He calls himself a socialist. That’s good enough for me, in this case.
I’ll believe that when Obama himself, or a named member of his team, says it. Remember when Biden said he wouldn’t be the VP nominee?
Well, waddya know? He does, doesn’t he?
I expected one or both of the Clintons to get appointed to the Cabinet, but IMO, I think this would be the wrong Clinton at State.
Cecil for SoS!!!
The offer does put Obama in a win/win (politically speaking). If she says no then he has satisfied the Clinton wing by making the offer and has them more willing to support without reservations. If she says yes then she is in the tent and to a large extent under his control. Not not as VP where again asking her would have been a sign of weakness and the temptation would be for her to position herself as a co-president. And he gains from her skill set which is substantial. In any case he achieves more party unity for having made the offer; add some kindly gestures to some moderate GOPers and his agenda can be muscled through fairly quickly.
What does she get out of it? I think that she is sincere in her desire to help this country however she best can and sees the SOS office as a powerful position to do so. More so perhaps than as Senator. And she would likely step from there into VP in a second term and have an option of another Presidential run from that enviable position. A shoe-in if the Obama years are at least better than what we’ve had. A walk in the park if they rival the Clinton years.
Clinton primary supporters voted for Obama at something like a 90 percent clip. When he addressed people whose support he had yet to earn, I’d say he was mostly addressing wary Republicans and conservatives, not people who had already voted for him. And conservatives would be the last people who want her as Secretary of State. I’m not sure what he’s planning to do to set the table for gaining their support, but this probably would not be it.
Let’s see- you don’t like her, I do. You like him, I don’t. What’s the basis of your statement that he’s a unifying figure? Because he claims to be? Let’s see him do something that’s actually unifying beyond making speeches first.
I don’t want Hillary as Secretary of State, but that’s because I want universal healthcare, and I think she’s the only senator who has the balls to fight for it now that Ted Kennedy is ill. Certainly our future ‘unifier’ has stated that he’s against it so I don’t expect any help from the White House.
Voters voting for him in a primary are a different thing than getting the Conresscritters to all follow your lead. Getting things done is easiest done if you have a majority and you can get them all on board if you need to. Getting the other side to agree to “reasonable compromises” is easier if they know that you’d prefer to do it with their support in return for reasonable compromises but that you can do it without their support if need be.
Those who hate Hillary are not the target Republicans and there are quite a few more moderate ones who will be reachable with a moderate GOP appointment or two and consultation along the way. Those who hate Hillary are not likely to be won over by Hegel as SOS (for example); they are to some extent a lost cause, a given number of votes against you no matter what.
Forget whether it would be a good move for Obama.
It’d be a terrible move for Hillary. She’s a very powerful Senator. Why would she want to lose that to become Senator for a year and a half until he has to fire her?
I agree. But I think Obama would do better to get those people on board by working with Clinton (and McCain) in the Senate rather than making them his direct subordinates.
And it may work that way, but all the easier for having given her her due by asking her.
I don’t think Obama needed to make this offer and IMO the threat from Hillary is much exaggerated. What could she do really? She isn’t very senior in the Senate and she isn’t personally that popular with the Democratic base. She isn’t likely to run for President again which diminishes her authority. And she agrees with most of Obama’s policies anyway. I just can’t see any concrete scenarios where she could really hurt Obama’s legislative agenda.
If she does become SoS I don’t think it will be a disaster. She will work hard and become competent and her high profile does give her an edge as far as public diplomacy is concerned. Still she doesn’t have any real diplomatic experience and I don’t see her as specially knowledgeable on international issues. Obama could do better IMO. Richardson,for example, has a lot more relevant experience than Hillary and and appointing him would be a useful gesture to the Hispanic community as well.
I don’t think Clinton is qualified. I didn’t think Rice was qualified either, and have yet to change my opinion. I think our top diplomat should have some experience in, you know, diplomacy.
Hillary seems a VERY odd choice for that position.
Lest this be dismissed as the cranky ranting of a Republican, I’d actually be FINE if Obama wanted BILL Clinton to be Secretary of State. At least he has extensive experience in diplomatic negotiations at a high level.
But Hillary? What foreign policy expertise does she have?
I’m sure Obama feels he owes her a high-ranking position, but it strikes me that Attorney General would be a better fit, if she wants a Cabinet position. Or he could make her the replacement for the elderly Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens.
But Secretary of State looks like a bad fit for her.
Hillary’s been on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and is said to have become quite the policy wonk there. I’m thinking (a) she’d be better suited for Defense than State, and (b) the Dems have a deeper bench of plausible candidates for State anyway.
I looked at this from an entirely different angle than I see posted here.
SoS requires you to be subservient to the President and carry his agenda. You’re his (wo)man, his messenger, his servant. Failure to be so gets you removed in a big hurry, because that’s the central tenant of the job. The Secretary of State’s job is to advance the President’s Agenda on the World stage.
So when the job is offered to Hillary Clinton, what do I see? I see a powerful and bitter rival being offered a powerful, yet subservient political position. Is this a plum? To anyone else, certainly. To a rival, it’s a bitter plum.
You only take that role if you’re willing to swallow your pride and serve your rival, who has gained the power you covet, yet failed to gain for yourself.
For her own power and ambitions, she can count it a plum that she was offered the role, yet the best course of action is to remain in the Senate and build a position of leadership there.
Hillary is no longer Obama’s rival. She isn’t going to challenge him in 2012. She has nothing to gain by opposing him politically. It would only lose her good will in the party.
Isn’t Bill funded by some serious offshore monies that would be in direct conflict if Hillary is Sec of State? I don’t remember the exact funders, but I’ll dig it up.
Oh dear God…
I don’t think you realize what you’re saying. The military as an institution hates the Clintons with the fire of a thousand suns. You think the military is at the breaking point now? If Hillary becomes the SecDef you’ll get to see first-hand what happens when it shatters.
Besides, word is that Gates is going to be kept as SecDef.
I really hope Hillary keeps her current job.