Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ?

Well, it's been lovely ride, but the end is in sight. Both Hillary and Barack have made comments recently about the joint ticket. Essientially, Hillary has said that she is open to the idea (if that is where this process is going) but who will be at the top of the ticket has to be determined. Barack has said  that he is not even entertaining the idea, and I have no reason to beleive otherwise at this time.

Clinton/Obama:
Pros: If they can get along, this ticket encompasses the entire democratic party. Obama will serve as a reason to vote for Hillary, who is still looked at as polarizing figure. The Republican stalwarts will still be licking their chops, but Obama will take some steam out of their sails. Hillary will bring the stability to the ticket and Obama will bring the vision.

Cons: Bill's role will be unclear and for a strong will like Obama, this could cause trouble. Also, Hillary may need Obama to get elected, but she doesn't need him to run the presidency, as Hillary will undoubtedly look to revist policies from the 90's with a similar staff. Obama may feel uncomfortable in this setting, and may view the next 8 years as a looong time to wait before it's his time again.

Obama/Clinton-
Pros: This represents a Democratic Party moving to the future with keeping roots to it's past. Having Hillary in the second seat means that his vision and charisma will be front and center, but Hillary's obvious skills as a policy wonk will never be far away. This will assuage the fears of many Democrats and moderates about Barack's experience yet hamper the efforts of the Repug attack dogs when they start the fear mongering.

Cons: Obama needs Hillary after he is elected, but he doesn't need her TO get elected. Obama's campaign of change will be contrasted greatly by Hillary and Bill's prescence of being the status quo. Bill will have to take a backseat, and it won't be Hillary telling him to do it, it will be Barack. History has shown that Bill doesn't take orders too well, and hasn't taken orders from anybody since 1992.

Bottom Line: Hillary needs Obama to win, and not much else after.
Obama can win on his own, but needs Hillary's experience after.

One might think that they are on the same footing with each other, considering that the primary process will probably end with some weird delgates/popular vote tie, or a slim win in both categories. The problem here is that while Barack can chose another running mate with a more solid background than Hillary, Hillary can't choose anybody that has the unique package of charisma and new voter base that Barack has.

As a Obama supporter, I am actually split on what he should do if he loses. If he takes one for the team and they win then he has 4 years playing second fiddle to Bill, and maybe losing in 2012, or running for president in 2016.
If he doesn't take the VP, and she loses the GE, then he is a top  contender for 2012, and at worse 2016.

At the end of the day though, I don't think she brings much to his ticket as a VP.



Display:


Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (2.00 / 3)

Flip a coin!

To be clear, what the VP brings to the table is not so much help with governance but VOTERS.  The idea is party unity.

The recent Pew poll said nearly 25% of Hillary's supporters would defect if Obama were the nominee, which is a troubling number.  How many of those people would vote for an Obama/Clinton ticket in November?  I have no idea, but that's the relevant question.  You can't worry about power sharing in the WH if you don't get there.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:04:01 PM EST

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (2.00 / 3)

Clinton/Obama...I don't think we're still talking about the status quo.  I'd not only vote for this ticket; I'd be out there for them every single day.  I think Clinton would be wise to let him take on his own projects and help him develop the experience to not only be qualified but easily blow everyone else out of the water in eight years.  16 years of Democratic leadership, two revolutionary candidates.    Sounds like the ideal ticket.


by ejintx on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:08:04 PM EST

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (none / 0)

Hillary was somewhat of Vice President during the 8 years she was in White House. It is unlikely she will except being Obama's VP runningmate. Regarding Obama being Hillary's VP nominee- The question needs to be asked What Red State could Obama deliver to Hillary. Assuming Hillary carries all of the Kerry(2004 states)- It is unlikely Florida will go Blue- assuming McCain select Charlie Crist as his VP runningmate.
can Obama help Hillary win Ohio.
by nkpolitics on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:13:36 PM EST

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (none / 0)

Hillary brings Arkansas, West Virginia and Ohio to the Dems (assuming that Crist is the VP nominee for McCain, otherwise I'd mention Florida too).  Obama brings Colorado and Virginia and helps solidify a huge victory in the less-Clinton strong states.

Combined, they challenge McCain in Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee and possibly North Carolina.  McCain will be too busy defending ground to launch a big offense.


by ejintx on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:24:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (none / 0)

Virginia is going Dem anyway - Mark Warner is running for the Senate virtually unopposed, so the Dems will be out to vote.  Neither candidate brings this in - it's an "reverse coattails".

Clinton/Obama - better ticket.  She will never be his VP (assuming he actually could win).  She has the experience and know-how, he can be the VP and learn so in eight years he can become the presumptive nominee.


by cmugirl90 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:55:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (none / 0)

What Kerry state is likely to defect to McCain?.


by nkpolitics on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:18:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (none / 0)

Pennsylvania and New Jersey have been iffy recently.  With both of them on the ticket, they'll be safe.


by ejintx on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 05:01:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (none / 0)

I disaggree with NJ- and PA- Both are Democratic leaning States.


by nkpolitics on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 05:16:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (none / 0)

Given the identity politics clusterfuck that this primary has become, I do think that a joint ticket is the only way to go. At this point, I'm aftaid that neither candidate could win without the other one. Whether they can even win together, given the acrimony between them and among their supporters (case in point, Samantha Power) remains an open question.


Fortune strums a mournful tune for those whose campaigns peak too soon. --Bored of the Rings
by Inky on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:14:27 PM EST

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (none / 0)

We've had many acrimonious primaries and the country came together just fine. Look at what Bush/Rove did to McCain in their primary. They really smeared him and hurt him and his family and now look at them. McCain hugs and kisses GWB all the time. I don't see any problem. I would hate to vote for Hillary but when it comes right down to it I'd hold my nose and do it mainly because of Supreme court justices.
by Becky G on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:24:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (none / 0)

I hope you're correct. I've just never seen it this ugly. I've read and heard so many people on both sides of the Obama/Clinton divide say that they won't vote for the other candidate in the GE. And there's polling data that suggests that the Democratic electorate has become polarized as well.


Fortune strums a mournful tune for those whose campaigns peak too soon. --Bored of the Rings
by Inky on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 05:02:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama will not choose Clinton (none / 0)

I was at a speech given by David Wilhelm (Bill's campaign manager in 1992 that came out to support Obama) and when asked this question the only person he mentioned as someone he'd like to see Obama choose is Jim Webb.

Webb would presumably shore up the national security/military issue, but almost as important is that he would play very well to the lower income white males.

Lastly, the only candidate that keeps bringing up the idea of a joint ticket is the one that realizes it would be their only way to win.  


by highgrade on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:17:36 PM EST

Re: Obama will not choose Clinton (none / 0)

He's  been in the Senate even less time than Obama, right?  I doubt that he would be an option.


by AnnC on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:50:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama will not choose Clinton (none / 0)

Jim Webb will never do it.  I don't think "politicking" is his thing.


by cmugirl90 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:56:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

who cares (none / 0)

He's not an option becuase he brings years and years of experience in the Senate. It's because he is a genuine war hero, was appointed to several positions  involving the military during the Reagan administration, and called the Iraqi invasion one of the worst strategic blunders in modern history back in 2003.


by highgrade on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:57:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama will not choose Clinton (none / 0)

The problem with Jim Webb in the #2 spot is that he would be about as biddable as Bill Clinton.  I like the guy a lot, but he's not one to subordinate his opinions for the greater good.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:13:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama will not choose Clinton (none / 0)

The guy was in the military. Subordination is the foundation of that experience. Also, he's still a politician. No one goes to Washington D.C., without thinking about whether he/she can eventually get to 1600 Pennsylvania.


by highgrade on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 05:39:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (none / 0)

Neither.  Clinton pretty much blew that bridge up when she all but endorsed McCain yesterday.


by Drummond on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:19:06 PM EST

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (none / 0)

I would feel very upset if Obama ran with Clinton as his VP. I don't see how they could work together and she is much to negative and divisive to be on his team. Not to mention a woman and an African American on the same ticket? It would never fly. He needs to pick someone like Richardson to help with the Latino vote.
by Becky G on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:20:11 PM EST

Richardson (none / 0)

  1. Too flaky
  2. Yes, he's had a lot of great titles - but there were HUGE issues with mismanagement when he was at the Dept. of Energy.
  3. Bimbo eruption problems.

by highgrade on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:43:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (none / 0)

I'd say Hillary flushed the "Dream Ticket" down the toilet with her McCain lovefest comments.

Somebody pull the plug on her already.  

For a laugh:  Larry David doesn't want Hillary near ANY phones.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-davi d/on-the-red-phone_b_90338.html


by goodnbad on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:27:11 PM EST

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (none / 0)

I dont think Hillary is going to VP nominee. She will be in the top of the ticket or she will not be in the ticket and this will make McSure the president


by indus on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:43:44 PM EST

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (none / 0)

Either combination would be the best thing to ever happen to this country: Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton. But, it's about numbers. Hillary Clinton is 60 years old. If she were the VP, she'd be 68 after Obama's two terms.

Obama is 44. After eight years as Clinton's VP, there would be nothing stopping him from having his own eight years as President. He'd only be 57!

We could be looking at Democrats in the White House for 16 years!


by zenful6219 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:50:25 PM EST

Neither (2.00 / 1)

I don't expect Obama to pick her after her garbage and I certainly don't expect him to accept an offer from her to play third fiddle behind Bill and end up being sabotaged like Gore was.


Bill Foster would agree, Barack Obama has coat tails.
by Walt Starr on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:51:58 PM EST

Obama will lose the general for us as Pres. or VP (1.00 / 2)

Obama is toxic. He will lose the election for us either as President or VP. He adds absolutely zero to the national ticket. I dont buy for a second the Black vote is going to stay home or vote for McCain.

All Obama brings is some unemployed college kids, who are fickle. Some DailyKos cultist will vote for Nader. But, a few thousand. Even a 100,000 nationwide. Big Dip. All of his other supporters back Hillary.


by moi moi on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:52:17 PM EST

Um okay (none / 0)

ANd I don't by the "women will vote McCain: crap.


by Socraticsilence on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:50:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why would Obama (none / 0)

Want to be a running mate for a McCain surrogate, or have a McCain surrogate at his running mate?
Not going to happen.
Obama-McCaskil, Obama-Webb, Or Obama-Kaine in 08.
"Please. How stupid do I look to you? World Domination. I'll leave that to the religious nuts or the Republicans, thank you." The Monarch (Evil Villain)
by fetboy on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 07:04:30 PM EST

Endgame: has to be CLINTON/OBAMA (2.00 / 1)

Hillary has the political skills, experience, qualifications and can articulate policy to the detail.  She will have the vision and strenght to lead on healthcare, Iraq war and Economy/Jobs.

Barack as VP has the finese to sell the plans to congress and reach across the lines to get the buy in.

The most qualified, experienced person should be at the top of the ticket and that is Hillary.  He can run in 8 years and by then he will be qualified.


by nikkid on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 08:16:02 PM EST

Re: Endgame: Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ? (none / 0)

As of now, I don't think it ends in either.  I don't expect HRC to offer it to Obama right now.  I also don't expect Obama to offer it to HRC.  Only way that happens is if both sides are forced by the Supers, and I'm not sure they'll do that.  Who knows.

Personally, I think Obama needs someone that's either

a) strong on foreign policy and the military to cover for his weakness there in a GE

or

b)  Someone who can sell an economic plan to the blue collar folks

As for HRC, she needs someone younger and viewed as with passion.  Also someone that's solidly to her left.  Edwards makes a lot of sense here for her.  Edwards makes sense for Obama as well.


by toonsterwu on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:06:31 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.