Face Facts, Folks. It's Almost Guaranteed that BOTH Clinton & Obama...

[writes3000]

will be on the Dem ticket for Pres/VP. Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama. It will be one of those choices. At the rate this is going, there is almost no other option that will unite the Democratic party. And more and more people are realizing it.

I've read article after article. And listened to commentators tonight. We will not win the Nov elections if we don't have a candidate going into JUNE! And it's looking very, very likely that we won't.

So choose your weapons carefully. Really think about it. Because the Democratic party is about to put every ounce of pressure they can to put these two candidates on the same ticket.

Are you all willing to destroy the party's chances this year just to keep up the petty fighting?

Wake Up!

[Dogmudgeon]

1. I enjoy petty fighting

Well, sometimes.

:evilgrin:

We need to keep in shape for that big elephant hunt we're having in November.

--p!

[writes3000]

2. I enjoy debate. But we're starting to write checks we can't afford to cash

There is a 1000% chance that Obama will have a prominent place in Hillary's team or Hillary will have a prominent place on Obama's team. And with so many "all or nothing" folks here swearing they won't support this or that unless....they are going to be sorely, sorely tested.

It has been said over and over again that these two candidates agree on almost 90% on the big issues. The Dem party will decide to insist on a unified ticket.

Will we be ready for it?

[MADem]

21. NO. Clinton will go back to the Senate if she loses. And if Obama loses,

he's getting to the point with some of his 'verbiage' that he'll probably not be invited to play in ANY capacity.

Bill Richardson is a better fit...executive experience, an impressive federal/international resume, Hispanic...he hits a number of sweet buttons.

[LeahD]

41. But , he shut down the recount in NM in 2004,

and he can't be trusted. He could have done much more for JK in '04, but he stood down.

Oh, funniest thing, it wasn't long after the election that he had his teeth capped......because he knew he was running in '08....or, jockeying for a position in the administration. He and Bill watched the SuperBowl together last Sunday.

[RaleighNCDUer]

44. Of course. He's DLC.

You would expect differently?

[MADem]

60. Of course he's running for VP--in a CLINTON administration.

He dropped about thirty or forty pounds, too, though he put some back on. Now he's rolled out a new bit of facial hair, it's polling nicely, too.

Obama won't likely ask him to be his VP if he gets the nom. But he'd be the best choice, having both executive and substantial international experience.

[cali]

47. to say you can't view the situation with any impartiality

is a wild understatement. Obama really hasn't said anything that crosses the line. You simply have a lot of hate. You're utterly consumed by it.

[MADem]

58. He's gotten pretty sharp. And his surrogates have gotten worse.

I am not one of those "haters" though. To hate, you have to CARE. I don't think Obama is a bad person, I just don't think he has the background or the experience to jump to the top job in the world just yet.

Please don't project your feelings about the candidate that YOU oppose on me. You don't know me, so don't pretend to.

Clinton has more clout as she cruises towards the age of seventy in the SENATE than as VP. This is the ONLY shot for her, unless Obama totally fucks up and she challenges him four years from now and knocks him out of the box (you know, like Ted Kennedy unsuccessfully tried to do to that southern fellah, Jimmy Carter).

If she doesn't make the cut this time, she'll stay in the Senate, no matter how much you'd like to see the "little woman" playing second fiddle.

[Dogmudgeon]

24. If you read my wonkier posts ...

... you will see I am quite a bit more of a party-unity guy than when I jump into a slugfest.

I also have been "calling" the Clinton/Obama ticket for some time now. The GOP cobbled together the same plans early in the fall and the present talk of a McCain/Huckabee ticket is built on that strategy.

DUers are NOT the usual rank-and-file Democrats. This is a rarefied part of the political atmosphere. What matters is how we represent ourselves to the voters and the world. I have never said, and will never say, that I will not vote if my candidate loses. I'd rather open a vein. The only way I'd NOT vote for Barack Obama, for instance, is if he decided he really WAS the messiah. Some of his followers may veer into those shoals, but Obama himself will not.

The real work starts after the primaries. The fighting is mainly a diversion for a bunch of half-crazy Democratic jackasses like myself.

--p!

[writes3000]

27. But when do you predict we will have a clear Pres candidate

Looking at the races ahead? Do you think we can go into April and May with the race still this close?

[dugggy]

29. Not until the very last primary has taken place, prolly June!

[writes3000]

34. June? And the General Election is in Nov? Only 5 Months away?

With the Republicans pointing out everyday (for months) how much in disarray the Dem party is? With John McCain eating up every opportunity to show himself in a Presidential light?

Anyone else worried about this scenario?

[dugggy]

38. Well...one of them has to win 51% of delegates and..

that may not be conclusive until the very last primary.
They are running neck and neck so far.

[writes3000]

40. I know, I know. Which is why...

I think the Dem party leaders will insist on resolving this sooner. And that means a ticket with both of them on it. Or one of them stepping down.

None of the roads will be easy but I don't see how else this is going to resolve.

No official Dem candidate until June/July is a disaster, IMO.

[RaleighNCDUer]

45. That may be how the Republicans would handle it, but we are not

republicans. Not most of us. Except the DLC.

Personally, I like it all the better if McCain doesn't know who he's campaigning against until the last minute.

Though no doubt Carville will let him know at the earliest opportunity.

[Dogmudgeon]

31. That is much harder to say

I think the press is driving that aspect of it. They want a long, conflict-loaded season. It sells advertising.

For a number of reasons, I do not think Obama will sustain his current bubble for more than another 20 days or so. It is based on the manic intensity of rapid, emotionalistic organization building -- an excellent launch but not enough for the long run. He will have to switch from a sprint to a marathon. How he manages or mismanages that transition will probably be the deciding factor.

--p!

[Skip Intro]

3. Interesting points.

I don't think either would choose the other for VP, tho.


The impression I get from Obama is that he detests Hillary.


I'm sure Hillary doesn't harbor exactly warm feelings for him, either.


But you do raise interesting points.


I'd find it hard, at this point, to vote for an Obama/? ticket. I just would. And many feel that way about Hillary too. It's on either side. Which supports what you say.


I hope Hillary is the nominee. I hope her VP choice is someone more experienced than Obama. I'd love to see a Clinton/Biden ticket. I am not impressed, at all, with Obama.

[AX10]

7. I'm with you.

The impression I get from Obama is that he detests Hillary.
That is quite mild compared to how I see it.

[Indiana_Dem]

14. The last debate it looked to me like they oughtta get a room! lol nt

[1awake]

32. hmmmm

maybe...

[writes3000]

17. We really owe it to ourselves and the country to explore this now

Because I think this is almost inevitable now. How can the Dem party tell it's female base that their rejecting their candidate? How can the Dem part tell their black base and the new youth base that they're rejecting their candidate?

The passion and intensity of this campaign has been with BOTH candidates. Name recognition, a new visionary, a multi-cultural candidate, the first female candidate, amd on and on and on.

I don't see how the Dems get out of this.

[mahina]

57. I don't get dislike, as much as really not respecting her.

Can't say I disagree. I mean, with not respecting her policy choices.

Plus, I love what Howard Dean has done for the Democratic party, and if she wins, he's pau. We can't have that.

[saracat]

4. Does it really matter after all? Perhaps not as much as we think.

It used to.

[Fovea]

5. I appreciate your concern

and I hope that your post makes you feel better.

But I would not put a lot of faith in pundits regarding the Dem
chances in Nov. Shocking, I know, but they do not have the election of a Dem as their highest priority, in general.

[EdwardWilbur]

12. What is a pundit?

[dugggy]

36. Pundit has origins in Sanskrit, classical language of ancient India

and it simply means a learned person or person full of knowledge.
Therefore a political "pundit" is some one who is very well knowledgeable
about politics.

[MADem]

59. How far we Americans have come from the Sanskirt definition !!!!!

PUNDIT, Sanskrit Definition: Learned person, person full of knowledge.

PUNDIT, American Definition: Overweight, slightly or severely alcoholic, brazen, loud, somewhat stupid, spittle-filled, continueously transmitting blowhard, usually, but not always male, and when female, often bleach-bottle blonde, and when black, generally taking the GOP viewpoint, and when Asian, rare as a hen's tooth, appearing on cable "news" ("news" is a media term for "propaganda") programs to shout over one another, creating much heat but absolutely no light.

[dugggy]

67. aww...its not that bad, I kinda like all the pundits Bill

O'Reilly gathers in his show. Most are good looking,
female and young. Which is the only reason I watch his
show once in a while.

[writes3000]

20. I'm looking at facts and looking ahead.

Most likely, neither Barack or Hillary can win the magic number of delegates to decisively win the nomination. That leaves the superdelegates. If the superdelegates decide the winner, it could rip apart the party. Look at how divided we are already. Look at the fury around Michigan and Florida. The stakes are huge.

Howard Dean said tonight that by March or April, he would pull the candidates aside to try to broker something. What else could that mean but trying to get one of them to step down OR more likely, combine the ticket?

What do you think will happen if we get to April and there is still no clear winner?

[RaleighNCDUer]

49. You really think the DLC would let Howard Dean broker an agreement?

They've been trying to destroy him for four years.

The DLC is not interested in the best interests of the party. They objected to the 50 state strategy. They cater to lobbyists and block any election finance reform. They will NOT let Dean do ANYTHING that he can gain credit from.

The DLC was behind the MI and FL fiascos.

Hillary is DLC.

This is almost undoubtedly going to go all the way to the convention, and it will be bloody. It could make '68 look like an afternoon tea.

[Fovea]

68. we go on to a brokered convention.

Or some backroom dealing gets done.

The party is ripped apart. But it is not as badly ripped apart as the wide stance party, and a whole lot of indie voters are out there who do not give a squat about whether our candidate is beloved by both the DLC and MoveOn. It isnt the debate, or the disagreement that will hurt us among those voters.


It is the appearance of the status quo that will screw us. I think that by the time November rolls around, running to the right will be about the stupidest thing one could do.

But there are still pols and voters frightened of six foot four arabs hiding in the bushes. And for them, no matter how tough we talk, the pugs will talk tougher. I find it funny that after having been end run by Newt in '92, the center wants to have a go at triangulating again.

Everyone in the world knows that America is very tough. Stupid and belligerent, perhaps, as well. So I dont mind seeing the status quo take a flying leap. The status quo has lost a wheel, and is drifting toward the guard rail with alacrity.

[Hutzpa]

6. How would they

decide on Presidency if they end it now?

:shrug:

[catnhatnh]

8. I think you are mostly correct in terms of the immediate dynamic...

and wrong because I believe that we could put Peewee Herman against any Republican and win-not because we deserve to but because everything that is happening now just gets worse before November.That said if either of them wishes to short circuit that team...well then either can name a vice-presidential candidate and make that kind of talk moot-and that would not surprise me....I wonder if Edwards, Gore, or even Ted Kennedy has been approached....I think it is almost a given in a "groundbreaking" election a name brand white guy on the undercard could seal the deal...Just guessing here but my, aren't surprises fun???

[writes3000]

30. I can't see Edwards or Kennedy agreeing to be VP but

Either way, I think you risk alienating huge numbers of the Dem base who are solidly devoted to Clinton or Obama. Here is where their unique status presents huge problems for the party.

My prediction could be wrong but my gut says I'm not.

Women who deeply feel that Hillary is the BEST candidate will feel rage and discrimination if Hillary is bounced from her candidacy.

The same is true for those disenfranchised groups who feel that Obama is the BEST candidate.

Take away large chunks of voters from either group and the Dem race becomes weaker.

[RaleighNCDUer]

51. Well, the hell of it is, NEITHER is the BEST candidate.

The DLC has managed to sideline the best candidates. Not that that matters to the DLC - they are not about party unity but about power for the DLC and their corporate masters.

[wake.up.america]

9. The Repulicans are watching with glee at this infighting, which has gone...

beyond decency.

Nobody is perfect. Neither Hillary nor Barack.

Hillary has the expereince, but seems a bit too conservative for me.

Barack is the great visionary. A great cheer leader. How about some specifics?

Edwards, unfortunately is out. Apparently, he was too cerebral for many.


Barack seems to have become a "cult" figure. Hope he doesn't get elected and say, "Great, we got elected, now what do we do?" Bush was elected somewhat the same way.

At least we are sure that the idiot in the White House will be gone. Hillary or Barack will return respectability to the office.

[EdwardWilbur]

11. I respectfully disagree. I do not think simply because one is charismatic that they are

cult leaders.

[EdwardWilbur]

10. How do you know for sure if I may ask?

[tishaLA]

13. I doubt there is anything close to a guarantee

like that, mostly because of Sen Obama. It seems to me that he will not want to be a shadow VP, angling for the inside track against Bill Clinton, nor will he want to have Sen Clinton as his VP because I think he genuinely does not like her or approve of her version of politics.

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. It does not matter, come November I will hold my nose

for whoever is the nominee... PERIOD.

THey are both a media creation... and that clothespin should have the logos of each one of the national media companies.

And people don't realize that this is by design.

I am sure the publies are enjoying the show... after all this makes election stealing oh so much easier

[OHdem10]

16. I love the way the Pundits decide our candidates, and like

good little sheeple we fall in line.

[writes3000]

25. Nope, nope, nope

I am looking ahead with clarity. Deny it all you want but we are headed to a brokered resolution. This won't be settled with primaries alone. And too many people will feel disenfranchised if they think that the process is rigged (ie, including Florida and Michigan OR not including those states, or if superdelegates choose the candidate based on favors)

[RaleighNCDUer]

52. Here's a clue:

IT IS RIGGED.

As long as we have the repukes on the other side, and the DLC 5th columnists on our side, we will not have a non-rigged election.

I swear, if Hillary gets the nom, I'm turning my back on 35 years of Democratic politics and going green.

[MADem]

18. Clinton will NOT take VP. Get that out of your head.

She'll stay in the Senate where she has more clout if she does not get the nom. She'll probably find a way to push Ted out of his bossman seat and grab the chair of the SASC. I would if I were her, frankly!

[writes3000]

22. You are not Hillary Clinton. Not even close, quite frankly.

So I'll continue to think for myself thanks.

[MADem]

26. We'll revisit this come Convention time. NT

[MADem]

19. Double clicked, pardon...

[sandnsea]

23. Then broke-ass Hillary should step aside n/t

[dugggy]

28. Best part of fighting....you get to kiss and make up

LOL

[ShadowLiberal]

33. I disagree, No way we get an Obama/Hillary ticket, Hillary offers nothing but baggage

Obama can (and has to) gain the support of Hillary supporters in other ways if he's the nominee. Hillary as his VP kills a lot of his independent/republican appeal, and damages his political outsider and change label.

[writes3000]

37. I see your points but...

I'm not sure how either candidate has an easy time getting the wounded supporters of the other candidate to rally around them. Why? Because I think the passion behind each candidate is fueled by so much emotion and aspiration.

I think we are underestimating how invested people are becoming in seeing the first non-white or first woman President. And each side is getting more invested in why the other candidate isn't worthy of the position.

[caligirl]

39. Obama could look to Claire McCaskil or Janet Napolitiano or others to fill the roleof vp

Hillary could choose Obama or Harold Ford or Jesse Jackson. Ohhh crap, Bill would have a hard time facing Jesse everyday. How about a second woman, Barbara Lee.

[writes3000]

42. Obama would be better picking a female VP

Who had shown support for Hillary, IMO.

I don't think Hillary can pick Ford or Jackson. It just looks too blatantly obvious. Richardson, maybe. But I don't think Richardson brings out black voters or young voters really.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

50. How about Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard - a Mexican-American?

She gets a 100% rating from the American Civil Liberties Union, a 95% from NOW, voted against the IWR, and is pretty liberal (far more liberal than Hillary Clinton). She was the first Latina elected to the U.S. Congress and represents an area of Los Angeles.

Her father was the famous Ed Roybal who served for about 30 years in the U.S. Congress and founded the Hispanic Caucus. A ton of buildings in downtown Los Angeles are named after him.

[caligirl]

55. Never heard of her but if she helped bring in the states he missed this is good.

Certainly an outstanding record.

[oviedodem]

65. GREAT find but too much of a minority ticket for America though.

Her first strike is that she is Mexican and the freepers will undoubtedly say that she will open up the borders and hordes of republicans will vote regardless of the candidate.

Good idea though!!

[RaleighNCDUer]

54. Sebelius, of Kansas. Obama's best choice.

Whoever Hillary would pick is immaterial, because the real VP would be Bill. Which would mean, of course, no VP successor after her term is up, but the DLC will be willing to pass the torch back to the republicans by then.

[RaleighNCDUer]

53. It;s not as if this is the first time that either a black or a woman has

run, and run well, and lost.

If Hillary becomes president, it will destroy the chances for any other woman for the next 50 years. She'll be an unmitigated disaster, and every one of her missteps will be laid at the feet of ALL women.

[CK_John]

35. Worst move we could make. McCain would use that as club. n/t

[RaleighNCDUer]

43. Fantasy. It will never happen.

By convention time, Obama will be the stronger candidate, and Hillary will never accept 2nd billing.

Besides, neither of them have good defense qualifications, so whichever is chosen will have to have someone who is strong on military and foreign affairs credentials.

Putting Hillary on Obama's ticket would poison that ticket for all the millions who never want to see another clinton in the WH, making his a losing ticket. Putting Obama on Hillary's ticket will not help Hillary against those same.

Hillary is a losing nominee, whatever her place on the ticket.

If the DLC does manage to create such an unnatural union, they will simply lose us yet another election.

[Life Long Dem]

46. Sorry to say, this looks more like someone wants a piggyback ride

[krkaufman]

48. Not if Obama wins the nomination. I just don't see Hillary as VP ...

... but, more importantly, I don't see Bill as Second Spouse. :) (Also, given that many Obama supporters chose the path because of a belief that Hillary is too divisive a figure (through no fault of her own) to win the general election, it wouldn't make sense to have her on the ticket as VP.)

[Tatiana]

56. I don't know... I think a good portion of the electorate truly wants change.

(Maybe from a different candidate, this time.)

[Taverner]

61. Ojala

[rucky]

62. Not really a fact, but the best strategy under the circumstances. n/t

[ursi]

63. the order on the ticket would depend on which one can let their ego get out of the way

[workinclasszero]

64. I don't see

Obama being anyone's vice-president. He would be much better off in the Senate.

Besides the VP will be playing second-string to Bill.

Who wants that role?:shrug:

[milkyway]

66. Couldn't be more wrong. Desperate ploy by Clinton campaign.