« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Hillary as VP on the ticket yes or no?
Afterhours on MSNBC with Dan Abrams, had the second half of their show after the events of the night occurred, discussing talking about Hillary for VP, yes/no?
Here is my quick reply giving the top-three reasons is should be no:
1) Iraq: She voted for it, and destroys the Obama argument that judgment trumps McCain's experience, because she had the same lapse of judgement that has killed thousands of our troops and enabled the biggest foreign policy disaster in our nation's history. She forces that issue off the table because McCain can simply point to her to negate his clean argument on this issue and thereby cedes national security by default because she is on the ticket.
2) She unifies the GOP: She would be the single biggest unifying force for the GOP base to embrace McCain.
3) GOP pre-loaded GOP talking points: The GOP can avoid talking on the issues if the CLinton name is on the ticket. All they have to say is "Hillarycare" and half the country tunes out and rejects the Democratic potion in Pavlovian response to the tainted brand name of Clinton.
What are you opinions and reasons for or against?
And keep it classy folks.
Comments (21)
Think outside the box: Gov Brad Henry (D-OK)
June 4, 2008 2:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
So you are saying no to a Clinton VP...?
June 4, 2008 2:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Where is he as far as choice?
I was liking the idea of someone like Gov. Tim Kaine (D-VA) but he is anti-choice, so that is a non-starter. I still think former Gov. Mark Warner (D-VA) is the best pick.
June 4, 2008 2:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
No.
Clinton's done nothing whatsoever to make me regret voting for Obama. She's done nothing but remind me why I was vaguely sick of her from the onset.
June 4, 2008 2:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Can you give more specific examples as to why she would not be a good choice.
June 4, 2008 2:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's a transparent blackmail attempt: "Make me VP, or I'll tell my minions to sit out the election."
It's also a pathetic bluff. At most, her minions amount to a few tens of thousands of fanatical wackos. The vast majority of her votes came from low-information casual observers.
Let the wackos sit it out! Barack can't afford to pollute the ticket with someone who voted (and beat the drums!) for war. For example, see e.t. 08:00 on this gut-wrenching Donahue/Spiro video:
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05302008/watch2.html
She also out-dicked TheDick on Iranian obliteration, and repeatedly mocked Barack's position on negotiating with the bad guys. That's shaping up to be a major winning issue against McBush -- and Shrillary would totally destroy its effectiveness.
OTOH, I think she'd make an absolutely wonderful running mate...
...McSame/Shrillary '08!
LK
June 4, 2008 2:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama didn't even manage a total sweep today. Here it is June, and he finally reached the magic number, and yet his supporters think victory in November is just waiting for him to reach out and take it. What myopia! What arrogance! You think he doesn't need Hillary on the ticket? You'd better hope he gives her that VP spot.
June 4, 2008 3:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don't worry. He will.
June 4, 2008 3:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
And Bill Clinton lost after he clinched the nomination in 1992. Your "argument" is a complete strawman with no relevance to reality, nor to the subject of this discussion.
June 4, 2008 4:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
As a practical matter, she's the only VP candidate who can guarantee 18 million votes before joint campaigning even begins.
June 4, 2008 3:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Completely fraudulent assertion.
She, nor any VP can guarantee that.
June 4, 2008 4:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama said Hussein posed absolutely no threat to his neighbors, despite unknown capabilities on anthrax, missiles that would reach his neighbors and a $10 billion/year slush fund to work with in a post-9/11 box cutter/IED world.
Being knee-jerk pacifist first time proud plays well in TUCC and the South Side and gets liberals out to the caucuses, but won't do very well in a mainstream election in November, as seen in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, California and Texas, and as implied by results in Florida and Michigan.
Hispanics balance their votes between parties. They like McCain. They like Hillary. They don't care much for Obama.
June 4, 2008 3:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Every single point you try to raise is pure fiction with the exception that Obama correctly pointed out that Saddam Hussein in fact posed no legitimate threat to his neighbors.
June 4, 2008 3:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hold that thought. Cling to it through those dark nights ahead.
June 4, 2008 7:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
No.
She brings too much drama, her husband is a liability, and she embodies the worst traits of a damaged Washington insider.
I am in Jeffery Tobin's camp: Deranged narcissism runs deep in the Clinton family gene pool. HRC is owed nothing, and the fact that she can't even concede with dignity, particulary given how overtly gracious Obama has been, is evidence enough that she would be a disaster on the ticket.
She is the anti-Obama. Her "you-go-girl" coalition ought to at least realize that Obama has acted like a gentleman in this race, a "nice young man" in every respect. She lost for many reasons, but not because Obama isn't qualified to win and go on to be president.
What a spoiled sport. All of the Tonya Harding compares are valid. She could see the "Obama nomination train" pulling into the station two months ago and to think that she wasn't ready? How in the hell could she be ready on day one as commander in chief when she couldn't even read the BOLD PRINT on the side of the OBAMA EXPRESS as it was running over her?
Willful ignorance and selfish pride. She's going to try to wreck Obama's chances in the general...just wait.
June 4, 2008 8:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
NO. Hillary should not be asked to be Obama's VP.
For all your reasons, Mitchell, but even more NO because Hillary's candidacy represents the same old Washington that Obama has campaigned against. It would be entirely inconsistent with his raison d'etre to ask her to join him. I don't think she could really get behind him either.
First of all, Obama's campaign represents a different kind of leadership than what Washington has been used to, and I don't think Hillary gets it. She's too old school. She doesn't know any other way of governing than to impose change from the top-down (her leadership on the health care debacle of the 90s and her more recent "with us or against us" language speaks volumes to this).
In contrast, Obama seems to have learned from his years in community organizing that the only way to sustain real change is to engage citizens at the community level and empower them - make available the tools and resources - to enable them to create change in their world. The motto for Obama's campaign could very well be summed up in the words of Margaret Mead (a classic favorite of community organizers everywhere): "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."
Secondly, though she might have gotten her start in politics as an idealistic youth, she has become an entrenched Washington elitist. For all her campaign antics and posturing with ordinary folk, in practice, Hillary has been remarkably dismissive of and shown outright disdain for "those people" (see http://hudson.typepad.com/us/2008/02/why-i-wont-vote.html) She's gotten good at giving the political sale pitch, but buyer: beware of the bait-and-switch. I don't believe she would be willing or able to transform herself into the kind of leader she would need to become if she were to serve as Obama's VP.
Thirdly, I don't think she possesses the temperament to be a good VP. Throughout her campaign she has been passive-aggressive, manipulative and less than truthful. I don't think she's particularly good at being is a team player, and I think her overwhelming desire to be the president herself (and belief that she should be - deserves to be - the president) would lead her to undermine an Obama Administration.
I think Obama should ask Al Gore to be his VP. Watch this; you'll see why: http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/243
June 4, 2008 8:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Had she graciously accepted Obama's victory last night, I would still consider her VP material. Now I just can't imagine how she could even be considered,
An Obama/Sebelius ticket would give the sincere feminist Marshans more than a little consolation, and would weed out the bigots who have used women's rights as a front for thier prejudice.
But an Obama/Edwards ticket would go a long way towards sothing the southern voters.
It IS time, also, to start planning the demise of the electoral college, though. That arcane vestige of the horse-and-buggy era needs to be eliminated forever. It allows for too much mischief from our own self-appointed billionaire royals, especially in this age of Diebold and voter caging.
June 4, 2008 9:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
NO.
She offers nothing substantial to help the ticket. Her die-hard extremist supporters are too much like Joe Lieberman to be trusted. They themselves vow that they will never vote for Obama, even if Hillary were on the ticket. So, Hillary created a monstrous situation by fomenting these extremists; she herself cannot now control or lead these out-of-whack ones. Best to let her and them fade from the limelight.
In all, she would bring a ton of negatives to the ticket, especially the too-fresh-in-memory recent history of her choice of scorched earth rhetoric and dishonesty-on-facts campaigning.
June 4, 2008 9:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
The VP could have been hers. Three simple steps would have made it almost inevitable.
1) Been gracious in defeat and acknowledged that Obama had won.
2) She should never have mentioned in public that she was open to it.
3) Killed the petition. Putting a gun to some ones head is never a way to gain a trusted ally
Once again, I think bad advice and the wrong message lost her something that could have been hers if she wanted it.
June 4, 2008 9:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is Hillary the pied piper? Does anyone honestly believe that her 18M voters will follow her wherever she goes and do whatever she says?
June 4, 2008 9:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not gonna happen.
I think the smart move would be to offer her Secretary of Health & Human Services.
June 4, 2008 9:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment