Monday’s rancorous Democratic debate and the campaigning since have made the prospect not just improbable but positively out of the question. But some commentators have been imagining the power of a Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton ticket. “He’s fired up, and she’s ready to go,†columnist Ellen Goodman put it. Historian Doris Kearns Goodwin has thought about it, too. “In this case, we wouldn’t just be combining a black and a woman, but the two narratives of the campaign: inspiration and experience, both of which are needed for change,†Goodwin said. “It would be a bold move but a great one.â€
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Politico on Health care reform would save state money
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- outlander on Open thread 11/22
- JWink on Jail consultants straining patience
- Howserfan on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Monkeyhawk on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
58 Comments
The national media has been grooming this announcement since the race began.
I was wondering when they would pull it out and post it up front.
Never happen. Both are too strong of personality, each unwilling to quietly take a back seat to the other. And VP is not a position of significant power, for one important reason: a president cannot fire his VP. Further, VP has only rarely been a springboard to the presidency; history is littered with VPs who were candidates to succeed their presidents and failed (GHWBush is by far the exception).
Nice fantasy, for some. But extremely unlikely.
I agree with your conclusion, GMC. There are some other, practical reasons which, IMHO, also argue against this type of ticket, one being too great a change from past “precedent”.
It would be interesting though. A scenario:
The Clinton’s win the White House and Obama becomes VP.
Obama votes his “mind” on tie votes in the Senate. He uses his influence to sway votes differently from what the Clinton’s desire to occur.
Bill Clinton becomes the surrogate, Assistant President and sparks fly.
NO.
They are too similar – both Senators for example. It would have the same weakness that Kerry-Edwards had.
Either of them with Richardson would be better.
BTW – the fact that a president likewise cannot “fire” his spouse is why first spouses do not get significant powers either, as Bill learned in his first term watching Hillary botch her first try at HillaryCare. As Bill seeks his third (surrogate) term, I wonder if Hillary has remembered that lesson . . .
Looking at the other side:
I still think McCain/Huckabee might be the strongest. In this case it brings together differences rather than similarities.
Yeah, Ben, that is one of the precedents I had in mind. Two Senators on the same ticket doesn’t seem to work well when one looks at Presidential elections, at least those in the 20th Century.
Well at least you wouldn’t have to choose the lesser of evils, you’d have them both.
That might be true Pleefer – McCain and Huckabee are both pretty bad!
They have been drinking KoolAid again
I would be overjoyed to have Clinton/Obama.
Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton.
In either case, I would pity poor Obama.
Ben, I couldn’t agree more.
I’m not shy about who my man is.
Obama/Clinton for sure. Dick has shown us that it is the VP that actually makes policy.
You can only have a strong VP when you have a weak pres., i.e. Cheney/bush.
In that case, Sol, Clinton/Obama would be better… She can be the figurehead, and let Obama make policy… LOL
V.T. is correct, there is an unstated rule about not doing “two firsts” at the same time in any campaign. Also, I think this pair genuinely dislike each other.
Check out this animation:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinions/cartoonsandvideos/telnaes/telnaes01162008.html
Obama would be a fool not to accept if Senator Clinton offers.
But I don’t think she will.
I CAN see her working with Edwards.
JR – that one would be a no-go for the same reasons – too similar. Either of them will need a governor – just like Kerry did!
Then add a Jew and a Cripple to the cabinet and we can all live in perfect harmony.
The only candidate on either side who is qualified by experience is Rudy Giuliani. Match him up with Wichita’s own, Robert Gates, for an unbeatable combination of charisma, knowledge and experience.
Priceless!
And on the Democratic side, put Hillary on the ticket with Obama as VP and Edwards as White House barber. Also priceless.
Oh gee I can just hear it.
For four years, every other word would be “911″.
Ya got me wrong Ben. I think Edwards will ask something of Clinton. Attorney General maybe. He could do a lot of good there and that seems to be his mission whether he can be President or not.
James–
Too late:
FDR (cripple)
Henry Kissinger, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz (Jew)
The real Democratic Dream Team??? Any GOP challengers!
This makes me almost puke. These two are for nanny government. No way would I or will I vote for either one. Go my man Mitt.
Ahhhh . . . . the ultimate fantasy: Hillary and Ron Paul!
Hillary and McCain will be the ticket.
Romney/Obama
Almost sounds like a song.
Romney
Obama
Come on pretty Mama.
Key Largo
Montego
Baby why don’t we go
With RomneyObamaaaaaah….
Given the animosities flaring up between the Clinton and Obama campaigns, I would guess you would see the following pairings…
Clinton/Richardson–to pick a governor and the Hispanic vote
Obama/Sebelius–to pick a governor and a woman who is probably going to throw her support to him anyway.
Hillary would be stupid to not grab and hold onto the one who has garnered so much support of the same party. I don’t think she’s stupid.
She knows that some who wouldn’t vote for her WOULD vote for Obama over the Republicans. If she loses Obama, those votes will go to the republican party.
Even though this fight has been rather nasty from time to time, I really think that they can move past it. Their policies are a lot alike.
I USED to want a Hillary/McCain ticket, but no longer at all.
If Obama is not on the ticket, I wonder if the “unitier” will support the eventual nominee?
I think we’re about to see if he’s a uniter or a divider.
The gay community already knows.
Obama’s not going to pick sebelius either. He needs someone who is NOT also from the midwest. And exactly HOW many votes does she bring to the table in a national election?
I’m not saying I like this, but I think it will be Clinton/Bayh or Clinton/Richardson.
We’ll see how loyal obama is to his party, or if his temper tantrum will throw the election to the repukes.
On the other hand…
I think obama has sure as hell promised governor “leadership” something. A cabinet position? Something in the second term if she loses a senate election?
I wonder what Hillary did to piss off less than chatty kathy? I hope Hillary teaches sebelius and her bots a lesson if she wins the nomination.
If Clinton gets the nomination she will support Obama getting a leadership role in the Senate. She will need his support to get needed legislation through there.
For VP she would be best served choosing a governor.
Ben:
Daley’s ghosts notwithstanding, two Senators won in 1960.
I think we rely a little a too much on these historical stats sometimes. Causation is absent, ya know?
For my part, I think Edwards would accept the #2 slot again—whoever wins–but I doubt either Clinton or Obama would have him, and he would not be content to sit down and shut up.
Richardson would be an interesting wildcard, but he’d better explain his role in Wen Ho Lee’s unnecessary nightmare.
Rage – I think LBJ was House. Also it was a north-south liberal-conservative pairing. Obama and Clinton are really very close in policy as were Kerry and Edwards. Either Obama or Clinton needs to match with someone who is different; not similar.
Agree that Richardson has ’splaining to do about Lee.
Rage, while I agree on Gov. Richardson needing to explain his role in the Wen Lo Hee matter, something in my expansive gut (that is for Ben) tells me that for a whole lot of folks, that is and will be a nonissue. Your point on 1960 is well taken, but again, has the late Mayor Daley’s ghost been exorcised sufficiently from the matter to give any predictive credibility to that particular election?
Ben, LBJ was a Senator in 1960, from Texas; he did start in the House, true, but by then, IIRC, he was in a leadership position in the Senate (Majority Leader?).
VT – it’s been a long time. I remember old “Landslide Lyndon” as one of the sleazier of the old Dixiecrats.
has the late Mayor Daley’s ghost been exorcised sufficiently from the matter to give any predictive credibility to that particular election?
Maybe not, Vaughn, but it was a very close election and, sadly, the past 7 years have shown that’s all you need to steal an election, and make it stick.
But in terms of the Senator’s curse, if that’s really true, then then Dems have already lost; there have been numerous Senators in the #2 spot on winning tickets–it’s the top position that loses.
But, again, I keep in mind the supposed flukes: take a look at 1980–a governor from Hollywood, and a what?–former Congressman/UN ambassador/CIA director?
Not exactly a “dream team”!
“If Clinton gets the nomination she will support Obama getting a leadership role in the Senate”
Just about ANYONE on the D side would be better than Harry.
I think we should dump both harry and nancy and get real democrats in the leadership positions. Both of these bush rubber stamps should go.
Just about ANYONE on the D side would be better than Harry.
I think we should dump both harry and nancy and get real democrats
Amen to that, KFG. SF Nancy has been a particularly huge disappointment!
And don’t look now–actually, go head, look, PLEASE!! –Harry is pushing thru retroactive immunity for the friggin’ telcos CRIMINAL actions!
All they had to do was say “the government showed us the proper paperwork.” The government didn’t, of course! It was probably more like. . .
“Eddie, we need to spy on all Americans, and you need to help us. Of course you’ll get whatever legislation we can ram thru–you’ve already got a lot on allies on the Hill. Then you can join me and Lynn for cocktails later! Sneer/laugh! ”
“Okay, Dick, but if this gets out, you know there’ll be hell to pay! Particularly if they find out about our political censorship of streaming videos too!”
Crooks do what they do.
What Rage said!
You people pick on Pelosi because she’s a woman!
The first woman Speaker of the House, and I’m so darn proud of her. 2 steps from being President you know!
Get over it.
Getting a woman President next!
No, we are picking on pelosi because she is an idiot bush-bot. AND a disappointment as the first woman speaker. Her poor performance will make it that much harder for another woman to get the job.
And reid? He’s now getting tough with DODD on his filibuster of the telecom immunity scandal. Too bad he couldnt be that tough on the repukes when THEY threatened to fillibuster.
What a maroon…
Wow Farm-it, for once I agree with you.
Pelosi should go along with Reid.
Hehehe, nice one, “Litter Box”! An unabashedly liberal atheist (and former Pelosi admirer), and a liberal, iconoclastic, lesbian farmer!
We just hates the wimmin, don’t we, KFG? :)
Actually, I’m responding to this crap just to call attention to my telco post above!:
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/01/democratic-dream-ticket/#comment-281950
Not that I’m so damn special: We should ALL be SCREAMING it from the rooftops!
Great Max! How’s this: Speaker Clyburn and Majority Leader Durbin?
You with it, bro? :)
Yeah Rage, we’re some wimmen hatin’ fools, eh?
Did you see this?
http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/0...
*Now* Reid’s Cracking Down?
So Harry Reid announced that the Senate would take up new FISA legislation, which would include retroactive immunity for telecom companies that broke the law and helped the Bush administration do warrantless spying (see this New York Times story for an overview). Chris Dodd said that he’d filibuster the bill. But now Reid’s insisting that Dodd and friends are going to have to do a “real” filibuster:
If people think they are going to talk this to death, we are going to be in here all night. This is not something we are going to have a silent filibuster on. If someone wants to filibuster this bill, they are going to do it in the openness of the Senate.
That’s nice, but, umm… how come Chris Dodd of all people is the only senator who has to do a “real” filibuster? I don’t recall Reid threatening to “be in here all night” when the GOP blocked the Webb amendment, or the habeas corpus bill, or the energy-bill provisions shifting tax breaks away from oil companies and toward renewables, or any of the other bills the Republicans have been filibustering at an unprecedented rate, etc.
–Bradford Plumer
ME: Good question. Why is Dodd the only one Reid is holding accountable, and why now?
I prefer “majority leader DODD”!
But I’d settle for Durbin.
Okay, folks, starting sending Snickers bars and other relatively non-perishable foodstuffs to:
The Honorable Christopher Dodd
Re: Telco Filibuster Nourishment
448 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
Phone# (202) 224-2823
F*** HARRY REID!
I’d send him water too, if only we had some to spare out here.
Gatorade maybe?
Oh wait! It’s not over yet!
“The outcome increases the chance of an intraparty Democratic skirmish over the surveillance law, which would replace a stopgap measure passed last August that is due to expire in just eight days.”
Rage, my understanding is there is really no rush to pass this since there is a year long “grace” period after the law expires.
The House provision did not include telecom immunity. We’ll see if pelosi will cave as fast as reid. Probably, since the offending AT&T building is in her district.
They are ALL bought and paid for by the corporations, especially the telecom companies.
Except Dodd. He ain’t beholden to the telcos.
The insurance industry owns him! :)
Which, Rage, makes sense seeing that he’s from Connecticut.
Heheheheheh. What did Dylan say?
“ya got ta serve somebody”
Sad, but true.