Five reasons Hillary should not be on the Obama ticket:

1.She wants to be president a little too much. A good VP has to be happy in the role of spokesmodel and ceremonial ribbon-cutter, someone who can be counted on to take one for the team whenever necessary. Sure, you say, Hillary can be counted on: to wage ruthless turf wars, compete for the spotlight, hijack the agenda and otherwise insert herself into the power equation whenever possible. True, Obama wouldn't be the clueless, spineless weakling that Bush is regarding the VP's office, but why would he put himself in the position of having to look over his shoulder all the time, trying to keep an eye on Hillary's machinations behind-the-scenes? He wouldn't, I'm pretty sure.

2.Her negatives still stink. Hillary and only Hillary will inflame the passions of legions of wingnuts who would otherwise stay home in stunned, Bud Light-muted apathy on election day, watching Dukes of Hazzard reruns. McCain offers evangelicals and anti-immigration racists nothing to vote for—but Hillary, of all the potential VP picks, will offer them someone to vote emphatically against. They hate her, and they'll turn out in droves if she's on the ticket.

3.She brings no extraordinary credibility, experience or expertise to the ticket. Unlike a Jim Webb (former Secretary of the Navy) or a Bill Richardson (former governor of NM, former Secretary of Energy, extraordinary experience in foreign policy and diplomacy), or even a Joe Biden (gives good TV, has considerable foreign policy expertise), the most notable moments in Hillary's political career have consisted of playing first lady to Wild Bill, bungling a golden opportunity for health care reform in the early 90s, and voting (cravenly) the wrong way on the IWR.

4.She's nobody's favorite son (or daughter). That means she won't deliver a single state or constituency for Obama that he wouldn't win without her. Unlike Webb, who could be counted on to impress moderate "national security" Dems and indies with his military credentials and tough demeanor, or Richardson, who would deliver huge blocks of Latino voters in the southwest, Florida and urban east, Hillary has no built-in constituency except maybe older white women, most of whom, I'm guessing, can be persuaded to vote for Obama over McCain (if not, then there's something going on there besides misplaced hyper-loyalty or post-election-loss bitterness).

5.Wild Bill, the loose cannon. In just a few short months, Bill Clinton has managed to reduce himself from revered party elder to race-baiting jackass. At this point I don't think anyone who's paying attention to American politics wants to see Bill Clinton anywhere near the White House. Frankly, we don't need the drama (or the potential for scandal that seems to follow Mr. Clinton like a leg-humping dog), or the diversion from the important work that needs to be done to repair the economy, get us out of Iraq, slow global warming, fix our collapsing fiscal house and restore the constitution. Please, Senator Obama, do us all a favor and send Bill Clinton back out to pasture where he belongs.

I'm done with her and Bill for good.

She's nothing but a liability at this point.

She's as popular as Obama.

Or are you saying that Obama supporters will act like boors at the convention? That wouldn't surprise me.

...they're not.

We're not supposed to mention that she l-o-s-t.

But they're roughly tied in most measures. Any difference certainly isn't enough to legitimately claim that she's unpopular, especially among democrats.

is that she was widely disliked and mistrusted even before the campaign and has managed to turn herself into a complete pariah in four short months of race-baiting, lying and swiftboating.

She's about as popular as Obama, especially among democrats.

I know you like to think she's widely hated, but it's just not true.

NBC-WSJ POLL: NEW CLINTON LOWS
Posted: Wednesday, March 26, 2008

From NBC's Chuck Todd

As expected, one of the two major Democratic candidates saw a downturn in the latest NBC/WSJ poll, but it's not the candidate that you think. Hillary Clinton is sporting the lowest personal ratings of the campaign. Moreover, her 37 percent positive rating is the lowest the NBC/WSJ poll has recorded since March 2001, two months after she was elected to the U.S. Senate from New York.

The poll was conducted Monday and Tuesday this week by Hart-McInturff and surveyed 700 registered voters, which gives the poll a margin of error of +/- 3.7 percent. In addition, we oversampled African-Americans in order to get a more reliable cross-tab on many of the questions we asked in this poll regarding Sen. Barack Obama's speech on race and overall response to last week's Rev. Jeremiah Wright dustup.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/26/821438.aspx

there's a good chance she'd be booed: deservedly so.

the only people claiming she's demanding that are Clinton haters. There's no reliable source saying it.

because they're Clinton Haters? I don't know what the source of the rumor is, myself, but I doubt it arose out of thin air. It's too Machiavellian for that, somehow.

n/t

of all Obama! Just ask John Kerry, Bill Richardson, and all those who were tossed overboard with their infamous "triangulation" so it could help bilary..to name a few.

How can a VP who spent months criticizing the Prez on a fundamental level effectively work with him later?

hilary's roasted her own goose and I couldn't think it was more well deserved.

Her view of Americans frightens me. I don't even want to know her view of other people who inhabit this world. Things are too tense to have someone in the White House who pits groups against each other and places her personal ambition above the country's welfare. What next? A slash and burn competition against Vladimir Putin with Bill Clinton going around the world playing the kind of vile, desperate politics he displayed during this campaign?

Gore keeps his distance from the Clintons. I used to think it was because of overblown disappointment about the Monica thing but I'm realizing it's much much more now. The same with Carter.

6. "Shame on you, Barack Obama"
7. Mark Penn and Colombia
8. Bosnia
9. Terry McAuliffe ("Fox news really *IS* fair & balanced!")
10. In 2002, Barack Obama gave a speech.

<conclusion snip>

"The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not -- we will not -- travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain."

More Profound Insight..
http://www.barackobama.com/2002/10/02/remarks_of_illinois_state_sen.php

When hilary voted for the IWR without reading the 90 page NIE.

and talks about American Issues.. and hilary uses rove's hacktics in her failing run for president 6 years later.

<another snip>

"What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income - to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics. Now let me be clear - I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him."

Lieberman basically sabotaged the Gore campaign.

I'm no fan of Lieberman, but I have almost no memory of him in the 2000 campaign.

Fool me once shame on you..fool me twice SHAME ON ME. Uh Uh! NO MO'!

The guy who played Cooter on Dukes of Hazzard, Ben Jones, is a former Democratic congressman in Georgia, has been an active supporter of Edwards earlier, and is no "Blue Dog" Democrat either. Took on Zell Miller back in the day for not being a decent progressive Democrat too.

http://www.cootersplace.com/

Cooter's a liberal! That makes me feel really good for some reason.

- "As far as I know."
- The kitchen sink
- The so-called 'Commander-in-Chief" threshold
- Her plugs for McCain
- Those DAMNED PANTSUITS!!!!!!

that is added on the fact that Obama will need 24/7 round the clock back
watchers, because they will sabotage him in a heart beat.

Johnson and Kennedy comes to mind.

No chance!!!

Think of Obama's success with black voters, then reflect on the fact that Latinos are now the largest U.S. ethnic minority. If you can kick ass to the tune of 80-90% in both of those constituencies without alienating whites, then I'm pretty sure you win.

I hate to say that, as I don't like to play the politics of fear, but I think in some ways the circumstances would be even worse than when LBJ was JFK's running mate. It would just be completely set up for a white racist to be masquerading as the "lone gunman" to take out Obama and in effect put Hillary in charge. There are plenty of corporate/Washington insider elements that would be motivated to help such a "nutball" do this, much like happened in the 60's with those "lone gunmen" assassinations then.

Obama literally can't afford the danger of having her his second in command.

I do think Obama will be at extraordinary risk of assassination, and that some "crazed, racist lone-gunman" would be the ideal fall guy (you stand here with your gun, Jethro, and when you seen him turn the corner, pull the trigger a bunch of times, real fast). And it's certainly true that a corporatist VP less committed to getting out of Iraq would make an attractive substitute prez as far as the entrenched military-industrial types are concerned. Those guys must all be shitting themselves right about now; no doubt contingency planning is already in the works. If I sound a little crazy, then you probably haven't seen the Zapruder film of JFK's assassination and compared that bit of visual evidence to the official story.

... for Bushco to declare martial law and cancel the elections, and arouse the fears of Paul Craig Roberts of what might happen if they fear being prosecuted come January 2009...

In short, we REALLY need to be careful who is second in command on the ticket, and MAKE SURE that what happened to RFK Junior close to 40 years ago (anniversary is only a few weeks from now!) doesn't happen again!

And it was Helen Thomas that reminded us in a recent interview with Zogby that Bobbie Kennedy in those days had predicted that America would have an African American president by now... (I think he said 30 years from then instead of 40 years from then).

Bookmark~ In short hilary is a big drag and needs to go back and fuckin' mend her fences if she's capable.

She and Bill would constantly meddle. We do not need them in the WH, it is time for a clean break from the old Clinton/Bush dynastic politics. This country is in sad shape, and it has been trending that way since 1980. We must take a sharp turn to change politics for the better, and Obama is the one to create the huge shift in the opposite direction that was set by Raygun in the 80's.

I am first an obama supporter. He's the nominee. i truely believe he will win the presidential election. That makes me so happy.

what's so wrong with Hillary being on the ticket?? because of what she has been doing? yep she was wrong wrong. what do we do? continue with this devisive attidudes are act like obama acts.

just guessing ....how do you think obama would respond if he were reading the comments and attidudes on this site? How would he respond if he was posting here? Why are you supporting Obama?? because he's a winner, because he speaks well or because you identify with his message?

I have no idea who he'll choose as his veep, what will you do if he chooses her.....?

i'll probably get bashed for my comments

with Hillary being on the ticket??" Haven't I expressed my thoughts on that matter sufficiently for you? I have no way of knowing what Obama would think if he was reading my comments, but I have every confidence that he's smart enough not to choose Hillary for his running mate. There's no good reason to do it, and a host of good reasons not to. Obama doesn't strike me as a fool, or as the kind of person who's easily swayed by Clinton-camp propaganda. Given that, I'll assume he won't make the worst-of-all-possible-choices.

is just no way to run a presidential campaign. I hate to even think about it.

You know what I'm talking about.