Post N.C./Indiana: Hillary's next move

[Edison]

Obama has picked up even more delegates and popular votes, narrowly losing Indiana to Clinton. She even jumped the gun by claiming the Indiana win before all the actual votes had been counted. Clinton only won Indiana by 22,000 votes.
That takes balls.

But a victory?
It's very unlikely Hillary Clinton win the nomination at this point.
Her campaign is broke. She's dipped into her own private fortune for another $6 million, and she said she's prepared to throw down more. (the Clintons have a net worth of anywhere between 18 and 53 Million. (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aGwhTXxfCSHo&refer=home) ...and they're calling Obama the 'elitist'?)
..But it's been interesting to notice that since the primaries' outcome she has stopped asking for more money from her supporters. And her tone has shifted away from Obama-bashing and focusing more on McCain/Bush comparisons.

Is she backing off to save any chance she might have for;
-A place on the Obama ticket
-A possible bid for President in 2012
-Both?

Has she already received a phone call from some high-ranking Dem?

What say you, CIN?

[hixx]

You know, it just gets more and more fascinating as it goes. It's very exciting (it's definitely more exciting now that Obama is winning, hee), but this whole thing is so interesting.

Anyway, an Obama/Hillary ticket, I'm not down with that. Her history, her personality, her drive, Bill Clinton... would slow Obama down.

Plus, I don't think she'd go for it. Would she? Honestly...I don't know, anything could happen.

If it wasn't her, who would the VP be? Eek!

Anyway, it's all VERY dramatic, I love it. I love the whole story of it all and it really is an election like no other before it.

Hixx

[Edison]

Both Clinton and Obama have been tight-lipped about their potential choices for VP.
Obama had already stated clearly that Al Gore will be part of his cabinet (Secretary of the Interior?). It would be crazy if Obama offered V.P. to Hillary, but I have to think Obama already has someone in mind at this point. Hillary has shown she's a fighter and that she can get things done. She may end up an Obama appointee. (Some might argue Hillary would make a good Supreme Court Judge).

In April of last year Obama was on Letterman. Obama was still one of a dozen campaigning dems, but he was showing early promise. At one point Dave asked Obama about a possible Clinton/Obama ticket for President.

Obama's response; "..which order?"

Yeah, I'm really enjoying this election now.

[Fenstermaker]

I've had a lot of time to read the Drudge tonight. Apparently George Steph thinks Hill is staying in the race to get the VP ticket. (http://abcnews.go.com//Politics/story?id=4808341&page=1)

[robbersean]

It's also been theorized that she may be trying to get the Obama campaign to pay off the debt that her campaign has accrued.

[berzac]

Honestly, an Obama/Clinton ticket would only please the base of the dems. It would turn off many of the swing voters, I think, because swing voters are very anti-Clinton. If Obama is running on the ticket of Hope, I don't think Clinton would represent a good picture. From my view in the cheap seats, Dems like Hillary because they liked Bill and dems plus swing voters like Barrack because he's a breathe of fresh air. Barack should pick either 1. someone with milatary back ground how is more moderate(ala Wesley Clarke) or 2. go the Clinton/Gore route in 92 ala a positive, progressive democrate, perhaps Edwards(although there's no way Edwards would take another VP nom).

I guess the real question is who do you think Barack should take?

[robbersean]

Bill Richardson. I know that he didn't really look great in the primary, but Bill Richardson would make a great VP. A governor with tons of foreign affairs experience AND he'd improve Obama's chances of winning a swing state (New Mexico).

Another good Veep choice for Obie:

Ed Rendell- governor of Pennsylvania

[hixx]

I think Obama/Richardson would be unstoppable.

Yes I do.

Hillary still makes me nervous though, there's a long way to go till August.

My excited energy from yesterday has morphed into tentative acceptance today. Who knows what she's going to pull out, or could happen by then.

Until someone officially declares him the nominee, I'm holding my breath.

Hixx

[Schoolyj]

Bill Richardson. I know that he didn't really look great in the primary, but Bill Richardson would make a great VP. A governor with tons of foreign affairs experience AND he'd improve Obama's chances of winning a swing state (New Mexico).




Richardson would be a really interesting choice. I was surprised he did not get more support in the early primaries.

I think Obama/Clinton is never going to happen. For Obama, Hilary would be the Democratic version of Dick Cheney - a huge chunk of red meat for the opposition's die hards to chew on.

Obama/Richardson (a bro and a cholo - you heard it hear first) would be another historic two-fer; and a possible return of Al Gore to the executive branch would give us a chance to absolve ourselves of the 2000 debacle. Guilt ridden, technocratic whites would be shaking with joy. So much national healing with one vote.

[Edison]

U.S. President: Barak Obama
Vice President: Bill Richardson
Sec. of Defense: Wesley Clark
Sec. of Interior: Al Gore

How's that for a start?
Other VP nominees?

[nhoj]

Interior Secretary would be a demotion for Gore. Not just from VP, but from highly influential member of the private sector. He, Gates, Buffet and a lot of others have shown that the best and brightest citizens can often make a bigger difference in the world doing private charitable and/or cause-based for-profit work than by working in government.

[Edison]

..Not to mention the huge pay cut.

It's true that many former statesmen have gone on accomplish much more for the private sector after leaving office. Bill Clinton has said quite a bit on that subject himself. Aside from Hillary's campaign, he's been having a ball and getting lots done that he could never do as President or Governor.

Of course one of the best examples has been President Jimmy Carter.
Carter was a good President, but once he left office he went on to found Habitat For Humanity. Habitat alone has had far more impact and has brought more long-term positive change and good will than virtually everything he did as President.

I'd be fine with Gore remaining in the private sector, too.

[Fenstermaker]

I think Obama/Richardson would be unstoppable.

Yes I do.




Really? I don't know. There are so many f*cking ignorant people in our country (like the ones who go after Obe for his middle name.) I don't know if I want to see what they do against a black man and a Hispanic.


PS I do really love Richardson, and at the beginning I was hoping for an Obama/Richardson or Richardson/Obama ticket.

[Chip]

I dunno, a lot of those people Jill's talking about are pretty ignorant, but that also means they're pretty ignorant. They might not notice the Hispanicity with a name like Bill Richardson.

-hip

[pbsebastian]

I think a Obama/Richardson ticket would be great.

I also think Wesley Clark would make a good VP for a couple of reasons.
*He does well in the West.
*He could undercut the Military experience angle that McCain is using.
*He was a stanch supporter of Hillary. This could, in some way, be used to bring the party back together again.

Before I would have said Mark Warner because he is a popular Southern Democrat. However, because the Western states are now becoming swing states the South is no longer the ticket (no pun intended) that it has been in the past. Besides it looks like he is running for Senate this year anyway.

[hixx]

I forget sometimes how ignorant people can be. I do.

But, if Obama and Richardson could get the latino vote, the black vote, and the liberal urban vote..hell, we could tear it down.

And Chip's right, I bet we could sneak Richardson past some of them "Barack's a muslim" votes.

Hixx

[speedymarie]

I've thought Richardson for VP for quite a while. He would be amazing, and has a lot of immigration and foreign policy experience that Obama could use. And help bring in the Hispanic vote that supposedly loves Hillary so much.

And Al Gore most assuredly for Interior.

What about Secretary of State?

[macarthur31]

Obama-Clinton won't happen. I can see the whole "keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer" angle, or maybe even a "Team of Rivals" redux, but HRC as the VP undermines the whole "change" theme in a "change" election.

Yet, something must be done for her in order to be on-board for Obama, as they'll need her and Bill to fire up the base. SCOTUS nom? Maybe too old as she's 60, and Roberts and Alito are in their low 50s. Ya figure that Obama would want to put in a younger justice to ensure that the progressives will have a voice in that chamber for many years. And if that deal is made, it's gotta be secret -- if the Repubs get a whiff of that idea, then she'll still be an albatross on his campaign.

I could see Obama taking a Clintonista as a VP -- this is where a Clark makes sense to burnish his miltary creds. You could also see a Rendell or a Strickland here as they'll bring their big state with them.

Billy Rich has good a good rez, and he would bolster Obama in the West. The rumor is that he loves the ladies (a la his other buddy Bill), and if there's any smoke there you know the Repubs are gonna find something.

The CW sez that Obama may go with Kathleen Sebelius, Gov-KS. Now, she didn't necessarily deliver a barnburner in her Democratic Response to the SOTU, but she's been tabbed one of the top 5 governors in the country and can turn Kansas blue in November. Plus you'd have a strong woman leader on the ticket, and you'd have the poetic call-back to Kansas in Obama's narrative.

Here are some left-field options:
Russ Feingold (Sen-WI). He's a true midwestern progressive with a sterling record on reform. This would be a true "change" ticket, plus I don't think him being Jewish would be a hindrance. (Lieberman's faith wasn't that big of an issue with Gore in 2000, and that was 8 years ago.)
Jim Webb (Sen-VA). He's probably not a company man, but he'd be a heck of an attack dog. This would give Obama some serious military cred, and we could have a blue Virginia. Downside would be that he might be too new, as it is his first term as well -- and it'd be great to hold on to that seat so we can get a filibuster-proof Senate.


Over on McCain's side -- I wouldn't be surprised if he rolls with Kay Bailey Hutchison (Sen-TX) to court disaffected Hillary-ites or Bobby Jindal (Gov-LA) as he would be a youthful, energetic complement.

[robbersean]

I've heard Jindal's name bandied about as a veep for McCain and I just can't see it. I know the guy is a rising GOP star, but he's been governor of Louisiana for what, five seconds?

I've heard Condi as a possible GOP veep too, but I don't know how interested she would be in that job, or how interested McCain would be in having her.

[Chip]

Jindal's supposedly a very intelligent guy. But yeah, he just got elected as Governor of Louisiana. And frankly, they need him down there. Now, in four years, that could be interesting.

-Chip

[stevescholz]

Obama-Clinton won't happen. I can see the whole "keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer" angle, or maybe even a "Team of Rivals" redux, but HRC as the VP undermines the whole "change" theme in a "change" election.

Yet, something must be done for her in order to be on-board for Obama, as they'll need her and Bill to fire up the base. SCOTUS nom? Maybe too old as she's 60, and Roberts and Alito are in their low 50s. Ya figure that Obama would want to put in a younger justice to ensure that the progressives will have a voice in that chamber for many years. And if that deal is made, it's gotta be secret -- if the Repubs get a whiff of that idea, then she'll still be an albatross on his campaign.

I could see Obama taking a Clintonista as a VP -- this is where a Clark makes sense to burnish his miltary creds. You could also see a Rendell or a Strickland here as they'll bring their big state with them.

Billy Rich has good a good rez, and he would bolster Obama in the West. The rumor is that he loves the ladies (a la his other buddy Bill), and if there's any smoke there you know the Repubs are gonna find something.


Mac, it's so good to read you here. I agree with much of what you said. Many liberal blogs are talking about Richardson, Sebelius and Clark. I don't think Webb would be the one, but I'd enjoy an Obama/Richardson ticket. My dad's met the Governor, and my dad lives in NM, so I'll see if he can do some recon work about Bill's "love of the ladies."

Picking the Veep is often seen as "the first measure" of a candidate. Look at Bush Sr. picking Dan Quayle. Look at Bill Clinton picking Al Gore. It won't be easy for Obama.

But Obama won't pick Sen. Clinton. He may talk about it in the press, but I doubt he'd want his campaign of change to involve someone who's fought so strongly against it. My guess is he'll select someone with more executive experience than he has (Richardson, Sebelius) or someone who's already supporting him (like Sen. Chris Dodd). Watch for Sen. Clinton to be discussed as the next Senate Majority Leader.

Something not mentioned here yet: the Clinton history with the Dems has been a tenuous one throughout the last 16 years. Bill Clinton has the same selfishness and hubris that Hillary Clinton has shown recently. There are many Democrats unhappy with the Clintons, and not just because of the tactics used during Sen. Clinton's run for the White House. There are long-time Democrats who don't want to face another four/eight years of defending another Clinton against the right-wingers and having little to show for it. Bill Clinton came to power, but he presided over a GOP-led Congress for much of his terms. And even with many good things (a balanced budget, a strong standing in the world), Clinton himself made no friends during his impeachment hearings by first lying and then coming clean. As a co-worker of mine said today: "if you want us to go out and help defend you, at least tell us the truth. Don't make us look bad by lying to us!" Why would we trust someone who keeps on lying?

Sen. Clinton also has an arrogance and sense of entitlement that turns me off. Throughout this campaign, she's proven she's in this race for herself, not her party or the people she rallies to her side. And she's not the only woman who could become President in this, or anyone's, lifetime. She's behaving like reality does not exist. And we've already had 7 years of a President who does that. There's a reason Obama keeps up the refrain "not this time."

BTW, Gore might get Sec. of State before Sec. of Interior. And John Edwards might be Attorney General.

And my dream GOP ticket this year:

John McCain & Fred Thompson. "America Is Cranky & Needs A Nap."

[hixx]

Steve, the McCain/Thompson line made me laugh out loud.

Hixx

[millerjake30]

Richardson has been running for vice president since he jumped into the ring of presidential candidates. He'll be Obama's VP candidate, and it seems that they've known that for a good long time.

The only argument Hilary can stand on right now is the Florida/Michigan issue. There are enough democratic votes not being counted to make Hilary a winner. (Maybe that's no longer true with the North Carolina bid, I'm really unsure) How the superdelegates feel about Michigan and Florida will be the deciding factor.

She's staying in, because there's a chance she could be the nominee. She's wanted this since she was a little girl, she's not going to give up until there's no chance.

If she were to get the nomination, she should, and most likely will choose Obama as her running mate. If he'll think it wise to do it, and he should...it would virtually guarantee him nomination in 2016 if they won.

Evan Bayh may also be a good choice. He's also looking for 2016 momentum.

[Edison]

Obama Picked up 7 more superdelegates today. (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aZHVJn18Tmsc&refer=home)

It looks pretty bleak for Hillary's bid.

Stay tuned for more, folks.

[macarthur31]

Something not mentioned here yet: the Clinton history with the Dems has been a tenuous one throughout the last 16 years. Bill Clinton has the same selfishness and hubris that Hillary Clinton has shown recently. There are many Democrats unhappy with the Clintons, and not just because of the tactics used during Sen. Clinton's run for the White House. There are long-time Democrats who don't want to face another four/eight years of defending another Clinton against the right-wingers and having little to show for it. Bill Clinton came to power, but he presided over a GOP-led Congress for much of his terms. And even with many good things (a balanced budget, a strong standing in the world), Clinton himself made no friends during his impeachment hearings by first lying and then coming clean. As a co-worker of mine said today: "if you want us to go out and help defend you, at least tell us the truth. Don't make us look bad by lying to us!" Why would we trust someone who keeps on lying?



The Clintons turned the Democratic party into their party. However during Bill's two terms, the Dems lost house, senate and governorships. "Clinton Fatigue" was a contributing factor to why Gore lost in 2000. Finally, those two totally sandbagged Kerry in 2004 so they could have 2008 all to themselves.

I'm done with them.

[Othy]

I am way for Obama, but if Hillary is on the ticket in any way shape or form I will feel betrayed by him and vote McCain. Isn't that ridiculous?! I guess you like who you like... I boycotted Heinz ketchup as to not support the Kerry campaign... and then didn't vote in 2004.