While Secretary of State is probably the job that best qualifies you to perform the President’s duties, the proverbial bucket of warm piss job, the vice-presidency, is a historically better platform from which to run for President. Because of that, and because she seems loyal to the administration, I predict Mrs. Clinton would accept the VP nod if offered.
As for the politics of it, consider this new poll:
If I was Joe Biden, I’d submit my firm and unalterable resignation effective January 2013. He’ll then be 70, which seems to me a reasonable retirement age. But, then, I’m not Joe Biden.
Hillary Clinton is 63. Even assuming the President wins reelection and she’s the VP, in 2016, she’ll be 68. She’s not going to be running for President at 68.
You’re considering it a bit too broadly, I think. Agnew wasn’t replaced because the President or the party convention wished to have a different VP for an upcoming election.
Agnew resigned because he was about to plead nolo contendere to corruption charges. Had he not done the right thing and resigned, neither the president nor the party could have done anything. The only alternative would have been impeachment. (Which would have been an interesting warmup exercise for the big one that was coming up. )
Anyway, I see no reason for Biden to be replaced on the ticket. Should the worst happen, I think he’d be a fine president, which (in a perfect world) would be the only consideration.
It’s pretty rare in all of U.S. History for a sitting President to change his Vice-Presidential candidate.
Since the Twelfth Amendment which established separate electoral college votes for President and VP: Jefferson dumped Aaron Burr (due to his coyness in 1800 under the old rules, when the latter was meant to be VP but tied with Jefferson, throwing the election to the House); the coalition of Republicans and War Democrats got rid of Lincoln’s first VP, Hannibal Hamlin; Grant’s Schuyler Colfax was involved in a scandal; and of course FDR changed twice.
Richard Johnson was dropped in favor of nobody in Van Buren’s losing reelection bid in 1840.
That’s all I can find; I may have missed somebody.
(The only other Vice-President to resign, John Calhoun, would certainly have not been on the ticket for re-election with Jackson, but resigned to take a Senate seat.)
Because it’s too damn old. Both Reagan and McCain’s ages were issues (as was Dole’s, who ran at 73), and in both Dole and McCain’s cases, helped contribute to their losing the election, and Reagan succeeded in spite of his age, not because of it, helped by the fact that Carter was such a disaster.
I see no reason why he would need to be replaced. Verbal gaffes are over-rated. Everyone gaffes, some more than others. Doesn’t make you a better or worse person, nor does it disqualify you from leading.
And gaffes are not the same thing as ignorance. Gaffes are simply mistakes and slips of the tongue.
If this refers to my post, I was thinking that a stated desire to retire at age 70 would be a reasonable fig-leaf reason for Biden to resign, when the real reason might be that someone more popular could help the ticket.
Maybe. But I’m pretty sure that the Secretary of State is more knowledgeable, and I’d trust her more if an important decision had to be made with little input from advisers.
Watch the 2008 vice-presidential debate again. That was the equivalent of a 45-rebound, 20-block Bill Russell performance; it’s not just that Sarah Palin didn’t have a chance against him - nobody would have. Besides, he’s a great leadoff hitter and a useful adviser to President Obama. Same thing goes for Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State.
Obama’s easiest route to reelection is to emphasize foreign policy and military successes, and stable adult judgment on big decisions about these. That he takes Biden’s and Clinton’s advice on these matters is a strength.
I think the President would be pleasantly shocked to find out there was any easy path to re-election this side of a big unexpected economic bounce.
What he has to do is run against the House of Representatives. Unless the GOP gets a message that pure conservative ideology, and obstructionism, alienates voters, a second Obama term will be so unpleasant that he’d be a fool to want it.
Obama and Biden have already officially announced their candidacy for reelection, I believe.
And replacing Shitkicker Joe would have been a horrible step for Obama. The Biden gaffes were always overblown, and mostly they were a matter of him telling the obvious truth despite the inane rules of political discourse. He serves the base by providing red meat while keeping the boss out of the mud (and he does the same thing in meetings, allowing Obama to understand everyone’s positions and passions because they’re engaging with Biden, while he gets to keep silent about his own). He’s great on the stump, especially among the white working class, which is not the natural constituency of a pointy-headed Constitutional Law professor, even if he wasn’t black. And if you ever see a speech by the guy that isn’t on a major stage, where he has the freedom to loosen up a bit, it’s clear he’s incredibly knowledgeable about many issues, incl. esp. foreign affairs.
Sec’y Clinton has said she will not run for president again. Take it with a grain of salt, of course, as these things always must be, but I think she’s made her peace with her resume, knowing that the next time the Democratic nomination will be in contention, it’ll be a younger generation vying for it.
Obama should send the right left signal for the direction of his second term, and make his new Veep Bernie Sanders or Dennis Kucinich or Ralph Nader. urrk!! :mad: Excuse me, I have to clean some pig feces out of my hair.
)