issues to count.  Yes, he's smart, educated and experienced, but that doesn't change the fact that he's also wrong.

For me, this is no better than Chuck Hagel.  Nunn did everything he could to block Bill Clinton from making real change in 1990's, and in my view, he's one of the primary reasons we didn't get as much change then as we could have. He's no different than Lieberman or that nut Zell Miller. I have a mini seizure every time I have to drive past the Sam Nunn federal building in Atlanta.

Obama/Clinton

McCain will pick Romney, unless he still needs to placate the right.  But isn't Sen. Hutchinson at least moderately pro-choice?

I'm a bit suprised that Jerome doesn't think Sabelius is still in the running.  Granted that McCaskill was an early Obama supporter and a staunch defender of Obama during the Rev. Wright flap, she's a possibility.

Tim Kaine will get slaughtered on taxes.  Yes what he did was absolutely the right thing to do, but he makes it too easy for the GOP to paint the ticket as "tax and spend."

I agree that Sam Nunn would be an awful choice, but Sen. Bayh would likely hand his seat over to a Republican if Obama wins.  Not the best way
to start an Obama administration.

Anyone else for Clinton?  She just makes the most sense right now.

Nunn not even in the top five....

Off-topic(not meant to hijack) but a MUST read on voter fraud 2004 Ohio from
Bradblog

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6189

The pundimwits where talking about Nunn for VP long before Obama even secured the nomination. It's entirely THEIR speculation.

And it's entirely concern trolling by the same old gaggle of bitter dead-enders and McTrolls to attack Obama for choosing him when he hasn't done so.

S is not short for anything, and Truman did not use a period after it.  Hence, one ought not to write,

"Harry S. Truman."

Instead, one ought to write,

"Harry S Truman."

You can easily create a list about Obama that would make any real Democrat angry; so, it doesn't really matter who Obama picks for a running mate.

No matter who wins, McSame or Nobama, we get stuck with a corporate candidate and thus, no real change on any major issue that matters to Americans.

suggesting Nunn is a centrist. As a raging moderate myself, I object to having the likes of Sam Nunn associated with my politics. Nunn is a Republican in Dem's clothing; at least Alabama's Richard Shelby had the integrity to change parties.

True centrists refuse to be "packaged"....you generally can't predict all of their positions, because they think each issue through individually, without knee-jerk reactions. It can be a Bob Graham, who was one of the 23 Senators to oppose the Iraq war resolution. Or a Joe Lieberman who leads on climate change...a Bob Casey who is pro-life, a Chuck Robb who (one of 14 Senators) votes against DOMA. And finally, John Warner, who though right of center, made it his mission to keep Ollie North out of his beloved Senate.

More often than not, these types never make it to the leadership positions, because they get black-balled by one of the interest groups they have antagonized. But they are generally thinkers, who would rather be true to their convictions than attempt to be "all things to all people".

Again, I'd never call Sam Nunn a centrist.

Great diary and very appropriate.

We all get to express our opinions so that -- if this is truly a bottom-up campaign -- then the upper levels get to hear what's being thought down below. And perhaps they'll listen.

Whether it's speculation or leaks or actual reports does not make a bit of difference -- what's important is that the campaign hear what supporters are thinking.

Choosing Nunn or Hagel or others of that homophobic and non-progressive strain would be a deal breaker for me. I would not support such a ticket. I've worked long and hard in the gay movement and with other groups and would not be at all happy to see a homophobe in the VP spot on a Democratic ticket.

I would think the one thing the media and even casual observers of the election thus far would realize, is that every time someone acts as though they have insight into the thinking of the Obama campaign - they are usually showing that they have no idea. I have seen nothing to suggest that Obama is considering Nunn.

Sam Nunn voted for Clarence Thomas.

I don't believe Nunn is in the running for VP and the diarist is right on that it reminds everyone of the Dukakis-Bentson ticket. I believe that Evan Bayh is the front-runner for VP. Democrats almost always pick a senator as the VP nominee (The exceptions in the last 60 years -Shriver as a replacement to Senator Eagleton (72) and Ferraro because there were no female Democratic senators (84))

From what I've heard from prominent Obama supporters, it's unlikely that Obama will choose a woman as the VP nominee. There is a feeling that there needs to be at least one white male on the ticket. If he does pick a woman, it will be Clinton, but Obama will not choose Clinton because Bill Clinton is too much trouble. (Actually, Bill Clinton never was a good politician and is more of a policy wonk - that's why he lost Congress and got impeached).

Obama will go with the "reach out" route. That's his style. He will also not go with a one-termer unless that person has other compelling government service experience.

McCain will respond to Obama's pick. He may go with a woman if Obama does not pick a woman. However, I don't think McCain will choose Hutchinson. He is more likely to go with a governor or former cabinet member. However, Republicans have strong resistance to female candidates, so from McCain's point of view, he'll only pick a woman if he needs to take a big gamble like what Mondale did. (But McCain is personally intrigued with the idea of picking a woman)

I think the leading VP candidates on the GOP side are Romney, Huckabee or some woman we haven't heard about, yet.

In the end, I don't expect Obama to pick Nunn as a VP; I believe that Obama is smarter than that.

But there's absolutely nothing wrong with everyone raising their voices to let Obama know just what a mistake such a pick would be. Believe it or not, not all pundits on TV just make stuff up. Some of them actually have sources within campaigns, so it's pretty hard not to believe that at some level Obama is considering Nunn -- indeed, at some level Obama would be a fool not to consider it, given the possibility of putting Georgia into play.

But he'd be a worse fool to actually make that pick, given the animosity such a pick would engender. Like many others, I would actually prefer 4 years of McSame to the possibility of any years/months/days of Sam Nunn.