Chess vs. Checkers: Why Barack Obama May Pick Hillary Clinton as VP

[writes3000]

First, let me state for the record, I am a staunch Barack Obama supporter. So this isn't a post by someone who backed Hillary in the primaries. Two, this is NOT a "panic" post. I'm not suggesting Obama NEEDS Hillary now because of three days of polling. That would be just silly.

I am simply intrigued by political strategy. And the question of whether Hillary as VP is a net positive or negative is an interesting one.

I think I know most of the negatives.

THE NEGATIVES

1) Attention & focus. Bill and Hillary both will draw attention away from Obama.

2) Bill can/won't be vetted.

3) Hillary will be a lightning rod for the Republican base. And she'll drive away independents.

4) Hillary doesn't guarantee a win in any one state.

5) Barack doesn't get along with the Clintons.

6) Hillary comes with those commercials - you know the ones. "John McCain has a lifetime of experience..."

Okay, I can see a strong case with most of those negatives. The Bill/vetting issue is a real one. Especially if there's a powerhouse scandal in there.

But if you're playing chess and not checkers, Hillary Clinton as VP brings some net positives as well. Some things to think about.

HILLARY UNDENIABLY BRINGS ALONG A PASSIONATE BASE: There are people out there who would be tremendously excited about Hillary as VP. There are also another group (Obama supporters first) who would incredibly excited by a unity ticket.

But you say, "The Republicans would attack Hillary like crazy." Yes, you're right. And that would immediately take them off message. Old habits die hard and the Republicans won't be able to resist the red meat. So, again, what does that do?

It lessens the negative focus on Obama. And this is huge. The Republican message will quickly split. Do they attack Obama or do they attack Hillary? Doing both will be nearly impossible. These next two points are a big deal in the context of the race we just had.

1) The Republican attacks will rally women who are already primed to fight against sexism. Even those women who would prefer to have Hillary at the top of the ticket will quickly become enraged at the Republicans.

2) It will allow both Barack Obama and Bill Clinton to unite in defense of Hillary. The visual of Obama and Bill Clinton standing up together to fight the Republicans would be powerful. AND it would allow Obama to be a fierce fighter in defense of someone else.

THOSE COMMERCIALS ARE COMING OUT ANYWAY:

And if Hillary's ardent supporters are sit fence sitting, that isn't a good thing - even if there are only 100,000 of them. By contrast, if those commercials come out while Hillary is on the ticket, who better than Hillary to set the record straight? She is in a unique position to pivot those words into a real attack on McCain. "What good is a lifetime of experience if it has led you to make wrong decision, after wrong decision, after wrong decision? John McCain's lifetime of experience has led him to stand beside George Bush's disastrous policies nearly 100% of the time. We've had enough of George Bush. We need change in America. And we need it now."

HILLARY MAY DRIVE AWAY INDEPENDENT MEN. BUT SHE WILL BRING ALONG INDEPENDENT WOMEN: And who is strongly behind Obama already? Women. So by putting Hillary on the ticket, you are fueling excitement among your strongest groups. Women. Latinos. African Americans. Jewish voters. Dem loyalists. Barack may indeed take a hit among independent men but I firmly believe that the under surveyed bloc of independent women will make up for that.

IT WILL BRING BILL CLINTON OUT TO CAMPAIGN: And I think this would be a tremendous asset in PA and OH. I can't overstate this point. Bill Clinton is probably the one strongest voice that can speak to those fence sitting voters in those states. We saw it during the primaries.

I could go on but I'll stop.

Why am I making this case now? Because there is a voice in my head that keeps wondering what Obama's strategy is. If he's going to name a VP, shouldn't he name that VP before the Olympics? Sure, he could announce during the Olympics but that might tamper a news bounce that could come from it. If Obama announces just after the Olympics, it leaves little time to prime the party about why this new name is exciting.

There's a voice in the back of my head that says - the thing that would bring the house down at the Democratic convention is if they announced right there on live television that Hillary Clinton is Barack Obama's choice as VP. And he says, "On the first night we met after the primaries, I told Hillary that I wanted her to be my Vice President but I needed time to make sure there was no better choice. America, there IS no one better to be my Vice President than Hillary Clinton."

One last point. The media. How will they react? I will tell you.

More than anything else, the media loves a strong narrative. An easy and compelling story. Most "news" programs aren't news at all. They're entertainment. And they're designed that way. They want an umbrella story with an amazing hook.

The story of Barack Obama & Hillary Clinton now teaming up on the Unity Ticket would blow anything that John McCain did out of the water.

It would be THE story of the year. It would dominate the imagination and the airwaves.

And secretly, most in the media, would be rooting for that ticket.

And the ratings and interest would convince their bosses to sell the Obama/Clinton story.

In my mind, this is a very real possibility. Will it happen? I don't know. Might it happen. Absolutely.

[Gman]

1. If Obama is serious about winning, he picks Hillary

18 million Democrats must be heard.

[thewiseguy]

2. Breaking News: The primaries are over

[liberalmuse]

20. Noooo!? Really?????

When someone goes through all the trouble to post something well-thought and interesting, they deserve better than this shit. That was really rude.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[paulk]

71. how is your post relevant to a discussion about VP?

Please fill us in on your reasoning....

[JoFerret]

89. Good question n/t

.

[NYC_SKP]

8. They must be heard?

They were heard, their candidate lost, and just like every primary back through my memory, they need to really stop it and join the battle.

must be heard. really.

:eyes:

[Zhade]

40. The vast majority have already stepped up. It's only the pro-PUMA deadender morons who refuse to.

NT!

[CakeGrrl]

10. 'fess up...are you going PUMA if she isn't picked? n/t

[MonkeyFunk]

18. Yeah GMan!

Prove your purity!

[CakeGrrl]

32. Simple question...somehow the thinking is that 18 million voters

have yet to be heard, even though...they voted. Does that mean Kucinich voters and Edwards voters have been 'silenced' too because their candidate didn't win the primary?

Logical conclusion I draw from the post is that in order to be "heard", their favored candidate must be put on the ticket, or else...sounds like a threat to withhold support for the nominee to me.

[MonkeyFunk]

41. But the problem is even when people say they'll vote for Obama

his more fanatical supporters here still demand loyalty oaths. There's a very creepy authoritarian streak in many here.

There isn't a single instance where somebody questions something about Obama where you guys don't accuse them of disloyalty or even outright demand their banning.

It's ugly.

[Gman]

51. That's right!

and I'll be damned if I "conform" to anything I don't have to or want to, especially the Obamamania around here.

[CakeGrrl]

63. So don't conform...I was just wondering if you were willing to say whether your vote in November

for Obama is contingent on whether Hillary Clinton is named the VP pick.

[Gman]

66. Why do you ask?

[CakeGrrl]

83. Curious. Why does anyone ask any question?

I don't think I've read one of your posts regarding Obama's VP pick that didn't have the "Obama had better do this if he wants to win" tone to it. It seems pretty indicative of not supporting him if he doesn't take Hillary on the ticket. I'm just curious if one of the posters who keeps hinting at this would admit to being one of those who won't vote for Obama if this comes to pass.

[Gman]

93. Up until Obama announces his VP pick I'll keep posting this reminder

that if Obama wants to win he'd best pick Hillary for VP. I'm afraid you're reading entirely too much into this little sentence. I think my feelings about Hillary are pretty well known here and I do not at all like the tactics Obama used to get the nomination. But be clear about one thing. I will vote for Obama. I'm still not enthusiastic about him but he has my vote. My problem is that this is the ninth presidential election I will vote in. I was very enthusiastic about every single Democratic nominee in the last 8. I was a Clinton delegate to the DNC in 92 and a Kerry delegate in 04. I stopped having the blind faith that the Democrat would win with Dukakis. I felt the same way about McGovern as you do about Obama. After Gore, for me it quit being about the candidate and became who has the best chance of winning. I agree completely with Karl Rove, Dick Morris, et al that Obama is the weakest candidate of all the Democrats in the primary. I think that adding Hillary to the ticket will completely solidify and re-energize those 18 million voters which includes a great many white working class voters that voted for Hillary. Hillary locks down the white working class vote and states that should be Democrat including WV, PA, OH. I think those same white working class along with the Black vote could make SC, NC and even GA too close to call with Hillary.. I think that Hillary will lock down the Hispanic vote in NM, NV and CO putting these states in play as well.

You may say, "Well, that's not so because the polls say...". Screw that. You may say, "Well Hillary will motivate the RW to go vote against Obama and her". Screw that. You don't think the RW has already decide they have to keep "that n****r" from winning any way they can (and I fear for his safety if he's up by 10 points in mid-October)? Hell, I live in S. Texas so I hear stuff like that not only from the whites, but from the hispanics who supported Hillary and (IMHO) are more racist than any white I've ever run across, and that racism is against both whites and blacks. And if anyone coughs and sputters at that statement, come live in Texas south of Interstate 10 for a year or so and you'll see what I mean, if you can handle it.

We all know this election is different. I've never seen anything at all like this. My 90 year old aunt says these times are "just like it was with Hoover", and she was a little kid then but she heard the talk. To you and me it makes no sense not to vote for Obama for a plethora of reasons. But base human instincts, including fear (and including fear of someone of a different color) can cloudy people's judgement. There was a reason 18 million people voted for Hillary. I think that if Obama ties into that energy, along with his own energy, those judgements become clear again and that ticket will be unstoppable.

You shouldn't read so much into a little sentence. :-)

[Gman]

52. Simple answer

I really didn't care about or for Kucinich's or Edwards candidacy.

[Zhade]

39. 99% of those Democrats will likely vote for Obama even without her.

And polls show a majority of registered voters -- the people who will actually vote -- DON'T want her on the ticket.

He doesn't need her.

[JoFerret]

90. So why are some people obsessed

with the PUMA?

[LVjinx]

42. Why would Hillary want to be VP?

[Prophet 451]

50. They were heard, they just lost

Sorry, that's how the primary process works, doesn't matter how many votes someone got if they lose. If you like to talk about how to make the process fairer, that could be an interesting discussion but let's not pretend those voters were ignored.

[Gman]

53. 18 million Democrats matter because

that's more votes than Obama got. Hillary won the popular vote.

The process needs to be changed and the caucus system abolished, but that is for another thread.

[paulk]

73. these people act like they just won the super bowl 52-0

when in fact they won it 10-9, and that 'cause the referee blew some big calls. Some might even say the referee was biased...

[Prophet 451]

79. Only if they were an idiot

With the possible exception of the MI and FL primaries (which were resolved mostly in Hillary's favour), both parties knew the rules going in. There wasn't a referee to be biased.

I'm not automatically anti_hillary. I'd have no problem with her being in Obama's Cabinet or even his VP pick (although I'd question the wisdom of that one) but this attitude that the votes were ignored simply because they were cast for a candidate who didn't win annoys me. Every primary season including this one, X number of votes are cast for a candidate who doesn't win, some of whom were far better candidates than either Obama or Hillary. Brutal as it may be, that's how the system is supposed to work (and I'd be interested in discussing how to make it fairer). However many votes Hillary got, she didn't win. Obama won it by the skin of his teeth. They knew going in that there were no guarentees of anything unless they won and Hillary didn't. If Obama picks her for a slot, fine but the demand that he must looks very much like entitlement to the rest of us.

Oh, and I was only ever a lukewarm Obama supporter, only became one of those when it was down to the last two and I'll be the first to admit some of his recent actions have worried me.

[paulk]

80. I'm talking about the people who think Obama ran a perfect

campaign and that he continues to do so because of his overwhelming victory in the primaries.

It wan't an overwhelming victory by any means and he is wide open to criticism for the way he is running the GE campaign.

Also, this constant dismissal of Hillary supporters because "Obama won, Hillary lost" Yeah, sure - they knew the rules - but the rules sucked. And you can't dismiss the hard feelings with "we won, you lost" People aren't like that. If they think the contest was not fair, no amount of "both parties knew the rules" is going to change that perception.

Politics is about power. 18 million votes is a lot of power. You can call it entitlement if you want, but if Obama doesn't take Hillary into account he will very likely lose this election. "Unity" needs to be more than just another slogan.

[Prophet 451]

82. OK, my misunderstanding there

I'll confess that I'm puzzled about how Obama is running his GE campaign as well.

The rules may have sucked but both of them signed off on them and yes, I will call it entitlement because what they are effectively saying is that their hurt feelings (justified or not) overrule their duty to the good of the nation and the world (which is not to say that Obama is a godsend to either but he's a billion times better than McCain). It is effectively asking for a bribe to vote in a way which should be one's moral duty.

I doubt Obama will lose this election even if he ignores Hillary entirely (which he won't). The public is so sick of Republican thuggery and McCain is such a diabolical campaigner that, assuming an honest count, Obama should win comfortably (although right now, his campaign seems determined to prove me wrong). Essentially, McCain is so bad that Obama could probably go on vacation until November and still be elected (I'm kidding. Well, mostly). And I don't think the contest was unfair for the most part. I'll agree that it's unfair that the same two states always go first, I'll agree that MI and FL were a bloody mess although they were eventually resolved but for the rest, the rules were pretty fair.

[JVS]

72. LOL!

:rofl:

[FogerRox]

3. Consider signing up for a 3 day Camp Wellstone political training seminar

http://www.wellstone.org/our-programs/camp-wellstone

[Muttocracy]

4. nope. She slashed her VP hopes with those pro-McCain Commander in Chief comments. nt

[Phredicles]

14. Exactly so. If she's the VP nominee, those remarks will come up over

and over and over and over... For starters, expect that to be question #1 at the VP debate.

[musicblind]

59. And those comments wont come up otherwise? n/t

[DevonRex]

76. Sure they will. She gave ammo to the opposition and therefore

cannot be on the team now. That was her choice and now she has to live with the consequences. It's pretty simple. Not only that, but her supporters also have to live with the consequences. Her supporters are pretty much Obama supporters now anyway because they're democrats. Unless, of course, they're in the "cult of personality" group, in which case there's no reasoning with them to begin with.

Being a veteran, and having been in law enforcement, always working in a man's world, I have no patience for people who need to be coddled. Life and politics don't always go your way. You celebrate your wins and take your losses like a mature adult. Then you do the right thing. That's all there is.

[musicblind]

84. well that certainly explains a lot about your personality.

I am being entirely rational about this, because I want Obama to win. Hillary is the best person to help him win. Period. If not her then Biden or Edwards. BUT Hillary is THE best choice. I believe that based on the valid points made by many of the posters here.

I get the impression the reason you are against it isn't because you want what is in Obama's best interest it is because you are petty and want revenge against Hillary for hurting your feelings in the primary.

[DevonRex]

87. I believe you edited a bit too late and way too little.

Here is your original post:

yeah I don't particularly
care for people who work in law enforcement. as someone with a background for psychology I can tell you that research shows such people suffer from power related issues. Since we are going to be stereotyping and name calling...

But no, the reason you are against it isn't because you want what is in Obama's best interest it is because you are petty and want revenge against Hillary for pissing you off in the primary.

[musicblind]

94. I edited because I rethought it after posting and decided

the first message came off rude and more hurtful than it should. I made the edit within minutes of having made the original post as well. That is part of why the edit tool is there. I think it says something very positive about my character that I tried to reword it to protect your feeilngs. Geesh ... But if you want people to know the truth about the psychological background of law enforcement officers then go ahead and let the information remain.

[elkston]

5. You gotta admit though, it would be a great story and enthralling ...

political drama. It's almost worth the risk just for how much damn FUN that ticket would be.

Honestly, all the people being propped up as front runner now bore me. I'll only be truly happy with Biden, Clark, or Clinton.

And yeah, getting chummy with McCain in the primaries really hurt her chances. I mean really if she had just dropped out after North Carolina/Indiana then I think it would have been a no brainer for Obama to pick her (if she wanted it).

[CakeGrrl]

6. I sure hope it doesn't happen; it's one thing to play HRC's comments

on their own; it's another thing to have her hem and haw in a VP debate about why she said that crap about her own would-be-boss against the Republican opponent, of whom she spoke favorably.

And let's not forget Bill's own little apple-polish for McCain against Obama: He wanted a GE matchup between his wife and McCain because it would be "between two people who loved their country". Again, McCain may play that anyway, but there's nothing good that will come of putting the Clintons on the defensive about it. They've had plenty of spotlight to that end.

If Bill Clinton needs the defense of Hillary as incentive to fight the Republicans, 'nuff said. That would be unfortunate.

The media is NOT rooting for that ticket for the right reasons. Does anyone watching the MSM lately really believe they'd fall in love with any Dem so-called "Dream Team" vs. McCain?

Obama has to consider how he can govern with his VP, not just how to get to the WH. That's Chess vs. Checkers.

And once again: The *Republicans* want it. That's reason enough not to bite.

ps - she voted for the IWR. On top of McNasty's ugly attacks, Obama does not need to defang one of his strongest campaign points against him.

[JustAnotherGen]

88. n/a

And once again: The *Republicans* want it. That's reason enough not to bite.

Pat Buchanan wants it. That's enough for me to say - uh - No goal!

[cbc5g]

7. maybe..I've been against Hill as VP but it sure as hell would energize the dem base

AND it would keep the Republicans off message. Who do they attack, Obama or Hill?


One other thing though..it WILL rally the republican base. But do they even have one like they had in 2000 or 2004?

[Just-plain-Kathy]

34. "Energize the dem base"??? ...Mrs. NAFTA would turn off most voters hoping for change.

It would be very disappointing if Obama caves to the Clinton's.

[LVjinx]

43. "Mrs. NAFTA" isn't the one who said her opposition to NAFTA was just overheated rhetoric

[Just-plain-Kathy]

56. When did Hillary oppose NAFTA? ...

Maybe it was one of those "I was for it, before I was against it" moments.

[JVS]

74. It would energize Dems like a can of Coke. It would energize the GOP like cocaine and PCP

Don't do it!

[Political Heretic]

9. He cant pick her even if he wanted to. Her rhetoric in the primary precludes that as an option.

When she chose to go kitchen sink she chose an all or nothing approach. He can't pick her now because all the McCain camp would need to do to win is just re-run Hillary Clinton own many words against Obama, or Hillary Clinton praise of McCain. "John McCain has passed the commander in chief threshold" Obama hasn't. Obama just "has a speech he gave" etc. etc. etc.

You cant nominate a VP that has thrown it all out on table and basically said that the "other guy" would be a more qualified president than you would.

[writes3000]

12. God, I hate that she said that. I hated it then and I hate it now. So short-sighted.

But I do believe those ads are coming anyway.

Who do they really influence? People who give merit to what Hillary thinks. It doesn't matter to those that dismiss Hillary.

So is it better to have her on the ticket showing that she doesn't believe that or sitting on the sidelines?

I think it's a tougher call than many here think.

[Political Heretic]

26. They don't have much influence unless she is the VP - which is why she can't be.

"Who do they really influence? People who give merit to what Hillary thinks. It doesn't matter to those that dismiss Hillary."

Yup, and that stays true unless she becomes VP of the Obama campaign. Then suddenly its relevant to everyone.

[Egnever]

35. Interesting point.

[FrenchieCat]

11. That's a lot of negatives in that list you have.

I don't know if we need to go through all that.

Plus your take of how the media would report this sounds better than what I suspect would happen.

It would most likely be discussions like "who will be really in charge? Bill or Obama?"

[writes3000]

15. Regarding your last point...

I think that's the easiest issue to resolve. Barack announces what he'd like Bill to do in the new administration. An actual position. Something that has to do with good will around the world.

[The River]

13. Your List Of Negatives

more than rules out any possibility
of Clinton on the ticket.

It isn't chess or checkers, it's politics.

[liberalmuse]

16. Good points!

I didn't support either in the primaries. They were way down on my list, but I'd like to see an Obama/Clinton ticket. The polls are too close for my liking, and I believe this would be the most solid ticket possible.

[sellitman]

17. There are GREAT choices that don't have Hillary's negatives

People who Obama actually gets along with.

That is why it won't be Hillary.

[writes3000]

23. I know the convention thinking is that they don't get along.

Maybe they don't. But I'm not completely sold on that.

And I think Obama said the real truth already. If Hillary is indeed the person who can help him win, he'll choose her.

As for working with someone he disagrees with, I think Obama knows how to handle both the Clintons. He has proven himself to be adept at motivating people and getting the best out of them.

[cbc5g]

19. I didnt like Hill in the primaries, but if she were on board we would have the most energized ticket

in Dem history. We need those 8% of dems who are still angry about the primaries. Dem Unity 2008 it sounds perfect.


I was one of the biggest anti-Hill people in the primaries for her tactics but we have to accept that 18 million people voted for her and she gives us a lot of strength in the south and among working class white people. It's true.

[WeDidIt]

22. There is only one set of conditions under which Hillary would be Veep

Obama would only do that if all internals pointed to a divided base and it was the only way he could win.

[writes3000]

27. Ah-ha, so you agree that it's possible.

Victory! (Just kidding, really.)

I'm so curious about how these discussions are breaking out.

I do believe that they are deep, deep, deep analysis of the polls going on.

His strategy team impressed the hell out of me when it came to state by state analysis.

I do think he is really focusing on who helps him win.

[WeDidIt]

28. I honestly don't believe conditions are anywhere close to where Obama

would choose Hillary as a Veep.

I'd put the odds at less than one in a million. You probably have a better chance of winning the next Powerball Lotto.

[writes3000]

31. LMAO!! You may be right.

I do think people are kidding themselves if they don't think Obama is first and foremost factoring in who will help him win.

Beyond that, I can't claim to know what his thinking is.

I enjoy your posts, IWantAnyDem.

[Motown_Johnny]

24. Hillary's behavior in the primary has disqualified her. Sorry she can't be the VP

[sellitman]

29. I totally agree

I would hope Obama goes back and listens to her real carefully.

She was disgraceful.

[LVjinx]

44. There was nothing wrong with her behavior in the primaries.

Although there were some fabricated stories, such as her saying she wanted Obama assassinated, that were certainly designed to put her in a bad light.

[polichick]

57. Agreed - you can't float the idea of assassination multiple times...

...and remain a safe choice for veep, especially when it's your lifelong dream to be prez.

[JerseygirlCT]

58. Yeah, I think she probably burned that bridge months ago

She could have run such a different campaign. Who knows? Had she done so, we might still be talking about a unity ticket with a different person on top.

I grew to intensely dislike her over the course of the campaign, after years of defending her. And Bill? Ugh. Selfish, petulant, hateful man. Such a shame - he too had so successfully rehabilitated himself into a true world leader. Wonder how long it will take him to clean off the gutter gunk he was swimming in?

[DevonRex]

77. I agree. It is time for those supporters to face reality. nt

[babylonsister]

25. No. Can or will the big dawg be vetted? No. I have no interest in this. nt

[Egnever]

36. bottom line right there

In the end he cant be veted

[pnorman]

30. The real question isn't how many voters she'd be likely to bring to the Obama-Clinton ticket.

It would also be how many voters she'd almost certainly TURN OFF! --- and viscerally! I'm convinced that the main reason that the whacko-right is so FURIOUS at Obama, is that he knocked their "favorite" candidate out of the ring a few months ago.

pnorman

[davidpdx]

33. I think more then that one comment by Hillary Clinton will come out

There were several troubling statements made by both of them that could be warped into commercials if she were picked. At the time that didn't seem to matter much though.

[grantcart]

37. It is possible and as your list shows Clinton as VP is complicated

but if she happens I think it will be great fun and give McCain another huge brain fart because after banking on it I am sure that now they are thinking it isn't possible.

[Zhade]

38. For negatives, you forgot to add that she's a proven unrepentant liar.

All mcLame has to do is play the Tuzla video, and he easily proves that Obama chose a liar for VP.

Obama's not going to hand mcLame that ammo.

[Imagevision]

45. Bill couldn't be controlled by Hillary, the man does what he wants, (ego freak!)

[GoesTo11]

46. Really good points and counterpoints here. Makes me think.

If only she hadn't gone with that Commander-in-Chief line. Maybe there's some way to mitigate that - Bill was always good at that kind of backtracking, but I have no idea how. If there was a way to put that genie back in the bottle, Hillary would have a lot of strengths - attack dog (yes she can), women's vote, white working class vote, Bill on his good days. But right now, I have to go with the people who say she has created too much baggage. Anyone want to try to make the case otherwise by explaining how she mitigates the damage from the Commander-in-Chief test? What could she say?

[quakerboy]

48. "More than anything else"

"the media loves a strong narrative. An easy and compelling story"

If I give you that you are correct, lets examine the Media. A kitty rescued from a tree is an easy and compelling story. As is a kitty thrown from a moving auto. But the latter is far more likely to hit the evening news if they have those 2 stories to choose from.

Given that paradigm, Which narrative is the media more likely to run with for the next few months:
1)"The story of Barack Obama & Hillary Clinton now teaming up on the Unity Ticket"
2)Hillary Forced Obama to accept her on the ticket, despite their internal strife.

I would bet money they go with 2. Not only is it more "dramatic", it has more applications. You can always dig up a new "conflict" between the 2. With unity, what; Its news they agreed again? Pick the story that is good for 3 newscasts without any real work, or pick the story that is good for 60 newscasts without having to do any work?

[Prophet 451]

49. I think it would be a mistake

Don't misunderstand me, I think Hillary would make a great VP but from a purely pragmatic viewpoint, I think she'll be ruled out by very high negatives (something like half the population said they wouldn't vote for her even before she started campaigning) and the fact that she'd be a rally point for disaffected Republicans who might otherwise sit this one out. I'll also be the first to admit those negatives have little to do with her and much to do with the demonisation of both Clinton for the last sixteen years.

That said, I can see easily see her in the Cabinet. Education or HHS would suit her especially well.

[Warren Stupidity]

54. Boiled frog syndrom: how to know when an analogy is overcooked?

I hereby declare 'playing chess not checkers' to be overcooked. Putting up a list of positives and negatives and then declaring victory for whatever you happen to believe is the best choice in no way illustrates the differences between the game of chess and the game of checkers.

Equally bad overcooked analogies: 'its political jiu-jitsu', anything to do with politics as football, anything to do with politics as a horse race, 'keeping your powder dry' - etc. etc. and of course the Ur-analogy, the boiled frog.

[saltpoint]

55. If Obama knows his veep choice, he and his staff are keeping it under

lock and key.

It could be anybody on a list of 20-some people that includes but is not limited to:

Hillary Clinton
Evan Bayh
Tim Kaine
Tom Daschle
Bill Richardson
Kathleen Sebelius
Sam Nunn
Joe Biden
John Edwards
Chris Dodd
Sherrod Brown
Bob Graham
Lincoln Chafee
Wes Clark
Jerry Brown
Ed Rendell
Brian Schweitzer
Bill Ritter
Claire McCaskill
Bill Bradley
Phil Bredeson
Janet Napolitano

... and others.

A case could be made for the selection of Hillary Clinton.

I hope it won't be.

[Cha]

60. That's freakin' lot of

negatives! And, since the package comes with bill(it's all about me)clinton.. I say "no way".

Edit~ And, here's numero uno reason..

ProSense (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-03-08 08:31 PM
Original message

"Democratic Party 2008 platform to call decision to go to war with Iraq a "strategic blunder"
Edited on Sun Aug-03-08 08:32 PM by ProSense

Democrats label Iraq 'strategic blunder'
Posted: Sunday, August 03, 2008 4:28 PM by Domenico Montanaro

From NBC/NJ’s Matthew Berger

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The Democratic Party will formally call the decision to go to war with Iraq a “strategic blunder” in its 2008 platform, according to a draft debated Saturday. The party also included language on Iraq withdrawal echoed by its presumptive nomine, Barack Obama, as it expressed a desire to “be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in.”

<...>

A drafting committee unveiled the 44-page platform for the national party, encompassing both traditional Democratic values and the plans unveiled by Obama.

The party’s draft differs from four years ago on Iraq, when it said “people of good will disagree about whether America should have gone to war in Iraq.” This time, reflecting a shift in American public opinion, the committee hopes to emphasize that “Iraq was a diversion from the fight against the terrorists who struck us on 9-11” while reiterating complaints about the war’s execution. It also echoes Obama’s calls to remove one to two military brigades each month.

“I think the facts are clear now,” Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, drafting committee chair, said after the hearing. “People of good will could disagree with the facts, but as clear as they are now, the facts are manifest that it was a blunder.”

The language on Iraq is consistent with Obama’s position, and is significant for a party that includes many leaders who initially backed the war in Congress. While some, including former Sen. John Edwards, have called the initial support a mistake, others, like Sen. Hillary Clinton, have said the error was largely in the war’s execution.

more

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6581667

[musicblind]

61. Goodstuff I hope she is the VP surprise! n/t

[democrattotheend]

62. I'm starting to warm up to the idea of her as VP

Still not sure what to do about the Bill problem though.

[GetTheRightVote]

64. I again, HRC is the obvious choice if he wishes to win, she unites the party

the groups within the Party will back their guy be it Obama or Hillary and I have no doubt we will win the White House. Also, I believe without her he will lose it. The race will be to close and may even be stolen when so many members of the party do not vote for Obama or even in fact vote for McCain. If he truly wishes to win he must choose with logic and if he does then Hillary is the obvious running mate for him. He told us he could work with anyone, prove it and choose your old rival.

[AtomicKitten]

65. The primary demonstrated the Clintons can't be trusted and Obama will keep them at arm's length.

[TexasObserver]

67. fool me once ... shame on ...

you can't get fooled again!

(Agree with your post)

[MonkeyFunk]

70. Demonstrated what?

that they actually run a campaign, and do things other than praise their opponent?

It was a RACE! They were running against each other! But it's over now, and you're resentment is ridiculous.

[SidneyCarton]

68. You bring up an interesting point DI.

I don't know if the benefits outweigh the negatives here, but we will see.

[tulip]

69. Like Clinton but it may be Bayh for the unity ticket

The buzz is that Obama will be in the South Bend area Tuesday and Wednesday. It's not on his campaign schedule and Evan Bayh will be present. Here are the links.

http://www.politics1.com/blog-0808.htm#0804
is that Obama plans to announce Evan Bayh as his runningmate on Tuesday. Why? Because the Obama press corps was informed over the weekend they will be in Indiana on Tuesday and Wednesday, yet there are no campaign events in the state on Obama's published schedule.

http://www.howeypolitics.com/2008/08/01/an-obama-bayh-ticket-wednesday/
Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama will stop in Indiana this Wednesday at Concord High School in Elkhart, setting Hoosier political observers aflutter with renewed veepstakes speculation. The visit, confirmed to HPI by Second Congressional District Chairman Butch Morgan, could be to announce the selection of Senator Evan Bayh as Obama’s running mate. He would not say whether Bayh would be in attendance. Democratic sources say Secret Service is working out details with local police that would include a motorcade.

[tulip]

75. More on Obama in Indiana with Bayh Wedns.

This is picking up pretty quickly. This is a pretty good indicator so be ready. I believe Bayh will be the unity choice........but it's all speculation for now.

Obama will name Bayh his VP choice on Wednesday
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bil-browning/obama-will-name-bayh-his_b_116752.html

[SDgs]

78. Hillary as VP

HILLARY UNDENIABLY BRINGS ALONG A PASSIONATE BASE

There is the faulty logic. You are making the assumption that Hillary's base will go for this. Most won't.

[Stuckinthebush]

81. I think her negatives are greater than her positives

Honestly, the I'm-not-voting-if-she's-not-in crowd is full of bluster. Unless they are either A.) fools, or B.) amazingly myopic they will end up holding their collective noses and pulling the lever for Obama. The alternative is not acceptable. The sad fact is that we live in a country where the system is a two-party system (like it or not). If they don't vote for Obama then they get McCain. Simple as that. They are intelligent enough to understand this. My favorite didn't win the primary either but I'm still voting for the Democrat because the Republican winning would be disaster.

Of course, he can pick her and she can sit in her office and go to funerals and state dinners. I don't see Obama as the kind to have a Cheney-type of vice president.

[Metric System]

85. I love how Obama supporters tell us to "get over it" and support Obama but STILL continue to bash

Hillary. Just looking over these comments make me sick to my stomach. Many of you have a very one-sided view of unity, not unlike the PUMAs. I think I better go on a self-imposed exile from DU again.

[writes3000]

86. "Some" Obama supporters. Just like "some" Hillary supporters actively....

work against Obama now.

I would just like to remind you that an Obama supporter started this post. Just like two other Obama supporters started two separate positive Hillary posts today.

[PBS Poll-435]

91. That's nice,

But look who showed up to soil the threat with rabid hate.

Doesn't look like they are Clinton primary-supporters to me...

[Phred42]

92. Hillary brings nothing but Baggage to the party.

The guy from the Standard (Hardballz) said the Repugs would LOVE it if she were on the ticket.

[JTFrog]

95. It would be political suicide and he has much better JUDGMENT than that. n/t