« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
WHY WE NEED HILLARY AT VP
look at these two Prospects from Real Clear Politics--MY SOLLUTION: Hillary as VP
If Indiana goes to Obama:
RealClearPolitics Electoral College
(270 Electoral Votes Needed To Win)
RealClear Electoral Count
No Toss Up States
275 John McCain 263
If Indiana goes to McCain
RealClear Electoral Count
No Toss Up States
Barack Obama 264 John McCain 274
Advertisement
Comments (14)
And Senator Clinton would secure Indiana why? Seems like a huge, insupportable assumption to me.
August 18, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Chris,
My post was too elliptical, I suppose. I mean that
with H Obama would win Ohio and possibly Florida.
Indiana (which is dangerous territory for a Dem) would be unnecessary.
Campion
August 18, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Respectfully, I think your assumption that Clinton would ensure wins in Ohio and Florida are also huge assumptions. It is an error to project GE results on primary results for obvious reasons.
Remember Clinton has really high polling negatives, over 50%, last I heard; and carries lots of baggage.
August 18, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reality Check:
People vote for the Presidential Candidate. They do not cast their vote for the VP person on the ticket.
If someone was not willing to vote for Obama, then putting Senator Clinton on the ticket will not change their mind. Why would it. If you are not willing to vote for John McCain now, then tell me which VP candidate should he pick to convince you to vote for him. Common Sense 101.
August 18, 2008 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Clinton's ability to go negative maybe increases her prospects. She might not be bad as a VP attack dog. The major problem all along has been Bill. I like Bill, despite his flaws and failings, but he is unrestrained and unrestrainable, and would make governance a nightmare.
HRC might make a good VP but WJC will mess things up.
August 18, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you.
After WJC's comments last week, he still seems pissed.
The campaign does not need WJC spouting off whenever he feels slighted, which seems to be constant these days
August 18, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
John...I can't imagine a worse choice, and for a very risky gain. Remember, Hillary is reviled and hated by the wingers. Having her on the ticket will bring them out in droves. True...she might attract some of the racist voters back into the fold, but I really don't think there are that many out there.
And then...when they win, there she is in the Whitehouse with Bill. Can't stand the thought. She ran a totally crappy campaign, very devisive and hateful. Think Mark Penn.....gag.
August 18, 2008 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do do really think so? Do you think the bigots, who will vote for McCain anyway, are any more likely to vote for Obama because he has a woman running mate?
August 18, 2008 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reality Check #2
Which VP candidate; Lloyd Bentsen or Dan Quayle, would you say brought the most experience, intelligence, qualifications, and campaigning skills to their ticket.
Which one won, and became the VP.
When are people going to finally get it through their heads that votes are cast for or against the two at the head of the tickets. 'Twas ever thus.
Bush one picked a unqualified moron and Michael Dukakis picked this superb resume. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lloyd_Bentsen#1976_presidential_campaign
You know the rest of the story. Spare us all this constant nonsense about the need for a great VP pick. It makes no difference. If people like the head of the ticket best then they will accept having a Dan Quayle for VP over a LLoyd Bentsen.
August 18, 2008 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you're right.
August 18, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Makes sense but the Clintons are hated here on this blog.
August 18, 2008 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well that's a fairly large assumption. I think you will find a number of people here who do not hate the Clintons. The problem here, the Obama and Hillary haters seem to make the loudest and stupidest comments or posts, which tend to draw the most attention. I for one do not hate them. did I vote for her? No, but not because I hated her or Bill.
Now do I see benefits to having Hillary on the ticket, yes. Do I see issues? Yes. Bill being one. With Obama as President, Hillary as VP Bill would to have to learn to play third string. The question can he? Remains to be seen. However, every VP pick has some issue or another. There is no one perfect pick.
August 18, 2008 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't speak for everyone, but I don't hate the Clintons. I'd have to care more about them to really hate them, and I don't.
Now, some of their supporters....
(I kid, I kid)
August 18, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Someone asked me who as VP helped a
party choice win the presidency:
LBJ
If it isn't too much to ask:
Why did Hillary win Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Arkansas, West Virginia and yes, Florida*?
Come on. This is NOT about who we hate--this is a simple question about who would help Obama win. Kennedy hated LBJ.
Campion
August 19, 2008 1:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment