Thinking Outside the Box on the Unity Ticket

People are now promoting the "unity ticket" as a way to re-unite the party, the "unity ticket" is Obama running for the presidency while Hillary Clinton is his running mate and VP-apparent. Abandon all hope: this isn't going to work.

I hate to sound doubts about the wonders of the dream ticket. I hope it's true that it wouldn't be vulnerable to both the candidates weaknesses rather than take advantage of their strengths. Will voters for Clinton turn out for Obama? Will women vote for the ticket on general principle? Will Obama supporters put their antipathy for Clinton aside? Would it be vulnerable to bullets in Bosnia and Rev. Wright, rather than one or the other?

Okay, I'm an Obama supporter. I make no bones about it. I don't know what is to be gained in putting HC on the ticket. New York State isn't going Republican. No way. Arkansas? People there aren't going to be swayed by the Senator from New York, who left Arkansas to pursue her presidential ambition.

Worse, nobody has pointed it out: there's no incentive for HC to accept being VP. Hillary Clinton has campaigned for two years for the presidency, and has prepared for eight years. She has gone $25 million dollars in debt for it. Nobody can settle back easily after that effort. If that weren't enough, Hillary will be 62 by November. In eight years, she is going to be 70. She either gets the presidency this year, or she never gets it. Making her VP is putting her in a hospice, politically speaking. Settling for VP will make her Bob Dole or John McCain material in 2016. She must realize this.

Meanwhile, just putting Hillary Clinton on the ticket will still keep Bill activated, pugnacious and resentful. I guess if he is persuaded to control his wagging finger it might work, but I am worried that Bill is going to have a hard time with it. The guy misses that highest office a lot. His over-shadowing Hillary has been one problem with her campaign; he has been all fight while she has been all bland. It has backfired. I expect he will have to settle for being the Second Man to the VP. I can't picture Bill calming down for that, even during the campaign. Bill has to go back to being charming, and smiling. The vinegar has to go.

I strongly believe he won't do it if his wife is just VP-apparent.

Also, what would it gain Obama's ticket? As much as polls say Obama and Clinton supporters say that they would vote for McCain or stay home if their respective candidate loses. No, I doubt very strongly they will do that if faced with the situation. Responsibility and fear would now trump principle. They aren't defecting to McCain any more than they'll vote for Ralph Nader. Some of them remember too well how dearly they, and their country, paid for that in 2000. And Obama made it clear tonight that he doesn't see disunity in the party if he wins.

But the question is what will Independents do? My guesses are that Obama's problem with Rev. Wright will become boring for all but Republican voters. Obama's background from Chicago politics should be counter-balanced by McCain's problems with lobbyist-- which also isn't going away. Obama was a political organizer, on the South Side of Chicago, and that should trump what McCain is able to present about himself (or the Clinton's about themselves). It's also a boon to Obama for campaigning, in the same way it has been so far. McCain has nothing to compare to that. So, I think the Independents might break Democratic, they might.

Yet, there's is no guarantee without the Clintons engaged. At best, it's uneasy. We need a guarantee.

Now, let's think outside the box: I suggest a much more radical approach to a "unity ticket." Let Obama not insult Hillary Clinton with being VP, instead, offer her the office of Attorney General and promise her a seat on the Supreme Court when it becomes vacant. That's right. It gives her a role in making history. Give Bill a cabinet position, too. Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense maybe, he has experience. Most important, though: give Chelsea a position; how about Secretary of Education, or Secretary of the Interior?

This should be far more effective than just giving HC the VP for a "unity" ticket. Hillary on the court will assure a "Clinton legacy" while dodging ticket controversy during the election, and it gives more than enough to them to in return campaign for Obama full-heartedly; meanwhile making Chelsea the heir apparent to the Clinton legacy which will last for more than one generation, perhaps grooming her for the presidency in 2016 if she wants it. There's just win-win as far as you look. The new will not vanquish the old, but will unite with them.

Now, let's look at the power and advantage of this move: it would be a unity ticket while keeping the ticket close to the vest. Everybody gains. Everybody will be a major part of history. Obama can choose a VP who is happier in the position and who balances the ticket.

Obama is unbeatable with the Clintons fully on board, and vice versa. The chances of success in the GE are close to 100 percent. Bill can put the finger away and smile and charm. IMHo, it's a 100 percent winner.

It will also solve the current controversies with Florida and Michigan. This is my "dream ticket." I hope everyone else, including Obama, sees the golden opportunity offered with it.

Offer CHELSEA a cabinet position?

In the first place, she is totally unqualified. I don't think it helps Obama's administration at all to have a token Clinton in his cabinet, just because she's a Clinton.

Besides that, Chelsea would just be a Hillary/Bill tool, and would undermine Obama when she could to give her mother a shot at the WH in 2012. Remember, Chelsea has already proven she will abandon ethics to support her mother.

Obama doesn't need to think out of the box. HE IS outside of the box. He doesn't need to prove anything to anybody, except that he can select qualified, loyal VP, cabinet members and staff to support his administration.

Where JFK said about his appointment that Bobby needed to learn more about the law. Did you know that? I bet Jimmy Hoffa was thankful. Now, I wouldn't say that was necessarily okay either. Abraham Lincoln loaded his cabinet with some people who were less than qualified. It ran like clockwork. At the end, the enemies on his cabinet like Seward practically worshiped him.

No, it doesn't have to be that high a position for Chelsea. I exaggerated for emphasis. Politically you sometimes have to give something to the younger generation if the elder one is to be brought on board. Obama is finally a pragmatist.
As a Chicago politician and pragmatist, he can't believe he's as above it all as you think he is. Strategic patronage can be very effective in creating and solidifying power, and it also keeps his enemies close. That's very important. Something Dubya never did-- and look at the results. We should welcome less faithfulness among appointees, and more seriousness about their offices.

Now, I like Obama a lot, but there's no way, no way, that he's so far outside the box that he could say fuck you to other people with support and power. He'd be in the company of Josef Stalin if that were true: a frightening amount of political power.

Stalin, BTW, build a great amount of his "out of the box" power through his command of patronage within the Bolshevik party. These things don't change in political systems. Liberals like Roosevelt, Johnson, and Truman all knew this.

Chelsea and Bill have supported Hillary 120%, including remaining silent when Hillary flat-out LIES to voters. There is no way the Clintons should be allowed within 20 feet of Obama. The idea of any of them being in his administration is absurd. They would work to undermine him and very possibly pass on administration strategies to the Republicans.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Honestly, enough already. They lived in the house for 8 years. It's someone else's turn. It is time for the Clintons to retire, and Chelsea to go back to wall street where she's obviously comfortable. Although I think it's really fun that Hillary made her slum around West Virginia. I wonder if she wore her real clothes from NY, or went shopping at the local Walmart to fit in.

If she is so fucking great she can earn her own way in the Senate.. or whereever

Again this country can be run without a Bush or Clinton in the WH

. . . (not that anybody ever does) and neither do their supporters. Without a literal bloodbath as was practiced in the late Roman Republic when a faction fell from power. Their power being in eclipse and brought to heel with a new order is the important thing.

Here's the deal for Hillary and Bill: support the ticket and be good Democrats or get run out of the party.

I think she's doing her best to show it now. If she's still in the race then, even if she isn't negative to Obama, it will be a disaster. Now, I doubt she'll do that, but she put a lot into this, she wants a consolation prize.

I think she's doing her best to show it now. If she's still in the race then, even if she isn't negative to Obama, it will be a disaster. Now, I doubt she'll do that, but she put a lot into this, she wants a consolation prize.

The first woman Vice President in American History.

Two hundred years from now school children will have to learn that name and know her story. She will be the Jackie Robinson of the feminist movement. In 8 years she will still be young enough to run for president. I don't think your premise holds water. There are lots of incentives for people that think in a certain way.

Chelsea a position? At 27 years old (or whatever?) thats just funny.

You think she will be young enough to be president at 70? At the very least, eight years older, she won't be better than she is now.

Nevertheless, I don't buy your "first woman VP in history" argument. Historically, the VP hasn't been a very auspicious office, till recently. Currently, the only power that it immediately has is what the President chooses to delegate to it, or whenever a Senate vote is a tie. A promise of this office promises nothing on what responsibilities she would be given.

No, I doubt Hillary Clinton being the second-to-Chief-Executive in the US will be a memorable great moment in feminism. Notwithstanding my doubts about her character, which may not reflect well on feminism in the end, the US is hardly the leader on this. While we're asking if Americans are ready to have a woman president, other nations have been there, done that, time and again. Those British we overthrew for being tyrants have had Queen Victoria, Queen Elizabeth and Margaret Thatcher. The autocratic Russians had Catherine. Our country gave women the vote only after 18 other nations did.

So, I doubt that the US will be remembered for its empowerment of women no matter what it does now. We're far too backward in our thinking to matter in the future. IMHO, if anybody asks solemnly if we are ready to have a woman President, we should laugh in his face. Or her face. The fact that it's even posed seriously, says something.