Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People (part deux)

Today's Quinnipiac University National poll is the second poll in a row showing a majority of Democrats favoring an Obama/Clinton ticket.

By a 60 - 33 percent margin, Democrats say Obama should pick Clinton as his vice presidential running mate.

That's almost 2 to 1 among a group that prefers Obama to Clinton for the nomination by a slim 45-41 margin.

It should be noted too that the poll finds that either Obama or Clinton at the top of the ticket would defeat McCain in November, Obama by 7 points, Clinton by 5.

Interestingly, Quinnipiac finds that Clinton and Obama perform quite similarly against McCain among white voters, among men and among women. The real difference between how each Democrat fares against John McCain comes among groups with whom Obama has traditionally held more appeal. In other words, when up against John McCain, Barack is stronger among Hillary's base than Hillary is among his.

In an Obama-McCain matchup, independent voters back the Democrat 48 - 37 percent, the independent Quinnipiac University poll finds. Men split with 45 percent for McCain and 44 percent for Obama, while women back Obama 49 - 36 percent. McCain leads 47 - 40 percent among white voters, while blacks back Obama 87 - 4 percent.

In a Clinton-McCain contest, independent voters split with 41 - 41 percent. Men go with McCain 46 - 42 percent while women back Clinton 51 - 36 percent. White voters back McCain 48 - 41 percent, the same margin as the Obama-McCain matchup, while black voters back Clinton 79 - 8 percent.

What I find most remarkable about these results is how close this contest is still. The poll was taken from May 8-12 in the wake of the results of last Tuesday's primaries, indeed, at the height of the post-IN & NC "it's over" talk. Yet Obama is up only 4 points above Clinton for the nomination and only fares 2 points better against McCain. It really shows you not only how popular Hillary Clinton is but also how solid her support continues to be and it really begs the question does Barack Obama want to expand the map and have a landslide victory in the fall as he has said he does or is he content to risk simply winning with 50+1? At the risk of sounding like a broken record, more and more I'm convinced that if we're really going to accomplish the former, finally, Hillary Clinton must be on the ticket.

Update [2008-5-14 21:11:59 by Todd Beeton]:I wanted to add that it's also striking how at odds the will of the voters is with conventional punditry. Not only does a majority of Democrats want Obama to pick Clinton for VP, which itself contradicts the "it'll never happen" chorus from the talking heads on the teevee, but there's also this result from the poll:

"Party leaders may be cringing over the potential damage to Democratic chances in November from the endless primary campaign, but two-thirds of the rank-and-file think Clinton ought to keep battling," Carroll added.

Tags: 2008 Presidential election, Barack Obama, Democratic nomination, Dream Ticket, Hillary Clinton (all tags)

Comments

171 Comments

Sure, if he wants to take on her baggage.

And totally invalidate what he's been campaigning on for the past year and a half.

by Shem 2008-05-14 04:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Sure, if he wants to take on her baggage.

It is crap statements like this that divide the party even more than anything you can tag onto Hillary Clinton.

You need to look at the numbers in regard to the democratic party: voters are split nearly 50/50 between Obama and Clinton.  That is a truth that can't be overlooked, especially if you really are part of the people's party.

So, just what has Obama been campaigning under that he hasn't contradicted?  No lobbyists?  Well, some of the most influential unions are backing him, which are undeniably HUGE lobbying forces in Washington.  No old school politics, no Washington insiders?  Ted Kennedy and John Kerry are two of the oldest insider and old school politics White Men you could possibly muster up that AREN'T in the Republican camp, and they support Obama over their constituencies vote.  Most of the Dem. Leadership is behind Obama publicly and privately...so how is he supposed to "clean up Washington" when his biggest supporters are also the big wigs who run Washington?

The big issue here is that the Democratic Party needs to win the Presidency, because combined with a Democratic Congress, REAL BIG THINGS can be accomplished.  With an Obama/Clinton ticket, you have two extremely passionate people who want to make a real change in government AND for the people of America.

And besides all that, just what is your personal reason to deny the votes and will of nearly half of the Democratic Party by keeping clinton off the ticket?  Are you for the Democratic Party as a unified force, or are you just for Obama only?

by Steven B 2008-05-14 05:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Sure, if he wants to take on her baggage.

If our intent is to build a party that lasts longer than a single presidency, it would be wise of us to choose a politician under 60 for the post.  

by zadura 2008-05-14 05:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Sure, if he wants to take on her baggage.

"our" intent?  For whom do you speak other than yourself?

by Tolstoy 2008-05-14 06:38PM | 0 recs
Obama is leading by ~100,000 votes

But Clinton could end up ahead. if thats the case, should Hillary ask Obama if he would like to be her VP?

With the margin between the two so TINY, when you include Michigan and Florida. (Obama removed himself from the ballot in Michigan) Since the Obama campaign is blocking a revote, the DNC really doesnt have a moral right to reject the existing votes.

Given that Hillary's winning the popular vote is a very real possibility, and that she clearly is the stronger candidate in the swing states, maybe a ticket in which she is running for President and Obama is VP makes more sense?

by architek 2008-05-14 05:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is leading by ~100,000 votes

Ha, you finally convinced us arch.

by brimur 2008-05-14 05:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is leading by ~100,000 votes

Excellent argument. But no, if Hillary wins the popular vote, she shouldn't ask Obama to be her running mate. They aren't a good fit either way. I'm sure you would agree that the ultimate nominee should pay the losers debts and send her back to the Senate where she belongs.

by xdem 2008-05-14 06:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is leading by ~100,000 votes

I don't think either candidate should pay either's debt. By the way, that is actually illegal. All Obama could do would be to help her raise it. Like by sending out an appeal to his email list.

by brimur 2008-05-15 06:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is leading by ~100,000 votes

Yes.  And as the poll shows, 2/3 of Democrats want the race to continue.  And Hillary is running neck and neck and she's running for President - not vp.  

I'll say it again.  I can't think of any reason she'd want to be Obama's token vp.  She would never play second to someone less experienced and less devoted to hard work.

She's the most famous woman in the world, already in the history books, her portrait hanging in the WH and her gowns in the Smithsonian, has two homes (one in D,C.)secret service protection for life, she's rich and she's going to do good work just like Bill for the rest of her life.

If O is the nominee I'm sure she'll help him but to run for an office with no constitutional power except presiding officer of the Senate is beneath her.  I predict she won't do it.  

by Tolstoy 2008-05-14 06:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is leading by ~100,000 votes

"She's the most famous woman in the world,"

Yeah, she's more famous than Virgin Mary!

And where living women are concerned, the most famous woman in the world is probably either Queen Elizabeth or JK Rowling.

by Aris Katsaris 2008-05-14 10:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is leading by ~100,000 votes

I think a review of the 12th Amendment to the Constitution is worthwhile here.  Under the 12th Amendment, the electoral college the President and Vice President are elected on separate ballots.

One of the motivations for the 12th Amendment (not the only motivation) was that the original system meant that the first place candidate would be President and the second place candidate would be Vice President.  

Without the 12th Amendment, Bush would currently be President and Kerry would be Vice President.

Early politicians discoverd a flaw in the Founding Father's work and corrected it.  They knew that (in spite of what might be popular), the President and Vice President must be on the same team and be reading from the same playbook.

The 12th Amendment does not apply to the nomination process, but the wisdom of the 12th Amendment does apply.  

Hillary is a fighter for what she believes and there is little evidence that she will act in concurrence with the Obama Administration if she disagrees.  We cannot burden Obama with this.  And Clinton's future is as a legislative leader.

I just think its a wrong match.  Lets not push it.

by smoker1 2008-05-15 04:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is leading by ~100,000 votes

The delegate count is all that matters. Why are the rules so hard for so many to understand? Ask Gore about the popular vote.

by kitebro 2008-05-15 07:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Sure, if he wants to take on her baggage.

It is crap statements like this that divide the party even more than anything you can tag onto Hillary Clinton

I couldn't agree more.

With an Obama/Clinton ticket, you have two extremely passionate people who want to make a real change in government AND for the people of America

I think given the closeness of the election, an Obama/Clinton ticket, warts and all, is the true definition of "will of the people."

by reggie44pride 2008-05-15 08:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

Problem with the VP polling is that the majority of people polled know few other VP options.  Hillary has great branding, that's what the polling suggests.  

by haystax calhoun 2008-05-14 05:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

Exactly. Most Americans probably don't know of other possible candidates for VP.

And just an FYI for all those demanding that Clinton be on the ticket: the nominee gets to choose his/her running mate, not a Quinnipac poll.

by chicagovigilante 2008-05-14 05:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

That's not really true... Kerry was pressured by the party to take Edwards...  We could see a similar situation with Obama and Clinton.

by yitbos96bb 2008-05-14 05:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

Ultimately, the decision was John Kerry's. The nominee will have earned the right to pick a VP.

Hillary Clinton just doesn't fit in with Obama's message. She's a shrewd politician who is good at getting things done, but she strikes many people as an establishment candidate practicing the same old Washington politics. Obama can pick someone better from a battleground geographical region that will help him much more.

by chicagovigilante 2008-05-14 05:18PM | 0 recs
The come from different wings of the party

I think what you are really getting at is the conflict between the DLC wing of the party and the Howard Dean / 50 State Strategy wing.  That more than anything might make it difficult for Obama and Clinton to share a ticket.

I think it is also why you will see more resistance from the Obama supporters than the Clinton supporters.  Many of the Obama supports have chosen their candidate not (as the media would have you believe) because of his Svengali like skill at oratory, but because of the ideology embodied in the structure of his campaign: grassroots driven, rejection of lobbyists, embracing the 50 state strategy, breaking with the DLC.  As much as we respect Clinton for the skilled politician and loyal Democrat that she is, she is perceived as more of an inside the beltway player... not exactly a 'crashing the gate' sort of candidate.

by protothad 2008-05-14 05:55PM | 0 recs
Re: The come from different wings of the party

It is becoming quite clear that the REAL "insider" has been Obama all along.

From his "get-out-the-vote" initiative that is commanded by Obama Central, to his close ties to lobbyists and people like Daschle, Kennedy, Kerry, and Edwards, we've been had.

The outsider in all this, the REAL agent of change  turns out to be Hillary.

by dembluestates 2008-05-14 06:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Real insider?

 I think the evidence does not support that assertion, with all due respect.

by xdem 2008-05-14 06:45PM | 0 recs
I guess you need to explain that to me

I don't get how a GOTV effort makes him a Washington insider.  He is implementing a wide scale, locally implemented, grass roots operation.  If he was acting like an 'insider', he would be focusing on swing states and advertising and would probably just leverage the existing local party infrastructure to do the usual half-hearted GOTV.

I'm also a bit mystified about the lobbyist claims.  The problem with lobbyists is when they buy the loyalties of our elected officials.  Obama has some consultants on his staff that are technically lobbyists, but HE is paying THEM... not the other way around.  Obama has actually passed legislation and created mechanisms for tracking lobbyists and there contributions.  He accepts no lobbyist or PAC money.  Consequently, more than any other candidate his funding comes from a very large pool of small donors.  I have often believed if you want to know where a man's loyalties lie, look at who signs his paycheck.  That is why I've spent considerable time looking at the campaign finance reports of the candidates I vote for, and it is why I really respect the immense small donor network Obama has created.

As for those other 'insider' ties you listed... uhm, they are all fellow Democratic Senators.  I don't find that particular shocking.  I would be surprised if he had not built relationships with his fellow legislators.  Its ties to K Steet and other corrupting influences that are a bigger concern.

Peace

by protothad 2008-05-14 07:22PM | 0 recs
Re: The come from different wings of the party

Baloney!  

by haystax calhoun 2008-05-15 11:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

Um no it wasn't Kerry's.  HE WAS FORCED INTO IT.  He wanted Gephardt.  

by yitbos96bb 2008-05-14 06:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

He wanted Gephardt

LOL.

That could have been an even worse ticket.

Edwards was the only thing that ticket had going for it!

by reggie44pride 2008-05-15 08:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

And neither do rabid bloggers either, nor media pundits, nor you.

by Steven B 2008-05-14 05:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

It is funny that you mention "winning with 50+1."  If I had to pick one reason why Sen. Clinton won't be the nominee, it is because she tried to follow that strategy.

by deepee 2008-05-14 05:01PM | 0 recs
The white working class

Apparently would prefer that Obama not choose Hillary as his running mate - 48% say no, 44% say yes.

Blacks, however, say yes - 62% to 35%.

I anticipate exploding heads.

by Drew 2008-05-14 05:05PM | 0 recs
Re: The white working class

Love your sig man. Hell yeah.

by brimur 2008-05-14 05:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

This might help Obama get elected, but it would be an absolute waste of Hillary Clinton's talents.  

I really really hope she says no and stays in the Senate and takes a big lead on health care reform.

by davisb 2008-05-14 05:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

Agree.  It would be a humiliation and even a demotion for her to be Obama's VP.

I suspect they can't stand each other anyway, at this point, and she would not even be offered the position (unless pre-determined she'd say no and therefore done purely for political reasons).

by Juno 2008-05-14 05:08PM | 0 recs
I like how you think

It would be a rather unifying bit of political theater if they did it that way, Obama offers but Clinton politely declines.  Personally, I think she is too much of a powerhouse to take the VP slot; it would be a waste of her talents.  I like the idea thrown around to make her Senate Majority Leader.  Maybe we can send that do-nothing Reid off on a make-work fact finding mission and give his job to Hillary while he's gone.  ;)

I also think she would make a great governor, though I don't know what state would provide that opportunity.

by protothad 2008-05-14 06:05PM | 0 recs
Re: I like how you think

> make her Senate Majority Leader

You got a wand you are planning to wave to make that happen? I apologize for the sarcasm, but I have asked several people who have proposed this why they think Clinton can win the Majority Leader post, considering that nearly all the major players in the Senate (except Schumer) are against her. Nobody has even attempted to answer. I can only conclude that this is a throw-away talking point passed among Obama bloggers who want her to go away, and do not really care where she goes. If I am wrong, please share the details of your thinking.

> she would make a great governor, though I don't know what state would provide that opportunity.

She lives in NY, so it would be rather odd for her to run for governor in any other state. If she runs there, she would have to run against the incumbent, Patterson, who happens to be the first AA governor of NY. After all the ridiculous media driven hype about how horribly racist the Clintons are, imagine the optics of Hillary even trying to take out Patterson, much less succeeding.

by itsthemedia 2008-05-14 07:10PM | 0 recs
Re: I like how you think

I freely admit I don't know all the dynamics of the Senate, so perhaps it would be a difficult sell for her to get the Majority Leader slot.  My motives come more from a disappointment with Reid.

As for governor... yeah, I didn't expect she could just claim the governership of NY.  A slot needs to open up somewhere.  Doesn't have to be New York though.  She has history in several states and national recognition.  Heck, she was something of a carpetbagger with her NY Senate run, and that didn't stop her.

by protothad 2008-05-14 07:36PM | 0 recs
Re: I like how you think

I think she could get a "pass" on the carpetbagging charge once, but not twice. Maybe governor of Arkansas - she could sell that as coming home.

I don't know Patterson's plans - maybe he will just fill out Spitzer's term and retire or something. A term as governor (assuming it was successful) would fill out her resume for a 2012 or 2016 run at the Presidency. But there really are very few second chances in that arena.

The only way I see her getting Majority Leader is if a President Obama backs her for the post. That seems like a long shot right now, but politics is a strange business. She might prove instrumental in getting him over the finish line in certain states and with certain groups this fall, earning some favors in the process.

by itsthemedia 2008-05-15 07:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

I definitely think we need to hear from Hillary sometime after June 3 on whether she'd want VP if she isn't the nominee.  

Everyone just assumes that she'd want it...I'm less sure.  

But I suppose it makes her the presumptive nominee in 4 or 8 years.  And if McCain can take his shot at 72 or whatever, she can take one at 68.  Particularly since women live longer.  

by bosdcla14 2008-05-14 05:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

I don't recall Hillary is on Senate Finance, which is where the committee in which the health care reform action will most likely be.

by wolff109 2008-05-14 06:07PM | 0 recs
Stop Stoking this Fantasy

It will not happen.  Obama needs things Hillary doesn't bring to the table (like the ability to unit people and the ability to not repel moderate Republicans.)  

Stoking this Fantasy is a cruel trick that the right wing is playing on Hillary supporters just to piss them off when it doesn't happen.  

Sadly, many of her supporters are playing right into this.  

While there may be some other role for Hillary after this campaign, VP is not it.  

by ruscle 2008-05-14 05:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Stop Stoking this Fantasy

You seem to know a lot from your distant bench.

I might add that Clinton has brought A TON of voters into this primary; its not all Barack Obama, all the time.

And the whole moderate Obamacans bulls**t is just a farce.  Show me any real numbers that say Obama pulls Republicans...it was a nice little story while it lasted.  Obama should try harder with the working class voters before worrying about Republicans.

by Steven B 2008-05-14 05:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Stop Stoking this Fantasy

Hillary did not bring a ton of voters into the primaries the facts just don't support your observations. It would be a horrible idea to put her on the ticket because it wouldn't be just her but it would be both she and Bill.

Bill has done some questionable things post his presidency and we do not need that coming up in this election. I'm sorry but it's just a horrible idea.

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-14 06:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Stop Stoking this Fantasy

Obama UNITES people?  

Obama has DIVIDED our party.

by dembluestates 2008-05-14 06:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Stop Stoking this Fantasy

What a stupid comment... That's like saying its the Woman's fault she got pregnant.  TWO people (and their minions) were involved in this and BOTH have there share of the blame.

by yitbos96bb 2008-05-14 06:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Stop Stoking this Fantasy

Obama has not divided out party - the Clintons who believe in their divine right to the nomination and their followers are the ones that have divided our party.

by mwfolsom 2008-05-15 12:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

I'm so torn over this ticket...

On the one hand... She obviously shores up some of his weakest demographics... Seniors, Working Class Whites (although I question if it would be as much as some think... I think more go to McCain than either Obama or Clinton as polling suggests), and most importantly, Latinos which I feel we need to spend a LOT of money putitng infrastructure and shoring up that community.  The people seem to want it which is an argument of the Obama campaign...getting people involved.   And on some levels, while she is the definition of Establishment and political elite, she also represents change.  

On the other hand, Clinton has a strong personality (as does Obama) so the question becomes can she stay in the background more as she did during the last years of Bill's Presidency and the first few years of her Senate career.  Instead of complimenting Obama, will she accentuate some of his flaws as he would probably do if She was the nom and he was the VP nom.  Is she too polarizing as the CW says or in a Dem year, will that not even matter.  

Its a tough decision.  There are people I like Better... Schweitzer being to me the best one.  But given that since IN and NC she has stopped the attacks (I credit the Newsweek interview to poor wording on her part like Obama's bitter comments AND that it was probably done before the IN and NC primary.)  and has tried to act in a unifying manner.  So I am warming up to the idea... I'm torn between the fact she OBVIOUSLY balances the ticket and that CW and the Reaffirming VP theory as discussed by Chris Bowers.

by yitbos96bb 2008-05-14 05:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

Great post, nice summary of pro's and con's.

The "staying in the background" aka "too many cooks" thing is the main issue I have with Hillary as VP.  OTOH, you're quite right that she has shown she can chill out when necessary.  That's a pretty good rebuttal.

I don't know what effect she'd have on the ticket.  I don't really buy the argument that she'd mobilize Republicans any more than they're gonna try and mobilize.  She's polarizing only because she's been on the scene for awhile as a prominent Democrat.  The Republican game is to demonize any Dem and make them seem "polarizing".  So, I'm skeptical that she'd turn a lot of people off, especially because she polls about as well as Obama.  Would she add to the ticket?  Sure, as would Edwards, Richardson, Sebelius, Napolitano, Webb, etc.

I think she's great (and I support Obama, but I think they're both very strong candidates, which is why it's been so close).  So if Obama feels like he can work with her, and she is able to be a team player and let Obama be Pres and then have her shot in '16, that would be peachy.

by acujimmy 2008-05-14 10:23PM | 0 recs
Still, though....

She's gonna have a whole group of people (McAuliffe, etc.) chomping at the bit to do stuff, and I'm not at all sure these people are going to be willing/able to read from the same page as Obama's people.

Could have head-butting between Clinton and Obama camps, which will be a distraction.

by acujimmy 2008-05-14 11:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

I think you're reading too much into this. Most people are not hardcore political junkies. They're almost certainly not familiar with other names that have been thrown around like Webb or Clark. Do they think Hillary should be VP? Well, sure because she's the Dem other than Obama they're most familiar with at this point.

But what I also see here is more a reflection that people are not as divided as the behavior of some in the blogosphere would make it seem.

by animated 2008-05-14 05:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

I agree -- those numbers are going to drop hugely in a couple months when Obama gets closer to making a decision, Hillary's been out of the spotlight for a while, and other names start getting seriously discussed.

by ChrisKaty 2008-05-14 06:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

She won't be out of the spotlight.  She will be out there campaigning for the nominee as McCain was doing in 2000 after the GOP bitter primary.  

by yitbos96bb 2008-05-14 06:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

Obama should be VP.

Hillary is THE one who should be president!

by RosWaState 2008-05-14 06:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

That's your opinion... however, that's not going to happen...

by yitbos96bb 2008-05-14 06:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

Every White House policy making apparatus has to have its zenith at the desk of the president. Hillary Clinton may be good politically, but it would be suicidal from a policy-making standpoint. We don't need 3 people trying to govern the country at once, regardless of how good the ideas from any of them are.

Every time you espouse the "Clinton as VP" meme, have you considered the practical implication of how the power sharing would work?

by tedit 2008-05-14 05:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

As an example, consider any parliamentary system's "unity government" - i.e. Germany right now. Train wreck in slow motion.

by tedit 2008-05-14 05:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

One interesting note from this poll: Both Obama and Clinton lose white voters by the same margin, but Clinton's support with black voters against McCain is quite a bit weaker. That, to me, suggests that maybe we should stop talking about Obama's supposed weakness with white voters and start talking about Clinton's weakness with black voters.

by unionfield 2008-05-14 05:12PM | 0 recs
Exactly

The problem with Clinton voters is that they have assumed that blacks will just come back into the fold. Wrong.  Also, Barack doesn't have a white working class problem in general he has an appalachian problem which is not surprising because those people are backwards.

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-14 06:18PM | 0 recs
Uhh...NO!!!!

Great way to win people over by insulting them.  Stupid

by pjv 2008-05-14 06:38PM | 0 recs
Obama/Clinton Ticket = No Thank you!

Too many things have heen said and written (many of them on this site) to mend the damage at this point.

Too many lobbiests, we couldn't fit them all in the bus.

Too much Bubba.

Too many debts, Clinton owes a lot of money and a lot of special interests groups.

Its time to end the dynasty.

by Silence Do Good 2008-05-14 05:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = No Thank you!

The whole "Clinton Dynasty" meme is a load of crap.  You can keep with your fantasy that the Clintons are somehow like the Bushes, but you're wrong.

I don't care how much you hate the Clintons personally, but you have to realize that for the last eight years, both Hillary and Bill have been working nonstop to raise money and establish greater power into the Democratic party which helped get the Congress back into Democratic hands...heck, they've been doing it for nearly 35 years.  

That is dedication to the Democratic party that you will never, ever come close to from your keyboard.

by Steven B 2008-05-14 05:39PM | 0 recs
The DLC and other Clinton issues...

...gave us the Bush years.

Not only with his personal indescressions, which you and both agree shouldn't count as much as they did, but they did.

But with the whole Clinton, centrist, de-regulation, corporate friendly, free trade stuff is what put us where we are today.

After losing our majorities in congress he had a public affair.

Bubba, by embarrassing us with his behavior and by leading this country towards the right, at least when it comes to corporations, allowed Bush to steal 2000.

And he did not have a 50 state strategy.
And he didn't have a plan for his wife campaigns past super Tuesday.

I could go on, but the point is, its time for new ideas and new faces.

by Silence Do Good 2008-05-14 05:52PM | 0 recs
Re: The DLC and other Clinton issues...

PLEASE don't go on.

What a load of right-wing crap.

by dembluestates 2008-05-14 06:08PM | 0 recs
Re: The DLC and other Clinton issues...

Right, because the rightwing is so against deregulation, dismantling social programs, and privileging the market.  Look into Bill's record and get back to us on this.  The person you're responding to is exactly right.

by Philoguy 2008-05-14 06:34PM | 0 recs
Re: The DLC and other Clinton issues...

Personal indescressions?  Is that all you can muster?  

Do you think highly of JFK?  Talk about a womanizer...all the Kennedy family men are notorious for personal problems.

You put a lot of weight on Gore/Edward's lose on Bil Clinton, where you should be looking at the strategy the Bush campaign used to undermine Gore and Kerry both...and how the Obama campaign mirrors much of their strategy.  There are a number of news articles out there referencing this.  

It seems you really have a personal problem with Bill Clinton, and it is very big of you to NOT let Hillary Clinton be her own.  

Are you also ready to state that Hillary Clinton has made a terrible Senator so far?

And, if you are asking for new ideas and new faces, what is your opinion of Ted Kennedy, Kerry , Pelosi and other Obama supporters who are betting on Obama in order to save their own asses in the future!?!?

by Steven B 2008-05-14 08:58PM | 0 recs
I do have a positive opinion of JFK

but if JFK were alive and his personal life had been exposed I would not want him on my ticket.

Nafta, Media de-regulation, losing the House and the Senate, having no plan to actually campaign post super Tuesday, not being able to raise even enough money to win a primary fight etc...

You think all I can come up with is personal???

by Silence Do Good 2008-05-15 05:17AM | 0 recs
Hillary isn't my personal choice

for veep, but I wouldn't be that bothered by it. It mainly depends upon how she runs her campaign in the next few weeks, and what her role as veep would be precisely - i.e. what areas is she going to take a special interest in. Another important factor is Bill - what role would his be, how influential? How would he interact with the media? He's been less that slick on more than one occasion.

One of the major problems with the Clinton campaign has been behind the scenes drama spilling over into the media, and that's something Barack doesn't need to deal with. Hillary would have to take a back seat, campaign in states she is strong in (Ohio, Florida, Arkansas and, heck, WV) and attempt to not stick her foot in her mouth.

by grass 2008-05-14 05:13PM | 0 recs
Edwards

Why not Obama Edwards?

by mady 2008-05-14 05:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

He'd have been the VP nominee twice in a row, and I don't think people thought that highly of him the first time.

I like him, but I don't know if I want the media to compare Obama to Kerry for 6 months.

by bosdcla14 2008-05-14 05:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

After watching them together in Grand Rapids a few hours ago, I'd put the odd on Edwards fairly high. There was a lot of "Barack and I" from Edwards and "John Edwards and I" from Obama.

Granted, this is exactly the sort of talk one would expect at an endorsement, but we were also half-expecting them to announce JE had accepted Veep. It's still too early to do that, though--bad taste as HRC hasn't dropped yet.

by lucky monkey 2008-05-14 05:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

I bet they promised him SOMETHING.

by dembluestates 2008-05-14 06:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

My guess would be AG.  

by bosdcla14 2008-05-14 06:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Edwards

Yeah he wants AG and I think he would be very good at it.

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-14 06:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

And I keep repeating that just like calling on her to drop out hardens her resolves and makes her NOT want to drop out, the more Obama is pushed to put her on the ticket, the less likely it is to happen.
Picking the VP is the first act of authority of a Presidential candidate. Do you really think he wants  to be perceived as yielding to emotional blackmail from the Clinton wing of the party ?

I dont think those polls are conclusive right now but if you think she is the best option, ARGUE for her and the SDs should lobby him in private. Public calls and pression for it to happen is the BEST way for it not to.

And once again, those polls, taken right during the primary, are not conclusive. Try asking people for Obama-Edwards for instance. I am pretty sure you would get even higher numbers.
Everything is relative and the fact that option is popular does not make it the most popular option or the smarter one. Heck, Richardson keeps getting talked up as a boon for a ticket when we all know he would be a disaster for purely political reasons (vetting, poor campaigner).

by Benjaminomeara 2008-05-14 05:15PM | 0 recs
A thousand times no!

In other words, when up against John McCain, Barack is stronger among Hillary's base than Hillary is among his.

vs
Hillary Clinton must be on the ticket.

If we do well with her base why do we need her?  Wouldn't it be better to pick someone else that expands to a diffrent base?

And if we wern't talking about Hillary Clinton would we even entertain the notion that someone with the baggage and high negatives should be on the ticket? We discount Richardson for a word he used and a rumor but we accept Clinton?  If we were talking about the same person with a diffrent name she wouldn't even get through a Democrat controlled Senate on a Cabinet post.

Stop trying to put the Albatross around Obama's neck.

by Tumult 2008-05-14 05:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

Presuming he is the nominee, the day after Obama picks a running mate, polls will come out showing that large majorities of Democrats strongly approve of his choice. Almost no matter who that choice is.

by vinc 2008-05-14 05:16PM | 0 recs
Shame on you Barack!

Yeah, like that ticket would sell. NOT.

Stop forcing this fantasy on us, Todd. It won't happen for a myriad of reasons. Hillary bring so much baggage to Obama's own baggage.

by richochet 2008-05-14 05:16PM | 0 recs
Hillary is not going to be on the ticket. Get over

..it.

She ads absolutely nothing to the ticket that Obama can;t get from someone else. Women are already starting to gravitate back to Obama in recent polls against McCain.

And Hillary, in general election matchups" does no better than Obama with "wokring clas white men" than Obama does.

This is silly talk.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 05:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket

this would add a troupe of food tasters onto the federal payroll.

by Tommy Flanagan 2008-05-14 05:16PM | 0 recs
Two words - > Edwards

Edwards just deep-sixed all the clinton-for-veep talk.

There's now way she can match his charisma, or appeal to blue collar voters.

by Al Rodgers 2008-05-14 05:21PM | 0 recs
I agree. Edwards would be far better.

That looked like a great ticket tonight.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 05:24PM | 0 recs
Re: I agree. Edwards would be far better.

He was my first choice. I saw him in NC at a bar-b-cue rally. Teeth count. Between them, Obama and Edwards have more dentition than the entire state of WV.

They wouldn't make a 'dream ticket', they'd make a

DREAMY ticket!

by xdem 2008-05-14 06:40PM | 0 recs
Obama/Feingold

Or barring that, anybody but Clinton.

by lojasmo 2008-05-14 05:21PM | 0 recs
Obama/Webb. Or Obama/Rendell.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 05:25PM | 0 recs
Don't do that to me!

I just about had a fainting spell.  ;)  The only downside to that ticket is I would lose Feingold as my Senator.

It is interesting that our remaining three presidential candidates are all senators.  It allows me to perform the 'Feingold comparison test' to see how they measure up.  I just line up their voting records and see who scores highest on 'ol Feingoldimeter. >:)
 

by protothad 2008-05-14 06:18PM | 0 recs
Are all the Hillarynuts going to screech...

...and whine and threaten to back McCain if Obama picks someone else for the ticket?

Hillary had a real shot at being Obama's VP about a month ago. Until se started thowing the kitchen sink at him.

Had she engaged in a civil campaign -- she would be the front runner for the VP spot.

She's blown that now. And threatening to blow up the party, through surrogates, if she doesn't get a spot on the ticket is patently offensive.

Stop it. The more you beg and argue for it, the less likely it will happen.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 05:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Are all the Hillarynuts going to screech...

I know being called a "Hillarynut" makes me warm up to Obamaworld!

Not.

IOKIYAO

by Juno 2008-05-14 05:27PM | 0 recs
Stop whining.

We get called Obamaniacs.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 05:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Stop whining.

It would be nice if you could be called Democrats, but since you're more interested in Obama than Democratic party issues or a longer strategy, that is what you'll continued to be labeled.

by Steven B 2008-05-14 05:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Stop whining.

It would be nice if you could be called Democrats, but since you're more interested in Obama than Democratic party issues or a longer strategy, that is what you'll continued to be labeled.

Coming from a Hillary supporter, that's something else. The most self-centered, Me-first Campaign on modern American Democratic politics.

The reason I support Obama is because he's all about building a new party from the ground up. This is Howard Dean's model. This is what all the denizens of MYDD used to dream about before they went in the tank for Hillary.

I care more about the Democratic party and its future than any goddamned Hillary supporter does.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 05:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Stop whining.

Obama is about Obama.  He's incredibly arrogant, and one of the problems with his campaign is how unrealistic people are about him.

by Juno 2008-05-14 05:52PM | 0 recs
Are you on drugs?

Obama is arrogant? You really think that? You think he's MORE arrogant than Hillary Clinton?

You're delusional

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 05:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Are you on drugs?

Yes, I think that, and I am not delusional at all.

What compelled Obama to run for president was the reaction to that speech with people screaming for him to run for president.

Pure and simple. Pure ego.

by Juno 2008-05-14 06:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Are you on drugs?

>>>What compelled Obama to run for president was the reaction to that speech with people screaming for him to run for president.<<<

And so what if it did? What's wrong with that? You sound bitter and frustrated that Hillary got beat by a neophyte.

Sorry about that. But...well...that's the way the ball bounces sometimes.

She'll get another shot in 2016.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 06:42PM | 0 recs
Clinton in 2016

I don't think so.  How old will she be in 2016?  Not quite grampy McBush, but a little long in the tooth 8 years after a generational shift election.

by NM Ward Chair 2008-05-14 08:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Are you on drugs?

And no, I am not on drugs either. I do not do drugs. I've never done drugs.

I really don't see how Obama is going to cause all this happy unity love fest in America if his own supporters are so nasty.

by Juno 2008-05-14 06:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Are you on drugs?

And no, I am not on drugs either. I do not do drugs. I've never done drugs.
 Oh sure.  You didn't inhale.

by NM Ward Chair 2008-05-14 08:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Stop whining.

Btw, I was a HUGE Dean supporter and on of the "First 100".

Obama is no Howard Dean.

by Juno 2008-05-14 05:52PM | 0 recs
Obama is better than Dean.

Obama's a winner, for one thing.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 05:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is better than Dean.

Bush won too

by Juno 2008-05-14 06:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is better than Dean.

Bush won too

What does Bush have to do with Barack Obama? Are you comparing them?

See. Now this is why Obama supporters think Hillary supporters are assholes.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 06:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Stop whining.

Am I supposed to be impressed by a reference to Howard Dean?

Calling me a "goddamned Hillary supporter" is proof that, while your candidate of choice promotes unity, you are just like a many, many other Obama supporters who continue to divide the democratic base into two factions: those that support Obama and those that attack Clinton.

by Steven B 2008-05-14 09:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Stop whining.

laugh, like clinton supporters have an absolute claim to moral superiority.  Everyone has been crappy to each other, stop pretending your side is the more honorable.  

by Xris 2008-05-14 07:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Stop whining.

We're not claiming to be uniters who will bring change and end divisive and negative politics.

Obamans are.  They should act on it.

by Juno 2008-05-14 05:50PM | 0 recs
We are acting on it.

By kicking Hillary's old-politics/negative scumbag campaigning ass.

The people (Outside of Hatfield and McCoy territory) have spoken.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 05:56PM | 0 recs
Re: We are acting on it.

More of that Obama inspiration and unity, I gather?

Makes me giddy!

No one proves Obama's campaign is a fraud more than his own supporters, or at least that he cannot achieve what he says he wants to do.

by Juno 2008-05-14 05:58PM | 0 recs
I don't much care.

If you have no interest in electing a Democrat in the Fall, and want to see the shit that has been occurring for the past 8 years continue, then good riddance to you.

My advice is either help elect a Democrat, or go home and cry for the next 5 months.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 06:02PM | 0 recs
Because we all know how inspiractional and...

...unifying a figure Hillary Clinton is.

Do you honestly believe the crap you are writing?

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 06:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Because we all know how inspiractional and...

Perfect finish to an illuminating, revealing moment.

Way to go, Juno.  These Obamabots are all the same.  Uniters?  NOT.

My way or the highway is the Obama rule.  He should be so lucky as to get Hillary to accept his crappy offer.

If I'm her, I tell him where to put it, and begin to campaign as an independent.  I'd love to see Obama and his disgusting braintrust try to win that scenario.

by dembluestates 2008-05-14 06:15PM | 0 recs
Congratulations.

You have now morphed int a Ralph Nader nut circa 2000.

I have news for you. This election isn't all about YOU. This country's got serious problems that need addressing.

Barack Obama is a good solid progressive Democrat. If you can't rally around him for the Fall that speaks a lot more about YOU and YOUR problems than it does about him.

I certainly would have rallied around Hillary if the situation were reversed. Because I'm a good Democrat who cares about saving the country from another 4-8 years of GOP Hell.

If you're not, then good riddance to you, Sir.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 06:36PM | 0 recs
Have you noticed that...

... its actually a rather small number of users that account for the largest volume of rude posts?  Please, don't believe that all of us Obama supporters are like that.  Its just seems to be the nature of the interweb that the negative gets amplified.

Peace

by protothad 2008-05-14 06:37PM | 0 recs
Re: We are acting on it.

you are totally right!  People on the internet who post on MyDD all have cards from Obama that state:

"This anonymous poster fully represents my campaign and everything he or she says should be taken as 100% truth and as a reflection of who I am as a person"

by Xris 2008-05-14 07:34PM | 0 recs
I prefer Obamabot
Sounds more scifi.  I plan on wrapping myself in aluminum foil during his inauguration.  ;)
 
by protothad 2008-05-14 06:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Are all the Hillarynuts going to screech...

Precisely.  Not going to happen.  Why waste breath?

by Please 2008-05-14 06:04PM | 0 recs
Sorry, but the Clintons bring

far too much baggage to be of good use as a VP.  Obama's best option is Sebelius: a charismatic, relatively new face with lots of recent exposure would serve as an excellent complement to Obama.  Not to mention that she is a white woman, and thus able to attract certain demographic groups that have been hesitant to enter the Obama camp.  

by brathor 2008-05-14 05:24PM | 0 recs
Obama doesn't need to put a woman on the ticket.

McCain does. Not Obama. Don't be fooled by the heat of the moment polls.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 05:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Sorry, but the Clintons bring
I'm sorry but in what universe is Sebelius charismatic? In her response to the State of the Union it looked like someone propped a corpse up in a chair and played a recording.
She is dreadfully uncharismatic.
by big poppa smurf 2008-05-15 04:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

All I can picture would be

When the 3am call comes in.. Hillary comes bursting into her old presidential bedroom screaming "I got it I got it!!"

by Winterblink 2008-05-14 05:25PM | 0 recs
She can't be on the ticket.

The media will constantly ask her and him about All the crap she said about him during the primary.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 05:27PM | 0 recs
Obama/Mcaskill, Obama/Casey...

Obama/Hagel, heck even Obama/Paul. But NEVER Obama/Clinton. That would be the mother of all oxymoron tickets and career suicide for Barack!

by Bob Sackamento 2008-05-14 05:30PM | 0 recs
Have we gone insane

to the point that Hagel should even for a microsecond be concidered for Obama's VP? That would be suicide for the Democratic ticket. I and many loyal Democrats would not vote for Obama if that happened.

by Christopher Lib 2008-05-15 10:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

It's not happening.  The only thing Clinton would do is lock down registered Dems, something Obama should be able to do on his own during the course of a 5 month campaign against McCain.  He needs someone to expand the map, to appeal to independents and moderates.

by Skaje 2008-05-14 05:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

No thanks. It would be a total distraction. And honestly, I don't think the poll takes much into account. So what if that many dems think he should pick her, that just means she's popular among dems as he is, and they would be happy with her as a VP. She wasn't pitted against anyone else, and people who were answering the poll were likely not sitting there analyzing ever upside and downside and looking at all the other possible candidates.

Plus, most of this large number comes from Clinton supporters, who obviously want to see her on the ticket, it makes sense. And some of Obama's supporters probably want her too, but just as many may want someone else.

Let the candidate choose his running mate. He should take this poll into consideration just as the many other factors, but this whole will of the people thing is bullshit.

by BlueGAinDC 2008-05-14 05:36PM | 0 recs
Todd, let it go.

It's not going to happen. You know as well as we do--as well as Obama, Clinton, and pretty much anyone who's followed the primaries does--that Clinton burned the VP bridge months ago.

It's not going to happen. Continuing to insist it will isn't much different than continuing to insist Hillary can win the nomination outright.

by Firewall 2008-05-14 05:41PM | 0 recs
Just pushing it is unseemly.

She had her chance and blew it.

Unlike LBJ in 1960 -- Hillary brings NOTHING to the ticket for Obama.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 05:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Just pushing it is unseemly.

Obama stands a better than even chance of blowing this election for Democrats in November.

The divisions he's created, his weakness in swing states, his baggage and rising negatives will make it hard to win.

And if he follows thru on his gotta-be promise to Edwards, and puts him on as VP, look out.

by dembluestates 2008-05-14 06:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Just pushing it is unseemly.

Clinton stands a better than even chance of blowing this election for Democrats in November.

The divisions she's created, her weakness in swing states, her baggage and rising negatives will make it hard to win.

by pjv 2008-05-14 07:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Just pushing it is unseemly.

you now polls don't back you up right?  Also, where did you get your magic powers, I was pretty sure the general was not until November.  Obama has won fair and square.  That does not mean you have to be happy about it, but this is our system and that's how things turned out.  

I never liked Kerry but busted my ass for him.  In the end I just want our side to win, and could care less about primary squabbles.  

by Xris 2008-05-14 07:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Just pushing it is unseemly.

"The divisions he's created". Earth misses you. Please come back!

by kitebro 2008-05-15 07:20AM | 0 recs
She wants it, she does.

It's not going to happen, though.

Obama wants someone who will continue to endorse his principles of transparency and bipartisanship.

Clinton is a master of partisanship.  Which makes her great for the Senate, but not so hot as Obama's VP.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-14 05:44PM | 0 recs
Re: She wants it, she does.

Clinton actually has a very strong record of bipartisanship.

This is another mythical paradox on which the Obama camp has expounded. ON the one hand, they express anger at Clinton because she has worked with Republicans, call her a DINO, etc., but on the other insist that Obama is going to magically unite people but can do so withou being called a DINO and similar slurs used against Clinton.

I've yet to get an answer from anyone as to what the evidence is that Obama can unite this country.  His own supporters are vicious toward other Democrats for simply choosing to support Clinton over him.

by Juno 2008-05-14 05:49PM | 0 recs
We don't have a problem with people supporting her

We have a problem with scumbab, GOP Karl Rove style campaign tactics being used by Hillary and her supporters to win a Democratic primary.

You don't see Obama supporters trashing Edwards, or Biden supporters do you?

The fact is you all have been acting like assholes. So we treat you that way.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 05:53PM | 0 recs
Re: We don't have a problem with people supporting

Oh, you do NOT have a problem with Karl Rove style politics.

Indeed, you should be grateful for them. They got Obama where he is with all that bogus race baiting crap.

You know, take an asset (the Clintons' excellent relationship with the AA community) and turn it into a liability.  Rove's MO.

by Juno 2008-05-14 05:57PM | 0 recs
Eh, nevermind

I was actually going to talk to you about the "bipartisanship" issue in your comment above, but you hauled out the old "Obama played the race card" chestnut and I'm not inclined to waste my effort.

If you still believe that, then I might as well yell at a brick wall.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-14 06:02PM | 0 recs
Re: She wants it, she does.

you guys/girls are totally civil though right?  I am sure you never throw a fit when someone supports Obama over Clinton?

by Xris 2008-05-14 07:38PM | 0 recs
Obama/Anyone Ticket = The Will of the People

by Lefty Coaster 2008-05-14 05:44PM | 0 recs
It would Pose a Dilemma
 I read every comment over at Taylor Marsh (it's a Zen thing for me) and I don't think we have enough hospital beds in the USA to care for the exploded heads which will result.
 If voters who will never vote for Obama and who will always vote for Hillary are presented a ballot with one box for both, there's gonna be big mess to clean up.
by xdem 2008-05-14 05:48PM | 0 recs
I must give you mojo

Just for the wonderfully disturbing image you have put in my head.

by protothad 2008-05-14 06:31PM | 0 recs
I have to disagree with the rephrasing

The question asked in the poll was, "If Barack Obama wins the Democratic Presidential nomination, would you like him to pick Hillary Clinton to be his Vice-Presidential running mate?"  In my opinion, that's not the same as saying he should.  "Would you like him to" implies a degree of satisfaction, "should" is an imperative to the exclusion of all other choices; and that was not what was asked in the poll.

I'm a perfect example.  If he picked HRC as his VP, I'd be fine with it, but I don't think he should.  No offense intended to the diarist, for Quinnipiac itself is guilty of the error; but at the same time,  I'd hate to see the error become the meme.

by rb608 2008-05-14 05:48PM | 0 recs
Re: I have to disagree with the rephrasing
Not only that but there is nothing in that question that suggests they would be not amenable to another option.
Yeah, I bet they would like it. But tell you I bet a  similar number would LIKE an Obama-Edwards ticket too.
It will be up to Obama to decide what works the best.
by Benjaminomeara 2008-05-14 05:51PM | 0 recs
Re: I have to disagree with the rephrasing

Exactly. The rephrasing implies exclusivity of the option.  There are no doubt other VP choices voters would also like.

by rb608 2008-05-14 05:53PM | 0 recs
Re: I have to disagree with the rephrasing

Moreover, as anyone with a basic knowledge of polling (or even generic statistics) will tell you, people tend to say "yes" when the question is asked in a vacuum. This is why eg. "do you want more funding for schools?" and "do you want lower taxes?" will both get high "yes" votes, despite their being mutually exclusive.

At best, this shows that 2/3 of these voters wouldn't mind Clinton on the ticket. I honestly think the fact that 1/3 of the voters would, in fact, mind Clinton being on the ticket is far more significant; for this kind of question, it's much more difficult to say "no," which speaks to the amount of enmity against her.

by Senori 2008-05-14 05:58PM | 0 recs
Thin soup, needs its own survey

The whole thing is based on one question, so it's too trivial.

I think it is a great idea to game this out, but one question doesn't help much. We'd need followups.  What would the same person who answers yes to the VP question say to:

Has Clinton's criticisms of Obama hurt ticket?

Will Clinton will deliver her base over the choice of John McCain?

Would you support Clinton as VP if she loses a seat at the healthcare table?  Or loses her universal coverage plan?

Would you feel Clinton's best options for her and her agenda  are in the Senate or VP?

Will Clinton's negatives harm the ticket?

Will Bill Clinton be a big help the ticket to get elected?

Will Bill Clinton be a distraction to the ticket if elected?

I need more info.

by drowsy 2008-05-14 05:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

You know, I get the theory that Clinton will help Obama with white voters, but wouldn't someone else actually be more helpful?

Besides, Hillary stands for everything that is wrong in the political process--that's the very reason why I supported Obama.

by MNPundit 2008-05-14 05:58PM | 0 recs
Obama doesn;t have a problem with White voters

...he has a problem with Appalachian hillbillies.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-05-14 06:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama doesn;t have a problem with White voters

While somewhat jarringly stated, you are basically correct.  The 'white working class' demographic problem that Obama supposedly has is really more of a geographic phenomenon.  Results and polls in other states show him doing just fine with the working whites.  Appalachia, however, has a unique mix of economic and cultural baggage that evidently creates a hurdle for Obama.  Its not a campaign killer for him, but it is something to acknowledge and attempt to address.

by protothad 2008-05-14 06:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

Todd, I'm with you. Put her on the ticket. Landlside.

by wolff109 2008-05-14 05:59PM | 0 recs
I object (part deux)

These polls are junk.  I'll repeat my objection that I raised in response to your last post on these polls:


 How many poll respondents could name more than one or two other Democrats that are viable for the job?  Sure, most could identify Gore, Kerry, or Kennedy, but not Richardson, Sibelius, Sherrod Brown, or Wesley Clark.  I suspect the poll mostly tests name recognition, but whoever's on the ticket will have more name recognition by November. (Ask John Edwards!)  Sen. Clinton's name recognition, while far greater than other potential running mates, does not necessarily translate into an electoral advantage, especially with her high unfavorables.

by Twin Planets 2008-05-14 06:03PM | 0 recs
Here's my take on how this could work.

If Hillary's campaign staff collaberates, starting immediately, with Obama's campaign staff to align her message to his, it could work.  Then we would have the two of them out campaigning with the same message.

I'm not necessarily in favor of the unity ticket but if it happens, oh well.

by GFORD 2008-05-14 06:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

Hopefully the next polls will give some alternative VP choices.  I would be willing to bet that Obama/Clinton will outpoll any other combination.  I have said for months now that we are picking our nominee for the next 16 years, and I believe that is the reason Hillary will accept the VP nomination.  She has no problem playing second fiddle and will take the next 8 years to keep her head down and mend some fences in preparation for her next run in 2016.

by Demo Dan in Dayton 2008-05-14 06:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

I agree that this combo would probably outpace any other combo were choices given (aside from Hillary at the top of the ticket that is).  And I agree somewhat with your "next 16-year sentiment" to a great extent, but with a slightly different reason for thinking that Hillary would accept the VP.  I don't think she would want it--and I personally would have a problem with someone of her stature and experience playing second fiddle to Barack (as I think she would too)--but I think she would consider accepting it soley for the sake of the Democratic party and our country and the same 16-year vision you reference.  I truly belive without her on the ticket, Barack would not win the GE against McCain--which keeps Republicans in control for another 4 years...and at which time I think Hillary would have a clear and easy run at President in 2012.  But that would leave us having to get through the next 4 years.  And I think that would be her single reason for considering accepting--because if she would, I believe she thinks that would mean 16 years under Democrats.  Not good for her personally or what she might want (because yes, as others have stated, I think her talents would be wasted as VP), but I think she'd consider it for the good of the Democratic party and the country--uniting the Democratic party as she has clearly stated she will remain focused on.          

by ChargedFan 2008-05-14 07:08PM | 0 recs
Dream on

Not. Gonna. Happen.

by NM Ward Chair 2008-05-14 07:59PM | 0 recs
My Kool-Aid Is Not Strong Enough

This is my first post here.

I'm an Obama supporter.

My kool-aid is not strong enough for me to swallow an Obama/Clinton ticket.

Good points have already been made against it. It would be a recipe for a bad brew and plenty of psychodrama.

by BluePearl 2008-05-14 06:16PM | 0 recs
Re: My Kool-Aid Is Not Strong Enough

Just the opposite for me. Clinton on the ticket is the only way I will swallow Obama as the nominee...

by SaveElmer 2008-05-14 08:08PM | 0 recs
The problem with that is Bill

He is the reason Hillary will never get the VP slot.  He could never keep his mouth shut.  You can't fire the VP's husband if he gets cranky and starts spouting nonsense.

by pjv 2008-05-14 06:36PM | 0 recs
Re: The problem with that is Bill

true enough.  The Clintons have always been and will always be a team.

They would BOTH have to sign off on it.

by DawnG 2008-05-14 07:29PM | 0 recs
Re: The problem with that is Bill

true enough.  The Clintons have always been and will always be a team.

They would BOTH have to sign off on it.

by DawnG 2008-05-14 07:29PM | 0 recs
I just don't know if it'll be as big a dream...

...as people make it out to be.

Anyone who is going to be VP must not outshine the pres nominee.  Both Clintons would have to be put in a position to tow Obama's line and I just don't see that happening.  I don't know how the more ardent Clinton supporters would react to that.  

It's not my call so I'm not going to form a hard and fast opinion about it either way, but I honestly don't think it will be as awesome and dreamy a combo as people think it will.

by DawnG 2008-05-14 07:26PM | 0 recs
The Obama Adminstration

The Obama Adminstration will be run by Barack Obama and he will select his own running mate, just as every nominee before him has.

Hillary will be Obama's running mate only if Obama wants her to be and she accepts. IMO both of those conditions are long shots. It is more likely (seven cents will get you a dollar) that Hillary will somehow win/steal the nomination.

by Sam Wise Gingy 2008-05-14 07:46PM | 0 recs
Re: The Obama Adminstration

And by "steal", I presume you mean she will convince a majority of the delegates seated under the rules to vote for her? You should not throw around words like "steal" in this context.

Even if she were disposed to "stealing" (which, you know, she's not), it would be hard for her to arrange for stuffing of ballot boxes or fraudulent voting machines at the Democratic National Convention. Someone would notice.

by itsthemedia 2008-05-15 08:09PM | 0 recs
Re: The Obama Adminstration

The point is a Hillary nomination is not very likely under any circumstances, and less likely still is an invitation for Hillary to be Obama's vice president.

by Sam Wise Gingy 2008-05-16 09:14AM | 0 recs
Re: The Obama Adminstration

My point is that the comment implied a Clinton win would be some sort of crime. That is no way to mend fences.

by itsthemedia 2008-05-18 06:12PM | 0 recs
Let Obama Make the Decision

Stop pressuring Obama to take Clinton as VP just bc you're sore that she lost.

There is no primary election for VP so Obama should be able to choose the person that he thinks is best for the job and, from a political standpoint, that person is not Hillary. She doesn't complement him well on the ticket (foreign policy experience...), doesn't fit the moral criteria to be in the Obama campaign (she takes money from lobbyists and she's old Washington), and she doesn't fit the role of VP.

by tpdteatro 2008-05-14 07:47PM | 0 recs
In addition, she went negative

playing the race card and doing things meant not to get support but to damage Obama.  When you throw rocks, you break things.  You can't just pretend it didn't happen.

Keep spinning, Todd.  Hillary has damaged herself, and how she handles the remainder of the campaign will determine if she has a political future at all.  VP is not in the cards.

by NM Ward Chair 2008-05-14 07:56PM | 0 recs
Not only it is the most efficient ticket, it is

also the only one that really unites the party. I think that our supporters are mistaken big time when they think that replacing one woman by another such as Sebellius (plus she has as much charisma and personality as a zucchini) and thus tricking the female electorate to turn out in huge numbers.  

I have no problem whatsoever with Clinton being on the ticket. I happen to think that she actually could and would be a very effective VP.

by likelihood zero 2008-05-14 08:41PM | 0 recs
todd, you are making things worse.

please stop with the spin and the cherry-picking of polls.  you keep trying to shove clinton into a VP position.  she's not running for VP, so please stop projecting your wishes onto her.  it insults, offends, and INFURIATES many of her supporters, so PLEASE STOP.  obama has insulted and angered many of us beyond belief, so please do not anger us even more by pressuring her into making up for his shortcomings.  let him fall on his own; his repulsive campaign has earned it.

by nance 2008-05-14 11:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

While I would like to see Hillary on the ticket, it probably would prove to be a miserable experience for him.  She would probably try to Cheneyize her Vice Presidency.  Would she really wait until 2016 to take charge?

by Bob H 2008-05-15 03:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama/Clinton Ticket = The Will of the People

Yes, Hillary Clinton is just like Dick Cheney. (roll eyes) Geez, get over your hatred - she is a good liberal and loyal Democrat.

by itsthemedia 2008-05-15 08:13PM | 0 recs
Hillary's base think Obama is a Muslim

see:  http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index. jhtml?videoId=168561&title=indecisio n-2008-west-virginia&byDate=true

The Clinton's controlled the Democratic Party for 16 years, yet she is loosing to a young black man with a Muslim name.  If she is such an asset, why isn't she the nominee?  Why couldn't she "close the deal?" It's all over, except the crying.  Please get on with the crying and get over it.  We have work to do.

by braised cod 2008-05-15 07:04AM | 0 recs
Hillary has no biz to be a VP

especially for Obama

by engels 2008-05-15 07:08AM | 0 recs
Obama/Clinton

All of the Dems who voted in these primaries constitute perhaps a quarter of the electorate which will turn out in November.  I don't think it's clear at all that an Obama/Clinton ticket would strengthen the Dems in the general.  Have no doubt that it would help unify the party, but the million dollar question is whether it would make indies less likely to vote for him.  I don't think there are polls yet which provide a good answer.  

Since the Democratic nominee doesn't have to pick a VP until late August, the best course, it seems to me, would be to let the primary race play out and choose then.  Lastly, the viability of Clinton in the VP slot would depend upon her committing to be loyal not just to the ticket but the new administration (eg. she'd have to pledge not to challenge a President Obama in 2012), and I don't think it's clear yet whether she or her supporters are ready to do this.  

by IncognitoErgoSum 2008-05-15 07:13AM | 0 recs
how is the question asked?

Is HRC listed in a field of other candidates?

Perhaps the pollsters ask which things about Obama are perceived as weaknesses and then the pollsters ask which VP would balance these weaknesses?

Just asking if HRC is a good running mate for Obama seems to be a biased way of asking the question.

by Carl Nyberg 2008-05-15 07:59AM | 0 recs
Who cares what the public thinks?

If asked, of course the public will say that HRC should be the VP, because she has the highest name recognition.  This doesn't mean it would be prudent from an electoral or governing standpoint. Public opinion is ill-informed, and should not be used as a basis for critical decisions such as this one.

by ctd72 2008-05-15 09:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Who cares what the public thinks?

Exactly.  I would like to see the same poll done but ask each person if they could even name other possible choices. The will of the people decides the nominee.  The nominee decides on the vp nominee.

by WellstoneDem 2008-05-15 09:41AM | 0 recs
Nonsense!

I really don't know why MyDD has become so in love with the ideal of Hillary as a VP.  Its bad in so many ways you can't start to count.

Shall we start the list -

1) the Clintons lie - truth is something that they use when handy

2) the Clintons only care about themselves - Bill oversaw the loss of both the House and the Senate.  They don't care about the Democratic Party at all

3) no sane person would/should trust them.  Their interest is seeing that Obama looses - Hillary and Bill will knife him in the back whenever possible.

4) Obama has campaigned against Clinton Politics from the start - lying, using one group against another when handy - polarizing the electorate, abandoning principles when handy are all hallmarks of Clintonian Politics.  For Obama to select her is to say never mind, nothing I have said matters - I'm just the same old, same old.

5) the idea that the beloved blue collar worker that is suppose to love Hillary is gonna vote for a Democrat for Pres, be it Hillary as the President or Vice President, is simply nonsense.  Most of those votes are headed to McCain in the Fall anyway.  

We can go on but their is no need.  The idea is dangerous.

I see this as another way to make sure Obama looses - whip up some groundswell of support for the idea that she has to the VP and when it doesn't happen they get upset and go into a corner and throw a fit.

Face it she has lost and needs to take herself and hubby and go away.  The simple, sad fact is that there a huge number of folks in the Democratic Party that just sick of their lies and parsing the truth on every occasion.  

The Hill Bill show is polarizing and no sane person wants to take on their baggage.  Besides this Obama will need to know that his VP has his back covered.  All he can expect from the Clintons is a knife in the back at the first opportunity.

by mwfolsom 2008-05-15 12:09PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads