MyDD :: Hillary Clinton for Vice President of the United States

Hillary Clinton for Vice President of the United States

by mtg44234, Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 12:51:48 PM EST

Hillary Clinton for the Vice President of the United States.

Plain and simple. No arguements. No questions. The only choice.

Here is why:

1. At the end of the primary season, Obama received 51% of the pledged delegates. Hillary recieved 49% of the pledge delegates. This is the most competitive primary season in the history of the United States.

2. Counting the votes: However you want to manipulate the math, Clinton and Obama virtually tied in the amount of votes received during the primary.

3. Hillary is her own woman. Hillary does not need Bill anymore. She has became to the first woman to compete in a primary and actually shown that it can, and eventually will be done, by a woman.

4. Clinton now has a massive list of email contributors. She has established her own following, and they are just as devote to her as Obama's our to him.

5. Every state the borders the State of Ohio went to Clinton. This is very important to remember. She won states with those electoral votes that will reach the 270 mark.

6. Obama's fundraising is slowing.look at the last three months of Obama's fundraising. McCain had his best showing yet in June. Clinton's money machine has stopped and can be reactivated once chosen for the Vice Presidency. They will be motivated!

7. Hillary has shown, especially during the past presidential primary season, that she can take on the media. She will step up and defend President Obama.

8. The role of Vice Presidential Nominee during the campaign is attack dog. Who can best fit this role in defending the new policies of the presidential candidate and go after their opponent? Last time I reasearched this, the Clinton attack machine seems to be very effective.

9. She finished strong in the primaries. Obama could not seal the deal on the nomination until the last state voted. Nothing against our future President of the United States, but what does it say about our party when you go down to the last state and your opponent is still winning, and by impressive margins sometimes?

So, if you have a candidate who has virtually received the same number of pledged delegates as the presidential nominee, received the same amount of the popular vote as the presidential nominee, has her own history making title (as compared to the first African-American) of the first woman to compete for the presidency, has the same amount of online support and financial resources of the presidential nominee, and finally, has more electoral votes of the states won during the primary, what is one to assume Obama is going to do when he picks his Vice President?

Obama/Clinton 2008. That is what he will do.

Tags: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Presidency (all tags)

Permalink :: 46 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Hillary Clinton for Vice President of the Unit (2.00 / 2)

I do not believe she would be on the ticket .

Her vote on Fisa should be an indication

Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.

by lori on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 12:55:43 PM EST

Re: Hillary Clinton for VP (none / 0)

Here G/E funds can be combined with his under this scenario, no?

by alamedadem on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 01:00:15 PM EST

Re: Hillary Clinton for VP (2.00 / 2)

No. You cannot combine GE and primary funds. Funds that were sent to her campaign for the GE must be returned to the donors. The donors can return those fund to help retire debt if they so choose.

Nor could she combine her GE funds with Obama's the FEC looks upon these a separate entities.

Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof.

by jsfox on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 01:46:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Clinton for VP (none / 0)

Primary/GE was not the question...neither was debt reduction. Donors couldn't use any returned contribtions for debt reduction if they're max'd out for the primary already.

If HRC, as a federal candidate in the general election (for VP) can spend her GE funds running for VP - this is the question. Legally, they won't be combined, just like Obama's and the DNC's will be separate - but can she spend them if she was a federal candidate in the general election?

by alamedadem on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 06:48:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Clinton for (2.00 / 1)

I said at the end of the primaries that I would accept it but, if asked, I would counsel against it.

I would still prefer someone else (I have a few names in mind) but I am less reluctant than I was. Senator Clinton has done what I had hoped she would. She's been a good sport and made a faithful effort on behalf of her party.

I give her credit for that.

by Reaper0Bot0 on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 01:03:50 PM EST

Re: Uhg (none / 0)

Every day a new diary talking about HRC....

Her Polling negatives are way too high.
Why put someone on the ticket who lots of Americans already have a negative opinion toward?

It makes no sense and likely takes States like GA, VA and perhaps CO out of play.

It won't happen.

by gil44 on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 01:08:55 PM EST

Re: Uhg (2.00 / 1)

I am tired of the GOP her negatives are too high line being aimed at the person that the majority of democratic party members voted for in the primary.

If you are not really interested in Unity just come out and say it.

Don't hide behind unity has too many negatives to it.

by dtaylor2 on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 01:26:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uhg (none / 0)

I am most interested in winning the GE. The primary is over, its time to look at how to help Obama win it all.

Clinton's negatives are sky high, and those negatives are especially high in the new swing states, CO, VA and the like. Thus she is a liability and she should not be on the ticket.

I want unity AND a GE victory.
Perhaps that is where we differ.

by gil44 on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 02:59:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't know where you are looking (none / 0)

but there have been points in the last few months where Obama's 'negatives' were just as high as Clintons- stop repeating GOP talking points. If you don't like her, just say it.

by linc on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 03:04:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't know where you are looking (none / 0)

If that is true, you have proved my point.

Why have two candiates with high negatives?

by gil44 on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 03:19:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why buy into the idea that it matters? (none / 0)

What about polling that says an Obama/Clinton ticket would blow McCain out of the water? How does that match up with your fixation on high 'negatives'?

by linc on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 04:55:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why buy into the idea that it matters? (none / 0)

In the polling I have seen, the BHO/HRC ticket does not fare better or worse than others.

by gil44 on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 05:09:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't know where you are looking (none / 0)

Because more than half the party supports Hillary and ultimately telling us to go fish is a unwise move.

Maybe it won't affect Obama's first term chances. But then again it very well might.

But come 2nd term or come midterm elections and it hurts the party when the majority of the party members feel their views were insignificant in the outcome.

by dtaylor2 on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 08:58:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uhg (none / 0)

But she put's FL, MI, AR & KY back into play for the DEM ticket.

More than acceptable trade-off for the tired and warmed over GOP tactics, that she will be able to really go after compared to the Primary.

He that lives upon hope, will die fasting. -Ben Franklin

by TxDem08 on Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 08:46:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

If Clinton is his running mate, (none / 0)

it increases his chances of winning Georgia. He is banking on carrying all of Georgia's urban areas, and pulling enough rural votes to win a squeaker. I don't know about the rest of the state, but in the four north Georgia counties that I'm familiar with, Hillary Clinton got more votes than John McCain in the primaries.

by georgiapeach on Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 01:44:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Uh huh. (none / 0)

Considering your rather unhealthy interest in whether Michelle Obama said "whitey" on tape, not to mention outright misrepresenting Obama on Native American issues (does "Barack Black Eagle" mean anything to you?) I have to consider your opinions suspect.

I could go point-by-point and refute all of your rationales, but I don't find it necessary to fight the primary wars over again. I welcome Senator Clinton and all of her true, well-intentioned supporters. Those that supported her just to attack Obama... you guys can go vote McCain. Just go. We'll do it without you.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 01:18:31 PM EST

Re: Hillary Clinton for Vice President of the Unit (none / 0)

No arguments? But you present several very cogent ones here.

IF Obama and Clinton can work out a way for this to combine their strengths, electoral and otherwise, and can forge a comfortable working relationship, I think it could be awesome. But that's a big 'if'. I think the key is to hammer out well defined roles for HRC and Bill under this administration. Hillary and Bill Clinton are not neutral personalities. They are either tremendous assets or significant liabilities. Gotta make it the former to make it work. But that also means I recognize a tremendous upside. Unfortunately, we are not privy to their real chemistry. And that's critical. So I'm on board if they want to make it work, and I don't begrudge either if not.

The future is unwritten

by Strummerson on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 01:20:36 PM EST

Re: Hillary Clinton for Vice President of the (none / 0)

I would like to see some polling of her and Obama against McBush and whomever to be convinced for sure. I think Hillary earned her ticket to be vetted and considered. I just would like to know for sure that she would not hurt Obama's chance to carry independents. Maybe Hillary's good would outweigh the bad. Need to see a poll.

by Spanky on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 01:21:12 PM EST

Re: Hillary Clinton for Vice President of the (2.00 / 1)

Hillary's democrats outweigh the lost Independents I think.

And then its merely a matter of who should the democratic party represent democrats or independents?

by dtaylor2 on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 01:28:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What about the Republicans? (none / 0)

Most studies that have been done suggest that Clinton on the ticket prompts a ~22 point wash... 22% are more likely to vote Democratic, 22% are less likely.

We don't only lose independants, but crossover Republicans, though, with a Clinton pick. In a year representing change, we should be going for wide appeal, not pandering to the base. That strategy is a proven loser.

Clinton's Democrats should be voting for Obama anyway.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 01:46:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What about the Republicans? (none / 0)

You say that "most studies that have been done suggest that Clinton on the ticket prompts a ~22 point wash... 22% are more likely to vote Democratic, 22% are less likely." Could you please provide us with a link to those studies?

The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers. -- Thomas Jefferson

by pollbuster on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 01:56:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Crikey (none / 0)

Okay... it was a poll from awhile back.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c ontent/politics/election_20082/2008_pres idential_election/pennsylvania/election_ 2008_pennsylvania_presidential_election2

Rasmussen says this about Pennsylvania:

If Clinton is Obama's choice for vice president, 35% are more likely to vote for them, while 36% are less likely to do so. Unaffiliated voters are fairly evenly divided as to whether adding Clinton would make them more or less likely to vote for Obama.

Not what I was remembering, let me keep looking.

In Minnesota, it's this:

More likely 19%
Less likely 21

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/pol itics/interactives/campaign08/battlegrou nd-polls/battlegrounds_mn_062508.html

So, while I can't find the exact poll while here at work, there's at least two examples of it being a relative wash with her on the ticket.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 02:48:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Crikey (none / 0)

Thank you very much for your quick reply, but I really think you shouldn't make universal blanket statements based on just 2 old polls that reflect just 2 states, both of which figure to be blue no matter who is selected as the VP candidate. And furthermore one of which was Rasmussen, who is decidedly pro-republican, and, who, just the other day released a poll showing Obama with only an 11 point lead in Illinois, which is totally off the wall.

The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers. -- Thomas Jefferson

by pollbuster on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 03:29:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Fair enough (none / 0)

I'm willing to bet that it largely stays like that consistantly, though. I was thinking of one poll in particular which I couldn't find, but it's obviously not the only one that says this. Clinton is polarizing; a lot of folks really love her, and a lot of folks (deservedly or not) really hate her. I don't think the VP pick should evoke any strong negative reaction for any major constituency, especially this year.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 03:39:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fair enough (none / 0)

I think Hillary helps in Ohio, Pa and FLA

Since the McCain/Obama race is looking like Oh, Pa, Mi, Virgina thats substantial.

If Hillary/Bill can work the poor folk and Carter works his base with trips like Bill you could see a massive full court push unlike any ever seen which would very much support Obama's vision of change through participation.

Carter and Bill playing the old guys role would mute Bill slightly and bring real unity to pragmatic yet liberal agenda.

If Obama ran with Bill, Hillary, Chelsea, Carter, Gore, Edwards, Barrack, Michelle all doing small town appearances it would generate a buzz the likes of which have never been seen in general elections.

Especially if he is up 8 pts and still running the full court press it could be a sea change in political power and ultimately Obama would get the credit.

As the first black president Obama really needs the Obama wave to last 8 years or he is going to get Carter-ized. But the above campaign would generate the kind of buzz and excitement to overpower Rush et all for EIGHT years!

And thats why it needs to be Hillary.

by dtaylor2 on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 09:10:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Carter? (none / 0)

Jimmy Carter is no way to get swing voters. The ones old enough to remember him probably do so for his "malaise" and considering he brought on the first Reagan landslide, lets let Carter keep talking to Hamas.

by Lakrosse on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 09:38:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Carter? (none / 0)

No I bet there is a place where Carter pulls votes.

I bet there are issues where Carter pulls votes.

Hamas isn't one of them.

Habitat for Humanity probably is.

by dtaylor2 on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 11:09:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"Carter's second term" (none / 0)

as a meme would flourish, and possibly even work. McCain has been trying to do that all along, and if Carter goes out of Obama, that would work. I think plains, GA is best for Carter to camp and that is it.

by Lakrosse on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 11:32:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What about the Republicans? (none / 0)

I disagree. We may lose some independents, and some Republicans, but not more than Obama has already lost with his crab-crawling and pandering to the center.

We should be going for a wide appeal, the only problem is, Obama should stick with what worked in the Primary! That was his appeal. Not flip-flopping or "refining" positions...that strategy is a proven loser.

What's funny is that you think we're gonna get a lot of Republican cross-overs, yet you say Clinton Dem's should be voting for Obama anyway? Kind of going in a circle there don't ya think?

Obama is losing support (not votes yet) among the far left. He is losing support on the center to right for, what they say shows he's just another politician. The center is what he needs, but not for the sake of losing his base and those that would think about crossing over. He needs to tack back to the left and plot a steady course. A Clinton VP pick is the only way he can still attract the center and allow her to sow those positions to support him on the center/right.

People want change, what they saw in the Primaries. Not the change they see him doing now.

He that lives upon hope, will die fasting. -Ben Franklin

by TxDem08 on Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 08:55:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

How original. (2.00 / 6)

Oh dammit. Another one of these?

Hillary is her own woman. Hillary does not need Bill anymore. She has became to the first woman to compete in a primary and actually shown that it can, and eventually will be done, by a woman.

This is a reason to make her VP??? This sounds like, no offense, lyrics to a Destiny's Child song, not a reason to give someone the #2 slot in the country.

Clinton now has a massive list of email contributors. She has established her own following, and they are just as devote to her as Obama's our to him.

But the ones that haven't joined up with their fellow Dems already are too busy calling him Obambi and chanting Puma. PUMA. PUMA! in their corners, and making fools of themselves with Larry Johnson.

Every state the borders the State of Ohio went to Clinton. This is very important to remember. She won states with those electoral votes that will reach the 270 mark.

Huh? Every state that started with the letter R went to Obama? Do you propose that New York and California will vote for McCain? These metrics don't help, since they make no sense at all.

Obama's fundraising is slowing.look at the last three months of Obama's fundraising. McCain had his best showing yet in June. Clinton's money machine has stopped and can be reactivated once chosen for the Vice Presidency. They will be motivated!

Clinton's money machine left her $20 million in debt. Even the PUMA-ites who can't stand him are bitching and moaning that he's not asking HIS donors to give HER enough money. If we stop focusing on Mark Penn and focus a bit more on Obama (who OF COURSE is having a fundraising lag, the primary demanded a ton of money that may, perhaps, have been spent better in the general), it'll be fine.

Hillary has shown, especially during the past presidential primary season, that she can take on the media. She will step up and defend President Obama.

She has indeed, and already is. A classy lady.

She finished strong in the primaries. Obama could not seal the deal on the nomination until the last state voted. Nothing against our future President of the United States, but what does it say about our party when you go down to the last state and your opponent is still winning, and by impressive margins sometimes?

You know, a lot of people seem to think that Obama couldn't "seal the deal" because Clinton stayed in long after it was clear she didn't win. It doesn't say anything about our party other than we had two good candidates, one of them with perhaps a better grasp of math than the other one.

So, if you have a candidate who has virtually received the same number of pledged delegates as the presidential nominee, received the same amount of the popular vote as the presidential nominee, has her own history making title (as compared to the first African-American) of the first woman to compete for the presidency, has the same amount of online support and financial resources of the presidential nominee, and finally, has more electoral votes of the states won during the primary, what is one to assume Obama is going to do when he picks his Vice President?

I would assume he would look at all the factors, and figure out who best helps his chances to win, who best helps his ability to govern, and who brings the most to the table. Then he offers that person the slot, after vetting them 100%.

If that person is Clinton, great, I'm fine with it, but I'm exhausted with these primary war rehashing diaries that declare, firmly, that Clinton is just simply the ONLY choice, as if they are the first former Clinton supporter to come to this conclusion.

John McCain wants to stay in Iraq.

by ihaveseenenough on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 01:21:48 PM EST

Re: How original. (none / 0)

If you are really tired of it, then why are you playing it out so intensely?

The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers. -- Thomas Jefferson

by pollbuster on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 01:58:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Um (none / 0)

No thanks

by hocuspocus on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 01:57:40 PM EST

I fail to see the PUMA logic in Clinton as VP (none / 0)

I clearly get why you want Clinton to be on the ticket, hell, you want her to be atop the ticket?

The question is, why would Senator Clinton?

Take away Dick Cheney, and the VP slot is historically a weak position.

She can have MORE impact as a Senator, or Gov of New York?

Also, if she wants to President, and you PUMA's all believe McCain is going to win, staying clear of a losing ticket is the smart move for 2012?

Not a lot of history of being THE LOSING VP candidate and immediately getting the Presidential nod next time around?

So, my problem with Clinton as VP has always been Bill (two alpha dogs get along just fine. Bring a third alpha dog in a room, you will have a fight within seconds)but I want Obama as Prez, and most of you REALLY pushing for Clinton as VP don't.

I fail to see your logic in all of this.

"Either you're the butcher Or the lamb but even so, Everybody pays as they go-Jakob Dylan"

by WashStateBlue on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 01:57:52 PM EST

Re: I fail to see the PUMA logic in Clinton as VP (none / 0)

Not a lot of history of being THE LOSING VP candidate and immediately getting the Presidential nod next time around?

Hmmm, someone named FDR.

The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers. -- Thomas Jefferson

by pollbuster on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 03:31:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I fail to see the PUMA logic in Clinton as VP (none / 0)

OK, you got me there!

Ouch!

"Either you're the butcher Or the lamb but even so, Everybody pays as they go-Jakob Dylan"

by WashStateBlue on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 03:48:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I fail to see the PUMA logic in Clinton as VP (none / 0)

I personally don't want her as Obama's VP on the ticket.

However, I do want a DEM in the White House and believe that the only way Obama is going to have a shot to get in is to have Hillary on the ticket.

Hell I still believe she's a better candidate than Obama, and would prefer her atop the ticket. But that's not what happened, and until the Convention is over I'll just have to make lemonade.

I think you have a valid concern about the alpha dogs, but I don't think you realize that Obama and Clinton are powerful enough alpha's themselves to lay down the law. For example, what did Hillary say to Bill...shut the F*ck up. And he did.

I want a DEM in the White House badly, even though I'm seriously having problems with Obama's decisions especially lately. And I believe the only other DEM able to get him into the White House is Hillary.

Otherwise, we better really focus on down-ticket races, because we're going to need a veto proof majority in both the House and Senate because I don't see another DEM strong enough to do the job. We also need new House and Senate leadership, but that's for a different topic.

He that lives upon hope, will die fasting. -Ben Franklin

by TxDem08 on Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 09:03:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Clinton for Vice President of the Unit (2.00 / 1)

6. Obama's fundraising is slowing.look at the last three months of Obama's fundraising. McCain had his best showing yet in June. Clinton's money machine has stopped and can be reactivated once chosen for the Vice Presidency. They will be motivated!

This is by far the best reason. Obama's money is slowing up, and a Clinton money machine could guarantee Obama fundraising thru November. There is a reason they're not giving to obama now: Why would they? In this life, and especially in politics, it is NOT something for nothing. They want Hillary on the ticket, and are way more likely to give if she is. These guys are insanely rich, and putting her on the ticket would give both camps a reason to just pump Obama/Clinton and forget about the debt, as they'd both be giving to get him and her in the White House. Also, Clinton can ensure her supporters vote for the ticket, whiping McCain's hopes away of getting them.

by Lakrosse on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 02:06:40 PM EST

um (none / 0)

so if Obama doesn't scratch their back they won't scratch his? In my opinion these people should be dealt with an arms length.

by hocuspocus on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 02:13:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: um (none / 0)

yes that is right. To get his back scratched, better known as his piggy bank, YES he has to scratch theirs. This is POLITICS, and thats a way of life. Unless of course he wants to have more trouble raising money than he is having recently. It would guarantee him to outraise McCain if he got their donors. They are extremely rich, and have more personal passion for the Clintons than Obama's donors for him.

by Lakrosse on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 02:30:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Clinton for Vice President of the Unit (none / 0)

If they love Hillary so much why haven't they donated the comparatively small amount needed to pay off her debt?

"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson

by MS01 Indie on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 02:41:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Clinton for Vice President of the Unit (none / 0)

because would they rather just give her money for losing, or use their leverage to get the person they love ON the actual ticket, where their money could mean something.

by Lakrosse on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 02:53:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Clinton for Vice President of the Unit (none / 0)

So they are just like lobbyist, using their money to manipulate the democratic process?

"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson

by MS01 Indie on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 03:36:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Clinton for Vice President of the Unit (2.00 / 1)

Welcome to Politics 1.1

The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers. -- Thomas Jefferson

by pollbuster on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 03:39:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

VP hinges on debt (none / 0)

I was as big a Hillary supporter as anyone, and I would love to see an OC ticket. I think they would make a great team. However, before anyone could seriously consider giving her the VP slot that debt has to be satisfied. You can't select someone for VP who goes into the fray with a 20 million dollar debt. It just doesn't look right.

The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers. -- Thomas Jefferson

by pollbuster on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 03:38:11 PM EST

If she is the VP (none / 0)

I would support the ticket whole-heartedly. That's a change from a few weeks ago, when I would have been vehemently against it.

by Neef on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 04:15:08 PM EST

Re: Hillary Clinton for Vice President of the Unit (none / 0)

tips and rec'd.....

I AGREE

by nikkid on Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 08:40:14 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.