With rumors reaching a feverish pitch that President-elect Obama may be considering selecting Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, it is worth noting the parallels between Obama and Clinton and another rivalry between the top political leaders from Illinois and New York in the 1860 presidential campaign, as documented in Doris Kearns Goodwin's superb book, Team of Rivals.

Even Obama himself has discussed creating a Cabinet fashioned after Abraham Lincoln's.
The similarity between the 2008 campaign and the 1860 campaign is striking:

1. A Stunning, Swift Ascent - Abraham Lincoln in the run up to the 1860 presidential election, was famous largely for his "House Divided" speech and his failed Senate campaign against Stephen A. Douglas in 1858. Barack Obama, was famous for his keynote address at the 2004 Democratic Convention, his best selling books, Dreams from My Father and The Audacity of Hope, and his failed run for the House of Representatives in 2000 against Bobby Rush. Within a decade of sustaining the most serious blows to their political careers, both men were elected to the Presidency.

2. Opposition to War - Both men stood against the defining wars of their young political careers - Lincoln opposed the Mexican-American War led by President James K. Polk and Obama opposed the second Iraq War led by President George W. Bush. Opposition to these wars - both of which initially commanded broad support among the political classes and the public at large - were seemingly foolhardy positions for ambitious politicians to hold, but in retrospect, turned out to be very wise ones.

3. Underestimated and Attacked for Inexperience - Doris Kearns Goodwin and Gary Ecelbarger in his excellent new book on Lincoln, The Great Comeback, detail how Lincoln was overlooked and even ignored as he pieced together his winning Presidential bid for 1860. Obama himself was not seriously considered to be a contender for the 2008 presidential election - some thought he would sit out this election and contest in four or even eight years (ie, wait his turn), once he gained additional seasoning in Washington. Obama, like Lincoln, realized the value of striking while the iron was hot - even if that meant they faced withering attacks for their relative inexperience in the process.

4. The Convention Site - In 1860, Lincoln's campaign was able to dexterously maneuver the Republican convention to Chicago, which gave him home field advantage as he tried to secure the nomination. Chicago was seen as a frontier city, a new, exciting city of the future that was supposed to mirror the hopes of the nascent Republican Party, which had been founded in 1854. Likewise, in 2008, Denver was chosen for its symbolic value representing a reborn Democratic party, forged in the fire of a disastrous Bush presidency. Choosing Denver for the convention played into the hands of Obama, as he offered himself as the Candidate of Change. The Democratic party, led by Obama, would once again contest western states such as Colorado in presidential contests and no longer be a party confined to the coastal states (plus a prayer to win either Ohio or Florida) under DNC Chair Howard Dean's 50 state strategy. 

5. The Hillary-Seward Connection - Both Hillary Clinton and William Seward were Senators representing the state of New York. Both had experience in the governor's mansion as well - Seward served four years as New York governor, and Clinton's husband served as governor of Arkansas for 13 years.  Hillary Clinton had the added bonus of actually being in the White House for eight years. Although both were seen as strong Presidential candidates, along the way they accumulated their fair share of enemies. Both also made the politically fatal error of failing to size up their rivals, assuming that the nomination would be theirs for the taking. If Hillary Clinton were to become Obama's Secretary of State, she would assume the role that Seward did for Abraham Lincoln during his presidency.

6. Obama's So-Called Third Clinton Term - Obama virtually patented, trademarked and copyrighted the term "Change" in his run for the presidency. Throughout the campaign, it meant at once moving away from the failed governance of George Bush, a rejection of the conservative ideology on a myriad of issues that had prevailed since Ronald Reagan's time, and an end to the battles over the legacy of the Vietnam War. For a time, during the primary, it also meant an end to the Bill Clinton-Dick Morris triangulation style of governance that Obama fiercely attacked during his 2007 Iowa Jefferson-Jackson Dinner speech.

Now barely a week removed from his Election Day victory, some are surprised at the presence of so many Clinton veterans in the Obama transition staff and potentially, in his Cabinet.  Some wonder how he was able to at once criticize many elements of the Clintons while embracing many Clinton loyalists. This has earned Obama criticism on the left from those who think Obama will favor a centrist, modest governance style rather than the significant change he proposed during the campaign. This is very much similar to the attacks Lincoln faced during his term for governing more as a centrist than a Radical Republican - Doris Kearns Goodwin devotes some space in her book to the belief among many that Seward was the real power behind Lincoln given their closeness and the lingering perception of Lincoln's lack of experience even after he became President.

*****

A "Team of Rivals" Cabinet has its merits and its appeals in challenging times like this one. Obama has made no secret that he will consider talent from all sides of the political spectrum if they he believes they have a real contribution to make to the country. It is a risky strategy, though - Lincoln was able to demonstrate real command of his Cabinet through many trying situations that weaker men would not have been able to manage. Note how George W. Bush's Cabinets consisted almost entirely of ideological yes men, with those who dissented - Lawrence Lindsay or Paul O'Neill for instance - being swiftly eased out of power. Much has been made of Obama's heralded campaign and how he ran a remarkably tight ship for almost two years. If he can replicate this success in Washington, DC, then a "Team of Rivals" Cabinet may not be an exception, it may become a rule for American government.