He's the NYT mag Q&A today. He demurs on questions about his own veep potential, but has this interesting response to a question about Wes Clark, who can probably be seen as one of his top 'rivals,' so to speak, if Obama is looking for a national-security/military pick:

it’s a real risk to bring somebody in who hasn’t held office. Other than Eisenhower, the great military leader in that incredible World War II experience, you’re going to want someone on your ticket who’s demonstrated he can get votes.

Update: Reader RY with a couple more good points:

1.  Against a Webb [VP] candidacy--he indicated, per many people's understanding of him, that he pretty much hates the political part of politics.  He said that his running for Senator was a more grueling experience than repeatedly risking his life in Vietnam!!  Not exactly the happy warrior you want running for national office.

2. In favor of a Webb candidacy--he may have a better rapport with Obama than many people realize, obviously an indispensable qualification for the job of running mate.  They apparently talk about writing, and how both them are "real" writers, not politicians who put out books that other people have written for them.  In short, they are both wordy, intellectual men, albeit men from very different backgrounds.  A bond might have formed between them around books and writing--both their own and perhaps prose they have admired by others.

--Michael Crowley