MyDD :: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP

Hillary if you Lose you better take VP

by DTaylor, Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:03:22 PM EST

There has been a lot of talk about who the VP would be if Obama wins.

I think if Obama loses its pretty clear that the VP would be offered to him and he would be strongly pressured to accept.

But as a avid Hillary supporter I want to weigh in that if Hillary loses I expect her to be the VP. I expect this both from Obama and Hillary.

If Obama wins and offers the VP slot to Hillary and covers her from his rabid supporters wrath and makes it clear that we are all in this together and she accepts I would vote for that ticket.

Many people have said that Hillary would not take the VP slot because she has better things to do....

Let me say this as someone who LOVES the Clintons, Hillary you have to take it.

Having Hillary campaign for Obama nation wide speaking his praises would work to heal the divide that Obama has helped create. But Hillary has some of the responsibility for that divide too. And I would think much less of Hillary if Obama in good faith offered the VP and her reply was I have better things to do.

So to be clear. Hillary I totally support you and if you can get the nomination I am with you. But if you win, I expect you to take Obama with you and it will destroy your legacy in my mind if you don't.

And Hillary,

If you lose and Barrack is the nominee I will expect you as VP. If he is gracious in offering it to you and you decline It will destroy your legacy in my heart...
Obama the individual can be a gracious and sincere person and I believe he could move beyond the hate that many of his GOP and independent supporters have for the democratic party choice for president.

If he does so, Hillary you are on notice. We your most loyal fans EXPECT you to be a good soldier and carry Team Obama to victory either as your underticket or with you as the underticket.

Either way Hillary you and Bill are the only way this guy is gonna win...

Tags: Hillary, threat diary (all tags)

Permalink :: 116 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (2.00 / 1)

No thank you. I dont want any Clintons even near the white house.

by Cheebs on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:04:41 PM EST

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

eh, as an Obama supporter

I want an Obama/Clinton ticket.

and sorry Cheebs even if he did ask her you know you are still voting for him.

Obama said, as Bill beamed. "Thank you, President Clinton."

by TruthMatters on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:12:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sebelius fits him a hell of a lot better... (none / 0)

Gore really fit Clinton.

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:24:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (2.00 / 1)

I did, but her comments since the 6th have made me wake up to the type of damage she'd do to Obama as his Veep.

Plus, why would she want it? She can play a bigger role in the Senate.

John McCain: Healthcare for Kids? In America? No way

by bosdcla14 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:01:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

this seems more mean than (2.00 / 2)

useful.

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:13:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (2.00 / 1)

Thank goodness you have absolutely no say in such things.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:21:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

Agreed. Can you actually see Hillary (and even Bill) taking a back seat to anyone--but especially the guy who beat her? Talk about Operation Chaos.

by Rationalisto on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:25:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Two reasons it won't happen. (none / 0)

1. Hillary Clinton is far too strong a personality to play sidekick. And she brings Bill with her. I have a hard imagining this power couple playing a subordinate role to President Obama.

2. While it's true there isn't a huge chasm between their overall policies, the tone of the campaigns has differed dramatically. Essentially, Senator Obama has run directly against the traditional politics represented by Senator Clinton (and John McCain). It's largely rhetoric, but the lines have been drawn starkly, and it wouldn't make much sense to contradict the message by bringing Senator Clinton on board.

by McNasty on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:40:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This is the biggest joke I've seen (none / 0)

Obama has been every bit as tough and nasty as Clinton has, perhaps much more so, but certainly not less.

It amazes me that there are people out there that believe Obama's run a "clean" campaign.

For starters he attacked Hillary personally. Not on issues but personally. The reverse is not true.

Obama played the race card on the Clintons in order to gin up the black vote. It worked in the short run but he has hurt himself with the white vote.

The notion that there is a "new" politics and "old" politics is ABSURD. As if human nature has changed.

When Clinton was the front-runner Obama said she was "devisive" and that she'll say or do anything to get elected. Those are personal attacks and it drove up her negatives. But supposedly he's the "good" candidate and she's the "bad" one. What complete and utter bull.

by mmorang on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:20:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is the biggest joke I've seen (none / 0)

There are many things that feed into the idea that there's a new and old politics. It isn't JUST about how you campaign.

No way. No how. No McCain.

by freedom78 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 09:35:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If Hillary wants the vice presidency (none / 0)

nothing would prevent her from getting it. Obama's The Math is not powerful enough to prevent it.

That's it, baby; let's go win this election!

by Beltway Dem on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:13:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think The Logic would, though (none / 0)

The candidate chooses his or her runningmate. Nobody does it for him or her against his or her will.

Obama's writing his own ticket at this point.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:04:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You and Harold Ford (2.00 / 1)

See, it's not going to happen. Nobody's going to pressure Obama to take Clinton on the ticket, and he won't anyway. I know Harold Ford probably owes his DLC spot to Bill Clinton, but he's not going to pull through on this one.

He's going to choose the person he believes to be best at fulfilling his vision of the presidency should something happen to him. That's the role of the vice president, and that's what he's going to do.

Clinton, while their policies are similar, is entirely in opposition of the legacy Obama wants to leave in terms of transparent government and departure from politics as usual.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:06:27 PM EST

Re: You and Harold Ford (none / 0)

Nobody's going to pressure Obama to take Clinton on the ticket?

Well what about democratic voters and the 15 million or so democratic voters who voted for HRC. The voters have a way of making their own decission and maybe BO supporters might consider that and how important winning in the fall is.

david

by giusd on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:23:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I have, but I'd like an effective presidency after (none / 0)

;-) I say nothing about not nominating a fine strong woman. Just... not clinton.

Not because of anything personal, but because her campaign has been a walking trainwreck

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:25:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I have, but I'd like (none / 0)

The funny thing is i hear all the time that the reason HRC supporters should or have to support BO is "it winning stupid". Which i have to agree with. Isnt it about beating McCain.

But when it comes to putting together the strongest ticket to win in the fall i always seem to get its not about winning it about something else. So maybe someone can explain this to me. If it is not about winning why am i supporting BO again.

Because i am not interested in his slogans for change i think it is nonsense. I will support BO because it is about "winning stupid" for the democratic party. So if your response is just not clinton why cant clinton supports say just not BO?

david

by giusd on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:42:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well, other people will say (none / 0)

that to pick Clinton compromises Obama's candidacy of change.

I'm not sure I believe that.

I certainly don't believe Obama's kumbaya nonsense.

That said, there are plenty of other good strong women in our party. Some of whom have been helping Obama campaign (I am so so sorry I missed getting a chance to talk with Sebelius).

My response is more faceted than 'not Clinton' I do not believe she would be terribly effective as a vice president. She would be effective as a vice presidential campaigner (and were it Edwards who was going to be the nominee, you'd see much less friction outta me. he coulda pulled it off).

Veeps do not need to be chosen to 'get us states' or 'voting blocs'. They can be chosen simply to buttress the platform of a candidate (in which case, dodd might make a good idea for the 'experience' or clark for the military).

Then again, they can be chosen because they work well with the candidate. and I don't have a problem with that.

I strongly believe in winning in the fall, and if I thought Clinton wouldn't come into the Veep with strings, I'd take her. It's not her I don't like, it is who is behind her (Scaife? Scaife?!).

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:49:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Funny (2.00 / 0)

Speaking of Scaife, it's funny how HRC was able to talk to her and her husband's worst enemy civilly, but a lot of supposedly Democratic posters won't even entertain the idea of her being in the White House, even as Veep.

by Blue Jean on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:43:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Funny (none / 0)

That was hilarious.

Do you think Clinton was more sincere when she complained about the VRWC victimizing Bill in the 1990's? Or when she abandoned that idea to cozy up to Scaife et al during this campaign?

by Rationalisto on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:52:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'd have voted for her as President (none / 0)

I'm not that dumb.

I just think obama has better choices.

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:03:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd have voted for her as President (none / 0)

I didn't mean you, Rising Tide, or most of the other Obama voters here. You're all genuinely pro-Obama, and that's great. Unfortunately, there are a few Republican trolls who would be glad to destroy the Clintons, even (maybe especially) if it meant hurting Senator Obama.

by Blue Jean on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:29:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You can if you want to. (none / 0)

The difference is that Obama supporters happen to be, this time around, in a stronger position. He's going to be the nominee; that's a given. The VP position is his personal preference; he's given the party no reason to not trust his judgement (unlike Bush in 2000).

So while Obama supporters can say "no" to Clinton as VP because it's not a done deal, Clinton supporters' only option is to not vote on the head of the Democratic ticket if they don't like Obama or his choice of running mates. What you're risking is a receptive president that won't veto Clinton's legislation and will elect moderates or liberals to the Supreme Court.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:54:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You can if you want to. (none / 0)

Its not a choice.

We WILL vote for McCain.

Try and understand that, its not a family squabble here, you are trying to kill off my wing of the party and I won't support that.

by DTaylor on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:50:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You can if you want to. (none / 0)

It's your right. You should vote for who you think is best candidate. And as I've stated in another post, Roe v. Wade isn't all that important, anyway.

by Rationalisto on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:53:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"Kill off?" (none / 0)

You think that Obama being elected president would destroy the DLC? How do you figure?

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:00:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nobody in a position to do so (none / 0)

We've (collectively) nominated Obama because we trust his judgement. Judgement was one of his campaign platforms, after all.

We should trust him when he decides his own VP.

Besides, Hillary Clinton has aggravated most of the top brass of the party with her antics. They aren't going to go to bat for her.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:47:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nobody in a position to do so (none / 0)

Then Obama will fail miserably and next cycle the DLC will control the party.

by DTaylor on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:50:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Fair enough (none / 0)

I guess it just remains to be seen in November, then.

The DLC really hasn't done us a lot of favors lately, if you ask me.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:01:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You and Harold Ford (none / 0)

I appreciate the diarist devotion to Hillary and I agree with the last line. But the rest is nonsense. As someone addicted to hard work, she would never consider such an easy job.

by Tolstoy on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:59:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You and Harold Ford (none / 0)

I see your point, but I disagree.

The VP isn't about fulfilling a vision, so much as guaranteeing that the person who's a heartbeat away could jump into the Presidency with as little trouble as possible, and I don't doubt that CLinton fits that mold very well.

And, now, it's also about doing what's best to assure a winning ticket. The science of strategic selections shows minimal results, but as far as getting the party together, Clinton's working class voters, women, and Latinos, with Obama's blacks, the highly educated, and new voters...well, those numbers alone are enough to trounce McCain.

I guess what I'm saying in this: in a year where Republicans should get their asses beat, the ONLY thing that stands in our way is a divided Democratic party, with major defections and losses of independents. A unity ticket could end such problems very quickly. I know that the objection to Clinton, from many, is that she's seen as divisive, but I'm not sure Obama's voters would vote against him or stay home simply to keep her from being a winner. And will those who think Obama too inexperienced really dislike having their own favorite policy wonk at his side to create incredible, progressive policies? There are negatives. No doubt. But I see so many positives from such a ticket.

No way. No how. No McCain.

by freedom78 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 09:46:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

My guess: not going to happen from either side, and the discussion will take place behind closed doors.

Clinton is more useful, more powerful, and more effective in the Senate then in the (largely symbolic) VP position.

John McCain

by Mandoliniment on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:06:44 PM EST

the discussion has already taken place (none / 0)

... and they both have their picks for veep. (multiple)

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:26:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the discussion has already taken place (none / 0)

True enough.

John McCain

by Mandoliniment on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:56:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (2.00 / 2)

Does Hillary want to be associated with him going forward? Especially if she really thinks he can't win, as I do?

No politician ever lost an election because he underestimated the intelligence of the American public. - PT Barnum, paraphrased...

by jarhead5536 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:07:15 PM EST

Agree, and I'll take it a step further (none / 0)

I don't believe he can win the election without her, but she should restrict her role to campaigning for him.

by phoenixdreamz on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:44:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (2.00 / 1)

So when did anyone in the Obama camp say that Hillary would be offered the VP slot?
I truly doubt it will be offered.

Hillary is no more entitled to be VP than she was President.

Let the children lose it Let the children use it Let all the children boogie

by toyomama on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:08:30 PM EST

And By The Way, (none / 0)

You're an 'avid' supporter, but we're 'rabid' supporters? That's not very nice.

Let the children lose it Let the children use it Let all the children boogie

by toyomama on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:11:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

Obama has said he could see her as VP, I think.

ENOUGH!

by JDF on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:24:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Agreed - first female V.P. she has to do it (none / 0)

She has to be asked. V.P.s have a much stronger chance of becoming president.

by catfish1 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:09:33 PM EST

Re: Agreed - first female V.P. she has to do it (none / 0)

"She has to be asked"
Yeah right. She'd be a drag on the ticket and would lose independents for Obama.

"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband

by venician on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:14:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Agreed - first female V.P. she has to do it (none / 0)

Disrespect Hillary lose the votes....its as simple as that.

by DTaylor on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:52:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Agreed - first female V.P. she has to do it (none / 0)

I have to say I agree with you. The Clinton's are very good at playing victim. It's their strongest hand. Back them against the wall, they turn vicious. And their supporters follow suit.

I think the Democratic majority and the party's are beginning to realize this. The end results could get very messy.

by Rationalisto on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:58:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

First Female Veep, no problem. (none / 0)

but please, for the love of G-d, choose Sebelius! (or Miss Donna, or Napoletiano)

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:27:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Selebius is nap-inducing (none / 0)

She is soft spoken Obama needs to counterbalance that.

by catfish1 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:03:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

who would you choose? (none / 0)

I liked her because of her great party-switching powers! (i.e. getting half of the kansan republican party to switch).

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:17:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

HRC had to get a Black VP (none / 0)

because of the subtle race-baiting and general scorched-earth campaign.

Obama and his supporters never made arguments like, "HRC is in this b/c of the female vote and that's a Dem constituency, so it's not relevant."

HRC's racist campaign tactics and the fact Obama was winning put her in the situation she had to offer to Obama or a qualified Black candidate.

But just b/c HRC's actions put her in a situation she had to offer to Obama, this does not mean Obama has to offer to her.

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:10:43 PM EST

Re: HRC had to get a Black VP (2.00 / 2)

You're right. Instead they went out and talked about her "crying fits." They had campaign surrogates everywhere talking about how Bill Clinton supposedly called the idea of a black candidacy "a fairy tale." They encouraged "pant suit" humor and every other subtly sexist examination of Hillary Clinton they could generate. They played the race card hard, and the gender card very subtle.

Smart campaign Obama's run. But the tactics haven't gone unnoticed by those of us who are not in the fan club.

The universe is a casual place, not a suit-and-tie affair.

by mtnspirit on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:16:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: HRC had to get a Black VP (1.00 / 4)

I won't vote for Obama even if Hillary is on the ticket.

Until recently I was selling drugs, and now I'm selling Obama T-shirts.

by switching sides on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:24:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Your nose called. (2.00 / 1)

It requests to be cut off, as it despises your face and believes its removal will teach you a lesson.

by McNasty on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:44:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: HRC had to get a Black VP (none / 0)

What are you going to do in preparation for November elections?

Are you going to work for good, progressive candidates for Congress? At the state and local level?

Or are you going to hang out online spending your energy sniping at Obama?

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:41:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: HRC had to get a Black VP (1.00 / 2)

Im certainly not going to vote for a man who disenfranchised millions of voters.

Real democrats count all the votes.

Until recently I was selling drugs, and now I'm selling Obama T-shirts.

by switching sides on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:58:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: HRC had to get a Black VP (none / 0)

Fine. You said won't you won't do to support Obama.

What will you do to affirmatively undo the harm done the the country under the Bush administraton?

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:01:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: HRC had to get a Black VP (none / 0)

Carl

You personally are a big reason I will be voting for McCain. When you cast your vote feel secure that I am busy uncasting it.

How does it feel to be disenfranchised?

by DTaylor on Thu May 08, 2008 at 09:38:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're attributing (2.00 / 1)

a lot of inanity in the mainstream media coverage to the Obama campaign directly. I don't think that's accurate. Can you show us how Senator Obama or his campaign team "encouraged 'pant suit' humor," or how he "went out and talked about her 'crying fits?'"

by McNasty on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:43:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't remember anyone (none / 0)

talking about "crying fits".

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:30:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't remember anyone (none / 0)

General Merrill McPeak, and Obama advisor, said in an interview on Feb 2 that Obama "doesn't go on television and have crying fits." Google it, it's pretty easy to find.

The universe is a casual place, not a suit-and-tie affair.

by mtnspirit on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:41:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't remember anyone (none / 0)

He shouldn't have said that.

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:02:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Scorched earth my ass (2.00 / 1)

Dems always do this - run away from acknowledging any national security threats.

The hand-wringing doesn't help.

by catfish1 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:04:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Scorched earth my ass (none / 0)

What national security issue did Obama duck?

Does HRC's willingness to kill Arabs make her more credible on national security in your eyes?

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:29:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Iranians are PERSIAN not ARAB (none / 0)

But I'm just a low information racist.

And she was not advocating bombing people of one ethnicity, she was addressing their Bush-like nutso leader.

by catfish1 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:04:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (2.00 / 1)

Obama world seems too arrogant to consider Hillary.

Instead, they need to huddle and say, WHO CAN GET US THE DEMOGRAPHICS WE'RE NOT STRONG WITH?

Such as: Woman, working class (and now I hear the 'yes we can' bunch saying OBAMA WENT FROM 29 to 34% with working class, so he's on the move! Yipee!) and seniors.

Hmmm. Let's ask again. Who can get him working class, women, seniors?

Jim Webb? Hmmm. No.

A mystery? Who? Can anyone think of someone who can help them win women, working class and seniors...and, also, while we're on the subject, the 30% of Hillary supporters who are not for him?

Hmmmmm. Is it Al Gore? No. I can't think of anyone else.

And after all, for Obama world, this is about process, not power. Cause power is dirty and leads to, leads to, well, it's only about the small stuff: health care, abortion, middle class tax cuts, end of war in Iraq, no war in Iran. and after all, these items are only important if we win the way we want to.

Who can help with those constituencies?

Gee, it's a mystery.

Anyone have any ideas for a divided party?

by NY Writer on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:11:34 PM EST

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

YOu seem to think that only hillary has the women vote all locked up. She may on this site, but outside of this bubble, every women I know will support Obama now that hillary has lost.

"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband

by venician on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:16:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Every woman I know will support Obama... (none / 0)

Well, you don't know me, but subtract at least one woman from that "every woman".

This one will "sit it out".

by susie on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:03:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

*growls* (none / 0)

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:18:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Every woman I know will support Obama... (none / 0)

That is certainly your right and your choice. To be fair, though, you'd have to also forfeit your right to complain about the government. Would that even be possible?

by Rationalisto on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:16:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Every woman I know will support Obama... (none / 0)

Dudeee, no one in america has to forfeit their right to complain about the government. Are you sure.

daivd

by giusd on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:00:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Every woman I know will support Obama... (none / 0)

Not legally of course. Just to be fair. As I said.

by Rationalisto on Fri May 09, 2008 at 07:09:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sebelius, Richardson (none / 0)

and quite a few other people (including Clark if you really like clintonmachinery)

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:28:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (1.00 / 2)

After today's comments from the racists Clintons, no democrat will want to have anything to do with the Clintons, much less have Hillary as a VP.

by Spanky on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:16:01 PM EST

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (1.00 / 2)

Obama is the one who has playing the race baiting game this primary season.

Excuse me if I don't shed a tear that he's getting some back.

Until recently I was selling drugs, and now I'm selling Obama T-shirts.

by switching sides on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:34:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh re-he-heally? (none / 0)

Would you be a "hard-working American, white American" then?

by McNasty on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:46:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Won't be offered to her, (none / 0)

and she wouldn't take it anyway.

Is that the next victimhood moment we must look forward to: "Hillary was passed over for Veep?" Oy vey.

by McNasty on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:17:59 PM EST

so now you're threatening HRC (none / 0)

if she doesn't take the vp???lol

by 4justice on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:18:16 PM EST

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (1.00 / 1)

hill no need your stinky vp thing. ask some idiot like leahy or kerry.

Welcome to a Landslide without white Working class, Latinos, Women, Seniors and holding-on sweeties

by engels on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:18:46 PM EST

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

I don't think Obama will either offer or Hillary would accept, and here's why:

- Obama won't offer because it would run counter to the entire theme of his campaign: which is, we need a change in the way Washington works. This is not Hillary's message. For Obama to say that Hillary represents the kind of change he's looking for is a stretch.

- Why Hillary wouldn't accept. Frankly, it's not what she wants. I might even go so far as to say it's beneath her. She would have little in the way of actual responsibility and would probably not want to work in Obama's shadow. Also, there's always the possibility that Obama will lose in 2008, setting up a 2012 re-primary. If Obama loses, I doubt he tries in '12. I don't see Clinton NOT running in '12 if Obama loses.

"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."

by VAAlex on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:26:24 PM EST

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

OK,

Lets all agree that as the convention gets closer and closer many hardcore HRC supporters (older white and latino women) are going to be more and more vocal about having HRC on the ticket. And there argument is of course a strong one (48% of the vote).

If BO picks someone else these voters will see this as the ultimate diss on their candidate. Then lets try to guess what these tradiational swing voters, who have voted GOP in the past, are going to do.

BO can of course decide that he can win without some percentage of these voters but if he loses there will be real consequences. Because these voters, that Donna Brazil doesnt think she needs, may not be coming back.

david

by giusd on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:30:22 PM EST

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

You're dreaming. Obama can appeal to each demographic that may be upset or whatever without asking Hillary, who simply wouldn't be a good second fiddle for him because of her celebrity, her well-known negatives, and the fact that during the campaign she all but said he wasn't qualified to be C-in-C. You can't say that, and then demand the veep slot.

Sebilius, Napalitano, Rendell, Richardson, Clark, Zinni, Kaine.

One of them will be your next vice president. Hillary would make for a strong Senate majority leader, where she can try to work through Obama's health care legislation.

PS - Donna Brazille didn't say what you're saying she said.

PPS - He's under no obligation to offer the second slot to the person who came in second place. She may get 48 percent, but all that earns her is a primetime slot at the convention, maybe introducing him and talking up what a great prez he'll be. The veep goes to whomever Obama and company think will help him in the general and who he'd most like to work with for the next eight years, and who can carry out HIS vision if something happens to him. That's not Hillary on any count.

PPPS - Hill would have had to offer the nomination to Barack because her only path to victory was coup-by-superdelegate, in the sense that they'd have to deny the pledged delegate leader. He's under no such obligation, seeing as how he beat her fair and square.

by jbill on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:45:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

Totally agree. But dont be surprised if all those older women dont buy your argument and vote for McCain. Because i seem to have noticed that there a couple of demographics that he is doing really bad with.

david

by giusd on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:50:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think Clinton would be an excellent VP (none / 0)

She has a lot of traits that would make her an excellent vice-president -- she's got some relevant experience in case the worst happens, she's obviously capable of being the administration's attack-dog when needed, and she's got some experience at the sort of goodwill diplomacy that the VP generally does.

However, I think it would be an utter mistake for Obama to make her his VP candidate. Clinton would undermine Obama's theme and style of governance. He's running from the outside -- she's almost the definition of a Washington insider. He's running as a uniter and conciliator, she's running as a damaging fighter. And, his style is that of a negotiator, hers of a technocrat.

None of those attributes of hers are intrinsically bad, mind you -- they all have strong points -- but they're not part of the Obama campaign theme, one that's done an incredible job thus far by any measure. This is outside the obvious issues of negative ratings among the country at large for Clinton. No matter how little of it is her fault, the reality of the situation remains that she herself is a galvanizing force to the right.

by Rorgg on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:35:01 PM EST

Re: I think Clinton would be an excellent VP (none / 0)

So this is somewhat of a repeat.

But as a HRC supporter who doesnt really care for BO i have been told i need to support what is best for my party. You know the democratic party. And well it is about winning in Nov, right.

But you are telling me that HRC should not be on the ticket because it "would undermine Obama's theme and style of governance'. Well i think this is nonsense and dont support this i support HRC. So if it is about BO theme and style of government than why should i vote for him. I am just trying to get one straigth answer. Is it the party or BO.

Because it am not interested in the BO movement. I care abot winning and if BO is not interested in putting together the strongest ticket to win then why should I support him? Just checking.

david

by giusd on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:47:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I am in it for the party. (none / 0)

That's why i voted for obama, really.

It's not because of him -- he's an asshole.

But so is hillary, and you don't want two assholes on a ticket. They'd fight, and it might get public.

You want a good soldier for the veep. Do you see Hillary being the best soldier we could find?

I'm focused on finding the best ticket -- and getting a woman on the ticket would be a nice thing to see -- particularly since Sebelius seems to be such a solid pick.

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:54:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I think Clinton would be an excellent VP (none / 0)

Here's my answer: because his theme is a vital part of his strength as a candidate. If Obama wasn't positioned the way he was, he couldn't have beaten Clinton. His campaign theme and style have clearly struck a nerve with the population at large, if not with you.

If he tries to revamp or dilute his strongest asset to assuage the fraction of Democrats who are wedded to Clinton, he'll lose what's taken him this far.

by Rorgg on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:54:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

by Rorgg on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:35:05 PM EST

I am all for bringing a female VP but... (none / 0)

Due to Clinton's negative assaults against Obama..there is to much bad blood. I am sure he is not very happy with her attacking him like he was a Republican. I think a better fit would be Kathleen Sebelius...maybe the ladies would be happy with her...she seems like a very good alternative...at least to me. What do you think?

by netgui68 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:36:00 PM EST

Re: I am all for bringing a female VP but... (none / 0)

So you don't want our votes then?

by DTaylor on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:58:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I am all for bringing a female VP but... (none / 0)

I think Sen. Obama would definitely want your vote. But if it's Clinton or nothing, then this train may have to roll on without you.

by Rationalisto on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:27:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

100 % AGREE (none / 0)

At this point- Clinton as VP might be the only way I will get excited about Obama's campaign. Otherwise I will probably drop off the face of the earth for a while. I WONT vote for McCain- I just won't be able to honestly work hard for Obama. I just don't really like him very much. I like his policies on paper (most of them)- just not HIM. I'm also praying that he will win me over if he is the nominee. Who knows. I won't make excuses for myself- I'm just not very INSPIRED by him, like the Obamabots are. He seems like a lot of empty rhetoric. Sorry Obamafans. I will vote for him- I'll just hold my nose and pray for the best. I will say this- I honestly don't think he will win. I hate to say it- but I feel it in my gut. Too many people I know have started to dislike the guy. I'm talking about LIBERAL, LATTE DRINKERS too. I live in Hollywood- and the people I know actually voted for him here- but have since started donating/backing Hillary. I think we all see that he's in some trouble this fall. Oh well, we will just have to hope.
I don't believe Hillary's out yet though- and I'm still fighting for her. This isn't over, by a long shot.

by easyE on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:36:27 PM EST

Why? (none / 0)

Do you not like him? be honest. Also...every politician is filled with rhetoric until they have a opportunity to turn it into action...at that point either it turns to empty rhetoric or an honest attempt at action. But really I want to know the honest to god truth why you do not like him as a person. I am white and personally I like him because I have not caught him in intentional lies and deceptive practices, I agree with his policies, he plays by clean rules of engagement and he does not waver 180% on his positions. Now tell me why you do not like him with the same kind of detail...please...I want to truly understand whats not to like about him.

by netgui68 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:44:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why? (none / 0)

Because i am a city kid who had to go to chicago city schools and city college since my family couldnt afford private school To me BO is a typical NE private school educated arrogent condesending frontrunner. In addition, i find his campaign against HRC nothing but FOX news 90's smears. And i could go on.

And please no bs comments since i was asked specifically what i personally think. If you dont want to know what a HRC supporter like me thinks then dont ask me. And if you disagree with me that is fine That wil not prevent me from voting for him and donating to him but i dont have to like him.

david

by giusd on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:58:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thank you for your honesty... (none / 0)

I don't like him much either.

But they're both assholes, and I don't like either of them too much.

I voted for him because he was less of a machine candidate than Clinton.

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:56:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thank you for your honesty... (none / 0)

That was the biggest difference for me also...the machine has got to go...it is killing our Country and our way of life.

by netgui68 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:58:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Rage against the Machine! (none / 0)

... also, I despise the people backing Clinton (the money people. the people on this site actually care. that's a different story)

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:00:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rage against the Machine! (none / 0)

Yes...these people care...but their rage is mis-directed...notice nobody replied with any good reason to why they could not stand Obama. One person said Obama has divided the party...I ask how has he done so...nobody seems to have rational reasons for their statements...just statements that I have to assume as based on emotions and polarization of their desire to win.

by netgui68 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:07:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama has divided the party... (none / 0)

well, that's a common psychological trick. Ascribing your views to more people than they actually exist in.

Another is based on who you know, assuming you know the electorate.

(like how people who watch tv think more people are doctors than people who don't).

His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?

by RisingTide on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:23:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

strongly disagree (2.00 / 0)

I think the division in the party is all Obama's doing and she is not obligated to throw away her career to prop up what is probably going to be a losing ticket.
In more practical terms, she is better off in the senate and we don't need to lose another senator.

And if she should prevail at the convention, I think Obama has too many negatives to be offered the VP slot.

For Obama it now becomes: Faith, hope and CHANGE! And the greatest of these is Change!

by TeresaInPa on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:37:50 PM EST

Explain yourself...how (none / 0)

is it Obama's doing...what did he do specifically to divide us?

by netgui68 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:46:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Explain yourself...how (none / 0)

He dared to steal the precious....

by jbill on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:48:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Stealing the election is done (none / 0)

By bending the rules, cheating, lying, deception and other dark methods...winning the election is about following the rules of the game and winning the delegate game.

by netgui68 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:51:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: strongly disagree (none / 0)

Fortunately for you, then, she'll be outta the picture a long time before Denver. Only only in Hillaryland does her presence on the ticket prop him up. He's doing just fine, thank you very much.

by jbill on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:48:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: strongly disagree (none / 0)

Surprisingly, I agree with you, Theresa--in part. I do think Clinton is better off in the Senate. Unless she becomes a Lite-Right Lieberman clone.

A better place would be SCOTUS. Not only would she have to stay out of any future elections, she could give Scalia a healthy and brutal dose of his own medicine.

That alone would be worth the last four months.

by Rationalisto on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:34:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

DTaylor. Good diary! I am glad to see you are articulating how you could come around to Obama as the nominee. I feel doubtful somehow that Clinton will accept a VP slot (or that she will be offered it) but still, alot of people want to see this and it can't be disregarded out of hand.

by wasder on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:41:14 PM EST

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

I promise you that if Obama doesn't offer and in such a way as to RESTORE the reputation he took from the Clintons I will vote McCain.

If he offers and she declines I will sit out.

But I am only voting FOR a Hillary (top or bottom) or McCain ticket in 2008

by DTaylor on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:03:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

I agree. He should take her as a VP. After all, he needs someone to asnwer that 3AM call. lol

by ETHIOLIB on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:42:32 PM EST

A question for Hillary Supporters (none / 0)

Honest question here -

Assuming Obama wins the nomination, I know quite a few Clinton supporters on this board have stated they won't vote for Obama. I assume you'd all vote for Obama / Clinton.

But I'd be curious if you'd vote for the democratic nominee in the following scenarios:

A) Obama / Someone not tied to Clinton, Clinton not offered VP
B) Obama / Clinton Surrogate (Bayh, Clark, Strickland, etc) Clinton not offered VP
C) Obama / Somone not tied to Clinton, after VP slot was offered to Clinton and she declined
D) Obama / Clinton Surrogate, after VP slot was offered to Clinton and she declined

by grover738 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:19:05 PM EST

Re: A question for Hillary Supporters (none / 0)

NO
NO
NO and
NO

by susie on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:30:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A question for Hillary Supporters (none / 0)

ditto

by DTaylor on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:04:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A question for Hillary Supporters (none / 0)

Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Maybe.

by Blue Jean on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:51:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A question for Hillary Supporters (2.00 / 1)

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around that combination of answers...why the maybe on D?

by grover738 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:02:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A question for Hillary Supporters (none / 0)

Because I was tired and so were my fingers. I should have said "yes" to all of them, but right now, I'm at the "maybe" stage for "If Obama's veep is not Hillary, and not a Hillary supporter", and I got mixed up.

By November, it will probably be "yes" to all four, but I'll be happier about some choices than others, like if it's Hillary or a Hillary backer like Ed Rendall (whom we need, BTW, to win Penn.)

Sorry to confuse you or anybody else. :-(

by Blue Jean on Sun May 11, 2008 at 07:20:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (1.00 / 1)

this blog is getting so ridiculous that I better give up on being part of it. In your dreams she's going to be his VP. If he's the nominee, I will count the days to see his defeat in November when mccain beats obama badly.

by darlene25 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:20:30 PM EST

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

If Obama's election win makes your head explode, you have to promise to post it YouTube. I promise to post a pic of my broken heart if he loses. Deal?

by Rationalisto on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:38:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

The Republicans desperately want a Clinton on the ticket. There's no reason to give them one.

Obama/Clark is a good-enough reconciliation ticket, if that's the goal.

Obama/Sebelius or Obama/Napolitano is a good-enough "double first" ticket, if that's the goal.

Or we can let Obama pick whomever he wants, like every other person who wins the nomination.

by Wayward Son on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:23:11 PM EST

Re: Hillary if you Lose you better take VP (none / 0)

Team Obama did a hatchet job on the Clintons.

Either they completely take it back or they learn to say President McCain.

Taking it back will be painful for Team Obama.

Hillary as VP with Obama kissing her ass painful.

We would have done it for you.

by DTaylor on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:06:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We would have done it for you (1.00 / 1)

Bullshit.

Hillary would never have offered Obama the VP spot and he's not going to offer it to her. You want a third Bush term? Fine, vote McSame.

We. Don't. Need. You.

by BlueGenes on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:20:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

it is a good sentiment (2.00 / 1)

he's not going to ask. maybe you can consider that his failing but it will not happen. I don't think he wants Bill Clinton in the White House and I think there will be too much of a risk that she will overshadow him. Kemp/Dole, etc.

by ab03 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:25:19 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.