Reply #5: Old news. He's been "on her team" for the longest time, and his WIFE is his greatest asset. [View All]

[MADem]

She'd be the nation's "First LADY" if that scenario unfolded, and she's been heavily involved in the IA effort.

Of course, he might have been moved down the list a notch or two after the results this evening!

Obama and Edwards are totally UNINTERESTED in that VP scenario, assuming a Clinton win. They've said so, repeatedly, and I believe Edwards, certainly--he's run for VP once, and he's not gonna do it again.

Obama might be sold (it puts him in the catbird seat in eight years)--but again, we're assuming that Clinton finds a way past Super Tuesday and recovers.

Whoever takes that job has to be able to deal with the reality of Bill Clinton...again, assuming that the Clinton presidential scenario unfolds.

Clinton needs a balancer, and neither Obama nor Edwards works real well--they both look too fresh faced and young. It has nothing to do with "competition" or "glamour"--she's got the most competitive, glamourous asset in town, with her own HUSBAND.

She needs someone with executive (read--a governor) experience, and she needs someone who LOOKS kind of old--someone with that elusive "gravitas."

Wes Clark is a lousy choice because he has no political/executive experience. He's better on the trail now than he was years ago, but he's still not good enough, IMO.

Vilsack has that type of experience, but what he doesn't have is a jazzy name--it just invites those "ball sac" jokes, unfortunately.

Of course, all that said, let me end with a huge caveat: The Clinton Dynamic includes Paradigm Breaking. Everyone thought that the Clinton-Gore team was sucidal. Two fat bubbas from the south on the ticket? That's a DISASTER!!! It was a disaster that ushered in a wonderful economic period for the U.S....

It'll be interesting to see who wins, and who they pick. That's half the fun of the whole exercise, IMO...