I doubt that happens. I could see Hillary getting a cabinet post so she could leave the Senate because just going back to that dull as dry bones place will be very tough for her. Plus, the way she conducted her campaign could cost her some esteem from Dem colleagues.
I think definitely #1, and she probably wouldn't even need to ask for #2. It would be done anyway. She may get more, but I doubt it will be VP or Judicial nominee. It might be a staff position in name only, like "consultant" where she doesn't really do that much, but it looks like she's on board fully, and she might receive a pay check for it. I don't even really think that will happen, but it might.
Don't forget though that she has also won more votes than anyone else in a primary, raised more money and won more states than any candidate who didn't win the nomination. While some of the other Dems might not like what she has said most will probably recognize that she does have a big following.
You know, I've seen speculation such as this in more than one respected media outlet, and I gotta say I don't get it. Does anyone think someone who's been such a high-profile partisan Democrat for the last couple of decades will be able to be regarded as a disinterested and independent arbiter of the law? I'm not impugning her legal mind or credentials in any way. I'm sure she'd be great on the Supreme Court. But it seems outside the realm of possibility to me. What am I missing?
what would really be funny is if clinton gets a nomination to the supreme court. then she would be around for a long time. and republicans would be crying bloody murder and delay her hearing indefinately (even though they are still complaining about how democrats have delayed the hearings for bushs nominees...)
I think New Yorkers should have exclusive rights to her. The rest of the nation is *cough,cough* undeserving.
Aside from having no trial, higher academic or judicial history, Hillary's legal credentials are confined to writing contracts to cheat people on land deals.
It would be wise for Obama to not do this. She would attempt to undermine him. This would be work, if she'd take it. I think she'd do a decent job as Secretary of State. For the sake of all things good and righteous, please no. A successful lawyer and politician does not a good judge make. I can't imagine too many worse choices as a judge of any significance.
you know what, i could see her as a secretary of state also. then she'd really have to worry about sniper fire. all kidding aside. she has proven she is a pretty tough cookie and i think she would be a great sec of state.
I always wondered when people talked so much about Bill Clinton as Supreme Court Justice. We all recognize the justices have political biases, but most as least try to couch their opinions based on established law. I can't imagine today's career politicians objectively analyzing law and precedent and the like. They would make decisions based on their personal political views. I think Hillary will get something related to health care. I suspect Biden will be Sec of State.
Let me start off by saying I do not think either Clinton would make a good supreme court justice. That said, there is nowhere where it says a supreme court justice can't have political experience or needs to have experience as a judge. Earl Warren, had previously run for vice president and was serving as governor of California when he was called up to be Chief Justice. The Warren Court was a high point in Supreme Court jurisprudence.
Just heard on NPR they are reporting that officials in the Clinton campaign are saying that Clinton will acknowledge tonight that Obama has the delegates to win the nomination. I'm not sure why they worded it that way but that sounds like a concession and there weren't more details reported. [Edit]NPR is also reporting that a unity event is in the works for later this week.[/Edit]
McAuliffe looks like he's having a good ole time with all of this end game stuff. He's really hamming it up with the Baghdad Bob routine.
What you guys don't realize is how much of this is complete posturing. For the Clinton campaign, it's all about maintaining some leverage in the VP sweepstakes, and I think it has been for some time. Whenever they concede fully, she loses quite a bit of that leverage. So they're trying to use every last second of time they can. If you read the "report" that she's not conceding, you'll see this as the quote: "No one has the number to be the nominee of the Democratic party right now," he said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080603/pl_nm/usa_politics_clinton_mcauliffe_dc Key words being "right now" -- at noon on Tuesday. Come tonight, Obama will have that number, and they'll change their tune. The actual words of the concession might be against the standard, but the symbol will be clear. She knows what she's up against, and she's not an idiot. She's just trying to use whatever minimal leverage she has for the next step. When voting ends tonight, you'll hear a very different tone.
I'd really like to see evidence that a majority of people found problems with the way she conducted her campaign. With all due respect, it'll take a little bit more for me to believe her Senate colleagues are upset than comments from the rabid Obama camp and/or the paranoid, delusional anti-Clinton camp.
She eliminated herself from any VP talk when she went nuts those few days after KY/WV, in my opinion. But beyond that, how does making this argument from noon today to 10pm today give her any additional leverage? You'd assume that Obama's already decided whether Clinton is on the shortlist or not. If you're right that she'll change her tune tonight, how does being defiant the next 10 hours make a difference?
Why would Obama want to choose a vice president who is playing games to be his vice president? "Posturing", as you call it, is what I call being dishonest and playing games and playing the old school typical politics that Obama and his supporters are completely against.
It's essentially seeing what sticks. Her main leverage is the case that "my supporters won't vote for you unless..." -- so every soundbyte she can get out to the media about not giving up and being committed to the cause maintains commitment from many of her supporters and potentially raises her value to Obama. Is it a weak argument? In many ways, yes, but it's all she has left, so she's trying to see if she can generate any traction. It's trial and error, at this point.
There's supposed to be a couple of Democratic primary contests. So I've heard. People still have to vote in them. She just might want to wait until that process is over. Impeach Bush.
