So, there are a few names being thrown about to be the next Secretary of State of Clinton leaves early next year.  There are some interesting possibilities here that I think could lead to some discussion.

The first possibly contender is the UN Ambassador Susan Rice.  She has some impressive foreign policy credentials and has served in various capacities durring the Clinton Administration.  However, her handling of the LIbya fiasco would probably make it hard, if not impossible to get through the confirmation process.  

The second possible contender is Senator John Kerry.  As a former presidential candidate and senate foreign relations chairman he is certainly qualified for the job and would be a pretty safe choice.  The problem with John Kerry is that he is pretty bland and Obama seems to favor bold choices in his appointments instead of the safe ones.  Also, if appointed, it would open up a new senate seat in Massachusets for new defeated Scott Brown to try again for.  

The third possible contender former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson.  He has served in pretty much every government capacity you can think of, house rep, governor, UN Ambassador, and Secretary of Energy.  Super qualified for the position, he is a very likely candidate.  However, like John Kerry, his political starpower isn't what it used to be.  He also kind of dissed the Obama admistration when he passed on the secretary of commerce job during his first term.  

The fourth possible contender is Deputy Secretary of State William Burns.  Currently the number two in the state department, has tons of foreign policy eperience from serving in a variety of different state department positions.  While he is certainly qualified for the job, he is a big unknown in American politics. 

The fifth possible contender is former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman Jr.  The former Ambassador of China and former Republican presidential candidate, Jon Huntsman has a lot of foreign policy experience.  This would definitely be a bold pick and would certainly be a big pickup for Obama if he managed to get Jon Huntsman as it would be an impressive display of bipartisanship.  However, it would also doom an future presidential aspirations Jon Huntsman might have.  

I find the idea of Jon Huntsman being picked pretty exciting. I always thought that if Romney won he should pick him as Secretary of State. Of course, I would of rather had Jon Huntsman as the nominee in the first place...

I think Jon Huntsman would probably do the most for Obama politically, but like I said in the OP, I think it will mostly come down to what Huntsman was to do in the future. If he has any future presidential bids in mind, then this would doom him. Unless he was considering changing parties.... which based on some of the stuff he has said since he dropped out of the primaries... he might just be planning that....

Secretary of State i would think would be the one cabinet position you would never give to an opposing party member.

Not only do you want tight reign on what they do... they know all where your skeletons are buried. So i'd count out Huntsman.


I'd count out Kerry too. I feel like they'd be afraid Scott Brown would find is way back into congress if Kerry left the gate open by being secretary of state.


If anything, Harry Reid might be a good choice... for the exact opposite reason. Harry Reid is hanging on by a thread in Nevada. He nearly lost to Sharon Angle, who had high level Republicans campaigning against her and who most of the state though was insane.

However, he might now want the job because if he did it would hurt his investment package.

Also... personally I think the BIG appointment is going to be treasury Secretary.

That will likely tell us how far his policy is going to change from his first term.

I imagine Geitner is leaving due to differences in Obama policy, since unlike Clinton he wouldn't have to worry about being SoS while running for president.

Going to be interesting to see who he can convince to take the job.

I don't know, he gave Jon Hunstman the Ambassador to China job, probably one of the top five state department jobs.  Like I said, I think Obama would love to give Huntsman that position, and if Huntsman is thinking of switching parties, he may really want it as well.  I think it would be a great apointment that would generate a lot of excitement for Obama in some circles.  

However, I agree that it will probably be a bit of a safer choice this time.  Maybe a direct promotion for William Burns or bring back Bill Richardson.  

As for the treasury secretary position, I agree that it will be a big appointment, but I don't think Obama has as much room to play politics with that position, which is why I focused on the secretary of state position.  

I dunno, I think there is a lot of room there....

If he actually is serious about the debt he'll probably go with someone like Erksine Bowles... the only issue with him being Bowles won't take any of Obama's shit, because the dude is serious about the debt.

If he wants to go hardball he'll go with someone like Lew or Altman or Sheyrl Sandberg.

If he wants to maintain course he'll probably pick a disciple of geitners.

Me, i'd hope for bowles, but i doubt it.

yeah, bowles would be great, but Obama wouldn't pick him.  I honestly don't see Obama as being all that worried about the debt.  I think in his mind he has already kicked that can down the road, his budget plan seems to be proof of that.  

I personally think it will be someone very similar to Geitner.  I think that is what Obama likes.  

Why are we so sure Clinton's going to run for president? I was taking her reason for retiring at face value: she's aged terribly over the last four years.

I really don't know who should take the job. Not picking Kerry to keep Scott Brown out seems like a good idea, though.

Eh, John McCain ran for president, so has Ron Paul. 

The two don't seem mutually exclusive to me.

Four more years of deficit running up and focusing on wallstreet at the expense of everybody else?

I feel like Obama wouldn't want to torpedo his own party like that.

Running once on "stopping inequality" when you vastly increased it by selling out the middle class and poor may work... but a second time?

A puntitive tax rate really won't cut it in my opinion.

Even if you assume he was just honestly mistaken with how the economy works... he has to know now that you can't fix the economy just by pumping up aggregate demand with government spending and pumping up wallstreet and hoping it will balance out.