question for all the obama supporters

now that the primary is winding down, and obama is going to be the nominee. what would your reaction be should he peg hillary for his veep spot, or some other high position in his administration.
he's going to need her support to win in november, what's the best way to secure it.

VP, no.

She could do a lot more good in other places.

...and I think the two campaigns need to have serious meetings to work this out. Let's see what kind of deal-makers we got.

i was just wondering what ya'll thought it might look like. there's really not enough information available yet to decide.
hillary will get some concessions, i just wonder what they'll be. this weekend was the first time i saw the hillary for veep floated anywhere but the blogosphere. it was george steponopholas (i almost certainly misspelled that, but i'm not looking it up)
anyway, while i'm not sure how viable it would be, there is a certain logic behind it. whether or not obama would offer her the veep spot, and whether or not she'd accept is another question. i do believe she'll do everything in her power to help get him elected, but that's going to come with some conditions, and i just wonder what they might be, so i thought i'd ask some of obamas supporters.

I would seriously question his judgment and his message.

At best, I would write in the personal choice: Barack Obama and (someone else, I'll think of whom).

That is exactly the wrong reason to do it. She is supposed to be a loyal Democrat. She should support the Democratic nominee out of that loyalty, not because of any political "plums".

to undermind him? Nah life is pretty good as a US Senator (pretty much why Webb and Mark Warner wouldn't consider a VP slot)

All of this is niceness so that everyone can act like they came out unbruised and all is forgotten.

And his (or her!) running mate.

I say that because I'm a Democrat, and because the thought of allowing another Republican access to the Oval Office makes me want to puke.

I support his decision. As I would support hers should she get in.. Prefer him though.

...why would she want to be his VP?

as her argument that she brings experience to the ticket. as for being the veep, she'll still be young enough to run for president in 8 years.

Department of White House Concierge Affairs.

IOW, a janitor.

Hawkeye-X

*Rolls Eyes*

As a half-Latino.. I'll be pissed if he picks someone whom I and my mom's family think is a traitor. My father couldn't care less who he picks, he (my father) is a nasty piece of work... he won't be voting Dem.

'high position in his administration' , I would have no problem with that.

It would make me less likely to campaign for, donate to, or otherwise aid the ticket.

I think he could offer her something, but not the veep slot.
that should be something that could help the ticket, not drag it down.
However, putting her in a cabinet post or whatever would not affect the general election.

You said earlier you think he is a "traitor". Can you be more specific?

deleted - posted in wrong spot

i'm not sure of it's accuracy, but i saw a recent poll that said around 20% of clintons supporters wouldn't vote for obama in november.
if her being on the ticket as veep secured those votes i don't think it would be considered a drag. in fact if those numbers are correct it could be the difference between winning and losing in november.

would cause more problems than it would solve. You can disagree, but if clinton supporters drop out or vote republican, I doubt there was going to be much to make them happy by giving her the second position. If they're that fractious as to leap out of the party, not sure they're worth holding onto vs. all the new registrants excited about Obama.
Between the two: a bitter piquant group that will take their ball and go home, and an enthusiastic group excited about bringing about change, I'll take the latter.

I'd prefer clinton supporters stay and vote, of course, but if they feel that strongly against being a democrat, who am I to stop them?

indicator of future performance is past performance.

Are those 20% long time Democratic voters or long time Republican voters?

The reason Obama will not put Senator Clinton on his ticket is because it would completely obliterate his message of change. He would instantly lose all the independents and all the anti-war left.

He would confuse and worry his base, who he has been talking to about change and a new direction now for months.

In case you haven't been paying attention, one of the reasons that Senator Clinton has been defeated is because she kept hopscotching around on her message. One day it was "inevitable," the next it was "experienced" the next it was "Help, I'm being victimized" the next it was "white people don't vote for candidates with a darker skin tone than they have," and the next was "vote for me and free gas!"

Obama will lose for sure if he puts Sen. Clinton on his ticket. So he won't do that.

Even if Sen. Clinton won't support the party and instead plays it completely selfish and says 'Fuck the party and fuck the country, fuck women's rights, if I can't have it no one can, if they won't pay me to support them, then I won't,' Obama can still win.

I don't think she will do that. Do you?

I mean, I support Obama, but I don't think that's the way Sen Clinton is, do you?

The only sure way to lose is putting Clinton on the ticket and destroying his message.

I am not a big fan of choosing another Senator as VP, we will already lose Obama from that chamber.

So I'm not worried about that. But I think any Democrat from a state with a Republican governor should be automatically disqualified, as should Democrats from states without a lot of good Democrats who could replace them and win reelection.

No veep spot... no cabinet position... she can choose some part of the World to go to...

I started a thread the other day about the possibility of her being a Supreme Court justice, though I actually got the idea from a caller on the Thom Hartmann show.

The more I think about it, the more it makes sense, because it's a good way to satisfy Hillary's lust for power while at the same time NOT subjecting the legislative agenda to DLC control, which would happen if she were Senate Majority Leader, for example.

I suspect that Justice Stevens is planning on announcing his retirement at about 1:00 PM on January 20,2009, so it wouldn't be long of a wait. And Hillary would certainly pass the Senate nomination easily.

It's an idea that has merit, although I don't love your framing. She would be a magnificent justice.

I've posted my concerns about her on several threads already, but in short, she's a drag on the ticket with her consistently high negatives, she's too power-hungry for Obama not to have to watch his back, and she's gone way too negative on him for them to even SEEM to be plausible.

recently. I think that is a very attractive idea. Realistic? I have no clue, yet I love the thought of it.

If Hillary's on the ticket I do one of three things:

1. Stay the hell home on election day

2. Write in "Al Gore" on my ballot

3. Vote for Bob Barr

I think it's a myth that Obama needs Hillary as badly as Hillary fans think he does. I also don't think Obama will pick her as his running mate, but stranger things have happened.

I've said several times that Hillary's turned me off to the point that I won't even vote to re-elect her to the Senate. Ain't a damn thing changed...

because that's just the nature of politics. a concession isn't a bribe. she will be offered some consideration. i was just wondering what it might be.

I've been paying close attention for a very long time.

Since you are so sure she will be offered something of value in return for her expressed desire to see the Democratic nominee elected, I guess I'm just at a loss as to why you can't figure out what it would be that she would be offered.

Perhaps Obama will offer to pay her federal gas taxes on her personal car for the summer months?

Look, Obama's entire theme has been "change". Hillary represents the past and no matter how good things were back in the 90s economically, it also represents "triangulating" and parsing and everything that those of us who were around for it came to associate with the Clintons that was not really very pleasing.

Plus, if Obama took Hillary as his veep, he wouldn't get her alone - He'd have to accept Bill and Begala and Carville and Lanny Davis and McCauliffe, etc., etc.

How in the world could Obama talk about "change" with that tired old team in tow?

But it's entirely his decision.

She brings high negatives and might help energize disspirited Republicans (which was one of my main reasons for not supporting her in the beginning). I am also concerned that she might be too much of an alpha-dog to play second fiddle as VP...Obama as a candidate and as president might find himself competing with her and Bill instead of working together.

At the same time, she has a base of passionate supporters, and I am somewhat worried about some of them defecting. Putting her on the ticket could go a long way towards minimizing that effect.

Obama has talented people on his campaign to make these determinations, and he's pretty savvy himself. I trust whatever decision they make will be the right one...and I am behind Obama 110% no matter what he decides about VP.

I think that's the greatest position of power she can aspire to at this point. It may not be as glamorous as some of the Cabinet positions, but it's got the most real meat in it and I think it's what she wants.
I would be reluctant to see her as VP, and I think the Obama campaign has signaled that she would be the first pick.

her "support" like a surfer needs shark bait.

If he can handle Hillary as VP then I won't second guess him regardless of my own beliefs.

to prove herself a capable woman, after all these years as just a wife with a husband who got elected Prez.