« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
The case for Hillary as VP
The case for HRC as Obama’s VP is based on 3 propositions. Obama needs help, she can provide it, and provide it better than the other potential candidates.
Advertisement
Comments (7)
This was truncated and it was too lengthy( and boring) for me to resubmit in full.
Briefly , it continued..................
The principal counter argument is that at least one of those 3 propositions is wrong. Less persuasively, that irrespective of those 3 , she's a bad person who shouldn'tbe the candidate however useful in the campaign.That's a moral judgment which I don't share.
Does he need help?
As shown by Real Clear Politics there were 13 polls taken during July , all showing Obama with a lead except for USA Today/Gallup. Just adding up Obama's net lead in those 13 he was ahead by
48 points.
But...
If you then look at the preceding polls by each of those organizations, and add them up he was ahead by 63 points.
Or looked at another way, during July his lead dropped in 4 and increased in 4. This at a time when he had much greater financial resources and the MSM credited him with a successful trip.
How could Hillary Help?
By bringing in the 17 million voters who supported her in the primaries.
Why think she can do it better than the alternatives?
See above. And she did that against many of the same names now being floated as superior choices.
July 31, 2008 5:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Uh... no offense dude, but that's not the way math works. Nevertheless, I agree that Hillary would help the ticket and (almost) guarantee a win. They would just need to get the states that Kerry won plus Ohio and/or Florida - and with Hillary on board that should be doable. Of course, to some this will seem like a setback to the "50 state strategy", but I always thought the 50 state strategy would have more benefits down-ticket anyway - giving Obama the kind of congress he needs to really get something done. But... we'll see.
July 31, 2008 9:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not going to say she wouldn't be a good choice or a bad one.
However, one place where I think you analysis comes up short. You make an assumption that the 17 million Hillary primary voters will not be voting for Obama come November unless she is on the ticket. Some proof of this. In fact most of the polls I have seen say this isn't an issue.
And no offense Obama has never been ahead by 63 points. His best leads were 8 and a most recent CNN/ORC poll has him favored by 51% to McCain's 43%. So please explain how you arrived at your number?
July 31, 2008 9:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah my math is kind of idiosyncratic. I took his lead in each of the 13 polls and just added them together. e.g. CNN up 7 points, Rasmussen, up 2 points etc. Done for the most recent polls that totalled 48. Done for the preceding polls it totalled 63.
Yes I agree that most of Hillary's 17 million will vote for Obama- except of course the portion which due to Republicans voting tactically. But that 17 million number is an indication of her ability in the General to attract votes from
independents who couldn't vote in the primaries.
And I am gravely worried that some of her primary voters will be sufficiently disaffected so they stay home,or-worse- go to the dark side.
Can you reference any recent poll of their intentions? Maybe I'll google the subject and see what I come up with.
July 31, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
flavius:
I sincerely hope you are joking.
http://www.thepersonalispolitical.com/2008/06/why-no-nightmare-ticket-lets-count.html
July 31, 2008 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not joking. I wish I were. I think those 17 million chose Hillary instead of Obama for the usual myriad of motives but higher than usual in the list this time were two unrelated ones : white racism and intense female excitement at the prospect of a woman president.
The first reduces the likelihood that many of them will vote democratic.Conversely , the second is a two edge sword. It also reduces the chance that some of these now-disappointed women will vote democratic but conversely contains its own antidote: HRC on the ticket will ensure that most of them vote in November .
July 31, 2008 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like Hillary and I have a great deal of respect for her, but she is an incredibly polarizing politician. Obama represents change. Adding Hillary to Obama's ticket will discredit his claim that he can bring change.
Further, it's not all about winning. Obama needs to deliver on his message of change and that will take a team which is completely dedicated to and focused on his goals. Our country is faced with many impossible situations and many expect Obama to be a miracle worker. If he cannot deliver he will be tossed out after the first term and the neocons will jump on that. He might also be looking at a midterm backlash in Congress should he fail to solve some of our big problems in the first two years.
Also, Hillary is a leader. She wants to be a leader and there is nothing wrong with that. If she is the VP she will be looking at the position as a stepping stone to the Presidency, still nothing wrong with that, but not the best partner when it comes to staying focused on a goal.
The bottom line: Hillary and Obama do not have the same vision or goals, and having someone wanting to be the leader with an eye to eventual succession won't be the best running-mate or the best partner when it comes to actually delivering.
July 31, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment