But this assumes that Hillary is the ONLY person that would represent them. If he can find someone else to help bridge that gap without the baggage of Hillary, why not go that route?
like hillary's opinion, man you've put a lot of stock in her ability lately, i didn't know you were such a fan
Well, what do you know... "My opinion" is spreading like wildfire. http://www.progressive.org/mag_wx050808 Why Obama Won’t Take Hillary By Matthew Rothschild, May 8, 2008 The Hillary camp is angling now for the VP slot, and some facile pundits are refrying the dream team cliché. But don’t go out and buy an Obama/Clinton bumper sticker any time soon. Here’s why Barack won’t take Hillary. For one, they can’t stand each other, and neither can their staffs. Michelle probably would divorce Barack if he chose Hillary. Given how nasty the Clinton campaign has been toward Obama, it’s hard to see them making up. And for two, Clinton wouldn’t help the ticket. Her negatives are astronomical, and she’d galvanize the Republican rightwing, which isn’t exactly thrilled with McCain. Any draw that she might have with independent women or moderate Republican women would be far outweighed by these factors. And I don’t buy the idea that her appeal with white working class men, which she now brags about in a racist way, is bankable. Here was her outrageous comment to USA Today: "I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on," she said citing an article that she said “found how Sen. Obama's support among hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me." Hard-working Americans and white Americans are an identical set? Black Americans aren’t hardworking? That’s not going to endear her to Obama, either. And, anyway, if the goal is to appeal to the white working class, Obama can do that better by choosing someone like Senator Jim Webb of Virginia or Governor Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania or Governor Ted Strickland of Ohio or even John Edwards. And if the goal is to appeal to Latinos, there’s Bill Richardson, who has a ton of experience, to boot. While I’m at it, if experience is the main criterion, there’s always Al Gore. Hillary Clinton is losing the Presidential race, and she’ll lose the Vice Presidential one, too.
Obama's base is broad? Really? 90% of AA's, students, and the over-educated elite. Then what? Hillary has much more breadth in terms of race and social status. Hard to dispute the numbers...
So the "numbers" that show Obama with more delegates, more votes, more states and more donors show that Hillary has broader support? Awesome. Apollo Creed: Here's the link to that quote. http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-05-07-clintoninterview_N.htm
Here was her outrageous comment to USA Today: "I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on," she said citing an article that she said “found how Sen. Obama's support among hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me." This is an outrageous comment. I just wish Obama had gotten the extra point or two in Indiana so we could be rid of her campaign. Damn, she ran a divisive campaign. I guess she has just gone nuts with seeing the presidency slip away. The only plus is that in the last weeks she has revealed to Obama that he has to resist feeding into the long standing bs stereotype of the latte drinking liberal. Screw Hillary for VP, too, unless it is the only way to keep from getting bomb, bomb McCain
But she is the ONE that they want to represent them. They voted for her, and as much as one may dislike her, many many people came out to vote for her. She has a powerful base and it can't simply be replaced by a white VP to racially balance the ticket. Lets face it, the only way no one gets disinfrancised is if Hillary gets the nod to the VP. And Obama's way to do that is to claim once again he is indeed a uniter. People will question why he picked someone of the "politics as usual" as his Veep. And this is where hillary has to say she's ready to change her self and is going to change her stripes. And again Obama takes the higher ground. It's unlikely, but it's the best thing for the democrats. I am beginning to sour on John McCain a bit based on his recent talk. I respect the man greatly, but he does seem to be pandering a bit too much.
A lot of folks throwing the "franchise" word around, as if the Dem Primary was a general election. Both parties limit their primary participation at times. Both parties have rules by which they select nominees, decide delegates, and take care of party business. While the Dem Party is on the ascendancy in the US it's internal workings are still the purview of the party, not the whole voting populace. Comparing MI/FL of 2008 to OH of 2004 or FL of 2000 is absurd. It's like saying the Fraternity President should be elected by the same rules as the Class President. And nobody gets disfranchised should Obama go with someone other than Hillary. Obama's the nominee and it's his potential administration, thus he has the right to pick who he wants... it may be a pick resulting from political expediency, but it's still his choice. Otherwise, we should have had a Clinton/Tsongas ticket running against Bush/Buchanan in 1992.
I'm coming late to this thread and haven't had a chance to read through it but I'm going to say Evan Bayh would probably be the best VP. He will balance out the ticket ideologically and coming from a red state may help pull in some battleground states. I agree that Hillary Clinton is unlikely to be VP for a number of reasons. One is that I don't think she will accept and I don't think Obama will offer. As for uniting the party I think either Clinton or Obama will do all they can after the convention, or earlier to unite the party. My guess is a Clinton (Bill or Hillary) will be offered a cabinet position, Secretary of State.
