I hope it's... Hillary?

A shorttremendously long diary to say that even though I'm fairly sure Obama won't choose Hillary as his running mate -- I kind of hope he would.

Caveats -- I was never a Hillary supporter. I've been intrigued by Obama since 2003, when a former collegue at the Tribune turned me on to Obama's senatorial asperations. I parroted the Kos line that the race was Obama's to lose since he announced, even though I figured the Clinton machine would find some way to squeak out a win.

I never understood why she wanted the Presidency. I felt -- and to some extent still feel -- that Hillary is better suited as a Senator than a chief executive. With Kennedy ill and aging, the Senate needs a Democratic lion. I thought that was a better role for her.

I have high regard for the Clinton presidency, and thought the White House Clintons got a raw deal by the media, that allowed the Right Wing to manipulate. I always wished Bill Clinton was more progressive, but admired the way he got things done while tweaking the GOP. I felt Al Gore lost entirely because he ran against both Bush and Bill. There would have been no Florida recount if Bill Clinton had been down there doing retail politics.

I hated the negativity of the primary, i thought she disqualified herself for speaking more highly of McCain than Obama. I never thought Hillary or Bill were racist, but felt they exploited racial politics once it became clear that Obama had taken the black support they were depending on. I think Hillary's campaign was run with a lot of heart, but was mismanaged from the get go by advisors who should have been shown the door ages earlier. Wolfson, Penn... excretable people who cost Hillary the nod just as sure as her Iraq War vote. I still can't figure out what was worse ultimately. I feel like they ran for the 2000 election at the start.

I loved their localized campaigns. Even while pandering I could appreciate the quality of it. The shamelessness of it. Obama can't do that, he's too new to get away with it. Looks awkward. McCain can. Hillary can. You likely have to to awin.  Again, felt it was racialized, I'll never understand the "hard working white people" line, but I understand what they were trying to do.

Those Penn memos show they could have been worse. I appreciate they weren't followed. Wish they weren't written. Wish they'd been burned rather than released.

But the release was what got me to thinking... I think they were put out with the express wishes of the Obama campaign.

I think they were poured out into the public to water down any attempts by McCain to later do the same. I think they were put out to water any future revelation of them... in case Hillary was the VP pick.

Because, since the campaign ended, we've seen discipline from the Clintons that we didn't see from their own campaign. It's been airtight. Even without the daily campaigning, there are enough of her former advisors on FOX News that real mischief could happen. And hasn't.

Then came the "cathartic" floor vote.

Then came the seemingly endless "clues" about Biden, Bayh, Kaine, Sebelius. Just enough for each to make each seem a certain pick.

And nothing about Hillary... and nothing FROM Hillary or her closest advisors complaining. Usually we'd hear if they were upset at their lunch options. But since the primary ended, nada.

It's been quiet... too quiet.

During the campaign, when Obama won the math in February, I thought Hillary's regional run (which would never have been enough) was to make his picking of her seem inevitable. Usually, a party that divided has to merge through a shotgun wedding.

But how do you make the shotgun wedding look like a love affair? Remove the shotgun.

Thinking over the last few days... the shotgun is gone. No one is calling for Hillary to be the veep. No one is pushing for her candidacy with any real ferver. Only the "Bower"y boys and girls whose craziness needs no attention.

So, picking Hillary back in June seemed dull and meaningless. Picking her now would be explosive.

And maybe not a bad explosive.

Obama can't attack well. It's ugly. It betrays his central message. Hillary can attack with zeal and it seems... natural. This isn't a dig -- she's just that much more battle hardened and... political. Maybe Obama is that political too, but it's discordant when he does it. Even his "houses" dig of Thursday, for all it's oomph and power seemed strained to me.

Hillary has baggage, but maybe there's just so much of it that balances out. She's been attacked so long that there is a natural ability to shake off the blows. I have a friend who doesn't eat donuts -- unless she's eating a dozen of them herself. Why? She thinks that you can only retain so much fat and sugar that if you're going to do bad, might as well do a lot and let only a little bit stick. I don't think medicinal science would agree, but it makes sense in the break room.

And lastly... I hate to admit this... but I think Hillary did earn it. If Obama wins, if the Democrats take major victories in the Senate and the House -- it'll be because of the every-state Primary that she and Obama waged. The organization each put into place will do wonders for the party up and down the ticket.

Hillary did a brilliant job applying her face to the idea of economic recovery. It doesn't hurt that there is a oft-mentioned track record of Clintons "cleaning up" after Bushes. But Obama is a process radical -- he talks about changing the system. The Clintons are policy "radicals." They talk about specific programs. That's a pairing that makes more sense than simply geography. Obama needs policies to really move the electorate. As they stand now it's hard to put your head around them.

I wish they'd both get behind single payer. But with Hillary on the ticket you know some kind of Health Care reform will happen. With Obama involved, you know they'll at least come up with a better name for "mandates."

Lastly -- simple politics. Kaine leaves behind a GOP Lt. Governor. Bayh, a GOP appointed Senator. Biden leaves behind, well, Biden is Biden. If you're going to go with a war-voting Democratic senator from a state not in contention -- why not go for Hillary instead?

So, that's what I'm thinking today. Never thought I would push this line of thought -- and it'll be meaningless in a couple hours when the real name is announced.

But at the moment on the Friday of the announcement... I hope the text message reads "Hillary."

Tags: Hillary, obama (all tags)

Comments

114 Comments

Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

I'll add... it'd be fun to learn that they decided this during that famous sit-down at Barbara Boxer's house. Although that sure would piss off the media. I like the idea of pissed-off media.

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 05:17AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Obama doesn't need Hillary's baggage.  Making her the VP will only motivate the rethugs.

This is one problem that my candidate doesn't need.  We need to clear this party of the Clintons, once and for all, and Ihope Obama finally does it.

by phillyandcheese 2008-08-22 07:01AM | 0 recs
he doesn't need his own baggage either
but you know the great thing about both Obama and Clinton's baggage?  Its been through TSA about a million times- hell, they each threw each other through that scanner.  We have seen both of them walk through the new fangled peep show body search thingy.  And you know what?  No one cares any more.


And, this is the stupidest line of attack on HRC as the VP.  When has baggage ever stopped a Clinton except in a Democratic Primary where shockingly soo soo many supposedly smart Democrats all the sudden became 'concerned' about Clinton baggage- like we don't know everything about them already?
by linc 2008-08-22 07:23AM | 0 recs
Re: he doesn't need his own baggage either

If we know everything about the Clinton baggage how come we don't know who contributes to Bill's library and what he's carrying around in that suitcase??????????????

by venician 2008-08-22 08:56AM | 0 recs
are you being serious? I can't tell eom

by linc 2008-08-22 09:04AM | 0 recs
Re: are you being serious? I can't tell eom

Well if you have a list of Bills donors please show us.

by venician 2008-08-22 09:23AM | 0 recs
Re: are you being serious? I can't tell eom

The chief financial officer for the William J. Clinton Presidential Foundation, Andrew Kessel, said that the vast majority of the roughly 113,000 donors to the foundation are ordinary Americans who made small gifts.

"We have 91,000 who gave $100 or less," he said in an interview Friday. "It's not all Saudi princes."

Information about the donors is available to the public on a single touch-screen computer mounted on a wall on the third floor of the recently opened library. Eventually, most who have contributed $100,000 or more will be listed on a wall in the museum's lobby, Mr. Kessel said.

However, some donors have asked that their names not be released. "We don't have many," Mr. Kessel said, adding, "It doesn't involve anyone controversial."

The computer lists donors by categories that correspond to the size of the gift. But there are no dollar figures provided for each of the funding levels.

Asked why the donor categories were not publicly defined, Mr. Kessel said,"It was a decision we made.We really don't need to at this point."

As a charitable organization, the Clinton Foundation is not required to make the names of its donors or the amounts of their gifts public. However, some of the other foundations that contributed to the library have disclosed their gifts on financial reports that are available from the Internal Revenue Service. By comparing those reports with the donor categories on the third-floor computer screen in the library, The New York Sun was able to match donor categories with approximate dollar amounts.

The highest tier,"Trustees," includes donations from 57 individuals, couples, or other entities. IRS reports reviewed by the Sun show that the foundations at this level have generally given or pledged $1 million or more. The Wasserman Foundation of Los Angeles, founded by movie mogul Lew Wasserman, gave the Clinton library $3 million. The Roy and Christine Sturgis Charitable Trust pledged $4 million. The Anheuser-Busch Foundation has given $200,000 annually for the last several years as part of what appears to be a $1 million pledge.The Annenberg Foundation also gave $1 million.

The Saudi royal family and the governments of Dubai, Kuwait, and Qatar donated at this "Trustee" level, as did the governments of Brunei and Taiwan. Also listed as trustees are three Saudi businessmen - Abdullah Al-Dabbagh, Nasser Al-Rashid, and Walid Juffali.

Other notables at the "Trustee" level include the deputy prime minister of Lebanon, Issam Fares; Hollywood director Steven Spielberg and his wife, actress Kate Capshaw, and an heir to the Wal-Mart fortune, Alice Walton.

The next tier down is labeled "Philanthropists." A major New York labor organization, Local 1199 of the Service Employees International Union, donated at this level, which appears to correspond to gifts of $500,000 to $1 million. Also donating in this range was the editor of the Las Vegas Sun, Brian Greenspun, who was one of Mr. Clinton's roommates at Yale.

On the level below that are the "Humanitarians." Based on benchmarks available from other sources, the "Humanitarians" seem to have given between $100,000 and $500,000. In their ranks are the King of Morocco, Mohammed VI, as well as a Pakistani-American businessman from California, Farooq Bajwa. Several perennial Clinton donors are on this list, such as the Big Apple Supermarkets chief, John Catsimatidis, and a San Diego class action lawyer, William Lerach. The U.S.-Islamic World Conference gave at the Humanitarian level, as did several Jewish groups, the Jewish Communal Fund, the Jewish Community Foundation, and the University of Judaism, according to the information available on the computer screen in the Clinton Library here.

The most controversial known donation to Mr. Clinton's library is also recorded at this level: a gift from a Manhattan socialite and singer, Denise Rich. Ms. Rich gave the foundation $450,000 while her fugitive ex-husband, Marc Rich, was seeking a pardon on tax-evasion and racketeering charges. Mr. Clinton granted the pardon hours before he left office, triggering a federal criminal investigation, as well as congressional inquiries.

As a result of that flap, a House committee voted in 2001 to require public disclosure of all large donations to presidential libraries. But the legislation stalled.

http://www.nysun.com/national/saudis-ara bs-funneled-millions-to-president/5137/

Any questions?
And yes, I know the New York Sun is a rabid right wing rag.

by skohayes 2008-08-22 12:08PM | 0 recs
You were serious!

hey guess what? No one cares who donated to his damn library- if everyone cares, it would be the first time in history.  Get a grip.

by linc 2008-08-22 04:12PM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

We need to clear this party of the Clintons???

What kind of sentiment is that?

I guess you want her out of the Senate too?

by JDF 2008-08-22 07:25AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

I call Rethug troll.

by SuGeAtARC 2008-08-22 07:37AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

I have always found this idea that Hillary will motivate Republicans hysterical.  I always knew, with their excellence in mocking and well oiled attack machine, the Republicans would make minced meat of Obama.

I was right and I wish, honestly, that I had been proven wrong.

A recent poll out of Ohio showed McCain with 89% of GOP backing, with Obama getting only 77% of Dems.  

I don't know that HIllary can save Obama.  I don't know that he needs her.  I do know that without a unified party voting in November, our chances are all the more grim.

by GoldLame 2008-08-22 08:36AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

The sit-down was at Feinstein's house, not Boxer's.

And there already is a better term for "mandates" . It's called "Universal Health Care" and those of us who support UHC don't really appreciate the demonization of this term as any universal program will, by definition, be "mandatory".

by LakersFan 2008-08-22 11:16AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Well if it is HRC BO will get a big bounce in the polls.  If it is someone else then we will have to wait and see.  But i think many of us think BO numbers will go down.  Lets hope it is just a temp change.

david

by giusd 2008-08-22 05:21AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

I don't think his numbers will go "down." We'll see after the convention -- which will do more than a VP pick to solidify the image of Obama as a strong and competant leader.

Even picking Hillary I don't think will have as much of an effect as a well-run, strong convention.

Remember what a radical thing it is to have Barack Obama ... a black U.S. Senator with a "furrin" sounding name as the front runner for the US Presidency. You can't get more opposite than George W. Bush ... a rich patrician who got the Presidency (and every other job he had) as a legacy hire. It takes a while for the country as a whole to move that far.

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 05:29AM | 0 recs
Let's keep thinking his numbers will go down

If we think hard enough, it might actually happen.

by iohs2008 2008-08-22 05:36AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

If they want a woman who has become a present day American hero, every woman would support?

Obama/Torres 08
http://www.eyespyfilms.com/portrait%20jp egs/dara_tessa_01.jpg

by nogo postal 2008-08-22 05:35AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

At first I thought you meant Gina Torres, aka Zoe from Firefly. Which I would also be totally down with.

by Cincinnatus 2008-08-22 06:15AM | 0 recs
Well, the NY Times has an article

about HRC's enthuisiasm for Obama.  I guess the paper of record isn't done hitting her.  She's probably the only person who could make over ten appearances for a former rival in the span of two months after a competitive primary and still get hit with a charge of a lack of enthuisiasm.

by Blazers Edge 2008-08-22 05:40AM | 0 recs
well said...Clintons are such a nice punching bag

for two decades now...from rightwing nutcases like Limbo, Blo-relly, newtie to MSM like NYT..

by louisprandtl 2008-08-22 05:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Well, the NY Times has an article

and continues to refer to him as "my opponent."

by IowaMike 2008-08-22 06:34AM | 0 recs
she put how much time into her campaign??

Didn't even stop for Mother's Day!

... she's earned the right to refer to him as her opponent. Everyone knows she's out of the ring. Let her take pride in how long she toughed it out.

by BlogSurrogate57 2008-08-22 06:41AM | 0 recs
Re: she put how much time into her campaign??

and that is showing unity, how?

by IowaMike 2008-08-22 06:49AM | 0 recs
unity is overrated

particularly when she's speaking to her own supporters.

She should be taking pride in her opponent, in the whole barechested fight they got on, and how great a president Obama is going to be.

You kinda undercut that if you won't let her talk about the time they spent on the trail.

Her loyalty and courage is shown by showing up and campaigning.

LET HER DO HER JOB.

by BlogSurrogate57 2008-08-22 06:53AM | 0 recs
Re: unity is overrated

Unity is overrated?

We need to show hillary the door, and quickly.  She'll drag this ticket down like quicksand.

by phillyandcheese 2008-08-22 07:03AM | 0 recs
Re: unity is overrated

and encourages them to stay divided.

by IowaMike 2008-08-22 07:09AM | 0 recs
the hell is this bullshit?

... not so much you as the poster above you, but...
rant rant rant
Okay. Sorry, needed to vent.

Look, it's her job above all else to make the unity crap work. She's a damn fine speaker (some say better than Obama on the trail ... and those were Obama supporters, for chrissakes!) ... let her talk her way, be her own person.

Don't expect her to be Obama, but Expect Her to Bring Out the Vote.

And if there's credible reason to believe that her actions were responsible for problems, we'll deal with her in the next primary.

by BlogSurrogate57 2008-08-22 07:17AM | 0 recs
Re: the hell is this bullshit?

the continued use of phrases like that encourages the PUMA crowd.

She better do her job. She will have the blame if its her "followers" that cause a mess at our convention.

And, seeing all of them in Iowa in person, and not having caucused for Obama, I don't know of anyone who supports your anedotal remarks about who is the better public speaker.

by IowaMike 2008-08-22 07:24AM | 0 recs
Re: the hell is this bullshit?

"Her" followers? "Our" convention?

Go HOME, Rethug troll, and stop trying to divide the Dems. We're one party, as we'll happily show you in November.

Anyone who divides Dems into "hers" and "ours" isn't a Democrat.

by SuGeAtARC 2008-08-22 07:39AM | 0 recs
Re: the hell is this bullshit?

Some are dividing themselves, I am just commenting on observations.

"Our" includes the "her" supporters who are actually dems and want unity, not threaten the Hill VP or else BS.

by IowaMike 2008-08-22 08:17AM | 0 recs
da PUMA dozen

PA went heavy for Clinton. Now it's heavy for Obama.

We like 'em blue around here. Did I mention I'm from Liberal Appalachia? (complete with still existent Dukakis sign!)

Meh. heard that line from someone out in Oregon (hadda rec list diary on kos, it's why I made note of it). By the time they all came here, I couldn't be bothered to go downtown to see Hillary.

I don't worry bout the PUMA crowd -- I worry about Hillary loyalists, who still want some brass tacks out of Obama (and may not have the net skills to find 'em on the net)

by BlogSurrogate57 2008-08-22 07:44AM | 0 recs
canadian girl

really, a troll rate just because you disagree?

Well, that is your MO.

by IowaMike 2008-08-22 08:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Well, the NY Times has an article

And, you know that Times article was feed to them from Axelrod. The Obama campaign has been planting nuggets trashing Clinton all summer. It's their always gracious concept of party unity.

by hwc 2008-08-22 06:40AM | 0 recs
At the cost of his own campaign???

Um, I read that article this morning.  How does saying that Obama has a Clinton problem help him?  This is a hit piece on Obama as much as Clinton, the classic "Dems Are Divided" pitch the Times have lived off for years.  Coupled with the McCain super-gaffe buried on the bottom fold of the front page with the headline "2 Rivals Quest: Common Touch"...as if it were a simple disagreement, while even the WaPost is tearing into McCain, it makes me think that they are not exactly "doing Obama's bidding" as you imply.

by thurst 2008-08-22 06:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Well, the NY Times has an article

I heard Axelrod peed on Buddy's grave too.

It's so hard sometimes seperating Hillary from her supporters. And balancing my contempt for their comments them with respect for her.

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 06:47AM | 0 recs
Ambinder has an e-mail from

a democratic operative suggested that Ax did plant the story.  I agree though about there not being anything in Obama's self-interest to embarrass Hillary Clinton at this point.  He has nothing to gain and the article certainly wouldn't win him any support.  The article is a hit piece on her.

by Blazers Edge 2008-08-22 06:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Ambinder has an e-mail from

Ambinder's "democratic operatives" are never wrong. EVER! Except for all those times when they are.

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 06:53AM | 0 recs
No Drama is the motto of the campaign

ain't no way Axelrod would be that fucking stupid to stick his neck out.

Someone on Clinton's team, gunning for Axelrod? From the looks of it, much more likely (y'all kept how many e-mails? geez louise!)

by BlogSurrogate57 2008-08-22 06:54AM | 0 recs
Amen

I have the same problem.

I am sure some Clinton people can say the same about certain Obama supporters in blogshpere as well.

by fladem 2008-08-22 07:09AM | 0 recs
some reluctant obama supporters

like me. I liked Edwards the Asshole.

can't stand some Obama supporters, either. ;-)

by BlogSurrogate57 2008-08-22 07:18AM | 0 recs
great diary - reccd!

I have never been a fan of the Clinton's, but I agree with everything you said above. For me it always goes back to those days when Hillary seemed to be saying that McCain would be a better choice than Obama - I think her chances of every being the VP ended there, BUT if she were chosen I would have no problem supporting the ticket.

One thing - for me and I would assume for many other Obama supporters, one of the most often repeated reasons as to why Hillary shouldn't be chosen was the idea that it would rally the conservative base. I think that excuse has been blown out of the water with the numbers that show that McCain has essentially sewn up his base, minus a few dead enders. If she isn't chosen it seems like it's coming down to personal animosity and the whole "undermining his candidacy" argument.

Sweet diary.

by highgrade 2008-08-22 05:40AM | 0 recs
Re: great diary - reccd!

Thank you!

And I agree... the "mobilizing the GOP base" argument never moved me too much. But it is interesting, I think Hillary truly redefined herself in the election. She and Bill were stick figures -- and I think they were fleshed out a bit in the minds of a lot of Americans. If you think of the mobilizations that went on in Ohio, PA and along the Appalacians in her favor -- some of those people will be voting for McCain in the fall, but once you vote for someone in a primary, I think it's hard to vote against them in the General.

We'll see how it shapes up.

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 05:52AM | 0 recs
Re: great diary - reccd!

I think people were fooling themselves to ever think that the conservative base wouldn't rally. They're really quite good at the whole "Close your eyes and think of England" thing.

by Cincinnatus 2008-08-22 06:19AM | 0 recs
Other Reasons:

not liking Hillary's backers (NOT supporters, people!).

Hillary being unable to divorce herself from favors owed over her presidential campaign (do we really need two sets of favors owed? not that obama seems to be all that good on coming through... see Rezko)

by BlogSurrogate57 2008-08-22 06:44AM | 0 recs
Expect it to be Hillary

And to get the word within the next few hours.

by Davidsfr 2008-08-22 05:50AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

I also hope it's Hillary, only Wes is a better pick for me.

But, at least make it Biden.

If it's Evan Bayh, I may start

POOP....

Pissed Off Over PICK....

We will be a small group, me and my black lab.

And, there will be poop bags on our walks.

by WashStateBlue 2008-08-22 05:51AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

I already fear POOP more than PUMA.

by Cincinnatus 2008-08-22 06:22AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

NGH........

For those who don't know what that means , ask Paul Begala ( Not Gonna Happen ).

Both Paul Begala ( on CNN ) and Gerry Ferraro ( On FOX ) said it is never going to happen.

These are two of the closest folks to the Clinton's you can find.

Gerry said explicitly that Hillary doesn't want it and Obama's pride won't even allow for it....

by lori 2008-08-22 05:56AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

I would imagine that, if Hillary is the pick, Gerry Ferraro would be the last person to know. She and Lieberman are proving that when former VPs choose VPs, they have lousy taste.

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 06:01AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

And this "Obama's pride" BS is another form of "uppity." It could just as well be "Obama doesn't want it and Hillary's pride won't allow it" but that doesn't fit with centuries of racial stereotypes.

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 06:02AM | 0 recs
Hillary already asked for it and

got shot down.

meh.

I could actually see Obama being enough of a compromiser to give it to her Anyway -- but that's too much drama, ain't it?

by BlogSurrogate57 2008-08-22 06:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it, Hillary is uppity

When a stereotype is being used, I call the stereotype.

There was no attack on Hillary there, just Obama. And a racial attack at that.

Disagree, fine. But a ref doesn't call every foul at once, just the ones that occur when they occur.

And I like and have liked Hillary fine for years. Many years. I didn't like her campaign, and I didn't like how she conducted herself toward the end. That doesn't mean I don't support her as a Senator, i don't support her as a veep or I don't support her as a Democrat.

I just supported the better candidate with the better campaign.

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 09:40AM | 0 recs
Re: If you liked Hillary, why does your diary say

Did you suffer some traumatic head injury recently? If so, I'm very sorry for you and I hope you make a full recovery.

Otherwise, I don't know how you got "you support the woman as long as she knows her place" from anything I wrote. And certainly the "she won more votes" is delusional at best.

Hillary defenders like you are the main reason I won't be too disappointed if she's NOT chosen. Her own qualities are diminished through the bitterness of supporters like you.

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 12:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's face it, Hillary is uppity

We have leverage now (0.00 / 0)
demand the top spot! And thanks to grlpatriot for the rec over at MyDD!
______________
by: catfish @ Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 18:39:11 PM CDT

And another great comment from "gatopescado"

That's Senator Soetoro (0.00 / 0)
you should know better :)
______________
by: catfish @ Fri Aug 15, 2008 at 14:34:13 PM CDT
 
Both from that hate site of Alegres.

by venician 2008-08-22 09:41AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Wow, Geraldine Ferraro said something bad about Obama? It must be true!

by Cincinnatus 2008-08-22 06:23AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

I would rather focus about what she said about Hillary Clinton in that statement .

That might be too much for some to do...

by lori 2008-08-22 06:49AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

" focus on... "

by lori 2008-08-22 06:50AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

O Lori!

by mikeinsf 2008-08-22 09:24AM | 0 recs
Why anyone is listening

to what Ferraro is saying at this point about anything is beyond me.

by fladem 2008-08-22 07:06AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Gerry said explicitly that Hillary doesn't want it and Obama's pride won't even allow for it....

What a...Sorry, I am polite company so I won't say it....

Go to Hell, Gerry!

by WashStateBlue 2008-08-22 05:58AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

I watched her last night and she was still undecided who to vote for but it seemed clear to me she would be voting for Mccain.

She has been saying for weeks now that Clinton wasn't going to be the VP because she doesn't want it and she repeated it last night , coincidentally Begala also said last night it was never going to happen.

That has been clear to me for weeks now.

Infact I believe she was ruled out during the primaries , Obama essentially made her out to be the poster child for what was wrong with politics and washington and ran against the Clinton legacy in a sense .

It wouldn't make much sense to pick her and I think Obama would rather win or lose on his own terms...

I think he has settled on Bayh or Biden...

I think Bayh....

by lori 2008-08-22 06:06AM | 0 recs
Either They are Decoying Or

they are really going to have egg on their faces.

by Davidsfr 2008-08-22 06:12AM | 0 recs
If she was ruled out during the primaries...

She ruled herself out, with CIC threshold.

by Cincinnatus 2008-08-22 06:24AM | 0 recs
Hillary and Bill have too much money

Obama should pick someone like him middle-class using McCain's definition of under 5 million. Thanks again for that great gift, John!

by Lolis 2008-08-22 05:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary and Bill have too much money

Actually Obama is well within the threshold as McCain said $5 mill PER YEAR and Obama is at what 3-4 mill total in assets, not in an annual pull.  it took probably, what 5, 10, 15, 20 years to earn that?

Sheeeeeit,  why he might even be lower middle class in McCain's book

by KLRinLA 2008-08-22 12:48PM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?
As I've written, I don't think it's going to be Hillary Clinton. If it was, Obama would have had to have a face to face meeting with Bill Clinton and as far as I know, that has not occurred. I still think that the main obstacle to a Obama/Clinton ticket is not so much between Hillary and Obama, but rather Bill Clinton.
I could be wrong and Obama could end up choosing her as VP.
I've supported Obama from the start and will keep supporting him no matter who he picks as VP, but I haven't had a problem with Hillary Clinton as VP. Maybe because I voted for Bill Clinton twice, including in the 1992 Democratic primaries.
Of course, I don't know anything more than most of you. :)
by oden 2008-08-22 06:06AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

I still think that the main obstacle to a Obama/Clinton ticket is not so much between Hillary and Obama, but rather Bill Clinton.

oden,  This is what I have also thought.  It's not Hillary that's the problem...it's Bill's baggage that's the problem.

I think she'd make a great VP, but Bill causes all sorts of distractions, due to the last eight years of his financial dealings.

by Stipes 2008-08-22 06:20AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

I agree.... Bill's financial dealings do raise eyebrows. I would imagine that would be fully vetted prior to any Hillary pick.

And I do think that there would have had to have been a face to face with both Bill and Hillary prior to any choice. And I do think that Obama has the one campaign that could have made that happen and keep it secret.

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 06:38AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Good point.  If any campaign could have pulled this off, it would be Obama's.

Imagine the media frenzy.  It would be like a 96 hour rock concert...turned up to "11."

by Stipes 2008-08-22 06:42AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Obama is trying to torture us Hillary supporters.  It's almost sadistic in a way.  Obama said yesterday that he has picked his VP and he described the individual as "ready to be president", and someone who can work to fix the economy and help middle the middle class,and someone who will debate and challenge Obama.  Does this not sound like he has picked Hillary???  But we all know he hasn't.....Obama is intentionally sticking a knife into the backs of us Hillary supporters by saying stuff like this.  Just to torture us.  ugh.....

by karajan72 2008-08-22 06:36AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

It's not a knife in the back, come on. He's playing the media. These speculation stories are gold, especially locally. You think the Virginia and Indiana press hasn't been going overboard in stories here?

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 06:39AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

The Democratic Party and the Obama campaign have made it abundantly clear, from the beginning, that they neither want nor need the type of people who would support Hillary or Bill Clinton.

by hwc 2008-08-22 06:44AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Yeah. What jerkoffs! Can you believe they even ran against her? What kind of political party allows for contested primaries and votes and elections? Stupid Dorkocrats!

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 06:50AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Right. They have absolutely no need of 18 million Democratic voters.

Go away, Rethug troll.

by SuGeAtARC 2008-08-22 07:42AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

It will never be Hillary for the obvious reason that the annointed one would actually have to admit that he "needs" her, something his ego will never permit.  Despite the fact that TWO polls show her doing better against McCain than he would.

by handsomegent 2008-08-22 06:48AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Oh, Gerry Ferarro, always so good to see you here. Bitter much?

As I said earlier, this idea that Obama's ego or pride is some sort of major force is patently offensive. Plus, don't you know that code words for "uppity" were consolidated a few weeks ago as "presumptious?"

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 06:52AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Ah there you go playing the race card again.  And we have a right to be very bitter, something which will be growing.

by handsomegent 2008-08-22 06:59AM | 0 recs
Oh no, they NEVER play the rac(ism) card

that's all Bill and Hillary, remember?  She didn't even cry about the people of New Orleans but she cried about her own election, the self-centred b.....  AND she tried to belittle MLK!
I can't believe anyhone would still be talking about her as a candidate for anything!

If the Obama fans still don't see that there is a screaming need to unify the Party if they actually want to see Obama win, then there is nothing anyne can do about it now. Being a sore loser is a problem in politics, but a sore winner is just askng to become a loser.  

by Thaddeus 2008-08-22 07:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh no, they NEVER play the rac(ism) card

The Obama people or at least a lot of them want to win but w/o her. They hate the Clintons because of the DLC etc, but primarily because the Clintons were in the way of Obama--and because she wasn't the Netroots little darling like O or Edwards were--and they enjoy flexing their muscles and pounding their chests--see--WE put Obama in.

by handsomegent 2008-08-22 07:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh no, they NEVER play the rac(ism) card

I don't know how you manage it, but you grow more obtuse with each and every post.  

One day soon, your skills will be strong enough to wield a troll scepter next to the one, the mighty, teh ENGELS.

by fogiv 2008-08-22 08:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh no, they NEVER play the rac(ism) card

You know I'm right but you don't want to admit it.

by handsomegent 2008-08-25 07:31AM | 0 recs
Polls showing her stronger against McCain

are meaningless, she hasn't been the target of negative attacks from either the repubs or Obama since early March, so of course her numbers are going to be higher.

When she was the target of negative attacks her numbers were down, she recovered after the repubs decided she was not worth attacking anymore and Obama decided he could win on the delegate count even if he lost several of the remaining primaries to her.

Nate Pablano has this all documented and explained at fivethiryeight.com.

by Davidsfr 2008-08-22 07:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Polls showing her stronger against McCain

On top of that, don't runners-up tend to get a bit of a "sympathy" bump in polls like those?

In the end, you're right:  it doesn't matter a blip how Hillary polls in a McCain face off.  

I'm sure FDR polls better too.  Neither are in contention.

by fogiv 2008-08-22 08:03AM | 0 recs
If it doesn't read Hillary......

the Obama campaign isn't nearly as smart as they think they are.  They need her, BADLY.

I disagree with your discussion of the racial politics of the primary.  Obama went first--in South Carolina where surrogates Jim Clyburn and Jesse Jackson Jr. went after Hillary in an absolutely inexcusable manner--and the media let them get away with it because Obama was such a phenomenon.  And it didn't stop there.

It will come back to bite Obama dramatically in November if he doesn't do the unity thing now.  I don't think he will win without her.

by Thaddeus 2008-08-22 07:12AM | 0 recs
Re: If it doesn't read Hillary......

Clyburn was a Hillary surrogate at the time that he made his remarks.

by wasder 2008-08-22 07:42AM | 0 recs
Re: If it doesn't read Hillary......

See, that just proves how insidious Obama's campaign really was.

by bottl4 2008-08-22 08:52AM | 0 recs
oh that is such bullshit

Clyburn was "uncommitted" at that point, you know, like political analyst Donna Brazile?

by Thaddeus 2008-08-22 10:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Ha! No he was 'undecided'

Hey Catfish--why did you TR this comment. I was merely saying what I believe was the truth at the time. Certainly not a TR-able comment and I hope somebody here in admin puts an end to your abuse of this function.

by wasder 2008-08-22 04:20PM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

For the next two months, I want people to be talking about Barack Obama, not Hillary and Bill Clinton. I want people to be talking about the failures of the Bush administration, not about Hillary and Bill Clinton. I want people to be talking about the disaster that John McCain would be, not about Hillary and Bill Clinton. I want people to be talking about the kind of America an Obama administration will help make, about the future of the country, not about Hillary and Bill Clinton.

If Clinton is VP, that's not going to happen. And that's why I don't believe it'll be her.

And once we're all able to move on, I really think it'll be better for everyone.

by BobzCat 2008-08-22 07:26AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

You see it as moving on; I see it as losing the White House to four more years of Rethug rules.

That's not a direction I want to move.  

No, I don't know whether or not Obama can win without Hillary, nor whether putting her on the ticket guarantees a win; I just believe his odds are much better with her on the ticket than any of his other choices, who bring minimal, if any, votes with them.

Go for the votes, Obama!

by SuGeAtARC 2008-08-22 07:45AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

"Help us, Hillary-wan, you're our only hope." That itself is a fantasy. Obama is a strong candidate whose general election campaign hasn't even hit its stride yet. The coterie of Hillary-cult members are pretending that Obama "needs" her (i.e. needs them, and they so need to be needed). It's not true.

At this point, I'm just tired of hearing about Hillary Hillary Hillary. It's the 21st century... time to move forward.

by BobzCat 2008-08-22 08:21AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

"Move Forward" -- with, say, Joe Biden? Yeah, that's my definition of "moving forward".

Hillary Clinton would be moving forward. She's be moving health care forward, and the rights of women and children, and the environment. What exactly is backward about Hillary Clinton except your view of her?

One gets the impression that had you been around at the birth of the country you'd have failed to vote for a relative of George Washington's because it's "not moving forward."

by SuGeAtARC 2008-08-22 09:50AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

She'll be doing all those things as the senator from New York, and effectively. I hope you'll be supporting her efforts.

One gets the impression you won't be.

by BobzCat 2008-08-22 10:11AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Wait, you admit that she's forward looking, but you still think we should "move on" from her?

And how exactly am I supposed to support the efforts of a Senator from NY when I live in another state? It's not like I can vote for her. Sending her money is about the only thing I could do (well, and sending letters to my own congress-critters urging them to support her legislation, but I already do that with legislation I like anyway, so that wouldn't be for Hillary directly.)

Your logic appears to be .... nonexistent.

by SuGeAtARC 2008-08-22 12:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Then blame Obama

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Too funny.

by BobzCat 2008-08-22 10:05AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

what a great post.  i think it is very clear that obama needs clinton to win this.  with clinton, we win for sure.  without her, its a gamble.  my gut tells me that obama is going to gamble and pick someone else and try to squeak out a win.  democrats have a way of always ignoring the clear winning choice and going on a gamble.  we always lose in the end...

by Scope441 2008-08-22 07:36AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Clinton does not guarantee a win.  If you want to argue that his chances are improved with Clinton, fine.  But please stop with the hyperbolic claims that are simply not true.

by bottl4 2008-08-22 08:55AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Actually we don't have any idea if it's true or not. It's just a theory like the five thousand others out there.

If he does pick Hillary and gets a 10 point poll leap from it, then yeah, it's close to guaranteed. If not, then not. But you can't prove it's false any more than the OP can prove it's true. We don't even know that Clinton would help Obama (though I believe she will.)  

I guess my point it, your factless bloviation is equal to everyone else's factless bloviation, so don't get on a high horse about it.

by SuGeAtARC 2008-08-22 09:52AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Except that there's a difference between what you've said and the original poster said.  "close to guaranteed" isn't a "sure win".  Your argument also included the caveat of seeing a huge bounce from Clinton's pick.  Your argument makes sense.  

Scope's argument was a straight "Hillary=win" which is just wrong.  In fact, you showed you agree that it's wrong when you said we don't know that Clinton would help Obama.  I also think she would have helped Obama, but she wasn't a magic bullet that guarantees a win.

Every theory is not in fact equal to every other, that logic is partly why the MSM is so screwed up as they try to balance every argument with the opposing one and treating them all equally.

by bottl4 2008-08-23 07:31AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

As a practitioner of the hard sciences, I like theories that are falsifiable (testable.) Unfortunately in politics very few theories are actually testable, which is the point I was trying to make.  For example, "Can Obama win without Hillary on the ticket?" is not, at this moment, testable. It will be tested in November, but regardless of the outcome, it will be hard to uncover any real facts in the MSM about why Obama won or lost. (Maybe they'll get that "Freakonomics" fellow to turn his statistical pen on it -- that would be great.)

And "Obama would have won with Hillary as VP" is now not testable at all.

I have an aversion to people throwing around phrases like "patently not true" when what really should be said is "That can't be proven."

by SuGeAtARC 2008-08-24 07:12AM | 0 recs
I wish I had something to add

So i will just say thank you for allowing me the pleasure of starting my day with this:)

by Dog Chains 2008-08-22 07:37AM | 0 recs
Re: I wish I had something to add

I concur!!

by markjay 2008-08-22 07:58AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

You make a pretty strong case here, Lettuce.  Bacon says it's Biden, and Tomato is pulling for Clark.  I'm pretty hungry, so I'm okay with whatever Obama picks to make his sandwich (save maybe Nunn or a Republican).  

Thank's for the tasty snack, err, diary.  Well done, as usual.  Seriosuly, please post more often.  Daily.  With jokes.  And dancing monkeys.  

Rec'd.

by fogiv 2008-08-22 07:57AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

God, now I want a BLT sooo badly. Curse you!

by SuGeAtARC 2008-08-22 09:53AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Heh.  Sorry.  :)

by fogiv 2008-08-22 11:09AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's... Hillary?

Had one for lunch today, actually. It was soy bacon, but it's all about texture and salt.

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 12:18PM | 0 recs
I hope it's Hillary but it won't be

because she's smarter, more experienced and really doesn't need the job, she WANTS to make democracy work for ALL OF US.  Axlerod could never handle allowing this star on the ticket.

i thought she disqualified herself for speaking more highly of McCain than Obama.

Yes, well, Senator Obama spoke more highly of Ronald Reagan than he did of the only democrat to win two terms in 60 years, Bill Clinton.

And the Clintons did not use racial politics...Obama and his legions did.  I still want one person to explain to me how the word "fairytale" (decribing a candidates spin of his words on the war) is racial.
I want to know how comparing Obama to a great American many of us supported for ALL the WORK HE HAS DONE TO SHED THE LIGHT ON HOW PHONY JUSTICE FOR ALL IS IN THE MINORITY COMMUNITY, is a racial insult.  Frankly, saying being compared to Jesse Jackson is a racial insult is the REAL INSULT.

Already Obama and his friends in the media are starting to play BLAME CLINTON in case he loses.
It never ends. Read the NYT just to see why some of us are so damned angry.  What a phony piece of crap.
Up until today, it seemed to me the obvious choice, the smart choice, the ONLY choice was Hillary Clinton.  She won more of the popular vote and should be the candidate.  But there is no doubt who Pelosi, Dean, Brazille and the rest of the DLC wants.  

I hope Hillary says NO. I hope she and Bill take off, relax in some home on an island and leave the party. I know Hillary won't.  She's better than I am, better than most.  She does not NEED to work for us, she could retire as one of the most beloved and admired women in the world for all she has done for poor people, not only in the USA but world wide.  Some day the slugs who trashed her in the worst sexist display I have seen, will get it.

This party does not deserve someone like Hillary, someone who has truly cared about, worked for minorities and women all her life.

by Jjc2008 2008-08-22 07:59AM | 0 recs
Re: I hope it's Hillary but it won't be

Bitter! Go help Bowers retire Hillary's debt. This is a democratic blog. I'm sure you can earn some McCain points elsewhere.

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 09:43AM | 0 recs
Damn right I am bitter when

the Obama blogs and the NYT are already blaming Hillary for Obama's poor showing.

I may be bitter but if you want to see immature and whiny....look in the mirror.

by Jjc2008 2008-08-22 11:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Damn right I am bitter when

Awesome "mirror" retort.  Did you come up with that all by yourself?

by fogiv 2008-08-22 11:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Damn right I am bitter when

Well, the whole "rubber/glue" rhetorical device gets confusing.

by Lettuce 2008-08-22 12:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Damn right I am bitter when

"I know you are, but what am I?"

--Pee Wee Herman

by fogiv 2008-08-22 12:44PM | 0 recs
I am not trying to sew dissent...

but it has amazed me how something so logical as Hillary Clinton being picked for VP could turn into something so seemingly impossible and improbable.  

There is not one single Democrat that Obama could pick that has more supporters than Hillary. None. People have been talking for six months about "the dream ticket."  Its what Democrats want. We want a unified party.  Many people who voted for Obama in the primaries have said it was a tough call to make, and they really wished they could vote for both Hillary and Obama.

Yet, in spite of the fact that selecting Hillary would unify the party,  bring unprecidented fundraising and excitement,  along with unprecedented competence,  all I have been hearing all summer is "No thats not going to happen."  

Well why the hell not?  I just think its selfish if Obama doesn't pick her simply because he doesn't like her personality.  The voters want this.  Our party needs this boost!  

I am not a PUMA.  I intend on voting for the democratic nominee.  But I must say I will be very disappointed in the party if Hillary is not selected as VP.  Not to mention my enthusiasm about the entire election will be next to nothing. It is beyond me why Obama would want to do this to us.

by Sandy1938 2008-08-22 10:52AM | 0 recs
"something so logical"

I don't really understand how those who support Clinton for the VP claim that it's self-evident, obvious, the only logical choice.  When is that ever the case?  Lots of her supporters seemed to think that during the primary, too, which could be one reason why her campaign miscalculated and lost.

You cite many good reasons for choosing her.  Of course, there are lots of logical reasons why Obama might not choose her.  One could be that he doesn't want her attacks from the primary to star in John McCain's campaign ads.

You write, "Its what Democrats want."  Well, obviously not all Democrats.

You write, "There is not one single Democrat that Obama could pick that has more supporters than Hillary."  This is very true, and a good argument for her.  But a counter-argument could be that Clinton might very well be toxic to the Independents and moderates that Obama needs to win the GE.  Democrats, besides a tiny minority, are behind him.  He needs to reach out, and sadly Clinton has historically high negatives among the general population--deserved or not.

I'm fine with her as the pick.  But to pretend it's the ONLY LOGICAL CHOICE is a bit much, I think.

by Koan 2008-08-22 11:19AM | 0 recs
Well even daring to
think Hillary is the best choice, to be tired of the BLAME HILLARY mode for the stupidity of the Obama campaign labels you not a dem here.  
Good luck with logic....it really doesn't work with THIS brand of democracy...the kind that wants to silence dissent.
by Jjc2008 2008-08-22 11:08AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads