# Why does Clinton suggest Obama take a VP slot? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 9, 2008, 10:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709 "2008-03-09T10:48:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2008, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/41 "2008-03-09T22:35:00Z")
[QUOTE=Patty O’Furniture] Why are you calling it a ploy? Do you think she’ll change her mind and take back the VP offer as soon as she gets the nomination? [/QUOTE] There is no offer to take back. She said that “may be where this is headed,” which is a far cry from offering him the job. At most it’s a statement that she would consider him if she managed to win. Bill’s comment, I think we can agree, is clearly hyperbole. So yes, it’s a ploy for votes. Would she actually ask him to join the ticket? I don’t know. I suppose she might if she thinks it’d help her win, but I still think she is more likely to reward a longtime supporter, not an opponent. ---
**Author:** ![Katriona](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/katriona/32/113_2.png) [@Katriona](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Katriona)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2008, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/42 "2008-03-09T22:42:23Z")
[QUOTE=Jolly Roger] I’m not as savvy on this as perhaps the rest of you, but I don’t understand this, really. In the past several days I keep seeing stories of the [Clinton Campaign suggesting that a Clinton/Obama ticket would be a good idea](http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/08/bill-clinton-a-clinton-obama-ticket-would-be-unstoppable/). the thing is they phrase it as a _ **Clinton** _/ Obama ticket, as if the nomination were only a stones throw away for Clinton. Correct me, please if my observations are incorrect; Obama has the lead in delegates so far. Clintons win this past week has in fact not really gained her any ground in the race. It would take a large and improbable turnaround for her to even match Obama’s lead. If this is correct, why the suggestion that Obama should accet the VP slot when he is in fact winning? Especially if the likelihood of him winning the nomination is greater than Clinton’s? Is there some giant coup I’m not aware of? Does Clinton have a bunch of superdelegates ready to swing her way despite what I’ve been hearing? Or is Clinton just trying to convince people that she’s inevitable despite what the signs are? It just seems presumptuous to me, especially since so far Obama has the lead. Its like they’re trying to convince him to stand down. [/QUOTE] I think that she’s looking at it strategically - if she does pull it out and get the nomination, there are rumblings in the progressive blogoshpere that there are many people who will stay home rather than vote for her, only vote for the down-ticket elections, or write in Obama. Having him on the ticket might bring back those votes to her. ---
**Author:** ![Yookeroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yookeroo/32/323_2.png) [@Yookeroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yookeroo)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2008, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/43 "2008-03-09T22:50:37Z")
[QUOTE=Richard Parker] Neither of them would turn down the slot merely because they disagree with the other’s campaign strategy. That’s a naive strawman. [/QUOTE] Say what? You said: “Time can heal a lot of wounds, and often nasty things are said in the primaries. But not this. You don’t do general election-style slash-and-burn politics in a primary and then reconcile.” Obama accepting the VP slot or not would have nothing to do with that and everything to do with whether being VP furthers his ambitions. [QUOTE=Richard Parker] Obama would turn it down because the only reason Hillary would offer it is as a compromise solution so that she can win. Otherwise he’ll likely get the top spot, and I think he’d rather have that. Even if she offered it after she had already secured the superdelegates, he might not take it given Al Gore’s experience as second fiddle to a Clinton spouse. [/QUOTE] Of course Obama turns it down now. And it’s naive to think that Obama would turn it down based on Al Gore’s experience. [QUOTE=Richard Parker] Aside the nastiness of the primary, the simple fact is that they don’t help each other in the general. [/QUOTE] That’s sound a lot like opinion to me. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2008, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/44 "2008-03-09T22:53:34Z")
[QUOTE=Yookeroo] Say what? You said: “Time can heal a lot of wounds, and often nasty things are said in the primaries. But not this. You don’t do general election-style slash-and-burn politics in a primary and then reconcile.” Obama accepting the VP slot or not would have nothing to do with that and everything to do with whether being VP furthers his ambitions. [/quote] The problem is that you think the two are disconnected. They’re not. The slash-and-burn politics are what makes a joint ticket unfeasible because of its diminished electability. > [@Yookeroo](#): > > That’s sound a lot like opinion to me. No kidding. Opinion supported by reasoning. That’s what all of this is. ---
**Author:** ![rikc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c57346/32.png) [@rikc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rikc)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2008, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/45 "2008-03-09T23:11:59Z")
I’m not going to lie, I think this is actually the smartest and least damaging strategy Clinton can take at this point. It’s sneaky, sure, but it’s a good idea for her campaign. She’ll have to be careful with the negative campaigning if she’s going to pretend that she’d ask Obama to be her VP (let’s be honest, she wouldn’t), but still. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2008, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/46 "2008-03-09T23:43:45Z")
[QUOTE=Jolly Roger] If this is correct, why the suggestion that Obama should accet the VP slot when he is in fact winning? [/QUOTE] The only plausible paths to a Clinton victory at this point are 1)change the rules after the fact to get the Florida and Michigan delegations seated, and/or 2)convince enough superdelegates to vote against the majority of the elected delegates. For obvious reasons, a victory obtained by either of those means is likely to be seen as illegitimate by many of Obama’s supporters. She is hoping (rather desperately, IMO) that this trial balloon will defuse that trap. ---
**Author:** ![vertizontal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/ad7895/32.png) [@vertizontal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vertizontal)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2008, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/47 "2008-03-10T13:14:31Z")
Why is this such a huge story lately? Of course she’s going to imply that she might consider him a running mate. That’s just being civil to an worthy opponent. A few weeks ago someone asked Obama if he might consider Hillary, and he said his usual “It’s premature to start thinking about a running mate now…” and then he was asked if Hillary was on his short list, and he said something like “Yes, I’m sure she’d be on anyone’s short list”. The latest comments from Hillary don’t seem to be substantially different, or meaningful, either. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2008, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/48 "2008-03-10T14:35:48Z")
The so-called “dream ticket” would be a nightmare for Obama. Even with Hillary at VP. Her presence on the ticket in either spot will motivate Republican voters. Once again, the media are mindlessly, endlessly repeating all the spin that comes out of the Clinton campaign. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2008, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/49 "2008-03-10T15:38:49Z")
[QUOTE=Richard Parker] Policy criticism hardly rises to the level of what we’ve seen in this primary. I acknowledged that much of primary battles becomes water under the bridge by the fall. But I think there is a limit, and that limit has been exceeded. [/QUOTE] Gosh, I just don’t understand this at all. Maybe we just tend to always think of the current political contest as the Big One, but this has NOT been an especially nasty campaign. There’s this prevailing assumption on the SDMB that the Clinton-Obama battle is some kind of haymaker-landing Mother of All Nomination Campaigns that’s been as nasty as a bag of bugs. It’s been nothing of the sort, it’s not hurting the Democratic Party at all, and by the standards of political campaigns it’s reasonably tame and all the differences will be forgotten by most people about thirty-two seconds after the DNC selects a candidate and the campaign versus McCain begins. It’s been an interesting campaign, a close campaign, but it’s not an especially mean one. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2008, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/50 "2008-03-10T15:53:24Z")
[QUOTE=RickJay] Gosh, I just don’t understand this at all. Maybe we just tend to always think of the current political contest as the Big One, but this has NOT been an especially nasty campaign. There’s this prevailing assumption on the SDMB that the Clinton-Obama battle is some kind of haymaker-landing Mother of All Nomination Campaigns that’s been as nasty as a bag of bugs. It’s been nothing of the sort, it’s not hurting the Democratic Party at all, and by the standards of political campaigns it’s reasonably tame and all the differences will be forgotten by most people about thirty-two seconds after the DNC selects a candidate and the campaign versus McCain begins. It’s been an interesting campaign, a close campaign, but it’s not an especially mean one. [/QUOTE] Two things. First, I think we’re living in a different era with regard to communication. In the same way a macaca moment can now destroy a campaign, I think nasty things said in a primary can resonate longer because of blogs, the 24-hour cycle, internet video, etc. So to the extent that this kind of nastiness if typical, it might have a different impact now. Second, I’m no expert on U.S. primary politics. I can speak about primaries going back to, maybe, 1992 (and only because I’ve seen “The War Room.”) So I’m willing to believe that what you say is true, if you provide a little evidence. Can you show me a time when a primary opponent has said his party-mate is not qualified to be Commander-in-Chief in a time of war? Can you show me an example of a campaign deliberately flaming racial and religious bigotry to win in a primary? And remember, my point is not that those things have never happened. But that when they do it is significant in the choosing of a VP and if the subject of those attacks wins the primary. The example that comes to mind is Bush’s treatment of McCain in 2000. But of course McCain did not win the nomination, so we don’t know how it would have affected him in the general. And McCain certainly was not discussed as a potential VP. ---
**Author:** ![BlinkingDuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/eada6e/32.png) [@BlinkingDuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlinkingDuck)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2008, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/51 "2008-03-10T15:54:51Z")
Uhuh… After the primaries, the candidates will come together and be tighter than a drum. The way it has always been… ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2008, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/52 "2008-03-10T15:57:14Z")
[QUOTE=BlinkingDuck] Uhuh… After the primaries, the candidates will come together and be tighter than a drum. The way it has always been… [/QUOTE] Maybe so, but there’s a difference between coming together and sharing a ticket. A big difference. ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2008, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/53 "2008-03-10T18:27:51Z")
Apparently Clinton’s campaign received the memo of who becomes president if the current one departs and why their arguments that Clinton/Obama would be unbeatable but Obama alone is unqualified was completely asinine. > [@](#): > > After several days of Bill and Hillary Clinton floating the idea of a joint ticket with rival Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton chief spokesman Howard Wolfson declared Monday that Clinton does not consider Obama qualified to be vice president. > […] > Clinton Communications Director Wolfson was pressed on the point during a press conference call a few moments ago in which military advisers to the Clinton campaign again questioned Obama’s readiness to be commander-in-chief. > > Wolfson reaffirmed Clinton’s position that Obama has not demonstrated his suitability to guide the nation in an international crisis. > > “We do not believe at this point that Sen. Obama has passed that key commander in chief test,” Wolfson said. Later, he added that failure to pass that his failure to pass that test would disqualify him as a vice presidential pick, since a vice president must be prepared to step into the presidency at a moment’s notice. [Chicago Tribune politics blog](http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2008/03/clinton_spokesman_declares_oba.html) ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2008, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/54 "2008-03-10T19:31:08Z")
And yet, somehow, they said he could somehow _become_ qualified by this summer, at the nominating convention. This is the Clintons being the Clintons at their goofiest. This is so stupid that I’m almost glad it’s being overshadowed by Spitzer’s new problems. ---
**Author:** ![kidchameleon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/898d66/32.png) [@kidchameleon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kidchameleon)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2008, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/55 "2008-03-10T19:43:40Z")
[QUOTE=The Flying Dutchman] If the party chose Obama, they have only to look forward to the next 8 years. I can’t see the American public voting for a 68 year old women after that. Democrats do not have a good record for submitting presidential candidates except for Bill Clinton. [/QUOTE] Is Obama the last hope for Democrats for the next decade and a half? Do you really think the Dems, or either party for that matter, can win four elections in a row? It’s happened what, four times in US history? The last fifty years ago. ---
**Author:** ![Phlosphr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c68b51/32.png) [@Phlosphr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Phlosphr)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2008, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/56 "2008-03-10T21:40:01Z")
The Clinton’s audacity is bullsh\*t. Asking the person who has won twice as many states as she has, the person with more popular support than she has, and more delegates than she has really takes some balls. Hillary’s balls must be made of steel for her to do that. [Jeez!](http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/gGBqYd) ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2008, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/57 "2008-03-10T21:45:36Z")
Gall is her most defining characteristic. ---
**Author:** ![Squarebubble1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Squarebubble1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squarebubble1)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2008, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/58 "2008-03-10T21:51:20Z")
Several reasons: (1) He appeals to the factions that she doesn’t (young, minority, etc.); it would (theoretically) form an unbeatable coalition against McCain; (2) It’s a (feeble) attempt to once again try to soften her image, by offering him imput into the Clinton dynasty (only if he plays their game); (3) The political reality of (2), however, is that Bill would be acting V-P; Osama would be little more than a figurehead for photo-ops: (4) It looks like a peace offering to the undiscerning, when it’s actually a slap in O’s face. Notice that Hil hasn’t offered herself to be O’s V-P. ---
**Author:** ![Paper\_Pusher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9adbd/32.png) [@Paper\_Pusher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paper_Pusher)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2008, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/59 "2008-03-10T22:07:56Z")
[QUOTE=The Flying Dutchman] The fact is both can win the general election. [/QUOTE] Probably so but Obama is likely to do so by a wider margin. Obama is likely to sweep into office with a greater majority in the senate and congress than Clinton. There are not a lot of federal Democratic candidate west of the Mississippi that prefers Hillary at the top of the ticket over Barack. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2008, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709/60 "2008-03-10T22:15:48Z")
[QUOTE=Paper Pusher] There are not a lot of federal Democratic candidate west of the Mississippi that prefers Hillary at the top of the ticket over Barack. [/QUOTE] Or south of the Ohio, for that matter. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-clinton-suggest-obama-take-a-vp-slot/440709.md?page=4)