People have just the wrong idea about the McCain Campaign.  Sure, he may have run an ad comparing Barack Obama, a President of the Harvard Law Review and United States Senator, to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton that received major play nationally.  And then I guess you could say he was running ads cross-cutting Obama’s face right next to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about his claim to hold talks without precondition.  And true, this was also after the McCain Campaign had sent out a pledge to “run a respectful campaign focused on the issues and values that are important to the American people.”  But to be fair, Barack Obama did refuse to hold ten Town Hall Meetings with McCain, which you have to admit, makes it all ok.  After all, when you refuse to make a majority of the general campaign pandering to the style of debate that your opponent has excelled in, you’re officially giving your tacit approval to any and all kinds of horrible slimes that may happen afterwards.

Let me be blunt, though.  John McCain doesn’t WANT to ask disgusting, irrelevant and fearmongering questions about Obama’s personal life and past associations.  He doesn’t WANT to rile up his supporters until they’re screaming things like “Terrorist!” and “Kill him!” in the crowd towards Obama.  Do you think McCain WANTS to set up Robo Calls that attempt to link Obama with Bill Ayers?  Of course not.  McCain is a war hero, a good and loyal American who thinks that this sort of discourse is something the American public will see through.  The only problem is… Obama’s -making- him do this.  Obama knows how badly John McCain wants to be president!  But he just doesn’t care, all he wants to do is talk and talk about himself and how he’d “change the country” or whatever it is those big celebrities that grew up with a single mother on food stamps talk about!  John McCain had no choice!  But still, Obama keeps leading!  Now, perhaps there’s a few out there thinking “I’m not sure, he’s keeping that muslim terrorist angle alive pretty well, I’m fairly sure there’s nothing lower that he could do to him…unless…”

Stop right there.  John McCain said very clearly, over and over again, that Reverend Wright is not an issue in this campaign, and he believes that Barack Obama does not share his pastor’s views.  Well… that is, until the polls… I mean, until Congressman Lewis FORCED THEM to reconsider it by asking them to be wary of how their words were riling up their supporte– I mean – by calling all of them dirty racists.  What else could the McCain Campaign do?

Really, the whole tragedy comes down to how much McCain has had to endure in low poll numbers while trying to just be President of the United States.  And really, at the end of the day my friends, what’s more important than winning?

A narrative of Change vs. More of the Same.
A narrative of a life of service and experience.
A race driven by the issue of Character from the GOP Candidate.
A race driven by the issue of Economy from the Democratic Candidate.
An older war veteran attacked as out of touch.
A young charismatic attacked as dangerous.
A consistent lead by the Democratic Candidate, sometimes slim, sometimes up to double digits.
Accusations of the media being in the tank as the last weeks approach.
A tightening of the numbers in the homestretch.

The more things change, the more things stay the same?

Sometimes I usually write out a post, then I figure out what the title’s going to be.  This one wrote itself.  From the Dow Index, to housing prices, to the level of discourse in politics, nearly every conceivable area where high is good, has tanked.  I’m not an economist, nor a real estate agent, so I can’t speak to the first two, but the entire scorched-earch politics lately have been a bit overwhelming.  FactCheck and PolitiFact and all of them are good in their own right, but there’s literally a lack of serious reporting on issues that at first glance seem at least more important than asking us if - and I’m completely serious here – falling oil prices are a good thing.  When you ignore something, you’re ceding it in these news cycles.  Thus, I’d like to give a shot at looking at some of the raised issues, and why they do/don’t matter. 

I’ve already given my thoughts on the Ayers deal, and more generally the guilt by association card isn’t sticking because it’s never stuck.  It’s red meat for the base, and it always has been.  Anyone who tells you McCain has to make undecided voters scared, I’d like to draw your attention to the economy.  It’s only been the story for nearly the past month, and the biggest issue on voters minds.  If there’s one thing you can’t change, is someone’s attention on the scariest thing around.  In 2000, we didn’t know what we were scared of.  We were scared of crazed mothers stampeding for Tickle Me Elmo toys in department stores, we were scared of teenagers in our public schools.  The results reflected it, mostly revolving around who we liked.  In 2004, we were scared of terrorism.  As much as John Kerry wanted us to be scared about the economy, didn’t happen.  And he didn’t make the majority of Americans comfortable with being the one to handle terrorism.  In 2008, we’re scared of the economy.  That’s just how it is, and as much as John McCain wants to make us scared of terrorism again, it’s not going to happen.  When you’ve got a shotgun leveled at your head, someone telling you there might be a tornado coming isn’t your first priority.  More importantly, if that person starts getting louder and louder, you’re less likely to even take them seriously anymore, since they’re distracting you from the goddamn shotgun.  Sarah Palin talking to me about abortion right now is quite possibly the most surreal thing I could think of during a campaign with everything going on.

Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac I think does need to be dealt with, though.  Here’s the basic layout for the claims for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as a general cudgel towards the Democratic Party:

1)  Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are institutions which  were conceived and initiated by Democrats.  
2)  Democrats supported these institutions, and rejected regulations on these institutions.
3)  These institutions were encouraged to loan to people who generally couldn’t pay them back.

Now here’s where it gets tricky, with point number 4.

4)  These loans were what caused the massive amounts of debt, and put us in this credit crisis.

This is where we get to a huge issue.  What actually caused the crisis, and what were the mitigating factors?  It’s actually a really scary case when you look at it.  Roughly 50% of mortgages were backed by Fannie and Freddie.  Democrats HAVE generally resisted most calls to regulate it, which could potentially have averted this level of a disaster.  But it begs the question… who backs the other 50%?  Welcome to the rest of the private loan industry, which are protected from regulations by… you guessed it, Republicans.  The way it’s played out is similar to carving out portions of the same overall popular idea of the past two decades in particular, the Ownership Society.  While at first glance this looks like a wash, it’s still fairly prudent to note that the Republicans had the Legislative and Executive branches (the Judiciary to an extent as well) locked up for roughly 6 years.  If they had actually felt as strongly as they do now about regulation, it’s strange that nothing was able to get done.  After being in power for that long, and then blaming the minority party for not taking action… it rings hollow.

While there’s more than enough blame to go around, the two major sins of both parties were buying into the idea of this Ownership Society at any costs, and being too willing to “roll the dice” on Fannie and Freddie for the Democrats, and the misguided fervor from Republicans that the free market would take care of everything.  The additional issue for the Republicans comes from being in power for 6 of the last 8 years and simply not doing anything concrete for either side.

From the individual campaigns, it’s just hazy.  McCain and Obama sent letters warning about the problem… great.  Without the ability to really explain economic plans to the public at large, the issue generally becomes who’s the best prepared to handle the situation, who has the best priorities, and who has the best judgment.  Or at least two out of three.

We have a 6-8 point lead by Obama nationally, he’s leading nearly every state that had the slightest hint of not being a GOP stronghold (and some that are).  According to FiveThirtyEight, and slowly bringing up the rear, RCP, the entire electoral map has been shifting inexorably like a glacier to over 300 potential electoral votes for Obama since the credit crisis hit the stock market and the bailouts began.

The automatic, last-ditch response of McCain and the RNC seems to be an effort to make up for lack of supporters by making their existing supporters more violent and angry.  While that’s not doing anything for me but lowering my opinion of the Republican base, as will be made quite clear later, more importantly it throws two scary possibilities into the mix, which may be the two ways Obama is not elected President in November:

1)  Attempting to turn Obama into not just a person who is different in policy or philsophy, but painting him as a black, terrorist in the minds of fringe voters could easily prompt a violent attack, potentially a murder or assassination.  It plays precisely into the viral e-mails claiming he’s a muslim as well, which makes it doubly dangerous.  If that happened, the blood is on McCain/Palin as far as I’m concerned for refusing to see the warning signs and continuing to reinforce their dangerously false claims, buffered by countless spam e-mails, all in a last-ditch effort to win.  This is beyond irresponsible, this is sickening.  I’ve never seen anything like it.

2)  There might not even be an election if the polls remain where they are, or the signs of a serious depression hit suddenly.  After all, due to our handy-dandy National Security Presidential Directive 51 mentioned in previous posts, the authority to handle duties in the event of an economic crisis is… whatever current administration is in place, granting power to the executive and his hand-picked assistants exclusively to “ensure the continuity of Constitutional government.”  Who determines whether we’re in such a situation to enable it?  Why, the executive of course.

I’m not saying this for people to go crazy and start breaking windows.  I’m saying this out of concern from what I’ve seen.  As opposed to virulent yet vague right-wing attacks I’ve noticed, it has nothing to do with their associations and vague business deals to get elected.  It has to do with disturbing ACTIONS that both this Administration, and the McCain Campaign have done without oversight, constitutional protection, or basic human decency.  If either of those two events come to pass, it would be a tragic day for everyone who calls themselves an American.  Hopefully they’ll wake up soon, and get back to thinking not just reasonably, but like human beings.

As was done previously for Obama’s VP pick, going to do the same ranking for McCain’s regarding the six factors. The levels are the same as before:

Very Low = Horrible public perception, a clear weakness. Few that will defend it.
Low = Poor public perception, not a make or break.
Hazy = No visible public perception, either due to lack of reporting, or contradictory reporting.
High = Good public perception, what should normally be expected.
Very High = Excellent public perception, a strong selling point. Even your opponent recognizes it.

Republican Nominee John McCain

Competence – Very High.  The somewhat nebulous nature of things that McCain has accomplished hasn’t really been turned into a central issue, but the amount of time he’s been a Senator coupled with his time captured in North Vietnam is a strength.  Critics could say he was incompetent in being shot down, but that ability isn’t measured as President.  What counts more than anything else regarding his military history is the perceived mental toughness in enduring psychological and physical torture while a prisoner of war.
Diplomacy – High.  Despite his feints to the right on certain issues, his Maverick image and generally good reputation prior to the election among Democrats and Independents bolsters the idea that he’s been willing to extend across the aisle to get things done.  What directly contradicts that is his rigid stance overseas and the seeming adoption of the classic conservative dismissal of international diplomacy and organizations.  This creates a percieved split in diplomacy between domestic and foreign affairs.  The reason this is High instead of Hazy simply has to do with the general public perception that while diplomacy in foreign affairs is important, the strength of his bi-partisan history domestically doesn’t make it an even match.
Judgment – Very Low. While Obama’s policy positions are fairly solid and public opinion has actually swerved to meet -him- in recent years, McCain has the unenviable task of straddling traditional and now unpopular conservative ideas alongside the image of a progressive energy policy which the gas crisis and war fatigue have turned to a political necessity. The Bush Administration has been a double-whammy to the Republican Nominee, pulling McCain along with their unpopular policy decisions during the presidency, and now doing a 180 turn to meet Obama’s policy on key issues such as a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq, in addition to direct negotiations with Iran.
Experience - Very High. McCain has had military experience including combat and an incredible story, alongside a 20+ year senate career with few scandals.  The Nothing has been focused on regarding a corrupt angle yet, though dissatisfaction with the current direction hammers his judgment as seen above.
Honesty – High. Prior to the election it was nearly stratospheric, but it’s impossible to be universally thought of as honest or at least non-contradictory in a modern political campaign. Feeling the need to shore up a normally reliable conservative base has forced numerous qualifying statements on policy issues when then sharing a conservative policy view with independents, and vice versa.
Charm – Hazy.  McCain can be charming, funny, and engaging in reasoned debates and interviews, most recently shown at the Saddleback conference.  He swerves between “lackluster” and “train wreck” in prepared speeches and campaign appearances.  I do believe the presidential debates will be much closer than some might imagine, though.  The key will be to make up for more than his share of just painfully bad moments on the trail, many of them when he needs it least. People can gravitate towards a loveable “loser” just as easily as the All-Star, but even on that front he has yet another double-whammy of a wife more than significantly younger than him, as well as her being extravagantly wealthy.  Those shouldn’t be an issue in and of themselves, but it will keep people from feeling sorry for him, and tie his hands as far as attacks go on Sen. Obama.

As everyone knows by now, McCain picked Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to be his Vice President.  It’s her turn up now to see how she matches up.

Competence – Hazy.  For the same reason Barack Obama’s hazy.  Both have a clear grasp of government and early, popular successes… but in a relatively short timeframe there’s few specific examples of either handling a looming situation or responding to a crisis.
Diplomacy – Low.  While working with minority Democrats in Alaska’s State Legislature to push through a needed ethics bill, she simultaneously is an ardent supporter of creationism, is a life-long member of the NRA, and is completely against abortion in any form.  Without any foreign experience to speak of other than a potential gas pipeline deal through Canada, without any particular examples of bi-partisan compromise, all in addition to a staunchly conservative view, reaching across the aisle doesn’t look overly reasonable at this time.
Judgment – Hazy.  Ironically, Palin is able to separate herself from the conservative missteps much more easily than McCain ever could, and could easily push up to a “high” rating if she plays her cards right.  Being under investigation for the firing of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan is already a story, so the outcome of that is a huge unknown still.  She could take a fall in that respect as quickly as she could rise.
Experience – Very Low.  This is a huge issue, and one that has wreaked havoc on the McCain Campaign’s message of experience.  The mayor of a town with roughly 10,000 citizens, then a 20-month Governor of Alaska as a heartbeat away from the Presidency.  There’s been a noticable shift in the rhetoric since then, with Mike Huckabee in particular claiming one month as a Governor is worth 10 years as a Senator, and attempting to play up McCain’s military “executive” history to bolster him up as well with this new definition of experience.  The problem is how to make the now separate, potentially valid arguments mesh into a coherent rebranding of the ticket without losing the attention or trust of the voters.
Honesty - High.  As an outsider, she’ll naturally start out high, and her history as a reformer within her own party is more than likely to solidify her place there throughout.  Regardless of any potential missteps or scandals, I’d be extremely surprised if there was any hit to her personal credibility.
Charm – High.  Whether this hits Very High down the line will have to do with her speeches, but I think with appropriate coaching she can hold her own against Biden as long as she doesn’t try too hard.  The political reality is that she is in a unique, and excellent position to hammer away at the Obama/Biden ticket and know any attacks in response will have to be muted to avoid alienating potential undecideds.  If she can strike a chord of some of the stereotypical conservative values through her life while mixing in red meat attacks for the base, McCain might have an attack submarine to counter Biden.

This is clearly reported across the media as an X-factor decision other than the pointed appeals to conservatives and women, but it’s not as much of a stretch as people think.  The two main factors for our relevance he should be looking to improve are his Charm and Judgment, two of his only weaknesses in an otherwise solid candidacy.  If Sarah Palin is as an effective speaker and likeable person as the McCain campaign hopes, they can close the gap and more importantly get people excited about McCain again.  Enthusiasm could be a back-breaker for the Republican nominee, and they need to make up that difference.  Judgment will always be an uphill slog in this political climate no matter who he picks, but as mentioned, an outsider and overall unknown has the best shot to break away with credibility for a new direction.  It’s a risky pick, but it could potentially be a homerun if those two factors skyrocket.

I’ll have the VP ranking up soon for McCain’s pick of virtual stranger, 20-month Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for his running mate, but I had to mention this beforehand:

Republican strategist Karl Rove said on Face The Nation Sunday that he expects presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama to choose a running mate based on political calculations, not the person’s readiness for the job.

“I think he’s going to make an intensely political choice, not a governing choice,” Rove said. “He’s going to view this through the prism of a candidate, not through the prism of president; that is to say, he’s going to pick somebody that he thinks will on the margin help him in a state like Indiana or Missouri or Virginia. He’s not going to be thinking big and broad about the responsibilities of president.”

Rove singled out Virginia governor Tim Kaine, also a Face The Nation guest, as an example of such a pick.

“With all due respect again to Governor Kaine, he’s been a governor for three years, he’s been able but undistinguished,” Rove said. “I don’t think people could really name a big, important thing that he’s done. He was mayor of the 105th largest city in America.”

Rove continued: “So if he were to pick Governor Kaine, it would be an intensely political choice where he said, `You know what? I’m really not, first and foremost, concerned with, is this person capable of being president of the United States? What I’m concerned about is, can he bring me the electoral votes of the state of Virginia, the 13 electoral votes in Virginia?’”

In the words of Larry the Cable Guy… I don’t care who you are, that’s funny right there.

There were countless accurate and uplifting moments in the 2008 Democratic National Convention, most of which attempted to turn a majority of McCain’s talking points back in on him with yet-to-be-known results.  However, in between the Clintons, Biden, Michelle, John Kerry, the straight-talking Barney Smith and even the loveable magical leprechaun Dennis Kucinich, (not to mention that Obama guy) there was a light, common enough thread until the end to seem intentional:  Abraham Lincoln.

First there were the references by both Senators Bob Casey and Richard (Dick) Durbin to the classic Lincoln line of the “better angels of our nature,” from his inaugural speech.  By itself, that could seem more of a casual if odd coincidence, since Theresa Heinz-Kerry referenced the same during the 2004 Convention.  But previous to Durbin’s repeating of Lincoln’s line, Al Gore had made a much more strident comparison:

“A century and a half ago, when America faced our greatest trial, the end of one era gave birth to another,” Gore said as the sun was setting on the top seats of Invesco Field’s east stands.

“The candidate who emerged victorious in that election is now regarded by most historians as our greatest president.

“Before he entered the White House, Abraham Lincoln’s experience in elective office consisted of eight years in his state legislature in Springfield, Ill., and one term in Congress during which he showed the courage and wisdom to oppose the invasion of another country that was popular when it started but later condemned by history.”

As a direct comparison… I dislike political analogies across the board, and this is no different.  I -will- say, however, that it does make an accurate point about the necessity of experience of the Commander in Chief in comparison to the necessity of his judgment, which I would argue was an intentional, key point of the convention.  The issue though is whether the Lincoln comments will be taken as the valid bolstering of Obama’s Experience/Judgment argument, or twisted into another attack of arrogance.  That’s the current wrangling that the campaigns have to win.

From ridiculing withdrawl timetables, to promoting time horizons, to finally setting a date for withdrawl from Iraq before the next president finishes his first term in office, the Bush Administration seems to be finally taking their medicine from the Obama campaign in Bush’s final push for a legacy,  While the date is “dependent” on security concerns, that goes both ways, meaning a pullout could potentially be as likely to be sooner than December 2011 as well as later.  Considering the rhetoric and accusations from the Bush Administration and McCain, who previously charged that setting any sort of timetable was an invitation to failure and supplication to the terrorists, this conceivably minor change in stance is gigantic.

But why would they change course?  Is it actually because they woke up from whatever Rovian dream that was weaved during the previous 6+ years and understood the numbers on the ground?  Or did they decide that they weren’t going to let someone else take the credit for ending the war, essentially doing it on their terms for historical record?  Maybe they were attempting to take the wind out of Obama’s sails in his push to end the war.

Whatever their reasoning, it’s now placed pressure on John McCain and Barack Obama on whether they’d stand by that withdrawl date between McCain’s infamous 100-year claim to station troops there, and Obama’s plan to have them out by 2010.  While McCain has simply stated the idea that he’ll have won the Iraq War by the end of his first term, it smacks more of pie-in-the-sky optimistic belief than anything rooted in policy.  Obama has a year’s difference of wiggle room to work with under the assumption that Iraq is nearly stable enough to pull out regardless of the situation at that time, barring something huge.  His policy position doesn’t have to change much in support or opposition to this agreement.  McCain has considerably more changing to deal with, because this position from the Bush Administration gives a solid U.S. policy framework that McCain is going to have to confirm or deny soon.  Unless the media rolls over, which is possible but unlikely in terms of such a hot-button issue, we may have a very different foreign policy stance from the McCain campaign heading into the final stretch, for better or worse.

The American Issues Project (don’t you love political names?) is supposedly poised to release an ad about Obama’s ties to William Ayers, the founder of Weather Underground, a domestic terrorist who detonated bombs in the Capitol Building, the Pentagon and other areas.  While none of the bombs resulted in fatalities, an attempted robbery by two Weather Underground members of an armored Brinks car resulted in the death of two policemen and a security guard.  The intended goal is to link Obama to Ayers’ crimes.  I can’t even begin to list the reasons the ad is not only disingenuous, but intentionally so… but I’ll give it a shot.

1st Connection. Obama was -invited- to Ayers’ house by State Senator Alice Palmer for a get-together and discuss him potentially taking her spot when she left. There’s not even a reference or understanding the two spoke at any length of time, much less about any radical issues.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8630.html

2nd Connection. Obama was on a nine-member board with Ayers for a charitable fund that had been founded in 1941, whose recent tasks have been welfare reform and affordable housing for disadvantaged people.  Hearing the ad, you’d think it was a jihadist training camp.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/us/politics/17truth.html?ref=politics

3rd Connection. Obama called him “Respectable” and “Mainstream.” That’s because whether it’s fair or not, the FBI gained its evidence through illegal wiretapping and so Ayers was let off the hook. Thus, to Ayers’ minor credit, he was given the opportunity to integrate himself and work on actual issues that affected people’s lives in Barack Obama’s district for roughly a decade before Obama came into the picture. Eventually he did become mainstream and respectable in his area due to that work. Ayers was never charged with murder, and society looks much more kindly for a second chance on those who destroy property rather than people, even when it’s government property.

4th Connection. This is a quick one, but the comments about being unrepentant about the bombings were not his statements ON 9/11, but rather from an interview prior to the attacks. Still unrepentant of course, but the unspoken insinuation that he would say that the day the attacks occurred should be noted.
http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/04/17/fact_check_on_clinton_attacks.php

Context. Ayers was, for better or worse, a political figure of note in Obama’s soon-to-be district through his (praised) work in educational reform.  In that situation you deal with them when you have to, you don’t get too close, and you avoid them when you can. I don’t see how Obama did anything less than that. If someone wants to defend this ad on purely 1st Amendment grounds, be my guest. But without further info, this drivel isn’t something I need to take seriously, when even Fox News won’t run it. That’s what surprises me, especially since we went through all of this months ago.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/22/fox-news-refuses-to-run-r_n_120599.html

After the long olympics break, going to just toss out a few mental excercises on the six factors mentioned a couple weeks back, rank the candidates on them, his VP choice, and determine how effective it is.  The rankings are not intended as some sort of objective truth, but the overall media coverage and public perception as far as it’s been able to be gauged:

Very Low = Horrible public perception, a clear weakness.  Few that will defend it.
Low = Poor public perception, not a make or break.
Hazy = No visible public perception, either due to lack of reporting or lack of history/evidence.
High = Good public perception, what should normally be expected.
Very High = Excellent public perception, a strong selling point.  Even your opponent recognizes it.

First up, Democratic Nominee Barack Obama.

Competence – Hazy.  While effective in the Illinois State Legislature, there’s few incidents of specific bills in the U.S. Senate other than rather large, popular and sweeping legislative bills with numerous other co-signers.  His youth in the Senate keeps this from becoming an issue of his competence overall, however, and generally blamed instead on inexperience within a tightly run political machine.
Diplomacy – Very High.  From two GOP supporters in Congress (one of which is actively hawking his ties with the presumptive Presidential nominee to help his re-election campaign in Oregon) combined with a successful trip overseas, Obama displays an ability to keep and solidify support through an effective oratory style combined with an adept maneuvering of policy ideas to respond to each situation here and abroad.  Even Republican Sen. Lugar came out in support of Obama’s pick of Joe Biden, at a time Obama had been slipping in the polls.
Judgment – High.  From the opposition to the Iraq War to domestic issues as Health Care, Obama stands fairly solid with the majority of voters now, while the fact he had those positions from the beginning while polls skewed otherwise says quite a bit for the strength of those views. 
Experience – Very Low.  From state legislature to federal legislature without any stint in executive experience in between, and hardly any years to speak of in comparison with McCain.  While his lack of experience is in many ways a shield against claims of incompetence, it does have the opening to be pulled down that road from pure speculation without solid evidence for, or against it.  An unproven resource is extremely difficult to judge. 
Honesty – High.  While minor policy shifts have occurred during the campaign, with the obvious shift to the center once the general election was underway, Obama has contradicted himself few times on matters of substance to make anyone believe he said something with the knowledge it was untrue.  The reason this isn’t Very High is the clear backtrack on public financing once he realized his edge in fundraising against McCain, which despite any and all labored reasoning, was a complete 180 from his previous claim.
Charm – Very High.  Seriously.  When opposing pundits are reduced to sputtering about his popularity and begin vomiting out embarassing comparisons of said popularity to Hitler and the Anti-Christ, he knows he’s virtually untouchable in that area.

As most people know by now, Joe Biden has been chosen as his running mate, the long-standing Democratic Senator from Delaware.  We’ll do the same for him, and see where he matches up.

Competence – High.  He’s on a similar track as McCain regarding the general idea about long-standing US Senators in politics:  You start out with the assumption of being extremely competent, but that assumption has always been tenuous at best under a focused negative attack.  His advantage in this area is that McCain really should not be expending too many resources targeting Biden specifically, so I would expect that assumption to continue uncontested.
Diplomacy – Hazy.  Despite his penchant for saying precisely the wrong thing at inopportune moments, his foreign policy experience is solid, with a good reputation among dignitaries overseas as recently evidenced by his trip to Georgia (the country, not the state).
Judgment - High.  On the key issues, Biden and Obama have had few disagreements, and Biden has had few unpopular stances across the board.   The policy stance of the Democratic Party is one of the few areas without a clear political weakness, thus a strong cohesive front is necessary.
Experience – Very High.  A six-term Democratic Senator (30+ years experience), he has the potential to even trump McCain in this area, which is absolutely crucial.  Given that most of his years were on economic and foreign policy committees, there’s not much more you can ask for. 
Honesty – High.  While having a weakness through his experience of being labeled a Washington Insider and potential corruption, everything about Joe Biden just shouts out working-class, which bolsters his credibility by virtue of being difficult for working-class voters to reject out of hand as “not like them.”  That, more than anything else, is going to be the hurdle McCain’s campaign is going to have to get over. 
Charm – Hazy.  Joe Biden has a likeable streak to him a mile wide, but first and foremost he’s an effective attack dog.  He won’t be looking to make friends, he’ll be looking to paint a target and hit it efficiently on a regular basis where it hurts.  That said, Joe Biden is one of the few who can do so with a smile.

Overall, I think it’s a surprising, and potentially perfect fit factor-wise, Obama taking up the mantle in diplomacy and charm which are incredibly necessary on the world stage, while Biden smooths over the inexperience and potential stumbling blocks Obama might hit during his first term in the White House.  Biden’s biggest flaw, his mouth, could be an unexpected boon as well, providing an effective contrast to Obama’s eloquence in speeches with a tough, straight-talk express of his own, provided he can keep on target.

(And naturally, this means my prediction for Edwards as VP bombed with the affair coverage, and the Clintons avoided Obama like the plague throughout the run-up to the decision, so hardly expected that either.)