If BHO is the unifier he claims to be......

......then he should offer the 2nd place Democratic primary finisher, who'd have finished mere percentage points behind him in both the delegate count and popular vote (w/ about 15 million votes total), the #2 spot on the ticket.  I'm talking Hillary, natch!

Of course BHO is under no obligation to do so, but it would be a brilliant and bold communal move, one that would indeed bring the party back together and focused on a singular common goal, defeating Sen. John McCain in November!  There's no way McCain could survive a battle w/ the 4-headed monster of Barack, Hillary, Bill & Michelle, could he?  

If Hillary were to be VP, it's doubtful she'd ever make it to the Oval Office, but being the first female Vice-President is not a bad way to go down in history.  Not to mention she'd be a real ball-buster in our do-nothing Democratic Congress, doing whatever it takes to redeem her legacy by finally getting health care passed.  If BHO were to be VP, he'd gain valuable experience and be in spectacular shape for 2016, when he'd be around the same age John Edwards is now.  His popularity and Congressional allies will ensure him the clout to keep Bill at a distance, which, well let's face it, would be beneficial to Hillary as well.

The Dream Ticket doesn't sound so nightmarish now, does it?  Even the most long-standing Clinton-loather, blogger Andrew Sullivan, is suggesting as much, if grudgingly so:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment /columnists/andrew_sullivan/article38665 84.ece

"An Obama-Clinton ticket would certainly give the Democrats a massive sigh of relief -- and perhaps some euphoria.

The conservative white voters that Clinton has amazingly managed to attract could be combined with the massive infusion of new young votes, internet money, and African-American enthusiasm to create a potential tsunami in the election. Instead of having to pick between the first black president and the first woman president, the Democrats could offer voters both: the first black president and first female vice-president. Worries about Obama's relative youth and lack of Washington experience would be allayed by the presence of the Clintons. The toxicity of the Clinton baggage could be balanced by the hope Obama has inspired.

The Clintons could be deployed to shore up support in some of the Reagan Democrat states, while Obama wins over enough independents to carry the Mountain West and the upper Midwest. California, Ohio, New York, Florida and Pennsylvania could be secured."

and Sully's even hinting the groundwork may be starting:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/th e_daily_dish/2008/05/two-straws-in-t.htm l

To truly unite the country, wouldn't Sen. Obama need to unite his own party first?  And what better way to do so than to run with the Dream Ticket?

Do you guys agree? Disagree? Don't hold back, let's get it all out there!


Poll
Which Dem. ticket would you most like to see?
Obama/Clinton
Clinton/Obama
Obama/other
Clinton/other
Gore at the top if convention's brokered

Votes: 46
Results : Vote Link : Polls

Display:


Tips? (2.00 / 1)

Come together?


by BlueDoggyDogg on Sun May 04, 2008 at 05:32:37 PM EST

Re: Tips? (2.00 / 1)

I'll agree with you. I think it is a necessary act, regardless of their personal differences. An acknowledgment that neither has a stranglehold on the current Democratic ideology. Kindof like JFK/Johnson. It probably has to happen in order to win.


John McCain wants to make abortion illegal
by Lost Thought on Sun May 04, 2008 at 05:36:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't like THAT analogy.. (none / 0)

it DIDN'T end well..


Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Comprehensively cover 100%, not only the healthiest 80%
by architek on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:39:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tips? (none / 0)

Last night was not the first time - I recall a debate question to that effect from the fall.

Also, you are grossly oversimplifying what the Obama campaign has done. I'd love to hear about how he played the race card or based his campaign on call her names.


by Falsehood on Sun May 04, 2008 at 07:41:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If BHO is the unifier he claims to be...... (none / 0)

Unity takes two. Obama has never suggested that Hillary is unfit to take office - Hillary has said so on several occasions. How could HRC run as VP with a president she said is unfit to be commander in chief?


by highgrade on Sun May 04, 2008 at 05:38:18 PM EST

example please (none / 0)

Obama has said he disagrees with Hillary, and that she represents an old style of politics. He has never said that she doesn't have the competence/experience to be president, only that her winning would lead to "more of the same." Also, he has NEVER, EVER, compared McCain favorably to Hillary.  


by highgrade on Sun May 04, 2008 at 06:41:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: example please (none / 0)

Demonizing her personhood? I beg your pardon? As far as I've seen, here are the Obama attacks on her:

1. She is politics as usual.
2. The 90's didn't help everything.

Nor did Obama brush her of his shoe, he brushed the attacks off his shoulder.


by Falsehood on Sun May 04, 2008 at 07:44:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

There is a world of difference between how the two (none / 0)

approach things. Hillary is a very strong candidate, Obama, I think, is a very weak one.

The more I see of him, the less I like him.


Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Comprehensively cover 100%, not only the healthiest 80%
by architek on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:41:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Wait a sec... (none / 0)

Which is it... explicit or dogwhistle that matters?

Just above you said that Obama hasn't said before recently that he'd campaign for Clinton... when he has implied it heavily without giving his opponent undue soundbytes to work from in the past many times.

So reading between the lines is important now, because you think he somehow implies that Clinton is unfit for office, but he needed to say that he'd support Clinton explicitly if she were the nominee?

You're all over the place on this.  Which is important, inference or explicitness?


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Sun May 04, 2008 at 06:55:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're not even bothering to read. (none / 0)

Obama said a month ago that his Organizing Fellowship would be trained and be unleashed to bring up voter turnout and promote Democratic causes regardless of who the nominee is; further, if you don't think Obama would campaign for any Democrat, then you haven't been paying attention.

It's Clinton that needs to re-inforce these facts because A) she's not going to be the nominee, and B) she's been unusually vigorous by Democratic primary standards in attacking Obama's credibility and worthiness for the White House.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Sun May 04, 2008 at 07:11:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If BHO is the unifier he claims to be...... (2.00 / 1)

most likely the only way BHO could salvage my vote if he cheated his way to the nomination would be taking Hillary as his Veep. With that being said, I don't know how I would feel about that, considering I don't want Hillary to be associated with such a surely abysmal adminstration.


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 05:39:07 PM EST

I hope you feel the same about Clinton, then... (none / 0)

Because the only way Clinton is going to win this one is probably by "cheating."

Obama doesn't need to cheat.  He's winning legitimately.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Sun May 04, 2008 at 06:56:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I disagree... (none / 0)

I think that Obama is trying to coerce himself into the Presidency


Universal healthcare IS a core Democratic value
Comprehensively cover 100%, not only the healthiest 80%
by architek on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:45:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If BHO is the unifier he claims to be...... (none / 0)

Please explain how he cheated, and how you know his administration will fail.

For someone so doomed, Obama's doing rather well, don't you think?


by Falsehood on Sun May 04, 2008 at 07:45:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If BHO is the unifier he claims to be...... (none / 0)

By Affirmative Action... do not count Michigan and Florida.


by SHIBAM8P on Sun May 04, 2008 at 08:31:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If BHO is the unifier he claims to be...... (none / 0)

Mr. Obama isn't the one who voted to strip FL/MI of their delegates. That was a group including Harold Ickes.

It is true that the campaign did not support re-votes, and you have a legit point there, to the degree that a re-vote was feasible. However, the votes as cast cannot legitimately count - there was no real campaign, and Obama supporters didn't have a candidate to vote for!

Your claim of affirmative action has as much weight as the opposite claim - that Obama has lost votes because of his race, unless you can back it up.


by Falsehood on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:21:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nah (none / 0)

He can't be for progress and bring the Clinton's back to the White House. That's regression.
by clad on Sun May 04, 2008 at 05:39:58 PM EST

Re: Nah (none / 0)

She'll live the VP house ;)

Anyways, the VP actually has relatively little influence on policy. Or, more precisely, only as much influence as the President wants them to have. When they are not named Cheney


John McCain wants to make abortion illegal
by Lost Thought on Sun May 04, 2008 at 05:44:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nah (none / 0)

Agreed - LBJ was laughed at in the Kennedy White House, until they all worked for him.


by Falsehood on Sun May 04, 2008 at 07:46:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If BHO is the unifier he claims to be...... (none / 0)

If choosing a VP is about unity perhaps it should be about what 'unites' the nation as a whole, not what 'unites' the voters one side of the aisle.


by My Ob on Sun May 04, 2008 at 05:48:51 PM EST

Re: If BHO is the unifier he claims to be...... (2.00 / 1)

Yes, and if he picks a Republican, then there's no reason for me NOT to vote for McCain then, and there's no reason why Hillary should't run with John either, right?


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 05:54:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If BHO is the unifier he claims to be...... (none / 0)


   He's not going to pick a Republican. Get off your high horse.

   And you need to quit abusing your trolling privilege. My comment that you t-rated was in no way trollish.


by southernman on Sun May 04, 2008 at 05:58:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If BHO is the unifier he claims to be...... (none / 0)

"Yes, and if he picks a Republican"

I have much the same response as when somebody in Senator Clinton's campaign said  "if only" Democratic primaries were held under Republican winner-take-all rules, she would be the winner.

You are stretching the elasticity of the if word beyond its breaking point.


by My Ob on Sun May 04, 2008 at 06:23:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why? (none / 0)


   What does hillary get him that some other V.P. possibility (like Sebelius) doesn't?

 


by southernman on Sun May 04, 2008 at 05:57:55 PM EST

Re: Why? (none / 0)

Here is why Sebelius is a bad pick.  Because she is a women and older women who support HRC will see this as a diss. They will say BO screwed our candidate and then picks another women and we are not smart enough to see that BO is dissing HRC. It will look like a craven political move by BO to bring HRC supporters to his campaign whle still locking her out.  I think this a huge mistake.

Just IMHO.

david


by giusd on Sun May 04, 2008 at 06:20:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I agree (none / 0)

Obama is going to pick the best person for the job; regardless of gender or color; I think he understands, however, the trouble of choosing a female candidate that isn't Clinton.

I'm not sure what he'll do, but whatever he does, there's going to need to be some healing time.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Sun May 04, 2008 at 06:58:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why? (none / 0)

because she is boring as all hell and we have zero chance of even breaking 40 in that state.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sun May 04, 2008 at 07:47:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

test (none / 0)

please ignore


by N in Seattle on Sun May 04, 2008 at 06:12:40 PM EST

knowing that she'd never accept... (none / 0)

...playing second fiddle behind him, Obama just might make such an offer.  That way, the onus (if there is one) would be hers.

Then again, as I recall, Jack Kennedy offered the vice presidency to Lyndon Johnson because he knew that LBJ would never accept playing second fiddle behind him.


by N in Seattle on Sun May 04, 2008 at 06:16:18 PM EST

Re: If BHO is the unifier he claims to be...... (none / 0)

OK,

Here is my opinion of what is going to happen.  Hillary will get very close but without MI and FL she will be just behind BO.  HRC supporters will be upset because MI and FL get shafted but HRC has no choice but to quit.  But there will be an immediate call for her to be BO VP and this will gain momentum as we get closer and closer to the convention. And BO numbers against McCain will hold with a slight lead.

Then it will be decision time.  BO will see the poll numbers showing that if he picks someone other than HRC for the VP her supporters will either go south or vote for McCain.  This would be my 75 year old mother in law.  If he picks someone else then HRC supporters will feel deflated and pissed because of how close it was and the MI and FL vote was not counted.  Thus, this will allow HRC supporters to say "BO" screwed us and our candidate and well screw him.  If he picks someone other than HRC, these voters will be really upset and with the election just three months away there will not be time to heal these wounds and IMHO BO we will lose in Nov.  If he picks HRC then there will be a huge surge in support from HRC supporters, especially older women, to a unity ticket.  And of course all the free press for the UNITY ticket.  This knocks McCain off his message and the unity ticket dominants the news for at least a two or three weeks.

And one last thing.  No you are wrong.  This is just my opinion I have no idea what will really happen.

david


by giusd on Sun May 04, 2008 at 06:17:02 PM EST

Re: If BHO is the unifier he claims to be...... (2.00 / 1)

I'd thought the idea absurd, but Sullivan makes quite the case.


John McCain: Cheney with a temper
by wrb on Sun May 04, 2008 at 06:23:44 PM EST

Not going to happen. (none / 0)

Obama won't do it.  Period.  He wants the person in the VP spot to be the most qualified person to carry on his policies and politics if something happens to him.  

Clinton, for all of her strengths, is not someone who will act even close to how Obama would.  She is not in favor of the transparent and diplomatic government that Obama endorses.  He doesn't trust her not to lie to the American people (the recent gas tax fiasco is enough proof of that).

Furthermore, he doesn't want to be looking over hsi shoulder for eight years wondering when the shoe is going to drop.  No, I'm not saying Clinton would have him assassinated; that doesn't mean, however, that there wouldn't be opportunities for her to have new scandals or start meddling in ways that cause trouble and shake public confidence in the administration.  I believe, for example, that there's even a lawsuit pending for her 2000 Senate campaign finances having some fraud accusations... that hasn't seen much light recently, but if she's the vice president (or even the VP nominee), you can be sure that all the questionable acts, people, and institutions both Clintons have been involved with will become daily news.  That's not my bias, that's just an observation after surviving the '90s.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Sun May 04, 2008 at 07:08:06 PM EST

Re: If BHO is the unifier he claims to be...... (none / 0)

One of the biggest jokes i have heard this election is that HRC will do anything to win.  Like BO wont do anything or what it takes to win.  And frankly i dont want a democratic candidate who is not will to do what it takes to win.  And lets not kid ourselfs BO has shown he will do anything to win.  And if he looks at the polls and focus groups and he comes to the conclusion that he needs HRC on the ticket to win then he will.  That is just my opinion.  Because the botton line is if BO doesnt win he is done.  He will not get another chance at the white house if loses.  Reagan did this in 1980 and JFK in 1960.  

david


by giusd on Sun May 04, 2008 at 07:21:20 PM EST

Re: If BHO is the unifier he claims to be...... (2.00 / 1)

I agree with you.  "Strategic" VP spot picks are overrated, and bringing these two, currently bickering halves of the party together would do more to help turn the White House blue than any other pick.  


No way. No how. No McCain.
by freedom78 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 07:28:40 PM EST

Re: If BHO is the unifier he claims to be...... (none / 0)

I'd say it would be bad because, to be frank, America may ready for really only one, not two white males on a single ticket. Too much change at one time would undoubtedly backfire. Its a shame no one will admit it, but I guess its the politically incorrect truth. Either will need a white male on the ticket to win.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sun May 04, 2008 at 07:49:13 PM EST

That's HisTest (2.00 / 2)

Can he unite the Democratic Party? If not, he's no uniter. He can start uniting the party by finding a solution to the Florida and Michigan problem.


Dizzy Zzyzzy
by Zzyzzy on Sun May 04, 2008 at 08:17:49 PM EST

Re: If BHO is the unifier he claims to be...... (none / 0)

hey how about  Ron Paul for VP ?

hmmmmm ??

that would cause such a stir


PUMA: Particularly Undeveloped Mental Ability
by wellinformed on Sun May 04, 2008 at 08:27:26 PM EST

The right is warming to Hillary (none / 0)

It started when Pat Buchanan started gushing admiration for how Bill Clinton was marginalizing Obama as the 'black' candidate leading up to NC. Then Scaife, Hannity, Scarborough and crew started jumping to Hillary's defense and aiming alll there invective at Obama.

But the Neo-Con Weekly Standard has finally practically endorsed Hillary. In a recent article they are positively smitten with the new Hillary writing:

"She's running a right-wing campaign. She's running the classic Republican race against her opponent, running on toughness and use-of-force issues, ..... And she's doing it with much the same symbols."

"And better--or worse--she is becoming a social conservative, a feminist form of George Bush. Against an opponent who shops for arugula, hangs out with ex-Weathermen, and says rural residents cling to guns and to God in unenlightened despair at their circumstances, she has rushed to the defense of religion and firearms, while knocking back shots of Crown Royal and beer."

"She might run to the right of McCain, if she makes it to the general election, and get the votes of rebellious conservatives. Or she, Lieberman, and McCain could form a pro-war coalition, with all of them running to pick up the phone when it rings in the small hours."

The Weekly Standard is suitably impressed with Hillary's conversion. They note they are not the only wingnuts warming up to Hillary quoting a post on National Review's blog, The Corner:

   "She's entering the culture war as a general. All of this has made her a far more formidable general election candidate. She's fighting the left and she's capturing the center. She's denounced MoveOn.org. She's become the Lieberman of the Democratic Party."

When right wing scumbags feel like you have adopted their methods, principles and ideals you really have lost your way.


by hankg on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:53:43 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.