wow I guess I can post a comment again after all.

Clinton is a strong administrator, senator.
What I wanted to add was that she's also
really in touch with a class of voter thats
different from Obama's base voter.

I disagree with the idea that the clintons "scandals" are going to stop her as VP. The candidacy of Obama, as president, is a singular exercise in seeing him face head-on the "scandals" the news media entertainment companies are running for ratings. Wright was a good example about that.

In the end, I don't see any emnity between Obama and Bill, or Hillary -

The ticket really speaks of one message, not a divided message - one that says Change is coming. Whatever aspect of Clinton's office that is largely ceremonial reflects whatever part of that message that simply doesn't throw out the baby with the bath.

But Clinton would go after national healthcare and frankly thats huge.

gorebeatbush?

I am sorry but I smiled when I read your post.
Caustic attack.

Ah.. do  we expect anything else?
This is the post Karl-Rove GOP we are talking about. They will swiftboat a rock lying on the ground.

Ya I was just thinking about how much.
Based on the current delegate math, Clinton reaches into northeaster strongholds where McCain's more conservative supporters would be found.

And Obama definitely hammers McCain in the south. They both did extremely well in Texas and California. In fact I remember clearly people in texas polled as saying they were happy with both candidates.

So. Lets see...  Obama has McCain right now by 3 percent, and thats currently with McCain getting the sapper hit on him while he's fighting Clinton.
Clinton carries about 2, to 5 percent in most districts.

But the Voter Registration is up 3 to 1 over the GOP. So lets assume that 20 percent of that base can defect.

That leaves 48% , then factor in the margin from the GOP side that will draw against them and that buffs McCain by 36%

And Obama moves deep into that group of "Anyone But Hillary " voters out there.

Wow. Yeah. And McCain's "Anyone but McCain" voters will move to Obama. Thats probably good for another 5 percent switch.

I would therefore predict the dream ticket to be

100 - (48+36) / 2 % /.96 = margin breaking for the dems out of the swing votes without buffs. = 9 points.

So adding it up. You will have 9 points breaking for the Dems out of the swing votes, Plus the average of Obama and McCain's take over the expanded electorate , at 48%

That puts them in the Whitehouse with 57% of the vote, compaired to McCain's 36 -5 +7 = 38% of the Vote.

So my prediction is that the Obama/Clinton ticket would take 57% of the vote, and the GOP would divide their vote and walk away with 38%

And this assumes that McCain chose a strong
candidate VP / no necessary victories in Florida or Texas played into the math. Remember, Obama didn't really campaign there.

Obama/Clinton: 57%
McCain/Cheney: 38%  

so talented, she could beat a freshman senator with a funny name

HA!

So talented, she had no-post Super Tuesday plan.

Well but this is what we have SD and party leaders for.  Because there are issues in addition to votes.  HRC supporters also give monies to the DNC, DCCC, etc as well as vote.  And the party does not what to lose these people.  What ever happens in the fall the party must go on and the last thing we can do is lose voters and donors.

david

This Hillary has been mistreated meme has to come to an end.   If anyone has been mistreated by his fellow democrat its Obama.   I think it would be very hard for Obama to put her on the ticket.    Republicans would run ad of Hillary say she brings a lifetime of experience and McCain brings a lifetime of experience and Obama brings a speech from 2002.    Said she would of left his church.   All the while Obama has consistently said HRC is qualified to be commander in chief.   And yes Obama has regularly been attacked by Lanny Davis, Terry McCaulife, Kiki McClain, Howard Wolfson, etc.

He will want someone who shares his vision

Help me here.

What is his vision?  And how would someone different share it?

If it's a "new kind of politics," that kind of eliminates most season politicians, since they are all mired in an older kind of politics.

So, what is his vision, and who shares it?

Kerry was forced to pick Edwards? I missed that memo. I was always under the impression that he picked Edwards because he really developed a strong message towards the end of the primary campaign.

No clue about Reagan and Bush, as I wasn't alive then.

But the point here is more that I think you're making the assumption that just because a candidate picked the last competitor standing for VP doesn't mean they were "forced" into it.

"He would have beaten her by less than 1% of the final delegate & Super Delegate count."

From where are you getting 1% ?

currently, Obama has a 5% lead  1874 delegates out of 3570 (pledged & super)  Hillary has 1696 (pledged & Super) -   53% - 48%

I seem to remember from my American History class in high school the constitution originally written that whomever came in second in the general election was VP? Can anyone confirm?

So originally presidents had no choice. I'd guess it was changed because of some tense working relationships. So there is some constitutional precedent for pairing up the top two finishers.

No. In my previous post I likened the changes in this office to engine problems in an airplane.

You have to pilot the plane to the mechanic's airstrip in order to fix it.

Clinton would hardly loom over Obama in the current empowered VP but she would definitely know how to bring it in for a landing so it could be retrofitted.

One thing for example: When the Iraq war decision was struck, Cheney actually created a separate Intelligence Bureau that reported to the office of the VP.  

Clinton would dismantle that. I mean, I just think she would know what to do.

Atila the hen. lol

I believe that the Clintons will continue to campaign all the way to convention because its a solid way to unwind the campaign but I disagree that there has to be some kind of deal.

In the end, Obama and Hillary will sit down. Have a cup of coffee. And laugh about the primary together, and then quietly get down to business just as they did when they worked together with ea. other in the Senate.

Obama is a born statesman, a community builder. He hears consensus. Very gifted. you could see it in his 2004 speech to the Convention.

I see this as a more organic thing. I've been happily married for 15 years. I remember what my dad said once.. "Son, its a good idea if you marry someone - to marry someone who can keep the books straight".

Clinton strikes me as extremely qualifed for the job. I don't know for certain but I wouldn't give up if I were her. But by that same token I would bow out at the convention.

I would give anything to be a fly on the wall when she gets the call.

Really? The "only" way he'd get your vote? If nothing Obama can do will change your mind, then your mind is closed. That's sad.

That is stupid.  If Obama isn't good enough with Bill Richardson as his VP then why is he good enough with Clinton as his VP?  

My Dream Ticket Since January of LAST YEAR:

1. Obama President.

2. Clinton, VP.
   
3. Richardson, Secretary of State.

Say what you want about Richardson's Gaffes, he took the North Koreans to the table while Bush was in office and got them to shut down their program. He is an ideal Sec. of State.

Al Rodgers abusing the system and the website again.

BS!

Progressive Blue

Isn't Obama the candidate who rises above hate, old prejudices, and past partisanship?  Maybe his followers should start heeding his message...or is his message just not that inspiring to follow.

It isn't a matter of toughness. It is a matter of trust.  I don't trust Hillary & Bill Clinton to do what is right for the Obama administration.  They will always think of themselves first.  We have enough problems to fix without having to worry about what Clinton is up to.