Other than for "unifying" reasons, what sort of strategic reasons are there for Clinton as VP?

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

First and foremost: she is most definitely qualified to be president.

I'm looking at this from a strategic angle. What does she bring to the democratic ticket that will help get votes and/or create a nifty political narrative for the campaign?

Are we really that concerned about dems. staying home? I don't think so.

Will she really be able to get white male working class voters than say, oh I don't know, a southern white male VP candidate (not that I'm arguing for this sort of candidate)?

I guess I'm just not seeing that her positives (which are many) outweigh the negatives. Obama will have to fend off the repub. haters of both him and Clinton. It seems to me she would be a bigger distraction than anything else (not that it would be her fault). And then bring the Big Dog into the picture. Would they potentially drown out Obama's presence? I think so.

I'd love to hear from any and all. Please leave nastiness aside. Please, just some intelligent or not-so-intelligent insights (such as mine), but can we at least be nice? Please?

[ShortnFiery]

1. NONE! HRC is one big embarrassment to both the democratic party and her (my) gender.

:thumbsdown:

[TwilightGardener]

2. I have no idea why this Hillary-VP shit is suggested, other than she's

Hillary Clinton, and people feel like she's too big a deal NOT to give her some sort of consolation prize. Otherwise, the same weaknesses that caused her to lose the nomination to a young upstart unknown black guy will be back in full force, dragging down his ticket.

[BlooInBloo]

3. None. Her negatives are second only to Bush's. She's would kill any ticket she was on.

[Jackpine Radical]

4. Well, she would provide an effective (but unfortunately hardly painless)

means for committing political suicide.

[SoonerPride]

5. She brings nothing but negatives to the table.

She can't help regionally nor can she carry states that any Dem nominee wouldn't already carry.

She might - might - help turn Arkansas. That's it.

[DeeDeeNY]

6. I don't know that she is really qualified to be president

That should not be a given.

[hendo]

7. Nothing, she brings too many negatives to the campaign.

There is a reason that the republicans haven't thrown the kitchen sink at her yet. They haven't taken her as a serious candidate since Iowa.

[Graybeard]

8. Does not conform with Obama's message of "Change".

Out with the old politics. America has a bright new future.

[suston96]

9. No strategic reason - a complete waste of a much needed Democratic US Senator....nt

[mattclearing]

10. None. She doesn't deliver Arkansas, and she doesn't have national security credentials.

She brings literally nothing good to the table other than the faint hope that she will drag the undereducated rural wing of the party begrudgingly into the Obama camp, when let's face it, a lot of these people voted for Bush, no matter what their registration says.

[DefenseLawyer]

11. She is hugely unpopular outside her base of party loyalists.

We have to remember that even with "record turnout", the percentage of the total electorate that votes in a primary is a small fraction of the total number of voters in a general election. She has a hard core loyal constituency within the party in certain states, but that popularity doesn't spill over to the average general election voter. And I don't just mean "independents" I mean people that vaguely view themselves as Democrats but who have never been so involved with politics to have voted in a primary. Her negatives still over around 50% overall and 35% for "is trustworthy". That dog won't hunt.

[John Q. Citizen]

12. Obama could announce he was just kidding about change and then put Clinton on the ticket.

The number one reason that Obama cannot put Hillary on his ticket is that her presence would fundamentally and completely destroy and repudiate his message of change.

And change is what people want.

[peaches2003]

13. Qualified for V-P???

I don't think she is psychologically suited to be V-P. The Clintons are not ever really going to accept being 2nd place in anything and would not be able to handle this office properly. This is a serious reason, btw.

[Writer]

14. She will pull in blue collar white voters and some older women.

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

19. Aren't there others who could pull in the same . . .

and in much larger numbers?

And who else will older women vote for? I have to imagine that the VAST majority of women will vote Dem. no matter the nominee.

[HarveyBrooks]

15. None.

She shouldn't lower herself to play second banana to an arrogant racist.
She's WAY to good for him (and most of you).

[peaches2003]

16. Your avatar really convinces me

that your opinion is worth considering. :crazy:

[HarveyBrooks]

21. As yours does for me

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

17. Have you read your sig. line lately?

"Politicians are like diapers. They should both be changed frequently and for the same reason."

You, sir, are priceless.

[cloudythescribbler]

18. I say -- A WOMAN NOT HILLARY, but could she FORCE herself on the ticket? nt

[newmajority]

20. The only "strategic" reason for it is to insure the survival of the DLC

And that kind of strategery is the LAST fucking thing this party or this country needs after every thing those gutless piece of shit cowards INCLUDING BILL AND HILLARY CLINTON have enabled the Repukes, the corporations, and the Neocon warmonger bastards to do to this country (and other countries).