GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

No Clinton-Obama ticket this year

by

Just over a month ago, a Democratic friend of mine gushed about a Clinton-Obama ticket. He thought the combination of the two rivals would heal the rift then developing in the Democratic Party, allowing for an easy victory in November. Bring together her experience* and his passion, the ticket would also generate a large turnout of women and African-Americans.

Well, events of the past week have all but foreclosed that possibility.

With Mrs. Clinton having found an effective means to attack her colleague from Illinois, she would undermine one of the key rationale for her candidacy if she tapped Obama as her running mate. In her 3 AM ad and her recent rhetoric, she distinguishes her “experience” from his own, playing the national security issue and suggesting he’s not ready to handle a sudden crisis.

Should she pick Obama, she would open herself to criticism that she’s picking someone she has claimed is not ready to lead to take the helm should something happen to her. Tapping him would show that she prefers political expediency to national security, further strengthening John McCain’s hand on national security, his strongest issue. Indeed, in that 3AM ad which many credit for helping her win Texas and Ohio yesterday, she asks, as blogger FullosseousFlap puts it, “an important question but channels a John McCain answer.” (Another blogger event re-cut the ad, removing the references to her and ending with John McCain.)

Interesting that she was able to defeat Obama yesterday on national security, an issue where she pales in comparison to the Republican nominee.

I wonder if Mrs. Clinton hesitated in ratcheting up its anti-Obama rhetoric and advertising until recently (when it was becoming clear that she could not waltz her way to the nomination) so that she could more easily tap him as her running mate, realizing how a Clinton-Obama ticket that could unite her party. (It was her husband who used to deliver the harshest attacks on her chief rival for the Democratic nomination.) Understanding that she would have to fight to win, she and her minions decided to throw the “kitchen sink” at Obama “to derail the momentum that had led to wins in 11 straight contests.”

The strategy worked, but makes it all but impossible for her should she win the Democratic nomination to pick Obama as her running mate lest she be placed on the defensive, fielding questions why she picked someone she (and her minions) savaged so fiercely. Questions which would further damage her credibility (already quite low) while strengthening the appeal of her Republican rival on the issue she used to great effect in the recent Democratic contests.

***********
*And I wonder yet again how sleeping in the White House for eight years counts as experience

UPDATE: Seems the candidate himself is echoing the theme of this post, responding to Ms. Hillary’s suggestion she might tap him as his running mate:

“They have been spending the last two or three weeks” arguing that he is not ready to be commander in chief, Obama said.

“I don’t understand. If I am not ready, why do you think I would be such a great vice president?” Obama asked the crowd, which gave him a standing ovation during his defense. “I don’t understand.”

(Via Instapundit.)

UP-UPDATE: Even the New York Times seems to be echoing this post:

Presidential candidates invariably say that their first consideration in choosing a running-mate is finding someone who is ready to step in and be president. What would Mrs. Clinton say when asked why she was choosing, in Mr. Obama, someone whose readiness to defend the nation she has questioned? (Whose qualifications to be a commander in chief rested on the fact that he, as she put it, “gave a speech.”)

Via Real Clear Politics.

Comments

  1. You make it seem like she picks Obama because she would have a choice? Unless she someone takes a lead in pledge delegates, not likely, she would have to accept him as a VP as a deal brokered by the convention.

    Obama is also the first black canidate with a chance to win the nomination, and possible the presidency…She has to be aware that the African American Community would revolt against her if she didn’t. They woudn’t vote for McCain but them sitting it out would make it impossible for her to win. I think the race part of it is the much bigger issue than anything else

  2. With Mrs. Clinton having found an effective means to attack her colleague from Illinois, she would undermine one of the key rationale for her candidacy if she tapped Obama as her running mate.

    Oh my god. You *seriously* expect Democrats to be consistent in sticking to rationales?

  3. DER has good points, I think.  Were she the leader, she might have to take Obama just to avoid deeply angering off half the convention.

    Would Obama accept?  Ted offered some reasons in the other thread, why he wouldn’t: "Obama’s a damn-fool if he agrees to the Veep-slot; if she loses he goes-down with her, if elected he’ll be powerless against (Vice)Pres. Bill, and he’ll have no-shot at the Presidency in 2012 or 2016."

    On the other hand, if Hillary would piss off half the Democratic convention by not offering, Obama would surely piss off the other half if he refused.  So this could be a real shotgun wedding in the making.

    2008: the year of shotgun weddings.  After all, barely a third of Republicans seriously wanted McCain (who, arguably, is barely a Republican).

  4. This is getting interesting as hell. I agree with a lot of the above. If at this point Barack isn’t one or two the African American populace is going to be so disappointed and disaffected the Dems would pay a huge price, and quite frankly, rightly so. But there’s just no arguing that Obama is very unqualified. And I think you can make the argument that Hillary is as well. Just not as unqualified. I think most of us agree that Obama has had really kid glove treatment by the media and he’s barely won half the Democrat vote. If both aren’t on the ticket, doesn’t their fundraising advantage melt away? I mean why would a Hillary supporter feel the need to donate to Barack if Hill isn’t the VP choice. Oh by the way I think a lot of Republicans have been waiting to donate until we selected a winner. Now we can support just one  guy, McCain.  Lot’s of Democrats have already blown their cash on losers.

  5. Actually, I think a Clinton/Obama ticket has become much more likely. The months and weeks ahead are going to get increasingly messy between them as they each scramble to get/maintain the momentum into the convention. Hillary will try to get Florida and Michigan seated at the convention, with the old stand-by, "Every vote should count!" Obama will try to prevent them from being seated, and if he loses that battle, then he will push for a new vote in those states which Hillary will try to prevent. Democrat voters will hopefully see that the same party that called for "every vote to count" in 2000 is now fighting to prevent their votes from counting. (Republicans should work to ensure voters see this).

    Democrats will become increasingly divided. Hopefully bitterly so.

    In other words, it will truly be a beautiful, joyous thing. (wipes tear from eye)

    A brokered convention is almost ensured. The media, as GPW pointed out, may have given Obama all the kid-glove treatment he is going to get. It is entirely possible that the Obamafad could pass by convention time and even though he is sure to have more of the "popular vote", Hillary may have all the momentum going into the convention. If this happens, the superdelegates may very well put Hillary over the top. (Can you imagine if Hillary wins the nomination even though Obama won more of the popular vote? Oh the schadenfreude!)

    The point is, that for either Obama or especially Hillary it will be essential to unite a fractured party. Any way you look at it, I think it makes a unity ticket more likely. Not certain, but certainly more likely.

  6. she would open herself to criticism that she’s picking someone she has claimed is not ready to lead to take the helm should something happen to her.

    You’re assuming (a) that liberals give a damn about national security and the country as a whole and (2) that liberals would chose to remember that bit of negativity.

    They could still join forces "for the greater good". No, I don’t think it will happen, but it could. The DNC will throw Orgasma under the bus before that happens.

  9. If Obama can’t get the top slot, he’d be wiser to refuse Veep and run for governor of Illionois when he can.  By building up his resume a bit more he might be able to run a more credible campaign again in say 2016.

  10. Well I would like to move past race but thats part of Obama’s appeal, that is why he is winning the black vote in such lopsided numbers. I don’t think you can examine the politics of what will happen unless you look at the impact race plays on the voting habits of those involved.

    I think a joint ticket is mostly likely under the condition of Hillary winning the popular vote and Obama having the pledged delegate lead. They will be a money raising juggernaut and Republicans better not underestimate their ability. Obama draws the voters in and Hillary can rally them to come out, McCain will need all the advantage he can get to hold his own.

  11. H-m-m-m-m. I can not recall a wife of a Vice President who was a certified loose cannon. Michelle Obama is covered with thorns. She would be plenty to handle as a first lady, but could she ever ramp herself down to the cookies and tea job that goes with being the V-P’s little lady?

    If Obama takes the V-P job, he can not run again in four years. If Obama takes the V-P job and they lose, he will be spend four years of in-fighting with the Clinton machine. If Obama takes the V-P job and serves eight years, he will be facing a national fatigue with the administration and he will have suffered the collateral damage of the constant hits that will rain down on President Hillary.

    Barak Obama would be better off being a free agent. If McCain is elected, Obama would be better positioned to run again in 2012 if he were not a part of the failed Clinton/Obama ticket of 2008. He would not be in a strong position to run against the other half of the 2008 failed ticket in the 2012 democrat primaries.

    Furthermore, Obama is better at the Alinsky playbook. He is running as a black candidate. He will have a far better position outside of the tent p*ssing in ( credit: Lyndon Johnson) than being inside the tent having to cool his jets.

    He is a master at saying nothing in an eloquent way. Why would he take a job where he has nothing to say?

  12. With Hillary Clinton at the top of the ticket it’s quite probable that she’d lose to McCain; she’s just too-polarizing and hated.  Why take the fall with the Clintons (plural)?  No sitting Senator has been elected President in the last 150-years other than JFK.  Truman, B. Harrison, Buchanan, Pierce and W.H. Harrison were former-Senators when elected President.  And with the exception of FDR, no VP-candidate on a losing ticket has later been elected President. 

  14. And of course I’m joking about the blood.  H/t RealClearPolitics… here is an interesting take on Obama’s missteps / why Hillary is back:

    http://www.progressive.org/node/6159/print

    One thing I love about Hillary’s comeback is that it comes down to 2 percentage points of the vote in Texas.  Even the Clintons were saying Hillary was out, if she didn’t win both Ohio and Texas.  Obama only needed to win Texas.  2 points the other way, in that one state, and he’d be It now.

  17. #14  You are right  ILC. I’ve always been fascinated by the fact that in politics you can lose by 2%, 90,000 votes and be a horrible dunderhead.  While Hillary was getting a huge confetti dump that riveled the World Series and Stanley Cup Series. I think it is partially about fooling the people. It is a show and sitcom.

  18. I don’t see anyway to prevent a race war in the Democrat party unless both these people are on their ticket. It is too close and there’s no time or enough states to clear it up. By the way, if Florida and Michigan can get a "do over" why not just start it ALL over and try for a different result? These Democrats have made crystal clear to me why they are so clueless about the Constitution, the Supreme Court, the Electorial College, poll closing times etc. It is too confusing for them. It is easier for them to just kinda make up things as they go along. 

  19. I wonder if Hillary ever wakes up at night and goes, "Oh my god, what have I turned into?  I’m THE MAN… the one trying to hold a black guy down!"

    Likewise Obama… he’s the guy trying to hold back a woman!

  20. Hillary compartmentalizes. 1) Blacks need her to "raise them up." 2) No black has reached the level of being able to lead. 3) Obama is uppity and on a roll. 4) If she gets her clock cleaned, it is because of the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. 5) If he succeeds, it will be a tribute to the doors she held open, the groundwork she laid and the critical support and encouragement she gave him every step of the way.

    In summation, Obama is no different than any other brown skinned person. He may be allowed to come to the party and dance, but he will never be a true equal. Victims do not have that option.

  21. <blockquote>I wonder if Hillary ever wakes up at night and goes, "Oh my god, what have I turned into?  I’m THE MAN… the one trying to hold a black guy down!"</blockquote> The same "feminist" who did everything she could to personally destroy the many women with credible allegations of sexual abuse by her husband?

    You are implying that she A) has a conscience, and B)believes any of the PC crap she spews.

    I don’t think so. I think she believes in Marxism and power and anything and everything else that comes out of her mouth is just propaganda.