On Demand
WNYC's Coverage of the Republican National Convention
Live performances in Soundcheck's studios
Studio 360: How Animals Communicate with Each Other
Selected Shorts featuring "The Trouble of Marcie Flint," by John Cheever
Radio Rookies: Brooklyn Broadcast Workshop
On the Media: Challenging Convention
Street Shots Challenge
The Brian Lehrer Show
Political Wrap-Up
Monday, May 19, 2008
Ken Walsh, chief White House correspondent for US News & World Report, dishes out the top political news of the day.
Should Barack Obama choose Hillary Clinton as his running mate? Comment below!
Features & Series
Podcast
Stay up to date. Subscribe to the Podcast
YOU PRODUCE The Brian Lehrer Show
Be a listener-producer with facts, questions and people you'd like to hear on the air.
More
The Brian Lehrer Show Scrapbook
Visit the scrapbook for daily photos and miscellany from The Brian Lehrer Show.
More
Shop at Amazon!
The Brian Lehrer Show picks
Start your Amazon shopping on WNYC.org and a portion of your total purchase goes to WNYC.
More
Comments
Yeah, baby....! Now that we've seen 75,000 mostly white, presumably hard-working (er, hard-workin', if you're Hillary) folk turn out to support Obama in Oregon, can we perhaps acknowledge that the man has SIGNIFICANT crossover appeal?
Look, the guy isn't perfect, but I'm thrilled we democrats finally have someone so tremendously competent and thoughtful who can inspire people ACROSS racial and gender lines. He earned it, entirely without any nepotistic advantages. When was the last time the Democratic party had anyone of this caliber? 1968? Let's face it, someone like Obama comes along only once every forty years, if we're lucky. Edwards could never have inspired this level of involvement. I'm just praying that Obama makes good use of his supporters' desire to get involved once he's in office. Think of what we could do.
75,000 is insanee for a political event. Obama has proven himself to be quite an amazing individual. He leaves a trail of success and good will wherever he goes. He seems to really like people and people really like him. Seems like the most charismatic individual in the room. Seems like FDR in this respect.
It is quite amazing if this guy can be President. I mean, you look at the names: William Howard Taft, William Jefferson Clinton, Ronald Wilson Reagan, Richard Milhouse Nixon, etc. And then Barack Hussein Obama!?! Wooah. Only George Bush's miserable presidency could have paved the way for such a symbolic break.
Obama shouldn't choose Clinton for VP. To include her on the ticker would go totally against his main message of change. She is the status quo. He should go with Jim Webb, Ted Strickland or Tim Kaine.
I've long thought that Hillary's experience and track record of working with the Republicans would serve Obama incredibly well -- sort of a Dick Cheney to Obama's Bush (though Obama is not at all like Bush!).
That said, I believe that the negative turn that Hillary took (out of desperation), will keep her (and Bill) away from the White House.
Politically, Obama seems to have little to gain by adding Hillary. I would love to see Jim Webb as his VP.
I think the combined ticket would be great on paper. However I don't think Hillary will take a VP spot, because she could continue to have a powerful voice in the sneate, whereas in the VP spot, she would not.
Hillary conflicts with Obama's "change" message and brings the dreaded three-headed Obama-Hill-Bill administration with inevitable infigghting. My solution: Hillary should be given a cabinet position over a new combined HHS and Education Dept, to oversee universal health care and early childhood education and college affordability.
Personally I don't see Hillary Clinton playing second banana to anyone. And based on the way she has campaigned, does anyone want to imagine the horror show, hypothetically 2 years hence when VP Clinton wants to launch some initiative that is important to her, and Prez. Obama says no? *shudder*
Also, having Bill as first husband is one thing. Having him has husband to the VP seems like he might cause too much of a distraction, MSM-wise that would cut into Obama's ability to control the narrative of his presidency.
CORRECTION
Obama now says he will NOT declare victory of any kind tomorrow night.
From today's article in Politico:
"Concerned about appearing presumptuous or antagonistic towards Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama will not declare victory in the Democratic nomination fight Tuesday in the event he wins enough pledged delegates to claim a majority.
"Rather, he’ll tiptoe right up to the line, without explicitly asserting the race is over.
"While it may sound like an exercise in hair-splitting, the conscious decision not to declare victory is a revealing measure of the sensitivity surrounding overtures that appear to disrespect Clinton and her supporters.
"It’s also a reflection of the Obama campaign’s supreme confidence in the delegate math at this juncture—the campaign now appears secure enough in its commanding position that it no longer feels compelled to declare victory in an attempt to marginalize Clinton.
"That marks a departure from the stance the Obama campaign took after his blowout win in North Carolina and narrow loss in Indiana May 6.
www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10438.html
No. Though I see the appeal of the so called “dream ticket”, choosing Senator Clinton as his running mate could be disastrous. Many Obama supporters would resent the seeming endorsement/acceptance of Senator Clinton’s negative tactics in the primaries by awarding her the nomination to Vice President and along with attacks of lacking experience, Senator Obama would have all of Clinton’s political baggage. The political hatred Senator Clinton brings along could be enough to sink Senator Obama. Personally, I would like to see an Obama/Biden ticket.
I don’t think that Senator Obama should choose Senator Clinton as his running mate. She’s already said it loud and clear that McCain was more fit to be president than he; how can Obama maintain any sense of credibility is distancing himself from old-style Washington politics?
ABSOLUTELY NOT!! Hillary Clinton does not deserve to be the VP nominee. She and her husband have shown themselves to be nasty, divisive, classless, racist against her own party's top candidate... And if she were the VP, she would continue to undermine Obama and look for ways to usurp his authority. Obama has earned all he's gotten through his own hard work and managing against all odds to stay positive and inspire millions of people to support his grassroots campaign. He is a leader, and she would just drag him down with the same old harsh, partisan negativity.
If he wants to run with a woman, there must be others who are better qualified and more respectable than Sen. Clinton. But what we need is anyone qualified and respectable. Clinton baggage is old and over.
yes it's the only way to unite the party and he's going to have an uphill battle as it is.
where are the super delegates hiding?
sam nunn is a hateful homophobe
No, I don’t think Hillary should be the VP. He needs a trusted coworker that enhances his strengths. Hillary may get complementary votes that he alone can’t but others can do that too. Take Bill Richardson. He may bring the Hispanic vote plus a few swing states. Bill complements Barack’s foreign policy experience and much more.
Yes, I do think Obama should declare victory tonight, especially if he has crossed the line for having a majority of the delegates. It's time for us as Democrats to move on and put our full support behind him and his campaign as they turn their sights on McCain and getting the message out to all voters as to why the solutions we are offering on health care, economy, etc. are what America needs right now.
No, Clinton should not be on the ticket - imagine the drag to an administration it would have if she decided to make a major figure for herself in it (which is likely) and then made mistakes, or if journalists found more dirt on Bill Clinton's business connections, personal life and more. But more to the point - look at her negatives - a large percentage of voters think she is not honest, and she has very high unfavorables. The dishonesty figure is going to be very hard to overcome, and her presence on the ticket will mobilize Republicans against them, instead of allowing them to actively campaign for crossover Republicans!
What about another strong woman candidate for VP to help unite the disappointed women voters in the party - a governor or senator from a swing or traditionally red state, perhaps?
The idea that somehow Obama and HRC together is a "dream ticket" has obviously been Clinton ploy from the get-go. After all, it's obvious he would be better off with a white male on the ticket.
Here's the Dream ticket
President - Obama
V.P. Jim Webb
Attorney General- John Edwards
Sec. State - Hillary Clinton
I cannot see her as V.P. She wanted President, - why would she want to be V.P.? She doesn't need the profile boost and although I am a supporter, I can easily see her as an underminer, because she felt she should have been the President.
There's no way Obama could govern with Hillary and Bill flanking him in the White House.
His best choices for VP, I think, would be John Edwards or Joe Biden.
Ah com'on: Rendell's (sp?) the guy. The white working man's man.
Jim Webb seems like a good choice but, to his credit, I am not sure he has the temperament to be VP. Hillary does not work because it is a little to much (identity politics) change plus she is not really in line with his message.
clinton has already been running a vice-presidential campaign.
the whole country knows who she is and what she stands for. she has proved she is popular among voters who would not vote for obama.
edwards has no support - he had to drop out.
Oh Please no! Change? He'd lose all credibility as an agent for change if he brings back the Clintons.
From Democratic point of view I think the best for Democrats to capture the White House and Congress will be join ticket Clinton - Obama. I do not think opposite (Obama - Clinton) is an option.
From National point of view I do not like all three choices. Country is facing one of the greatest challenges of its recent history with fuel prices getting higher and higher while candidates discuss bandaid measures.
This country is set up for automobile to be a major transportation mean. It requires drastic measures to restructure whole economy and so far to the best of my knowledge nobody among politicians is addressing this issue.
Hillary as VP, Colin Powell as Sec of Defense, Bill Clinton as Sec of State, DeWitt Clinton as Sec of Education.
senator obama must be weak if he can't handle vp clinton and former president (best pres. ever) clinton.
CLINTON SUPPORTER: IF Hillary does not get the nomination, she should be asked to run as VP. Who does Obama think is going to vote for him in FL and MI? By refusing to support their inclusion during the primary season, he's essentially given those votes away.
Your guest is right: Leadership and governance is the issue. Obama and Clinton would not govern well together.
The "dream ticket" has nothing to do with leadership and governance. It's a fantasy about how to get elected.
On that score, there is nothing that either Clinton can do for Obama, with Hillary on the ticket, that they CAN'T do just as well as cheerleading surrogates for him in the general election.
Obama should not pick Hillary as VP because of the following greatest hits of this campaign season.
1) Robert Johnson's claim that Obama is not Black enough
2) Bill Clinton trying to box Obama as the new Jesse Jackson for winning South Carolina..
3) The ridiculous "as far as I know" answer hrc gave about Obama being not being a muslim.
Hillary should decline, or communicate that she shouldn't be asked. She can serve New York best in the Senate if she is not going to be at the top of the national ticket. If she has the opportunity to run again (for ANY elective office) she will have greater stature and respect.The first woman with a chance to be president didn't give up, she never said 'die'; she stayed in the race longer than most men in a similar position would EVER have stayed in the race. She succeeds in demonstrating her toughness, resiliency, and strength that could never be questioned again.
I support Hilary Clinton. I have been a fierce, active democrat my entire life. If Senator Clinton is not on the ticket in one way or another, I will be unable to support the Democratic ticket. I would urge my fellow Democrats to listen to people like me, your neighbor, colleague, and dedicated Democrat. It is incumbent upon us to find common ground. The stakes are high.
DW,
so you want mccain?
the courts to move to the right, 100 years of war and no investment in our infrastructure.
u don't sound like a democrat
Barack will choose Brian Lehrer as his running mate. As he should. Love you B!
No.
What makes anyone think that HRC could actually deliver the white working class vote. If she won the nomination or was picked as vp, she would be painted as a liberal and a elitist. They might even link her to Rev. Wright.HRC needs to go back to the senate decide who she is and actually accomplish something.
Al Gore. If Gore would take it (and he might because he has a love of service as strong as his hatred for modern politics) it would make Obama a great ticket.
It would add the gravitas and experience of a Nobel Prize winner and world leader on emerging global issues.
It would vindicate the last Democrat to win the popular vote for the White House.
It would further the narrative that the last 8 years have been a horrible mistake.
It would underscore Obama's position of opposing this Iraq war from the beginning.
Are there negatives? Okay, the GOP will attack him, sure. But newsflash -- if Jesus himself came back from the dead to be Obama's running mate the GOP would attack Him for being a soft on crime, long haired hippy.
No! Obama needs a clean slate to carry out his message of change in Washington. People are ready for it, they want it desperately, and the Clintons would greatly complicate this goal.
anyone threatening to withhold their vote to the presumptive nominee Obama because Hillary is not on the ticket reveals a lot about the character of that individual.
or Sherrod Brown.
No, neither Obama nor Clinton would be happy with this arrangement. Unfortunately, I fear the DNC will pressure Obama to name her to his Cabinet, which she might accept, especially if it were an important position like Secretary of State.
To accomplish his goals and live up to his potential, he should not have his hands tied. I pray this will happen.
I and my 70-year-old women friends all support Obama with two exceptions.
By the way, Sam Nunn is 70, 2 years younger than McCain. Brian or his guest assumed he was around 80.
The clintons cannot be trusted & have only their own interests at heart.
Hillary shouldn't be Vice President. She's a good Senator.
Bill, on the other hand, would be a good choice.
But I think he needs someone else if he wants to keep going on this message of change. It's a good message because everybody is ready to move on from the Bush clowns.
Let's hope we don't have another Loserman vice nominee. He lost the Gore election, not Nader.
No- she should not by the VP. there are many reasons. First, she should not be rewarded for her dirty, lowdown, hardball campaign tactics. two, they hate each other. Three, she and bill will try to control the campaign and the white house. four, she adds more negatives than positives in the voting populace as a whole. five, Obama can "win back" the female vote without her.
He should choose a white male from a swing state or perhaps a national security expert from the south. He should NOT choose Kathryn Sibelious as she is green and we have no chance at Kansas anyway.
People like DW are frauds. After all the name calling and picking a favorite what is really the difference btw HRC and Obama. If last week taught us anything its that the republicans need to go. This year i am voting against the republicans.
Jim Webb would bring the populist strain of the Democratic party to the ticket -- a very, very serious Obama deficiency. He would also help with the security issue, as a former under-secretary of the Navy. Hilary should be President Obama's first Supreme Court appointment.
JFK didn't like LBJ
reagan didn't like bush
the pres gives the vice pres any power he/she has
of course someone who won 49% of demo primary voters should be on the ticket.
when are we going to grow up.
I think the question needs to be reworded: Should Barack Obama choose Hillary and Bill Clinton as his running mates?
No...I don't think so.
NO!
Hillary could sooner run as McCain's VP.
DW,
Why? Please provide one good reason as to why loyalty to Hillary Clinton supercedes agreement with the values of the Democratic party over the Republicans? Obama and Clinton are in agreement on almost every issue and he has run a more competent and less divisive campaign. Clinton has been a good NY Senator and can continue to be a good NY Senator --it is her job after all. She was not owed a Presidency or Vice-Presidency and, it seems, has not been able to win one. Why on earth would this make you not support the Democratic ticket? Being a Democrat IS the common ground needed here. So why?
HILL V-P??? NO WAY!
She's been spending the past few months ice picking the Democratic front runner. Team players don't do that.
She has proven that as Veep she would spend all of her time undermining his authority.
I think that a "Dream Ticket" is out of the question for two reasons.
1. Hillary wouldn't represent the change that Obama has ran his whole campaign around.
2. Clinton on the ticket would mobilize the republican base. The would not to vote FOR McCain, who it seems the GOP as a whole doesn't support, but instead vote AGAINST her.
I think it's a bad idea. This "Dream Ticket" would be a purely political move that would turn off the ground swell of new Democratic voters and crossover Republican voters who truly support Obama's vision for Change in DC.
Obama is clearly a good liberal Democrat, a loyal party man. So it is a little weird, or anomalous, or spin, or in some cases racist, when self-declared life-long liberal Democrats say they will never vote for him.
75,000 people peacefully gathered on a Sunday afternoon on short notice. That's freakin' amazing! Gives me hope this nation may be nearing the end of its long nightmare.
Time to turn this page, and get rid of the Clintons, both nationally and in New York. Why are we so prone to being taken for fools? Mrs. Clinton is a carpet-bagger who used NY and her spousal position to get herself into a position to run for president. Are we not yet tired of this type of self-interested politics?
Besides, many many people dislike and hate Clinton (I actually voted for Mr. Clinton 2x), so ... ... the poor white southern uneducated people should not dictate to the great state of New York who should be our choice for president. All being not equal, they can have her.
(Yeh, I know Mrs. Clinton won NY, but unlike our southern kin, we'll vote for Obama with no problem, as we are better people inside, period.)
Change? Hillary being the first woman VP would be an incredible change...I think it could be the bullet proof ticket!
I'm sick of people saying that a vote for Hillary is a vote for Bill too. No one had any concerns like that when she ran for the Senate. He hasn't gotten overinvolved with her policies in the Senate. There is NO reason to think it would be any different if she was President. It's just more anti-Hillary trash.
I think an Obama-Edwards ticket would be fantastic! I was an Edwards supporter before he dropped out of the race. New blood is needed.
Obama has pulled a Nader on his own Party. The Dems had a sure thing with Mrs. Clinton but blew it with this sexist/racist circus. I can't help thinking that the Republicans had a hand in it because I can't believe the Dems are so good at losing elections. They have chosen their own have-a-beer-with-Bush candidate. McCain will be our next president.
If Obama has any hope ;-| he needs an old white guy with national security and foreign policy experience. The boys club once again.
This independent 40 y.o. female financial professional in the nonprofit sector will now be voting for the Green party candidate who ever that will be. It's supposed to be about the issues, not about penile charisma, right?
mike
very true. they use that line to justify their craziness. i think half this board is GOP trolls.
how come nobody referred to the fact that Hillary is what is commonly referred to as a w-o-m-a-n. can i hear somebody say, "amen"? good.
if Obama is as smart as everyone here seems to think he is (Brian, please don't think you're fooling anyone with even an iota of impartial coverage on this race) he will do well to select another woman as his running mate. gentlemen, please, grow up!
btw, do you all really take yourselves and your opinions (not to mention your ballot), so seriously or is it that you're just so enthralled with the conventional political process -- the one that elected the current president twice?
Caroline,
You sound like a firm believer in family dynasties, with a man at the head of course. What does it mean to say, "The Dems had a sure thing with Clinton"? Apparently not, these are contests and not every Democrat wanted Hillary like you did. In fact, more wanted Obama. But he had no right to run, you seem to be saying, since he is a man. Could that be right?
Obama supporter:
I think the turn out for Obama in Oregon and his wins in places like Iowa is a message to the DNC that Obama is an electable contender.
Hillary is doing a huge disservice to the DNC by acting as a spoiler & forcing Obama to continue to spend resources to campaign against her. We need to be a unified party already so that we can start hammering away at the McCain=Bush redux. The fact is 2 of Hillary's big wins (Florida & Michigan) don't count since they held elections illegally. She lost already fair and square. If she cares anything about her "party", she would quit already.
I PLEDGED BUT WOULD HAVE LOVED TO GET A BRIAN LEHRER T-SHIRT. WHY CANT THEY HAVE THOSE AS PLEDGE PRIZES?
I hope Barak won't choose Hillary as VP. I _ardently_ hope he won't. She has too much baggage, like Bill. The two of them would put him in a vice and squeeze him. He would end up wasting most of his time and energy in internal fights just to keep control of the situation.
Much better going with Al Gore. I don't see any negatives with that choice. That is the real dream ticket.
I just want to add another voice to the message that is coming across here loud and clear: No to Clinton as VP.
It would, as many have noted, undermine Obama -- initially, because it would show such poor judgment, eventually, because he'd have to deal with her all the time.
An Obama/Clinton ticket is also just too much 'change' -- I think it's important that Obama be seen with a truly supportive white guy standing next to him, rather than with a woman (esp one whose motives and loyalty will be suspect).
fyi
winning liberal democratic primaries (ie Oregon) doesn't make you electable. being able to win in swing states would.
Absolutely NO to Clinton as VP. She brings nothing to the ticket that he cannot get himself -- older white Democratic women are not going to vote for McCain, and they are not going to stay home. The fight is over undecideds and independents, many of whom but not all are working class whites. Clinton will NOT bring them en masse to the Dems.
What she WOULD bring is a strong distaste in the mouth of Obama supporters, motivation for Clinton haters to vote for McCain, and Bill (the last person Obama needs hanging around as a distraction).
Undecideds will split over many issues -- race, economic and national security, health care, etc. Obama is starting to go after McCain in earnest and will get a good share of the them on his own as they learn more about him and become more comfortable with the idea of his candidacy.
For VP he needs a populist with solid national or international security credentials. Someone who can speak well (so he doesn't drag down the energy of the campaign) and someone who might actually make a good president, since he will be in line to do so. (Sibelius is an AWFUL speaker. Unfortunately, I don't think there is a woman in the mix right now who would bring the right assets.)
The Obama/Hillary ticket is just a ploy for power hungry Hillary to have power at ANY cost.
This is a woman who moved to NY just to try to be a senator somewhere. She had no connection to our state. This is also a woman who is counting TWO ILLEGAL elections (Florida and Michigan) as wins, despite the fact that those states went against the DNC rules. Its funny because the DNC is supposedly the party she belongs to, yet she is flouting their rules because it serves her.
She is also further dividing the party by continuing to run against Obama and wasting our press coverage and resources on a within the party fight instead of focusing it on the ENEMY=REPUBLICANS
She doesn't care about an
Michelle Obama, it has been reported, is not a fan of Senator Clinton. Gloria Borger on the Chris Matthews Show yesterday reminded us that in a First Lady-Veep contest -- for further reference see: Gore V. Hillary, circa 1990s -- there is precedent that the First Lady generally wins most of those battles. What's more intruguing to me is whether or not the Republicans are targeting Michelle Obama:
http://ronmwangaguhunga.blogspot.com/2008/05/is-there-michelle-obama-trinity-church.html
#59:
Obama was ahead of Clinton from the onset. How is HE the "Nader?" Clinton has been losing for months, she is the spoiler, not he.
I like the idea of H Clinton being asked to run as VP and letting HER decide. That seems the most fair way to decide. She has gathered alot of support, whether folks want to recognize this or not! I am glad she is tough.
The other ideas presented: continue as NYSenator or Supreme Court or Sec of State are good ideas.
We have been to Portland; the first news was 80,000, which is more that 1/2 of Portland, I think!
I don't understand the motives of Hillary supporters claiming they won't vote for Obama without her on the ticket. Do you believe that McCain is the next-best thing to Hillary? Do we have you to thank for 8 years of Bush in the White House?
Myanmar? China...Exxon making biggest profit in American business history. Elections. Why are we talking about nerds?
#73, you need to ask?
It's pledge drive. They think they have to cater to the nerds like me and you who actually pay for WNYC. Whatever, I forgive them. Pledge drives don't bring out the best in programming, but all in all, it's hard to find a better station.
I think the idea of the nominee feeling forced to choose a running mate is distasteful. However, if he does choose her, I will give him the benefit of the doubt and I hope everyone here will too.
That said, something needs to happen to bring the party together. HRC clearly wants something, and unlike many on this page I do not claim to know what anyone else if thinking so I do not know what that is. But whether anyone here likes it or not, Obama cannot win without blue collar voters, women or oler people. He also is unlikely to win without Ohio or Florida. They will have to figure this out because right now she has roughly half of the Democratic vote and that is huge. His coalition is looking dangerously like the McGovern coalition; he hardly bothered to even go to WV or KY.
Obama/Clinton ticket is the dumbest idea in the history of dumb ideas. Hillary said McCain was better qualified to be President. Hillary has consistently demeaned, disparaged, and denigrated Obama as a candidate. Her treatment of Obama should automatically disqualify her from VP consideration. In addition, Hillary is simply too dishonest to be President or Vice President.
I actually agree with both mc on #75 and seth on #76.
That is, as mc said, despite yesterday's rally, Obama needs to roll up his sleeves. It's not going to be a sure shot, and Hillary supporters can't be left out.
But as seth said, there's no way to put HRC on the ticket as vp. It doesn't make any sense after the things she's said and done. And I'm sorry, mc, but there's no comparison of the trash talking that Hillary has done to Obama's much more decent approach. The time for Clinton sleaze has passed. A large number of Americans are over it and want to move forward - and if they weren't you wouldn't have seen the "presumptive nominee Clinton" scrambling as she's had to over the past few months.
Well, eva, I never considered her the presumptive nominee. The media did based on polls taken before a single vote was cast. If mot of the Democrats want Obama, I am perfectly comfortable with that. I do not, however, buy this narrative that he is somehow different from any other politician. There has been plenty of trash talking on both sides - he has just had a lot of assistance on this (see Chris Matthews, David Shuster, Keith Olbermann, Randi Rhodes etc., etc.) I don't hold the trash against either of them, it seems to be a matter of perception on either side so there is no point in arguing about it. Meanwhile, he has shown that he is just as shrewd and ruthless as she is on who to embrace and who to throw over which is fine. That is how you win. It just negates the "new" argument.
Before the Iowa Caucuses, the prevailing media narrative was Hillary and the 7 dwarves. Every cable news pundit and every op-ed writer assumed the Nov race would be Hillary vs Rudy or McCain. For Hillary to whine about the media trying to push her out is breathtakingly hypocritcal. Before Iowa, the media was ready to give her a coronation as the party's nominee. All the polls before Iowa picked Hillary as the nominee. To Hillary's dismay, nominees aren't chosen by media groupthink or polls. Hillary's downfall was voters got to decide her fate.
I haven't noticed her whining about the media trying to push her out. I have heard her say she is staying in until at least June 3. No whining there. I hear lots of whining from some Democrats (Obama supporters) who apparently are afraid that Obama can't withstand even a weak challenge to the end. He doesn't look worried. Why should they be?
Speaking of voters - we still haven't heard from all of them yet. What is everyone so afraid of?
mc,
I have to agree with Seth. And I don't entirely blame either of the Clintons. They're in part a damaged product of the GOP attack machine. But we've had enough of the Clintons at this point, and really, there is no way to equate Obama's decent approach to politics (whether you want to call it "new" or not) to either of the Clintons' slime machine.
I have no idea what Keith Olberman says every night, but I will say that 1) to hold what Keith Olberman says about HRC against Obama is absurd and 2) HRC worked hard to win Keith Olberman's contempt. Throughout the campaign, she worked hard to win my contempt as well.
As I said previously, eva, I do not hold any of what the talking heads say against either Obama or Clinton. How contemptible she is is purely a matter of perception and how clearly anyone hears anything anymore. There is so much hyperbole out there it's hard to know what someone said or didn't say.
Hillary should stay in only if she comports herself with the dignity and gravitas befitting a former 1st lady. She must not say she's the best or better candidate. She must not attack or criticize Obama. Her speeches should consist of bullet points summarizing her policy proposals and contain no hint of attacking Obama. Hillary needs to go quietly and not try to stir up rancor against Obama.
I hope that the other 48 states one day have the guts to stand up to Iowa and NH. We need a better selection process. I'm tired of MSNBC's Chuck Todd or someone like him pontificating that 2 or 3 candidates at most can get their tickets punched out of Iowa or NH. This is nonsense. More states should have had the chance to vote for Dodd, Biden, or Richardson. Their resumes are head and shoulders above Hillary or Obama. We need a natl primary day with a layered runoff scheme elimating candidates who fail to meet a specified threshold of popular votes.
Obama is hands down preferable to me over Hillary in substance and style but the nominating process and MSM rammed them down our throats because of their jaw dropping fundraising numbers and rock star iconic personalities. Candidates shouldn't be penalized because they failed to raise enough $. Biden, Dodd, and Richardson were royally screwed by MSM and voters are worse off because of their shabby treatment by MSM. 2 remedies include public financing and preventing IA and NH from keeping their roles as winnowers.
seth,
It's a little ridiculous to say she can stay in the race and not promote herself as the best candidate. She obviously thinks she is the best candidate as do a great number of other people. I think the race has recently taken a more civil tone on both sides and I commend them both for it.
I am in complete agreement about the order of the primaries. I don't see any reason for the primacy of Iowa and New Hampshire. And I agree about Dodd, Biden and Richardson and also Kucinich who is the candidate that best reflected my positions.
By the way, it looks as though it's Obama who will eschew public financing this time around.
MC,
I dispute your assertion that a greater number of people prefer Hillary to Obama. Of course, she can promote herself, she should avoid giving the Repubs any more ammo to use against Obama. At least we're on the same page when it comes to ending the tyranny of Iowa and NH.
I don't think it would be a 'dream' ticket. Why?? because despite the fact that Americans voted passionately for one or the other, it would be a single ticket composed of two of the most polarizing figures in current politics and that might be just too much for some people to handle. On a practical side, the relationship in the White House might appear civil on the surface, but abrasive underneath. Hillary wants to be president; She and Bill would be scheming their next move (i.e. 012). The ticket needs balance and I don't think Hillary would really provide that.
This thread is closed.
Back to Episode