Democrat "Dream Team" unlikely Posted by: McQ
on Monday, May 12, 2008
Yesterday, Dale and I discussed the obvious fact that Hillary Clinton's run for the Democratic presidential nomination is pretty much dead with even wins in WV and KY not being enough to save her candidacy. Obama has recently even taken the lead in pledged superdelegates. So in every conceivable way that matters in the nomination process, Obama has the lead.
That has revived talk of a possible "dream team" ticket with Clinton accepting the VP slot on the ticket. I, for a variety of reasons, find it difficult to believe that will happen.
A) Barack Obama doesn't want to share the spotlight with Hillary Clinton (and, inevitably, Bill) - not after the war that's been waged between them in the primary. I believe, politically, some pretty hard feelings have developed between the two.
B) Given Clinton's ego I simply cannot fathom her accepting the VP job.
C) Michelle Obama - from what I've read, she has nothing good to say about Hillary Clinton and I'm sure she'll be strongly advising her husband that it isn't in his best interest to have a Clinton as a VP.
Add to that the fact that Clinton's next and possibly last opportunity for the presidency is 2012 and it doesn't make sense for her to accept the position.
If, for instance, Obama turned out to be the Jimmy Carter of this era, she's stuck with being a part of a failed administration. And unless Obama chooses not to run for reelection, she's stuck with being the loyal VP and going down with the Obama administration's ship.
OTOH, if McCain beats Obama, it is likely he'll be a one-term president. She's set up for 2012, and Obama is out of the way. Even if McCain chooses to run for reelection, she would have the inside track among Dems.
However, if an Obama administration does well, and wins reelection, she's pretty much screwed in both 2012 and 2016 unless she's been the VP. Should that be the scenario, she'd be faced with the daunting task of running at age 68 against the incumbent VP of a successful administration with 8 years if "executive experience".
Carl Bernstein disagrees with my assertion she won't take it but seems to agree about "A" and "C" above:
Another major Democratic Party figure, who supports her for president, agreed: "It's not going to be a quiet exit. ... Obama has got a terrible situation. He marches to a different drummer. He won't want to take her on the ticket. But he might have to, even though the idea of Vice President Hillary with Bill in the background at the White House is not something — especially after what [the Clintons] have thrown at him that he relishes. I believe she'll go for it."
However, several important Democrats aligned with Obama predicted that he — and Michelle Obama — will vigorously resist any Clinton effort to get on the ticket. Rather, Obama is more likely to try to convince Clinton to either stay in the Senate or accept another position in an Obama administration, should he win the presidency.
Right now, given the probable lopsided loss Obama will suffer in both WV and KY, I'm sure he's fine with her staying in the race. It is much more palatable to lose by such margins if your opponent is still in the race vs. having dropped out prior to the primary. However, after Oregon, which everyone expects Obama to win, it would be the appropriate time for Clinton to drop out, if she's going to do it. I think if she does it at that time, she then could look toward a viable future candidacy. If, however, she takes it to the convention, I think she irreparably harms her political future and may cause a big enough schism within the party to cost it the White House in '08.
Regardless of when and if she does bow out, I still don't see her on the ticket in any capacity for the general election.
They are still in a virtual tie. Neither Clinton or Obama will have the magic number of delegates come convention time. To me, Clinton staying in the race only makes sense. She makes the very valid point that she, not Obama, won the battleground states. She further develops the persona that she’s a fighter, never quitting, and only taking the occasional boilermaker break to be with the people who love her.
Clinton is setting herself up for the 2012 run for the nomination, worst case. And, like retired_military was wont to imply, this race isn’t over yet.
Like you, I don’t think Clinton will be Obama’s VP choice. I agree with you on some of your reasons but differ on others.
Add to that the fact that Clinton’s next and possibly last opportunity for the presidency is 2012 and it doesn’t make sense for her to accept the position.
That is the conventional wisdom but I fail to see why that is so. If she is the VP she would be the heir apparent in eight years. She is sixty years old now and she would obviously be sixty-eight when the next opportunity would present itself. That would be younger than McCain is now. And we all know that women live longer than men. Plus, with a little help from modern cosmetics, she would still look the part.
If, for instance, Obama turned out to be the Jimmy Carter of this era, she’s stuck with being a part of a failed administration.
Irrelevant. If Obama’s presidency is viewed as a catastrophic failure, then any Democrat would have a hard time gaining office. All one has to do is look at the failed presidency of GWB. Even with heavy baggage from the Wright affair, odds makers are still giving the next election to Obama with favorability. Besides, the Clinton “ego” you stated would have to suggest that if she thought she were involved in any executive capacity, the administration would be golden.
OTOH, if McCain beats Obama, it is likely he’ll be a one-term president.
What makes you so certain that McCain’s term would be limited to just one? McCain reminds me of my now deceased grandfather – WWI vet and who was tough as nails – and he lived to be ninety-six. And to borrow a phrase; My grandfather was a scrappy old hand who was as mean as a rattlesnake and twice as fast. He was still hopping his own barbed wire fences at age eighty. Something tells me McCain still has some of that same old piss and vinegar running through his veins. Why is it so certain that just after four years, McCain – who has been seeking the office for some time now – would simply step down? Or is it that you think he would be handily defeated?
But Clinton won’t be his choice for VP because I believe she would be viewed as a net negative.
I’m sure there are many conservatives or at least right-of-center people out there that are at least indifferent about Obama. But if given the chance, they would love to vote against, and I’m quoting my father here, “That bitch!”
And yet I’m disappointed. Barack’s story may be true, but many of the facts are not. His larger narrative purpose requires him to embellish his role. I don’t buy it. Just as I can’t be inspired by Steve Jobs now that I know how dishonest he is, I can’t listen uncritically to Barack Obama now that I know he’s willing to bend the facts to his purpose.
It looks to me like Stanley Kurtz could have easily lifted any of that from the many posts here at QandO. And all for next weeks issue as well… Wow, what breaking news!!
How dead is that horse you’re beating anyway?
Not as dead as bookmaker’s odds in the month of May will be in November.
But you knew that.
The Wright/Trinity well is bottomless, pal. What the voter knows about Wright and Trinity now is what they saw in those videos and the excuses they heard Obama make after the National Press Club disaster. Now, already, you see that he is doing worse with white voters in the primaries than John Kerry did in the general election in 2004.
John McCain is not a hard choice for moderate and Reagan Democrats.
Obama, if he is the nominee, will lose the popular vote by ten points. He’ll finish between Dukakis and McGovern. He will not only lose battleground states; he’ll lose states that would be noncompetitive if Hillary was the candidate.
Recall how seriously he was outspending Hillary in Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania.
White voters would vote for a black candidate; they will not vote for a black candidate who is 20 years and counting a member of a black supremacist church.
Bruised Egos and hard feelings have nothing to do with it. What the VP adds to the ticket is the only issue, and Clinton adds nothing positive that Obama doesn’t already have covered himself. She adds plenty of negatives though.
No Sir, my compadre Bill Richardson will be the chosen one. You read it here first. (Okay, you probably read it in other places, but Pedro endorses this message).
Obama, if he is the nominee, will lose the popular vote by ten points.
That’s a bold prediction, McPhillips. I wouldn’t go so far to say that Obama will beat McCain, but I will predict it to be extremely close if McCain pulls off a victory.
RCP’s poll data gives Obama the lead over McCain by an average of +4.5. And the latest ABC/WP poll has Obama up by 7. Remember, this is all after the Wright episode. That doesn’t seem to suggest that McCain will beat Obama in November by a whopping ten points.
You may think that the Wright episode will stew nicely for the Republicans over the summer. I would disagree. I think that horse is dead. People are tired of hearing about it already. And most importantly, I don’t believe that the majority of Americans treasure your guilt-by-association damnations as much as you do or as much as you think they will.
The Republican brand has been so badly damaged that if Republicans try to run an anti-Obama, anti- Reverend Wright, or (if Senator Clinton wins), anti-Clinton campaign, they are simply going to fail. This model has already been tested with disastrous results.
Not really. I’m looking out toward the "paying attention" stage of the campaign, not the "what are they talking about now" stage.
I wouldn’t go so far to say that Obama will beat McCain, but I will predict it to be extremely close if McCain pulls off a victory.
I’ve got it 55-45 for McCain, and I’m saying that the Obamanauts will need to struggle to get him his 45. If Hillary was the candidate, it would be very close.
RCP’s poll data gives Obama the lead over McCain by an average of +4.5. And the latest ABC/WP poll has Obama up by 7. Remember, this is all after the Wright episode.
There is no after the Wright episode, and it’s not an "episode." It’s part of the ground reality of Obama. It’s more real than anything that comes out of his mouth or the house that he lives in.
That doesn’t seem to suggest that McCain will beat Obama in November by a whopping ten points.
Dukakis came out of the Democratic convention in ’88 with a 17 point lead in August. This is May, during the Democratic primary. Obama is about to lose a can’t lose it in November state by around 30 points.
He is damaged goods. If his candidacy was not destined to result in setting back race relations in the U.S. by 50 years, I wouldn’t care whether he gets the nomination or not. I’d be happy to see the GOP face the weaker candidate. I’d say keep him. But I actually care about the country, and as bad as the Clintons are, and as hard to beat as they would be, I’d rather see those worthless bastards shoveling their sh*t at the American people one more time than someone who belongs to a "church" that is the black equivalent of the Klan or German National Socialism.
If Democrats are such morons as to be incapable of waking up to that, then I wouldn’t dwell too long on which party’s brand isn’t doing well at the moment.