Hillary as VP would cripple Obama's chances in the GE

*discuss*

Makes sense to me anyway.

I know people who are Republicans but are disenchanted with McCain and are willing to vote for Obama in the GE, but on the flipside, would go for McCain if the choice was between him and Hillary and if Hillary were Obama's VP, it would probably be enough to turn them off from him. So the pundits say that voters generally don't care who is the VP choice and that could be true, but I think one possible exception could be a figure as well-known and unfortunately, polarizing, as Hillary..

So while I think that him and Hillary merging would help within the party, I think it could hurt outside of it--and the truth is, you can't win with just Dems.. you need a little bit of everything..I just think he could pick someone who'd benefit him more than her..IMO.

:sarcasm:

But Obama would lose more independants than he would gain in diehard Clinton voters by including her.

um..not so much..

The people who voted her across the finish line in TX, OH, IN, WV, KY, PA will not "all" be with her..especially if she is not numero uno..

If Obama is coerced into taking his stalker with him, I hope he plants her in the Senate, and sends her to every funeral he can find....and revokes Bill's White House clearance without a written invitation..

He should pick John Edwards or someone else with tons of experience to lean on when the shit gets real.

She's historically had such high negatives among the Republicans. Those who might stay home who are uninspired by McCain, could get energized in an "against Hillary" vote.

This would be a gift horse to the GOP.

All they would have to do is run ads with her endorsing McCain over Obama over and over and over and over and over and over, and it would seal the deal for McCain becoming the next President.

her having said that would really hurt our ticket if she were on it.

NT!

after he failed to win the nomination.

They may have had radically different politics (and also despised each other), but LBJ delivered Texas and Arkansas and helped him squeak out a victory against Nixon.

Hmmm....

Arkansas would have gone for Kennedy regardless. In 1960, Arkansas was still solidly Democratic-- it wasn't until 1966 that things started to change, when the first Republican governor since Reconstruction (Winthrop Rockefeller) and the first Republican Congressional respresentative (John Paul Hammerschmidt, 3rd district) were elected. And in 1968, Arkansas still could not bring itself to vote for a Republican presidential candidate (Nixon), so it went with Wallace instead. The first vote for a Republican presidential candidate was for Nixon in '72, because Arkansans, like everyone else, bought into the neocon meme that McGovern was "too liberal". Since then, the only Democratic presidential candidates to carry Arkansas have both been Southern governors (Carter and Clinton).

:shrug:

He can no longer run as the "change candidate". His opposition to the war is neutered. His principled stand against the gas tax holiday is rendered moot.


And if, by some chance, he still manages to win.... he is put into a position where it is impossible to govern - with two Clintons, who both want back into the white house desperately, working against his presidency from the inside.


It's a disaster electorally... most of the vote that Hillary is getting is McCain vote in the GE and she will not be able to help him there.... and it is an even bigger disaster if he wins, because it will neuter his ability to govern effectively.

the gas tax is a three-day campaign story.

You think you can win without those who support Clinton, and I think that's just untrue.

There are other ways to get Hillary supporters without having Hillary on the ticket.

And that's the problem. Hillary has been running McCain's campaign for him, running with all McCain's talking points, allowing McCain to sit back and smile, and even the "gas tax holiday" was a McCain campaign idea.

All the while Hillary was going negative on Obama, she was eliminating any leverage she could bring to a 1-2 combination of the two -- and that's especially so in this case where the Mark Penn/Charlie Black combo had her proclaiming McCain's line. Choosing her as VP would effectively neuter the Democratic ticket.

voters where Obama is weak. Hillary is getting them now because she isn't Obama. But come the GE they BOTH will be weak with those voters.

A guy like Webb (who is from Appalachia and of that stock) or Edwards who has credibility with those voters, would draw them in and give him credibility in a way Hillary will never be able to.

His winnings are based on a partial credit primary among liberal voters. Meanwhile, the Republicans, who perceive Obama as further left than Clinton, don't want him to take their tax money, leave them open to terrorism and possibly use his "closet Muslim" influence to hurt American Christians. Yes, it's all loopy, but that's what's on the other side. That and the racism--the real racism that you should be afraid of.

I don't see him winning if he gets the nomination. I am wondering if the Dems want to lost the presidency this year: win the Congressional houses but lose the lightning rod seat of president when all the post-Bush financial disasters hit the fan.

ultimately, it's your problem.

All this knee-jerk emotionalism. Predictable, typical, but still astounding.

I've been wondering about your final point myself. My parents - lifelong Democrats, both - recently told me they're voting for McCain this year. I was stunned, at first, since they absolutely revile the Republican party. I asked them why the hell they'd vote for him. They said it's about time the Republicans had to face up to the consequences of their disastrous policies.

They remember Carter all too well, and how he was essentially doomed from the start, having to try and fix the damage Nixon/Ford had done. They see this election as the same thing - Republicans field a weak candidate, hoping for a Democratic victory so that when the shit REALLY hits the fan, they can point to a Democrat in the White House and say "It's all their fault!"

They're worried that neither Clinton or Obama will be able to undo Bush's damage in 4 years, and think WHOEVER wins, Clinton, Obama, or McCain, will be doomed to a one-term presidency as a result of Bush's legacy of failure. They hope that, if it's McCain, it'll be the final nail in the coffin of the GOP.

I can't bring myself to support my parents' decision, and I'm still trying to change their minds - primarily for the Supreme Court seats that will likely open up in the next 4 years - but I'm wondering if they're right or not.

I find it interesting that some people (like your folks) are voting Pug so that McCain has to pay for previous Republican actions. I also believe that a one-term presidency (like Carter) is a definite possibility. Under these circumstances, I think putting the first Black or the first woman in that office is kind of a cruel joke.

It remains to be seen what the real strategy is, but I wonder if they want to lose this year.

However, I don't agree with my folks that the reciprocal is true.

Frankly, I'm not sure how this country would handle another 4 years of Bush-like economic policy. It's possible McCain would bring some sense back by returning to an ACTUAL conservative budget policy rather than Bush's "tax cuts for now and massive crippling debts for the future" approach to fiscal responsibility, but I really feel like it's too big of a risk, even if it means a Democrat has to take the fall for Bush's disastrous regime.

As I see it, we have to take a gamble on that. If Obama wins, I hope he can live up to the lofty rhetoric of his stump speeches. I hope he can inspire the nation to put an end to the divisiveness and negativity that saturates the political atmosphere, choking out progress and fueling the fires of bitter partisan rivalry. I hope he governs based on what's right and what's needed, not what's polling well or what will win him re-election. I'm far too cynical to believe that he'll do all that, but still, somewhere in my jaded cynic's heart, I hope that I'm wrong. We need a president like that, who will make unpopular choices to fix things, even if it means losing in 2012.

Because the way I see it, our country's hurting, and it can't wait 4 more years for treatment.

to make the right call on this. If Obama decides that Hillary's support among women, Hispanics and hard working white folk who aren't racist (this rules out appalacia) outweigh her high negatives with independents and republicans, and the chance that she'll play a staring role in McCain's ads, than I'm all for it.

Bottom line, its about Obama's electoral map. His folks will be able to determine if Hillary is the best choice for this.

Personally I hope he picks Sebelius, but that's just me. :)

Hillary has pulled a lot of votes this primary season and with Obama's already strong base, her presence on ticket would bring more people on board. Hillary isn't as disliked by voters as some people like to say.

say that Hillary won't help in bringing out the democratic base. It would be silly to make this argument. The percentage of older women voting for an Obama-Hillary ticket may overcome the independents going to McCain. Whether this is true or not is a decision for Obama's folks to make.

Over 50%.

If she even allows herself to be vetted...

An unheard of ticket, to start. Think!

She and Bill would be out of control the whole time.

that American voters think about that?

She's untrustworthy and not competent to be president.

I'm 100% behind Obama and if you think that you're out of your fuckin mind.

This is why I have you on ignore.

And you live in Texas?

and she can not bring anything to do ticket that someone else could with less baggage.

While Clinton strikes me as someone who wants to be president because it's a personal goal.

Plus how stupid would Obama and Clinton both look trying to play "nice" now and supporting each other?

He's offered America a break with the past, a chance to turn the page.

That message would be fatally undermined if Clinton were on the ticket. Both Clintons are part of the past, not the future.

hilary is and a$$hole and will go away one of these fine days.

With those, he proves clinton's a liar and uses her own words to undercut the ticket and reveal her opportunistic hypocrisy.

And that will be the last we hear of a unity ticket.

All she'd do is drag him down.

But neither is a good option, imo.

She and Bill would totally undermine his ability to lead this nation at every chance they could. They have no respect for the man. They'd only use their positions and platforms to try to get their way as if they HAD won the presidency. Talk about a train wreck. She'd have made a fine president if she'd won, but she didn't. She'd make a horrible vice president and Bill an even worse VP spouse. No no No! Absolutely not.

This country has made great strides in that we're at a point where Americans could very well elect a black man or a woman president. But if anybody thinks Americans are gonna elect a black man AND a woman, they're sorely deluded. We ain't there yet. I'm not saying it's right; that's just how it is for now.