Yep, and there’s a GOP ad coming out with all the clips of her talking about how she and McCain have reached the CinC threshold, but as for Obama? Well, you’ll have to ask him.
I doubt he ever intended to make even a pro forma offer to her, but if he did, I imagine that ship sailed when the ad surfaced. I think it was Hardball I was watching yesterday that had it.
Right.
Remember, dudes- HRC was the choice of almost exactly 50% of Democrats.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html
Gloating, name calling and insults are not the way to mend fences with the other half of the party. It’s bound to piss off a few folks- who, I admit will more likely stay home than vote for McCain.
But in swing states like Fla (where Hillary is very popular), all it tales is about 1/10 of 1% of the vote to push *all *that states electors to the other party.
Look, dudes- it looks like your man won. Be as gracious as your candidate. Reach out and mend some fences or Obama will go down in history as the first black man to lose the Presidential election.
I know HRC has baggage, but she is strong exactly where Obama is weak. Projectsion of Electoral votes showed her doing better than Obama.
As someone rooting for a McCain victory, may I say to Obama: please, please, please, select Hillary as your running mate.
Unfortunately, I don’t think he’s that stupid.
I’ve seen a number of these projections too and I tend to think they’re all terribly flawed.
The one’s that simply show that she won a state like California, for example, and he did not are too stupid to even discuss. Sure she won it in the primary, but that in no way means that he’s not going to win it in the general. California is gonna go for the Democrat no matter who it is… unless maybe the Republicans nominate Angelina Jolie.
Even the more seriously thought out polling is very likely dramatically wrong on the assumed turnout of African-Americans. Would Hillary, or any other candidate have won Mississippi? Of course not. But Obama very well might. There is simply no question that we’re going to see the highest black turnout ever (barring Reconstruction) - it’s simply a matter of just how enormous that turnout is.
As for Obama’s running mate - it’s not gonna be Hillary. Webb would win him Virginia, Richardson would bring in the Hispanic vote, even Schweitzer from Montana could be a great asset, and none of them brings Hillary’s baggage.
Something to mull over mid-debate…
I love how he ditched his press corps. Led them on the plane then snuck off, so they were all in mid-air heading for Midway while he was meeting with her.
Incidentally, Obama isn’t goofing off in the wake of his unofficial nomination. He was in the Senate on Wednesday introducing an expansion of the government spending transparency bill. I love how he’s taking advantage of his new position as unofficial head of the party to move his legislative agenda forward.
He also has tightened DNC financing rules to conform to his campaign’s rules, shutting out the lobbyists from donating completely. Keep backing “Mr. Finance Reform” McCain into a corner on this, Senator Obama!
Hillary has no intention of muscling her way onto the ticket and then getting herself a Klingon Promotion.
As far as I know.
from ETF’s link above: “Naming her as running mate would mobilise the Republican base for McCain more quickly than if the angels Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan and William F. Buckley descended from heaven to anoint the Arizona senator live on C-SPAN.”
Personally, I’d like to see polling data to support that claim. For one thing who watches C-SPAN? 
Seriously, if the Republican base is going to mobilize for McCain they will find many reasons to do so, whether it’s Richardson, or Sebelius or anyone else in the VP slot. Clinton as VP might give them something extra to yap about but it will be very old news–and it could be potentially offset by the kind of voters that like both McCain and Hillary. Hillary is by now (rightly or wrongly) perceived as a centrist as against Obama’s liberal–there are inaccuracies here but my point is perception not reality. The Republicans will attempt to mobilize their base by portraying Obama as a foreigner: someone who is not quite American enough, not quite Christian enough, not quite hawkish enough, (not to mention the not so subtle racializing that will figure in all of this). In comparison to what I suspect they will do with Obama’s “otherness” I think that the old Clintonian claims, levelled at the VP on the ticket, might well be little more than a distraction. Does anyone really think that Clinton-hatred among Republican die-hards will do more for that kind of voter’s feelings toward McCain than Reverend Wright clips 24/7?
While I’m at this I find it rather odd how much vintage Republican paranoia about the Clintons has surfaced on these boards, including this thread. I was never a big fan of the Clintons when Bill was in office and am not a wild enthusiast about Hillary right now. That said, it’s one thing to talk about their Beltway politics, their manipulations and so forth. It’s another to speculate that they might be able to arrange an assassination or would actually do so. That kind of nonsense comes directly out of the Republican playbook and I think it’s time for Obama supporters to think twice about indulging that rhetoric.
For all his many flaws, Bill Clinton’s presidency was a popular one and America’s international standing under his leadership was way higher than it is now. Although many of his policies hurt the poor and although he was often not a team player, overall Bill’s record was one that Obama supporters could at the very least as having its ups and downs.
Whatever happens with Hillary’s future–again, I’m not certain that she’d be the most strategic choice for VP and I understand why some would see that choice as defeating Obama’s promise of change–I think that a chill pill about Hillary specifically and the Clinton presidency in general is in order.
IMO what Democrats need to be thinking about is not what will mobilize the Republican base but what will mobilize Democrats. Obama is a god-given candidate for bringing in voters who in the past have felt too young, too jaded, too disenfranchised. But Hillary represents another kind of Democrat and while I don’t believe that too many of the latter would ultimately stay home or vote for McCain I do think some kind of unity between HRC and Obama is crucial right now–and what’s more he seems to realize it too.
That is a great article. I agree 100%. Hope Obama and his team read it… but I suspect they won’t need to.
I agree that having the Clintons strongly supporting Obama will go a long way toward bringing her backers to vote for him, but I believe it would be much wiser not to have her on the ticket. She can get out her vote for him without the VP position, especially if Barack and Hillary combine publicly to present a leadership role for her on a signature issue like universal health care. In what Obama has been saying about her I see the foundations of that already being laid.
ETA: It seems to me that Hillary evokes a visceral, irrational hatred among the Republican base, waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay past any point of rational explanation but unshakable, ineradicable, and unlike the normal antipathy to those damned America-hating liberals with which the rest of the Democrats are regarded.
But Webb brings baggage that is SURE to alienate Hillary’s female supporters.
It was written a LONG time ago. Opinions change. He’s apologized. But make no mistake, it would haunt him in a General Election. And it’s a risk I don’t think the Dems, or Obama, can afford to take.
Shayna, I just want to commend you on your knowledge of…well, all of this. You have shown yourself to be well versed in this election and the goings on more than anyone else I’ve seen on the boards, and I just think you should know its appreciated.
Seconded
[sup]Pssst - Jolly Roger: Didn’t you know she’s Obama’s secret top campaign strategist?[/sup]
…and he should he happy to have her. She should be invited to his inaugarartion party. Seriously. 
I agree with you. It’s probably in part the lingering effect of their having been so powerless to curb Bill’s charisma, his political success and often his downright good luck even while believing that he somehow threatened everything that they held dear. Then, when you shift from Bill to Hillary herself you get to add to that heady brew a large dollop of sexism–a lawyering, cookie-baking-bashing, “shrill”-speaking female. It’s just too unheimlich for this crowd.
On the other hand I simply don’t agree (with the writer whose work you posted) that this irrational bunch won’t already be mobilized, with or without the red flag of Hillary Clinton.
Fortunately the Democratic base is potentially quite large–and I also think you’re right that Obama is already laying the foundations for some kind of rapprochement hopefully fusing those who love Obama’s charisma and are inspired by everything he represents with those nostalgiac for the Clintons, comfortable with their version of Democratic politics, and eager to see a hard-working and smart woman be respected.
I would love to be at the inauguration!! I would really, really love to be in the inauguration, to see Obama sworn in. I woudll just hope it didn’t rain, like when Bush was inaugurated. It was pouring. I remember telling my wife - this is a sign for what’s to come! I guess I am right sometimes.
Can we get our hands on a few tribbles and wave them in front of her, just to be sure?
There’s always this:
“I can visualize a woman President.”
PS: Thirded.
Not sure what y’all will make of this but according to this CNN poll, the majority of Democrats are up for the absurd notion.
