Obama as running mate?
This from "A group of prominent Democrats was being formed secretly to go to Clinton to ask her to bow out for the sake of party solidarity. Now, neither candidate, counting their current super-delegates and potential unpledged delegates, can win a majority of delegates even after the Pennsylvania primary April 22. It is hard to imagine either bowing out. That raises the possibility of carnage in Denver with the super-delegates and the disputed Michigan and Florida delegations in play."
This is
Seems to me the opening is there after Pennsylvania for Barack Obama to be offered the vice-presidency and the moral high ground.
Are we sure he won't take it?
Hello, I'm 
°δ΄Η³Ύ³Ύ±π²Τ³Ω²υΜύΜύ Post your comment
you must be a teddy bear!! offer him vice-president?? because you think hes not good enough for president or what. You must be out of your mind. get real
Last time I checked the odds of a woman or a black guy (with the middle name "Husein") beating a true "American Hero" with the gorgeous-looking WASP blonde wife are rather slim. So, talk of an intra-Dem agreement, whereby A gets the presidency and B gets the vp as if the whole thing is a sure thing, are premature to say the least.
Hello,
I find this article very strange. Why would the candidate who has MORE delegates agree to be the VEEP?
More importantly, why would you use a notoriously biased Republican columnist to make any point on what the dems should do?
You do not appear to be an "honest broker' in reporting news about the campaign.
Kate Schertz
Democrats Abroad France Member
Justin,
I've just read another one of your brilliant blogs and articles on this years US presidential nomination race and just wanted to say thanks!
Being from the UK, previously I understood very little about the process and intrigue of these events, but, thanks to your coverage, I am an avid follower of the race and feel I understand the ins and outs.
Thanks again. Keep it up.
Carl
The implication in your comment Justin is that somehow for him to continue his candidacy would be taking the moral low road? Why is it Obama that must capitulate to Hillary? He is clearly out in front among pledged delegates and is likely to remain there.
How could Obama keep a straight face after a campaign promising change? Then agree to sacrifice himself to be the undercard for the establishment candidate? Many of his supporters would feel betrayed and rightfully so, they'd much rather wait until 2012 if Hillary becomes the nominee with a power play.
Why should he take the VP slot when he's ahead in all the measures that count -- delegates, fundraising and the popular vote. It's common knowledge (and common sense) that Hillary picked up the vote of White folks who voted along racial lines, i.e. racists. Rather than opening a dialog about it within the party, she's started this VP whisper campaign and you've had your head turned by it.
Use your critical thinking skills and international news platform to dig into the real issues in this campaign. I'm tired of these ethnocentric analyses. Really. Work a little harder.
It is hard to imagine that, after the intense primary campaign, either candidate would be able to serve on the other's ticket. The flak that they have given each others' policies alone would give the Republicans fodder for a month or two.
Also, the ill-will that both campaigns seem to harbor, and that the Clinton campaign makes painfully obvious, would make this difficulty an even greater one. But, perhaps this would be the only way to unite the Dem. party after the implosion that may very well occur.
Why should he play second fiddle? We have had Bush, Clinton, Bush,...and we do not need to continue the sequence. Obama is doing right by saying such a question is premature and asking what exactly this experience of hers consists of. The caucus results in Texas are showing more delegates for Obama and overall he is in the lead. Why is Ohio the only 'bellweather' state seeing as he has won more of those, too?
What are you taking and where can I get some? Why in the world would Obama accept the vice-presidency when he's ahead and in the driver's seat? Even if Obama loses Pennsylvannia, he'll still be ahead in elected delegates at the convention and the so-called superdelegates will swing to him because they know he has a better shot than Hillary Clinton in November? The only way Obama accepts the vice-presidency is if the superdelegates swing to Hillary. But that would be at the convention, not before.
Your comment about Obama taking the moral high ground when Clinton won't release her tax returns, clearly hid from the truth when she was first lady regarding her work, the Kazakhstan and Dubai deals she and her husband are doing (which is a Republican glee fest if she is elected and which you reporters are either too ignorant or too blind to write about), etc, etc. is insulting.
Perhaps you need to check your moral high-ground. Seems to me you are in quicksand.
Shouldn't it be the other way around? Obama offering Hillary, since Obama will definitely have more pledged delegates that Clinton? I can never figure out the media...do some math before getting all whipped up. Clinton's throwing this out because she's trying to keep herself attractive.
Ummm... with more votes, more delegates, and more states won, shouldn't it be Obama offering *Clinton* a spot on *his* ticket, and not vice versa?
Obama accept the VP spot? I think it is too early to say anything like that. Obama still leads Hillary in delegates and has a very good chance in of winning Pennsylvania. I doubt the Michigan and Florida delegates will be seated since all of the candidates agreed before the primaries that they would not count. You can't go back and change the rules after the game has already been played. Obama was not even on the ballot in Michigan and did not campaign in either state and to seat the delegates considering this would be a nightmare for the Democratic Party. I still think Obama will win the nomination.
Why should he play second fiddle? We have had Bush, Clinton, Bush,...and we do not need to continue the sequence. Obama is doing right by saying such a question is premature and asking what exactly this experience of hers consists of. The caucus results in Texas are showing more delegates for Obama and overall he is in the lead. Why is Ohio the only 'bellwether' state seeing as he has won more of those, too?
"the vice-presidency and the moral high ground."
How is conceding the battle he has won the moral high ground? She wont beat his delegate count.
I dont understand how Hilary Clinton winning 16 more delegates last night counts as a comeback. If that was the case then Baracks 12 victories would have ensured that Hilary was out. The truth is that its all down to the numbers, not the media hype.
Also, Hilary is playing a very strange hand, trying to claim that she is a better candidate for crisis, when in fact last time there was a crisis she was the candidate who supported an unjust war.
Last night really highlighted the face that the media chooses the candidate.
"Carnage" is the appropriate noun to describe what will happen in Denver. I am sure that this gathering of the Democrat faithful will devolve into a circus, and those who were looking forward to naming their favorite with a certainty of success are now girding up for the fight of their political lives. Let the bloodletting commence!
Yes, I am sure. Not only would it be political suicide, but it is impossible for Hillary Clinton to be the nominee at this point.
Obama is leading by over 130 pledged delegates at the moment. Hillary is leading the super-delegates by 39 and this is subject to change over time. He has won more states than Hillary. Why should he be offered the vice presisdency? If it is because of his skin colour you need to argue more and it will not be accepted by the Americans anyways. But on votes and the number of states he has won, he should run for the presidency and the vice presidency could be offered to Hillary .
This is an absolutely shameless attempt to marginalize the Obama campaign.
Hillary Clinton is trying to convince voters who are still making up their minds that they should vote for her because she'll just bring Obama with her, anyway.
By even posting this story, the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ has demonstrated a very short memory.
They seem to have forgotten that Barack Obama is STILL IN THE LEAD!
Hillary has virtually no chance to make up the difference in earned delegates.
Let's say he takes it -- putting party unity above his own ambition. I suppose his thinking is that he'll have a pretty good chance of ascending to the presidency while still a relatively young man. Never mind that history doesn't support that idea. Lately, old political nostrums and conventional wisdom don't mean much.
Balancing against that is notion that Hillary is a loser versus McCain and who needs to go down with THAT battleship? It is even rarer for a failed VP candidate to win nomination on the top of some future ticket -- and even rarer still to win election (FDR comes to mind and that was almost 90 years ago).
So, if I'm Barack Obama, I'd have to say "thanks, but no thanks."
That, of course, would leave him in control of his own destiny because by the time the PA primary is past, he'll still be leading in the delegate count.
But will the nomination be worth anything after the Clintons scorch the earth under his feet? That's a question I can't answer at this distance from the convention.
But I think Obama would be willing to make a go of it and the contrast he would offer versus McCain would still make him the guy to beat in November.
That's just my opinion; I could be wrong.
But I doubt it.
Both candidates are extremely well-liked by the Democrats. It would make sense that both would run together.
However, one must take into account the many voters who dislike Clinton. She is considered an opportunist and a "soft" candidate that is only after votes. Sad to say, much of this is sexism. A strong female voice is threatening to some. I would say that if Clinton gains the nomination, it would behoove her to take on Obama as her running mate (if he accepts). By doing so, she will soften her image and draw more moderates to her.
Yet, if Obama gains the nomination, he should distance himself from Clinton. By choosing Clinton as a running mate, he will lose moderates who do not like Clinton
He will take the offer. As President of course. There can only be an Obama - CLinton ticket and not vice-versa. For someone who lost 11 straight elections and after winning just two, she is extremely shameless to presume that she can just run away with this. Typical Clinton nonsense! This VP thing is a trap and a shameless one at that
Frankly, I can't see the upside of being Hillary Clinton's Vice President, especially for Obama. Even if Clinton were to win and he ran in 2016, the basis of his appeal as a Washington outsider would be undercut. As VP he'd be overshadowed by Bill Clinton, and tainted by twice as much of the Clinton fatigue that dogged Gore in 2000. Moreover, the high negatives that Clinton currently pulls among independents put her in a horrible position for the general election - why tie himself to a sinking ship?
It is the media. At the end John McCain will have it. Billary are so weak when it comes to fighting republicans even when they look tough. The democrats are very shy about their identity and their philosophy, if they have one at the moment.
If you disagree with me just think of William Buckley Jr. for a minute and how strong he is in defending his positions and then think of any democrat who has the same steam.
The democrats are searching for an identity since they lost JFK but they never found one. Obama might offer one but he has to be more hardcore than he is.
I was surprised when Tim Russert asked them about the Russian PM. Both of them has offered nothing. They did not even elaborate any thing out of it. There is no ideology, no values , no strategy. Simply they have nothing in mind.
Step away from the bubble and think for a minute. After Bush the second, all the Democrate can come up with is either a former first lady or a first term senator.
Why is it so scary to disagree with the Republicans? Please give me an answer!
I realize that the Clinton campaign sees this as a momentum issue, not looking at the delegate math, but the math is important. It is almost impossible for Hillary to catch Obama in the pledged delegates. It would be quite the coup for Hillary to try to convince the superdelegates to swing it her way. Therefore, why are we talking about Obama being offered VP and not vice versa?
(Rubbing my eyes) Are you serious?! Why should Barack Obama bow out? He's ahead in both votes and delegates. If anything, it is Hillary who should drop out. Obama's got the moral high ground no matter what happens.
I cannot understand your reasoning behind your suggesting this. Have I missed something somewhere?
I agree, it seems rather unfair to force Obama to take the VP, position. Not just because of the fact that he is by all means still winning the race, but also for the people who volunteered and donated to this campaign and continue to give him the lead in the total votes cast, states won, and delegates pledged so far. He has run a good race that sets goals and continues to achieve them, while Hillary's campaign has been down right incompetent and has only succeeded by turning to fear monger that was able to hold off a total disaster on tuesday. Its seems silly that someone who has continued to improve and continued to bring in new votes all while still winning should be expected to step down.
If Obama had had Hillary's primary track record, he would have been forced out long ago. What does the democratic party and ultimately America owe the Clintons? You are the president by the grace of the people, not because you demand it.
I'm puzzled as to why you think it might be this way? He still has the most delegates and, according to the Obama campaign, he's losing only a tiny bit of his lead to Hillary.
So why should he be the one to bow out? What's democratic about that?
I have thought that's the best idea all along,
especially with a drawn out bitter campaign there are some simple question to ask:
When one of them has lost,
how many of Obama's young embittered supporters are going to vote for say Hillary Clinton/Wesley Clark?
Or Clinton supporters for Obama/AN Other?
McCain would be delighted at the scenario. No wonder Karl Rove said "Hillary should fight on regardless" ahead of the Tuesday votes.
So the 2 should end up on the same ticket, and with an essentially tied situation it's reasonable for the younger newer face to be the VP candidate.
That way the democratic party preserves most of the clearly split votes of the 2 camps.
The comments above mention how "unfair it is for Obama" etc but there is a bigger issue here, which I think the superdelegates will consider just as you say:
The focus on individuals over here belies how much democratic party unity matters over there, especially to the superdelegates.
Given the fact that Obama will have more delegates, and will be ahead in the popular vote, and is consistently shown to do better against McCain than Hillary would, I think it more likely that Hillary will be offered the VP position??
Any way you look at it Obama will win the popular vote and hence will have more delegates.Its obnoxious and naive to offer him the VP position.
I get the feeling that Clinton wouldn't accept being vice president, wheras Obama may. So that's what may have to happen to stop the party eating itself.
Justin - I've noticed you have a soft spot for Hillary. In any case I can't think of any other rational explanation for your suggestion tha Obama might be considering bowing out in her favour.
To me as a non-American, the idea of the grating, synthetic, emotional-baggage-laden Hillary Clinton being President of the United States is simply too ghastly to contemplate. As someone put it on another TV channel yesterday, she is an acquired taste that I have not yet acquired. And just what is this 'experience' that she is always on about?
I hope Obama wins in the end and can open a new chapter in American and international politics.
It is just going to end in tears....
American electorate will not vote on a duo in wich you see a proeminent white power figure in an inferiority position. Simple as that.
Clinton's advantage in this race is the states she has won. Looking at the states won so ,Clinton would have a lot more electoral college votes than Obama even though Obama has won more states than Clinton and ultimately its electoral college votes at the end of the year that count. This is probably why Clinton is still in a strong position even though she has won 16 states to Obama's 24, now whether Obama or Clinton will want to be VP...there's another question entirely!
The very idea that the race is open is madness. Obama has a very clear lead, and Clinton's "victories" in the three states which she was highly tipped to win - Texas with its Latino based vote that favours Clinton for example - she gained net only a handful of delegates over Obama. These gains were less than many of Obama's single state victories.
A cynical man might suggest that the media is trying to make something look like a contest to keep its audience "hooked".
What amazes me is that everyone seems to rail the media for small statements while ignoring the bigger media impact on the election process: GROUP THINK. All one candidate has to do is convince everyone that he or she is the front runner and suddenly more people jump on board. Why? Well, we don't want to confess to voting for the looser. This was never the way the founding fathers intended our representative republic to be -- votes should be blind and results kept confidential until all final numbers are in. Let me research the candidates in peace and tell me when it's my turn to cast a ballot.
It now seems likely that neither Clinton nor Obama will be able to win enough committed delegates to win the nomination outright.
A joint ticket also seems unlikely, because each is understandably unwilling to accept the VP position. The loser may either remain in the Senate, hold an important role in a Democratic administration, or seek office as a state governor.
Deciding the presidential candidate is likely to be in the hands of the super-delegates. Nothing wrong about that. After all, they were instituted to handle such matters.
I suppose they will be looking at three criteria: the number of delegates and the popular vote in the primaries; electability against McCain; vulnerability to the inevitable right-wing character assassination attempts (any potential scandals or controversail acts, etc).
Hillary should get the top spot because she's the heavyweight and much tougher than Obama. He's not ready for primetime.
Remember, Hillary gets plenty of votes where it matters.
Combined, I don't think McCain has a chance. Alone, he's got a good chance.
This frustrates me so much. Barack Obama is clearly the winner in the Democratic nomination. Clinton is scratching and clawing her way to no where. How can anyone call Ohio and Texas "wins" for Clinton when clearly she had to obtain this pseudo crown by taking the low road - and this is supposed to be an admirable representation for America and its citizens? Secondly, let's remember that part of the sway to her favor in these two states was courtesy of the Republicans who ONLY casted a vote for her to bump Barack out of the picture and then have McCain ultimately win the Presidency. All of this and she still only won by a slim margin. Clinton needs to quit her posturing and get out of the picture and Justin my dear, you need to quit your day job. You are way too off the mark on this one.
Justin Webb, what are you talking about? "The vice-presidency and the moral high ground?" Are you suggesting that Barack Obama should consider accepting a consolation prize and a pat on the head if he loses the Pennsylvania primary even though every projection has him maintaining his delegate lead all the way to the convention?
He is still winning, you know, and may win Wyoming and will likely win Mississippi in the coming days. If he loses Pennsylvania, Hillary Clinton will pick up a few more delegates than he will, but it will not swing the delegate count in her favor.
She can only win this thing ugly. And she clearly intends to. So, if she does manage to wrestle the nomination from Obama, I think it's in his best interest to walk away and keep relatively quiet during the general election. The damage done to the Democratic party will ensure a John McCain victory in November and after four traumatic McCain years, and the prospect of re-electing a man that would be 80 years old at the end of his second term, a more seasoned Barack Obama could sail relatively easily to the presidency.
Besides, Obama has easily held the "moral high ground" in this race since it began. He doesn't go negative (much) and he appeals to the better angels of our nature. The guy could fill a stadium on an hour's notice. He's an inspiration.
If Hillary manages to scratch and claw her way to the Democratic nomination, however, the world will discover just how unpopular she really is. This is the Democratic primary and she is appealing to her base. The rest of the American electorate, however, is not terribly fond of her. Hell, I am a registered Democrat from New York and I can't imagine casting a vote for her in any election for any office.
So, if Barack Obama, the front-runner, is offered the vice-presidency in April, I find it unlikely that he will take it. I also find it unlikely that he will offer Hillary Clinton the vice-presidency should he seal up the nomination. She just has too much baggage.
It's Obama or it's McCain. Some Texans and Ohioans have gone and made a big old mess, but they haven't changed reality. Hillary is unelectable and the Democrats in Pennsylvania should realize that before they make a big mistake in April.
Is Hilary Clinton REALLY swaying Ohians with a cynical ad that claims she has better judgement? Does no one in Ohio care that she decided to join the war that has helped tear apart the US economy and international image?
Also, Obama will likely win Texas once the result are in.. Not to mention the fact he will almost certainly lead in delegates and super delegates no matter what Hilary does.
The media is again trying to deny Obama the respect he deserves. Its embarrassing! Winning 16 extra delegates is hardly a "comback" when your opponent holds a lead of 150..
The idea that Obama would want to become a VP candidate for Hillary seems pretty unlikely - he's ahead, he has defined himself in opposition to her image, and she might well lose to McCain anyway. But more to the point: looking at the electoral mathematics, does it really make sense for either of them to have the other on the ticket? Without being crass, isn't a white (Southern) man going to be needed by whichever of them finally gets the nomination?
There is absolutely no plausible mathematical possibility that Hillary can gain a pledged delegate lead (read: ). She could sweep the remaining 16 states and still be behind Obama in delegates (and this will not happen, obviously). After the last primary, Obama will have won more states, more pledged delegates, and more popular votes. The superdelegates (who have been steadily leaving Clinton and joining him) will never, ever give the nomination to the candidate with the fewer states, fewer delegates, and fewer votes. It's going to be Obama, but because of last night, the infighting is going to continue for months more. It's sad, but we're handing John McCain a serious/probable win in November. In an election that really should be handed to the Democrats on a silver platter, the Party famous for blowing golden opportunities might just blow it yet again.
Justin,
You yourself pointed to the Newsweek piece outlining how Clinton could not get enough pledged delegates even if she won all the remaining states.
She's behind in the next two (if one believes the polls) and didn't win Texas with a big margin.
Obama would be betraying his supporters by taking a running mate offer and McCain will beat Clinton anyway in November.
Her strong suit is experience and "being tested". McCain kills her on both. The only candidate to stop McCain is Obama (see West Wing season 7 for details).
Of course Mr. Obama won't accept the VP slot on the ticket after Pennsylvania.
Come on now, Mr. Webb. Aren't you the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ's correspondant for the race in America? You should know then, that Mrs. Clinton has no possibility of capturing a lead in pledged delegates. Even with her narrowing Superdelegate advantage, she'll never regain the total delegate lead.
Her performances in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island are extraordinary, but inconsequential to the actual delegate race which Obama holds and will only widen in the event that the race continues on past Pennsylvania.
Millions of dollars in ads, millions to run these contests, a lot of mudslinging, and the difference made at the end of the night-- Clinton gains delegates on the order of a single digit.
Meanwhile, her "offer" to put Obama as VP on the ticket is just desperate political posturing and an attempt to extend the olive branch to Obama supporters on the night of her greatest victory of the primary season to distract from the truth-- which is that she's losing and that she has virtually no chance of winning this nomination unless the Superdelegates override the national popular vote and substantial delegate lead of Obama or if Florida and Michigan get another shot.
A fantasy ticket for the Dems but not realistic .The game is too intense now to speculate on such a back room deal.If HC gets the nomination Obama will be well positioned to spend his time growing in the Senate,while the next President deals with economic and foreign policy disaster.He would have another shot ,the advantage of youth.Bush legacy very grim!
WOW!! What a short-sighted little article. Apparently, winning three of four states taking her total to 14 states and his winning 12 in a row to currently hold 27 states, not to mention the Americans abroad only justifies this man the passenger seat?
Did I mention that he also has nearly a 100 delegate lead?? Hmmmm - who should be in the passenger seat?? Although, with her sneaky, underhanded tactics and "politics as usual" games, I would hope he could find a better suited running mate (you know, one with morals??)
As an American, I find this article very... um.. outdated. Obama is ahead in everything. Pledged Delegates, Popular Vote, Number of States. Everything that matters. Superdelegates are not kamakazis, they will go for whoever has the lead in the aforementioned.
I do not know where your head is...
This is a bold face shameless and open robbery attempt, arrogants and insult to more than 20-30 million people who voted for Obama. whom they have characterised as dellutional and cult followers. Hillary After tearing up and making people to feel sorry for her, still lags behind in counts and delegates. Who needs a cry baby in the oval office? Instead of trying to inspire people hope at a time of disper and economic hardship, she is busy attacking Barack. I don't think she deserve to be Obama's VP talkless of been on the ticket w/him. Why isn't the press asking her to release her tax record, show contributors to clinton library who are seeking favors, whom has they pardoned? what about their chinese american fundraiser who was just convicted, she is yet to return some $850,000.00 to him or at list do what Barack has done, give the money to charity. what exactly has she done foreign policy wise?. Were did she borrow the $5m for her campaign from? etc
She is getting a free ride from you the press.
There is a magic number of 2,025 total delegates needed for either to win the Democratic nomination. If neither reaches that total, no matter who is leading, they cannot win the nomination. There are no more state caucuses/primaries that can give either the win before we reach the convention. The super delegates will decide the race.
I'm not someone who comments easily, but this irks me in the worst way. If our domestic media coverage of the election is a total farce, Justin Webb's blog stands out as a parody of a wet dream of a farce as related by a blind, deaf, legless man through interpretive dance.
He's got a nice smile, though.
tristan
nyc
As many commentators have observed, the states which Mrs Clinton has won are those which are needed for a Democratic victory in November; the states which Mr Obama has won are highly likely to vote for Mr McCain and therefore are not worth much to the Democrats. In addition, should a Clinton-Obama ticket prevail (which is by no means a sure thing) then assuming that she, like her husband before her, would be elected for two terms, then Mr Obama would be tried and tested and ready to continue the Democratic occupancy of the White House for another eight years. The unpledged and superdelegates are duty bound to consider which is best for the party rather than for one of the individuals. It will be a pragmatic decision which, rather than dividing the party, would bring it together with the most historic ticket in the history of American politics. Pundits like Bill O'Reilly and Dick Morris, who is sorry, sore, man, say that riots will break out as they did forty years ago. I don't believe that to be true and repeating it over and over again will not dissuade superdelegates from doing what they consider best.
Funny....Obama is the current leader with more pledged delegates, popular votes and more states won. I think he will maintain this lead till the end. All Hillarys wants is to show the world and the voters that she is the leading candidate which is not true.
Go OBAMA....
You've got to be kidding! Obama is over 150 pledged delegates ahead of Clinton - she'll be lucky to get a place on his ticket, not his on hers!
Don't be blinded by the headlines from last night - on the delegate count Clinton picked up less than 10 delegates.
The latest figures for the Texas Caucuses have Obama ahead 56-44 - meaning Obama will actually pick up more delegates out of Texas than Clinton, once you combine the primary (narrow win for Clinton) with the Caucus (double-digit win for Obama)
I usually enjoy your perceptive blog pieces but I feel this one is just out of touch with reality!
Why the hell would he? PA won't change the delegate count, even if she wins.
He's won twice as many states, more delegates and leads the popular vote. He might be persuaded to offer her the VP slot to wrap things up, but she does not have the upper hand and PA won't change that. Do you actually follow such matters or just read Clinton's talking points?
Positive he won't take it. Abused, kicked around, lied about then put on a ticket to try and usurp the votes of the people who supported him? Nahhhh. Remember - most of his supporters are smart people. All putting Obama on a Clinton ticket will is pull Obama down on the Clinton ship. She is and will remain firmly rejected by the majority.
"Seems to me the opening is there after Pennsylvania for Barack Obama to be offered the vice-presidency and the moral high ground.
Are we sure he won't take it?"
Your jokeing, right? Even though that prospect doesn't make sense, given our-odly enough-most "undemocratic" of systems, O God I sure hope not!! Don't say that!!
How ironic that the country that wants and strives to promote democracy around the world can't even ensure it within its own boarders-with deligates, super deligates and the like!
I'd be careful of using Robert Novak as a source for any news. Especially that concerning the Democratic party. I don't know if those overseas know it but he's a hard line Republican columnist who rarely has anything unbiased to say.
Obama is going have a few more weaknesses exposed before this is all said and done, and he knows it.
That's why he was trying to push Hillary out so quickly. Time is actually on her side.
Obama's paper resume lacks depth and appears to have been constructed with a fast-track mentality, solely for the purpose of running for office.
Now that the media is beginning to treat the candidates equally, Obama may not be so sweet with them (media).
From now on, no amount of fainting routines will help.
I guess what urks me the most is that Obama never really promised anything that we didn't already have.
We all had hope long before he took the stage and started singing the verse.
All he's done is state the obvious.
Hopefully, his American Idol strategy will come to an end and he'll begin to lay out clear plans for our Country.
Until he does that, Obama is nothing but talk.
This is insulting. After Clinton's "big vicotries", she only netted 18 delegates, and that doesn't include the delegates tied to the Texas caucus, which Obama is winning. She's down by 96 delegates, even with her lead in superdelegates. People forget Obama was down 20 points in Texas just two weeks ago, and he made up 16 of that. Once he goes somewhere and people get to know him, he gets votes. With 7 weeks until Pennsylvania, he has the time to gain support. Obama will pick up momentum in Wyoming and Mississippi and open that lead back up. To think of someone who has won three contests in four weeks ask someone who has won 12 to quit is ridiculous. This is more of Hillary's selfish attempt to prove that over half of the nation (or the Democratic party for that matter)doesn't hate her. There's no way she can beat McCain. In no state race to date has Hillary ever gained support, she has only held on to enough to prevent Obama from winning. People have already made up their minds about her. She cannot gain any more support than she already has. Obama can, and has shown that everywhere he's gone. He can gain Independents and even Republicans. She cannot, and you can't win a race without Independent support. Hillary seems perfectly content to take the party and the country down with her selfish dream.
As an American I don't care who offers who what as long as we get Clinton and Obama working together. Whoever has the highest count should be driving it. We need that change and we need to make double history here.
Mrs. Clinton has shown again that she is undefeatable. After all of the pressure from the left wing of the Democratic Party, continuous media bias, free air support from scores of political pundits, continuous manipulations of the polls (always on Obama's favor), etc... she is pretty much alive & a viable political candidate.
Obama can not defeat McCain just with the left wingers & Blacks! To win, you need to have the centrists, women, Latinos & Asians. Hillary has them all. She will win!
President Obama as a vp?Obama has presidency written all over him and there is no doubt that not even a political dynasty like the Clintons will stop him.
The Clinton camp should stop trying to dig up Skeletons which do not exist. Please leave Obama alone and instead support him on his way to becoming the next president of the USA.
Justin, can you clarify what has / will happen with the delegates that John Edwards won earlier in the season before he stepped down. Can he direct them to one of the other candidates ( essentially kingmaking ), can he free them to vote openly, or are they lost to the final choice ? Could he still therefore play a big roll before / come the convention ?
I really think that the wise thing for Clinton to do is to quit the race and rally behind Barack Obama as his vice. How can someone in the lead with over 50 votes settle for the vice slot? It's not possible and it doesn't make sense at all! Clinton's advisers esp her husband should tell her the truth and nothing but the truth. QUIT!
Why should Barack Obama want to be Vice President? it is Hilary that is still we behind in the Delegate Count. She may have had a "one night" of Victory in Ohio and some way in Texas, but we have to remember how much the gap was closed by Obama from a few months back and at the end of the day with caucus delegates in Texas how victorious was it for Hilary?
If the Grandee's of The Party do go against the will of the Voters, they could face damage like they have never witnessed before to the Party, are the Clinton's and the "old boy network" so important which the Washington politics of The Past is what the voters want CHANGE from.
Justin,
I guess you need to be more thoughtful of what you say. I suggest you better do your homework before posting something here. I think it would be helpful if you can explain the logic of why you think Obama would accept vice presidency post when he is leading the pledged delegates?
Why on earth should Obama become VP when he has more delegates and has won more states.Even if none of them was able to reach the 2000+ needed for nomination,Obama has the vibes and has encouraged the younger generation to come out and have their voices heard.Hilary should consider Deputising Barack Obama.Though she is good,both of 'em will be unshakeable partnership to win the presidency.Obama is still gonna lead putting Clinton behind on VP consideration.According to poll,Obama has the credential to outclass the Republican McCain,so let us no gamble and lose the Presidency to Warriors whose policies has been damaging the US economy and global partnership.
JOSHUA
LONDON,UK
Interesting piece Justin. I have a sneaky feeling you are trying to wind people up - especially Obama supporters. All evidence even after the results from Ohio and Texas indicate that Obama is still well ahead - Hillary could not dent his lead even after throwing the kitchen sink at him. She might go for the WC next, I hope the party have enough sense to restrain her before she completely destroys the house.
In the coming days when proper analysis is done and the press feel they have sufficiently answered her desperate plea for their help, they will stop putting out spin articles about 'big wins for Hillary'. There was no big win, soon it will be clear such talk is plain riduculous. So why would Obama take VP? Hillary is the one practically staring at the VP ticket that's why she brough it up.
Justin, I know you are too smart not to have factored out all of this, but as every good blogger knows, winding up your readers from time to time keep them coming back for more. Justin for VP, any takers?
Whatever you are saying seems to be, at best, a hollow echo of whatever trite analysis you are reading at the time Justin. I'm sorry but I can't read your blogs any other way.
Two days ago your blog title was "It ends in a cliffhanger"...which can only mean that you "thought" Obama would be the Democrat Presidential candidate now.
And now he needs to emerge from his muddy sty of low morality, lick his wounds and graciously accept an offer from the woman who has shown she will say anything to become president.
Can I ask? Do YOU believe Barack Obama is a muslim with a dodgy dealing past and a tendency to say things he doesn't mean. Or isn't he any of these things "as far as you know"...to quote the woman whose deceptions you have made no mention of. Would you, like Hillary Clinton, prefer to see John McCain in office ahead of Mr Obama.
What DO you think Mr Webb? If you are going to make wildly fluctuating statements the least you can do is give us a little of YOUR reasoning.
Numbers aside (he doesn't have anywhere near aa much of a lead as some are making out, or we wouldn't be having this conversation), Hilary has practically all the big states and a much better chance against McCain.
I have to agree with most of the posters here.
Obama taking an offer of VP would be a complete u-turn for him because he has put himself as the "not part of Old Washington" candidate.
His campaign has turned into an "all or nothing" campaign, and if (and I think it's a BIG if) he were offered it, he would have to automatically reject it, as another ploy by a part of the established system to derail any kind of change or reform in US government.
I also think the Clinton campaign would be shooting themselves in the foot if they offered. They have been playing that Obama is not fit for the office of POTUS, so why would they think that he would be suitable for VPOTUS? The whole point about being VP is that you should have the qualities to be President. If offered, the Obama campaign would surely say that Clinton just will do anything to get into power.
Sure the question will be asked privately by campaign strategists and spectators, but I doubt an offer would ever be extended.
The idea of an obama vice presidency is crazy at best. Why would anyone even contemplate such a thing. See, even after the headline-grabbing Clinton wins, she's ended up gaining just a net of 4 delegates, and she now trails by 105 delegates, by conservative estimates. With Wyoming and Missisipi coming next saturday and Saturday, it's almost certain the 4-delegate gain will disappear.
If the worst happens and Hillary gets the nomination through the back door (this is the only way she can get it), it will be suicidal and kissing the dust, not gaining the high ground, for Obama to take a VP slot. To really take the high ground, Obama would rather bow out with dignity with a statement that his supporters should support Hillary in the general election, for the party's sake. in reality, majority of his supporters will not support Hillary under such circumstance, and, with McCain winning in November, Obama, with his moral high ground, can stage a come-back in 2012.
Obama will be the next President, but he can't have a Clinton as a VP because they both are dishonest! By the way what ever happens to White Water, Hillary's tax returns and the blue dress?
That sounds big. It seems USA might atlast be following Kenya's footsteps. Mrs. Clinton should read the signs of the Obama wave and accept to be her Excellence the Vice President of USA. It is not too much to demand from her if Democrats are to stay a united party.
Clinton is never in a million years going to be the Vice President to Obama, he would never offer it to her and she would be more willingly to drag the entire democratic party through the mud before giving up on this fight.
Obama, on the other hand, may be willing to become VP. It would make more sense as well. He has less political expierence and would learn a lot from being Vice-President. It would also make him a shoe-in for the nomination in 8 years,
I believe what Justin meant by the high ground is that Obama would be willingly to spare the Democratic Party the mud fight, whereas Hilary would not.
I like Justin Webb. I also like Matt Frei.
Maybe they should stop competing, and agree who does what.
Did you have a late night, Justin? Like other correspondents here, I don't get your comments on Obama becoming her Vice President. Unless, you course, you are not an impartial journalist and dream of seeing Hillary enthroned in the White House. Obama has a lot of guts and will now 'fight' the dirty tricks campaign meted out by Clinton. We Obama supporters expect another turnaround in the future. I'm afraid you are just going to have to live with that, when it happens!
Do you mean thats what you WANT to happen, as I dont think anyone else thinks ignoring the majority of the electorate is a good idea.
Don't forget the super-delegates, people!
The Clinton strategy is to offer Obama VP - an effective handcuff hampering a search of the Clinton closet!
I think he should reject the VP and leave that foul closet alone - If you sleep in a kennel you will catch flee.
Whether or not he would take it, only he can know. But he shouldn't.
Obama has to know that in 8 years time he will not be the same candidate he is now, and there's no way he could run anything like the same kind of campaign.
This his window of opportunity; far better he gives it everything and loses than hedges his bets and settles for the bronze because, y'know, maybe he'll have a better shot next time round.
Who knows what the lie of the land is going to be "next time round". If this campaign has proven anything it's that the best political minds can't predict what's going to happen tomorrow, let alone in eight years' worth of tomorrows.
The only answer is to seize the moment and see it through.
i blve they will both b unbeatable.obama clinton sounds ok.president obama,vice president clinton
Novak? Is he still allowed to be within a hundred feet of a typewriter or live microphone?
Please Justin, if you want to introduce the preposterous into consideration, you might spend an extra five seconds to find a journalist who has not yet destroyed his own reputation.
Clinton needed to score huge delegate victories to cut into Obama's lead both in terms of delegate count and number of states won, and failed. Her spin is unconvincing and insulting. As the Texas caucus results are finalised, Obama is picking up even more delegates and may exit Texas with two more delegates than Clinton.
The post is surely disturbing. is it that mentally sane for one to surrender a race to an opponent? I think the writer needs some help, either in simple statistics or simple logic!
I always find Justins webb's blogs very confusing in saying two different things in the same blog.
Today 1st para asking Clinton to Bow out. 2nd para about Obama to be Vice president.
Please give a realistic view.
V S mani
Hmmmm...just because Clinton is trying to project an 'elder statesman' image doesn't mean that you should fall for this hook line and sinker! Obama is ahead - he may well continue to be ahead. Perhaps it's time for Clinton to bow out gracefully and put the party's interest first.
I have followed the US Democratic primaries with much interest because first and foremost, whichever way you look at it this is going to be an historic presidential race.
Secondly, I am originally from Kenya and from the same tribe as Obama's father and would be very proud to see him realise Dr Martin Luther Kingβs dream.
Thirdly, we have never been so close to seeing history in the making in the US and the whole world is watching. The sad and ugly face though of America is put in a nutshell by the comment above from whoever this PARRISIA is!
Now that the Rupublicans have a candidate, what's stopping the Republicans from voting for Clinton so they have a less attractive opponent? Or is this not possible?
Why are the press vaunting about Clintons experience? What experience has she got apart from failing in her first attempt at the Health Service?
Justin, wow! your readers are unforgiving...some harsh comments there, especially from the Obamites. But I here what your saying...even though I would like Obama to be President in 08, I don't think he can do it against McCain...the best bet for 'President Obama' is to take the VP with Clinton, and succeed her in the following term. But, watch out Obama...don't let the Clinton's do an 'Al Gore' on you!
I just have a quick question about the whole shindig over in the US of A that I wasn't too sure of.
If it does go a brokered convention and Michigan and Florida come into play, will there be another vote or will the votes cast already count regardless?
The way I understand it at the moment is that the Clinton camp want the delegates reinstated so that Hillary's "wins" there can be counted, but surely that's unfair given that Obama didn't campaign in Florida and wasn't even on the ticket in Michigan.
Come on people why should someone be offered position number two when he is number one ???? Barak Obama is where he is now because the American people love him. Number 2... way he's on pole position and talk of him being offered vice presidency is a JOKE..
BLANTYRE MALAWI..
Some of the posts on here are very naive. Lets fast forward and imagine an election where it is Obama as the candidate. On election night he loses Florida, California, Ohio, New York, Texas... The big prizes, all of which he has failed to win so far. Obama may have more delegates, but you are forgetting that a number of the super delegates (potentially a large number) will stay loyal to Hillary, the one who wins the states a President needs to win. Also expect Obama to get less of an easy ride between now and the convention, the press are enjoying putting him on the spot a bit more now.
I like Obama, he would make a great Vice President. Just think, in 4-8 years time, he would be in a great position to become President. He would also have that vital experience he so sorely lacks now.
Clinton-Obama is the dream ticket.
i am in the UK following the Obama campaign. Am i missing something here? Why should Obama consider VP when even after Texas, he is still leading? Explain to me just how this piece you have written makes for a brilliant blogpiece(one of your readers said this is brilliant). Maybe i am getting emotional here but I cant help but feel insulted just for NOW!
Come on Justin - justify yourself! No one seems very impressed with this litte idea of yours. Please explain your thinking, such as it is.
The similarities with the latter seasons of the West Wing have been commented on before. Fellow fans will recall the way in which the Democratic Party machine tries to lean on Santos to take the VP slot and avoid the chaos of a Convention with no nominee. Is this what we're seeing happening in real life too? My guess would be that Obama is even less likely to accept the VP slot than Santos was in the TV show and I doubt that Hillary would be keen to share a ticket with him. All this suggests there is no end in sight to this bitter contest - which of course is good news for John McCain.
For heaven's sake how does a front runner become a running mate. Should'nt it be the other way round; Hillary is Obama's running mate. Go go go Obama, You're on the winning track!God bless you 'Prezzo' Obama
The similarities with the latter seasons of the West Wing have been commented on before. Fellow fans will recall the way in which the Democratic Party machine tries to lean on Santos to take the VP slot and avoid the chaos of a Convention with no nominee. Is this what we're seeing happening in real life too? My guess would be that Obama is even less likely to accept the VP slot than Santos was in the TV show and I doubt that Hillary would be keen to share a ticket with him. All this suggests there is no end in sight to this bitter contest - which of course is good news for John McCain.
Hahaha, oh Justin. This election is not taking place in a vacuum as Clinton's recent wins clearly demonstrate. You continue to jump from one bandwagon to the other.
Justin,
You yourself pointed to the Newsweek piece outlining how Clinton could not get enough pledged delegates even if she won all the remaining states.
She's behind in the next two (if one believes the polls) and didn't win Texas with a big margin.
Obama would be betraying his supporters by taking a running mate offer and McCain will beat Clinton anyway in November.
Her strong suit is experience and "being tested". McCain kills her on both. The only candidate to stop McCain is Obama (see West Wing season 7 for details).
Why on Earth be Clinton's VP? Everyone knows it will be the No.3 spot after Bill and Hillary. And why hitch your political fortune to the scandal ridden Clinton's? Obama doesn't want to suffer the same fate as Gore.
By the way the Texas caucus is going Obama's way - probably 56-44 - which will mean Obama wins Texas.
Surely the reason that Clinton would be in the box seat is that she won all the big states that the Democrats will need to win in order to get into the White House, i.e. Florida, New York, California? Or am I missing something?
Do the math...the following newsweek article explains why Clinton Obama is probably never going to happen - even if she wins every single primary from now to the convention, she will still lag behind Obama in delegate count.
Clever piece of spin on her campaign team's part though...
I agree, Obama is currently winning the Democratic Primary why would he want to be Clinton's VP?
This is probably just a tactic of Hillary Clinton's because she knows she is losing by popular vote/opinion and will try anything at this point to achieve her lifelong goal.
The running mates scenario is one that I have been pondering for some time now.
With 2 candidates so relatively close in delegates, surely this is something that the Democrats should have prepared for and sounded out the candidates on, long before now!?
To do otherwise seriously risks splitting the democratic vote. What better way to secure a victory than to have the two run together, potentially combining their fan base?
It was because of this point that I was very surprised that the contest was allowed to get so personal in recent weeks, as it has severely dented the prospects of these 2 working together.
In my mind I now think that there is no way that Hilary would accept the VP role, she's already been in the WH in a support role and has no desire to do so again. For her it's all or bust, which is why I think she was the one to make it more personal. The only problem is, by doing so she has perhaps not kept her sights on the bigger picture.
It always struck me that despite his amazing success, being the βoutsiderβ Obama would have been more content to accept the VP position and then use it as a springboard to the Presidency in later years - but this is now much less likely given the animosity Hilary has directed his way recently.
The fact is that both of them together stand a better chance of winning compared to each of them standing with an alternative running mate, but it feels like the window of opportunity for this to happen has well and truly passed.
If they do not run together and the Republicans win the Election then the Democrats will only have to look at the month of February and their own lack of foresight as to how, where and when they lost it.
I've been reading political blogs from respected news sources for a while now and this is possibly the strangest post I have ever seen. Justin, are you not following this race? Are the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ actually paying you to offer analysis this poor? I'd explain my reasons for saying this but I feel if I need to you really have not taken any of this nomination process so far in.
Justin, makes sense for Borak to be VP to Hillary to beat Senator McCain but you are looking at the election through the eyes of an Englishman!America is so different from the UK.
Gordon's Brown decision to be No 2 to Tony Blair may have kept the Labour Party in power in the UK for more than a decade but I wonder whether Gordon Brown regrets his decision.
If Borak wins the nomination, it will be the most fascinating election ever!An articulate Black man with left wing views against a 71 year old white American hero with right wing views and a few quirky left wing views which he will have to ditch. If Hillary wins the nomination, it would be a a very clever woman with an ex-president husband against a 71 year old American hero.
If either Hillary or Borak were to win the White House it would be a huge step forward in American politics and neither will be inclined to join forces at this stage.
Whoever wins should have an excellent chance of beating Senator McCain if America really wants some change. However in the end I believe the most important election topic will be jobs and the economy in an ever changing world and who ever can win the hearts and minds of the American people with regards to the economy will end up with the key to the White House.
So no more talk of joining forces, lets battle it out and let the Democrats decide their candidate! After all if Hillary wins she can always offer Borak a VP spot which could allow him to run later on and become President. I doubt it would work the other way as Hillary as already lived for 8 years in the White House and hardly wants to live in the second best house on the street.
Clinton needed to score huge delegate victories to cut into Obama's lead both in terms of delegate count and number of states won, and failed. Her spin is unconvincing and insulting. As the Texas caucus results are finalised, Obama is picking up even more delegates and may exit Texas with two more delegates than Clinton.
The final part of the Novak quote seems to be the watercooler issue, at present. What about the Florida/Michigan primaries? Should the democratic voters there be taken into account?
It's a dilemma.
The idea that a political party can determine its own rules for selecting its candidates seems pretty obvious to me. The DNC did just that in deciding upon the primary calendar. Florida and Michigan nevertheless jumped the gun by violating that calendar and holding their primaries before Super Tuesday. Their lawmakers - including Governors Crist and Granholm - knew exactly what the penalty would be, but they went ahead and did it anyway.
Lawsuits against the DNC's penalty (including one lodged by a Floridian senator and a representative, both Democrats) failed.
Given all this, the current outcry by these two states - again led by Crist and Granholm - is singularly lacking in credibility.
On the other hand, no-one can be happy with the current situation, least of all the voters and the DNC. In a race this close, excluding two of the bigger states doesn't feel right at all, regardless of sound legal arguments.
The solution? Who knows? Holding new primaries is costly and might even be unconstitutional. Holding caucuses - which would be perfectly legal, not to mention quite practical - would in all likelihood be unacceptable to the Clinton camp.
Messy? Sure, but that's politics for you.
This is absurd- offer HIM the VP out of good will. He has MORE delegates MORE won states and larger pool of the popular vote. The Clinton campaign are masters of spinning the facts. If Obama is cheated out of the nomination in some room at the convention in August the democrats will lose young voters who have been inspired for the first time (like me) in droves.
He is leading in the polls, leading in the popular vote, leading in delegates, and beats McCain whereas Clinton loses or ties - so lets give the "boy" a chance at the vice-presidency? This smacks a little of "he should know his place." Let the nice white lady be president and you be quite and be still and we will let you play Vice-President.
That is absurd. We need a decent person in the White House and for all Clinton's experience, she has little experience being honest, decent or authentic. Obama towers over Clinton and McCain. He is more presidential than anyone I have seen since Ronald Reagan.
I think it will be the perfect ballot ticket for the Democratics to have a Hillary-Barack as they front runners!
They will be unbeaten in the November election!
Justin, what your readers are missing is the concern that Obama is unelectable, despite his delegate lead.
Hillary's voters may defect to McCain, so strong is their doubt about Obama. He needs Hillary's votes to beat McCain.
Obama as the nominee is a dream for Republicans. Obama and Hillary, their worst nightmare.
I think it will be the perfect ballot ticket for the Democratics to have a Hillary-Barack as they front runners!
They will be unbeaten in the November election!
Unbelieveable.. It would be incredibly stupid on Obama's part to do that. How can the man in the driving seat decide to play second fiddle. Is it because Hillary has won Ohio and Texas.. When Obama was having Hillary for Breakfast, no one suggested this but now that she has pulled of three wins to one, this suggestion comes up from no where.. It's Hillary who has to concede to being the Vice.. America needs change and a Unity of purpose. Obama is the voice of a lot if not all of the minority in America and he would win come what may..And what is that Experience Hillary is talking about..? She had no security clearance and thus was not privy to the President's briefings or to the daily runnings of the white house..
Its so laughable to think that Obama should accept the VeePee offer when he is supposed to be the rightful Democratic Nominee.
I can see some bias in the polity.
For the Democratic party to win in November,it has to be Obama or else the Republicans will have it again.
So think Twice Democrats.
Justin,
You pose a very interesting question but I am fairly certain that Obama wouldn't consider it. He has more delegates already and the Texas Caucus seems to be going in his favor too. It simply doesn't make sense for him to 'bow down'.
Besides, Hillary is the one who needs to exercise moral control. Her campaign has been dirty, full of fear mongering and pretty hurtful to democrats as it is. Obama hasn't gone negative on her past but you bet McCain will.
If Obama ends up the nominee, I hope that he chooses anyone else but her. Though its very unlikely that she would even think about being veep..
These are democrats,... moral 'high ground'? It won't be anything but nasty for the next three to four weeks as they attempt to distroy each other. When the money and the media are gone, the Clintons will still be standing.
As a Republican, it don't get no better than this!
Why do all of the media outlets always seem to assume Clinton is the default nominee? That unless Obama does something extraordinary, he doesn't have a chance?
CNN, ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ, WSJ, FT, and of course the NYTimes (which I've never seen as biased on anything) all assume that if Clinton has any momentum, she will get the nomination.
Come on.
The key to a Democrat winning the General Elections is winning the Blue States and possibly Ohio and Florida. Sen Clinton has won all the important Blue States and Ohio and Florida.
If the Democrats are smart, they'll seat delegates from Florida. In that scenario, Sen Clinton will win the nomination and might ask Obama to be the VP.
Slightly confused Justin, I've been following your coverage for a good while, and this seems uncharacteristically unclear. Why is Obama being offered VP? Can you explain why he might take it (given his current and projected delegate lead?)
i like the way the contest is keen for the democratic ticket. at the end of the day, i will like to see the two leading candidates as president and vice. this conbine ticket will definately be the winning team.
I think that this is the only realistic outcome. It would be tragic if it went all the way to the convention. The democrats have an embarrassment of riches in this campaign - two great candidates that each offer a very potent symbol of change. I can't see Hillary accepting the back seat. She's older and more experienced. A one-term Hillary with Obama as her vice president would provide him with fantastic platform for the presidency next time round.
Some of our American cousins posting here appear to believe that the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ's chief US correspondent doesn't actually know the most basic facts about this election.
Everybody is well aware Obama has more delegates, so there's not really much need for half a dozen of you to point out the obvious.
What Justin is referring to is whether Democrats will reach a collective judgement about what the best ticket will be - giving them a good chance of controlling the White House for 16 years - and then ask the candidates to support it.
Being "fair to Obama" because he has most delegates is not really the biggest priority, surely. As an outsider, I can tell you with some certainty that your system of electing delegates to conventions instead of voting for a candidate directly (just like the electoral college for choosing the President), is pretty absurd - you should focus on things that actually matter.
Because primaries and caucuses take place in different formats over many months, it is not appropriate to say they definitely prove a candidate is more popular than another. They are indicative, and this time the indications are so unclear.
If you want a more direct way of doing things, just hold a national primary with every state voting simultaneously. But you don't have that system, so don't pretend that you do.
I agree with most of those who are posting: you're logic is backwards. Who would give up despite a virtually insurmountable delegate lead and decide to accept VP instead? Relative to the number of delegates up for grabs, the contest was a wash.
Why would Obama take such an offer? For now, the race is still close, even with him in the lead--maybe more substantially after TX caucuses are counted. While neither will be able to obtain a majority, Obama and Clinton are incompatible. Clinton is too polarizing of a candidate to defeat McCain; many of the Democrats and Independents that voted for Obama might switch to McCain when faced with Clinton as the Democratic option. Throughout her career, she has refused to reach accross party lines (i.e. her universal health care bill of the 90's when she essentially killed the bill by avoiding a Republican co-sponsor). Obama has no need to back down, and is the most viable Democratic candidate in the race. If offered, Romney should accept the VP nomination, but Obama should stand strong and stay in the race.
I think it is ridiculous to assume that it's only Hillary who will be on to of that ticket! Why can't you Brits for once think that Obama should be on top of that ticket? I think the best scenario would be Obama on top and Clinton as running mate. Her people (old people & Ethnic whites) will still vote if she's in as VP. Obama has already proved that he can get Independent vote, young vote, women vote and men vote. So, it's upto Clinton to accept the VP position.
I have a feeling that because in the end it is very hard that america will give a coloured person the presidency it might be actually the republicans who are working hard to get obama the nomination. Republicans fear the clintons' revenge. ever thought of that?
Yes we are sure he won't take it because he will be nominated to stand for the party as its presidential candidate. Its seems to me that all the race card is now being played here to discredit a potential candidate. Please allow people to choose without racially spinning issues, 'Shame on you Justin'!!!
Justin, I was very dissapointed reading your comment, and found it somewhat insulting. It shows me that you think that Barack Obama is not fit to be president. You and the press were responsible for what happened on Tuesday, not in Ohio (that state would have gone for Clinton even if she didn't campaign there)but to some extent Texas. For four straight days (Friday to Monday) it was all good things Clinton and all negative Obama. Nafta, Rezko, Tina Fey and her SNL friends etc. Well, that's the past and yes, Barack now has to prove that he is a fighter and made of sterner stuff. We still leads in the delegate numbers and according to the Clinton campaign a few weeks ago that's all that matters
I think a Clinton/Obama ticket would be great. Let's remember they are on the same team so to speak, and differ only marginally on certain policies (although not all). Also, I think as the race progresses, she will pick up momentum now.
And the argument that he has more states is questionable as far as the convention decision goes, should it come to this. Out of 11 staunchly Republican states which a Democratic candidate has NO chance of winning in November, he has won 10 of these. Whilst Clinton has won some key swing states - Ohio being indicative of her potential to being these over to the Democratic side come election day.
Let's get some perspective here. The two combined would have a huge support base.
Sorry, Ms. Clinton but trying to win votes by hinting that you'd name Obama your running mate is not only insulting to smart people but just causes you to come off as desparate. If the Democrats were smart, they would vote for Obama because he would beat McCain. A lot of democrats hate Clinton and would vote against her.
come on, look both of them ... Obama as US president .. hmmm.... he cant surely do that ... it will be mad ...
Doesn't it make the most sense for Clinton to serve 4 years and focus on current problems while Obama picks up experience? That would leave Obama with the possibility of 8 more years after Clinton leaves office.
If it's Obama, then the USA will have McCain for a president. If it's Clinton there may be a chance because -- and don't forget it -- America loves the underdog.
For the sake of party unity, this could come to pass but I hope that Obama has the moral authority to say, No I can't. Hillary roars of his inexperience but would have him be her running mate, one step from the oval office...Reality check: The VP slot already has been filled in the Clinton campaign and his name is Bill Clinton, as in two for the price of one. "Moral high road indeed!"
Chicago
It'd be a huge mistake for Senator Obama to subordinate himself on a ticket with Mz. Clinton at this time. Depending upon how the super-delegate issues unfold through April, he may - yet, tip the balance further in his favour. Notwithstanding Mz. Clinton's ability to access her husband's...leverage with some super-delegates/the Democratic Party 'old guard,' regardless of what happens in the spring, the convention's a long time away.
Furthermore, since the US is in a recession and it's likely to get worse before it gets better; whichever candidate assumes the roll of being the next Commander and Chief, the road ahead may be akin to Hoover's administration. Senator Obama would likely be better off seeing how the future primaries go and - rather than subordinate himself to Mz. Clinton, let her take over the mess the country's in if need be. After all, he's young [she's not] and a nation of Clintonvilles could make his next run a cakewalk.
#5: "How could Obam keep a straight face after a campaign promising 'CHANGE' "???, BECAUSE, you fools, he knows that "Change" is only an empty campaign promise. He's known that all along. Wake Up!!! Washington is a massive complex machine layered in UNChangeable bureacracy--and protocol--and tradition. One slick guy trotting in isn't going to "Change" a thing. WAKE-UP people! You've been played. Obam can't change a thing. He knows that. He just knows that "he can Fool Most of the People SOME of the Time." Just long enough to try and get elected, in fact.
I have being following the American
presidential primaries with keen interest.It is amazing how intellectualy sound the cadidates are,the intricate involve,the time spent and the huge amount of moneies spent on campaingn but the irony of it is after all set and down the end result .....still produce presidents like GW Bush.what a waste !
The Clintons come with a lot of 'baggage' along with their acknowledged first-rate political expertise.
I believe that 'baggage' cannot be overcome by the Clintons in the straight POTUS race, which must result in a McCain Presidency.
Therefore, it would be extremely unwise of Senator Obama to accept the position of 'running mate' to Hillary Clinton.
He would have nothing to gain and a lot to lose by becoming contaminated by association.
Better to wait until 2012, as he has youth on his side.
Rousing throngs in the thousands.
Electrifying the crowd.
Zeroing in on trigger points.
Keeping the competition at bay.
Outpacing everyone in fundraising.
I would hang in there Hillary Clinton, if I were you.
Yours comments are taking the long view, Justin, but are they justified? There are some here who cannot see the fact that there is a longer view in the Democratic Party at present; that strategy sees Clinton as the short term solution to gaining not only Congress and Senate, but the Presidency as well. And not for just one term.
The longer term view could therefore be that Clinton will make way way for Obama in 2012 if Obama accepts VP from Clinton in 2008.
Right now, I feel there is no accurate polling data which reflects how McCain will perform against either Clinton or Obama, but with the popular vote presently giving the Democrats the Congress and Senate, my money is on an Obama landslide in November if the Democrats choose him. If Clinton gets the nod, McCain will make it a much closer battle which the Republicans may just edge.
For myself, frankly, I think the Obama-Clinton ticket would be immensely more potent than the Clinton-Obama ticket. I know a lot of you guys have been dreaming of Clinton vs. McCain, but I'll be honest, they both look like cranky old people, and it's too much of a crapshoot. Obama vs. McCain looks a lot more like JFK vs. Nixon (though I don't think McCain is very much like Nixon at all).
The real problem here is that Obama would be in a very good position to succeed Clinton in eight years (being 55, a good age for a president), whereas Clinton will be 69). It's a rather heartless, agist way of looking at things, but that's the nature of the game to many.
This is why I think Clinton won't capitulate. For Obama, however, the problem is different. Spend 8 years as Clinton's VP (if she manages a second term, and Congress continues in the Dem's hands), and there's a distinct possibility that America may have tired of the Democrats that he'll be shut out simply by the desire for change.
The only thing we can hope for here is one of them to bow out for the good of the party. I honestly can't see Clinton, whose middle name ought to be "Ambition", tossing out what is likely her sole chance to grab the White House. I don't imagine, underneath that nice-guy persona that Obama is one bit different.
The very worst part of this, of course, is that with McCain's coronation, he's free to out-and-out campaign for the presidency, while the Democrats get to spend months watching their party get cut to pieces by two nearly equally matched individuals, and get to have many sleepless nights fearing that the super delegates will blow the whole thing out of the water.
Neither Obama nor Clinton will take second billing. The dream team you speak of is a pipe dream. Regardless and very unfortunetely, I say America better get used to two words: President Mcain.
Would you please stop making it seem that Hillary Clinton has a long term advantage in this race. Barack Obama is going to get the nomination, and he will not take a second seat to Clinton. You are writing for a major international news source and you're giving inaccurate descriptions of the current situation here.
Why should Barack Obama want to be Vice President? it is Hilary that is still well behind in the Delegate Count. She may have had a "one night" of Victory in Ohio and in Texas (little like the Neil Kinnock UK Labour Part infamous Sheffield Rally) - but we have to remember how much the gap was closed by Obama from a few months back and at the end of the day with caucus delegates in Texas how victorious was it then really for Hilary?
The last week Hilary's campaign has been based on Lies, Nasty Personal Attacks and Scare Mongering, why not Policy? - Gavin you must see and know in speeches she depends on scripts, IF she ever did have to answer the phone at 3am, while our children are asleep who would write her script then? who would do her make up and hair?
If the Grandee's of The Party do go against the will of the Voters, they could face damage like they have never witnessed before to the Party, are the Clinton's and the "old boy network" so important which the Washington politics of The Past is what the voters want CHANGE from.
What is this media "love in" with Hilary?
Barack Obama would never take a V P spot! That lady is what he is oppose to. The same old policies! He will not be in the White House running around bring her husband a glass of water. It would be best for him to just wait four years and return with these famous words, Yes We Can!".
It's simple, Justin.
You don't get to spend several months trying to assassinate someone's character, and then get them to accept the number two slot on your team.
Should you get the chance, you might ask Clinton why she thinks it's acceptable to use a leaked document characterized as "blatantly unfair" by the Prime Minister of Canada in her anti Obama campaign ads.
The real vice president if Ms. Clinton (aka Billary) was elected would be Slick Willy. No self-respecting Democrat would take the VP in name only job.
The real winners if Mrs. Clinton becomes the Democratic party nominee would be Ralph Nader (he says the system is fixed against newcomers) and McCain (if you want old party politics, why not go with the old man.)
What people are not mentioning is the states Hillary is winning are the ones the Democrats need to win if they have any chance of winning the race. I am hoping that Hillary wins the nomination as I cant see Barack beating McCain when the gerenal election gets underway
Justin,
After following you closely for many weeks, you tend to be more right-wing but close to Clinton. Very confusing indeed - I would wish you are neutral because your points are well summarised.
I wonder what you would report when you come back to the UK - the politics here makes you sleep with a cup of tea in your chin!
In short tell us that Clinton is pretending, Obama is politicking and McCain is Pushing to the White house. Come 2009, Ohio poverty will prevail, no change will come and alqueda will up the ante....
Despite Clinton's recent wins, I think Obama has the nomination almost sewn up. Mathematically, it is very difficult to see Clinton getting ahead in pledged delegates (unless a video of Obama smoking crack with Osama bin Laden turns up). If he gets to the convention with a lead, particularly if he can also claim a lead in the popular vote, it will be very risky for the superdelegates to overturn it (as would be true in reverse if, contrary to expectation, Clinton leads in both counts by then). In the Obama-leading case, they would risk accusations of racism as well as of contempt for the electorate. Also, contrary to what many (including Justin Webb) say, I think either Obama or (less certainly) Clinton will beat McCain. Given the looming economic crisis, and McCain's belligerence, a key Democrat message should be "War is VERY expensive. Can you afford John McCain?" They should play the "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" tape again, and again, and again. Hmm, I'm off down the bookie's to see what odds I can get on Obama winning the Presidency!
Obama has the most states, most votes, most delegates. Why would he agree to be #2 when he's in the #1 seat? Hillary's only argument left is that she has won "the big states." Her "big states" are also "blue states". Any Democrat can win them. Barack's big states -- like Virginia -- have not been in play since before I was born. He can win all the states Hillary can win. And more. She can't win some of the states he can win (like Virginia). Hillary's best scenario is a 51% majority. Barack can get a much bigger majority, and have a real mandate for his brand of change.
Hillary is a drag on Barack's ticket. He would boost hers but go down with her ship.
If offered the VP spot he should say a firm "no." If offered the Pres spot, he should say a firm "no" to Hillary as VP. No deals.
The democrats could display their unity by agreeing at this stage that it was either an Obama-Clinton ticket or a Clinton-Obama one. Then the fighting is (only) about who is top of the ticket.
Well Clinton is what America need right now.Obama can not solve the problem America face right now.The problem is not Irag war,The problem is the Economy.It too big for Obama if he fail America fall.So American should start looking at that now.Instaed of holding Clinton for the war in Iraq.The war in Iraq anybody could vote for it because they feel it was the right way at that time.But why is it ObAMA ONLY VOTE PRESENT ALL THE TIME IN OFFICE.hE NEVER EVEN MADE DECESION THE ONLY DECESION HE MADE WAS iraq war,all the time he vote present is it because he want to be president.I am black but color dont matter now.It the economy matter.I Live in Africa Senegal and i follow the election closely.Obama excetp vice and learn how to run govenrment u still young.
I'm disappointed Justin, you can do better than this
Justin,
Is there any legitimacy to my own personal feeling that if Hillary gets the nomination the Republicans will get more of the moderate/undecided votes? It appears to me that if Obama is nominated he will take those votes from McCain. Additionally, it seems Obama is seen as more likable than McCain, but McCain is more likable than Hillary.
I can't tell whether the suggestion that Obama bow out is founded on latent racism, Victorian etiquette, or a grievous miscalculation of 'experience.'
I hope that it's the last of these, but regardless, he -is- after all in the lead, and this article falls prey to the same assumption that's crippling a good slice of liberal America -- that one Democratic is as good as another, and anything's better than a Republican.
It's precisely that assumption that, presuming a Democratic win, will quite likely land us Democrats in the same muck that the Reuplicans currently occupy.
Offer the front runner a vp post!!!!
The is the most racist article yet.
The women should bow out. She will go down in history as the most devisive person 2nd to Bush.
I voted for Mr. Clinton twice..but Hillary..what netxt the dynasty contiunue and then Chelsea --which is being groomed as we speak..comes--and so it goes..
Get real people. After all that went wrong in the last 7 years we need a fresh start.
Justin--please stop putting this garbage in your web!!
I really don't understand how you can present this topic when your source comes from an ultra-conservative website. Don't you think that might have the potential to be misleading? I have to say this doesn't reflect well on your position here. You should be presenting the facts in a non-biased way. Shame on you, not just for clearly giving your readers a one sided story but also for making assumptions. You act like a journalist, you work for the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ, you should have better standards. I'm not sure how you have your job over there still. This is very unethical. You might as well quote a made up website and post a column that refers to John McCain as a goat herder. Doesn't make much sense does it? Well now you know how I feel after reading your "BLOG" here. And to think you have a column that is called "Justin Webb's America". I must say that if you were doing a huge book on the bipartisan aspect of america, you might have a good thing going. You're not however, you are covering an election. Regardless of how much experience you have, how long you've been doing this and how much of a pro you are you might want to take a step back and re-evaluate your original ethics. Those with power are the ones who should self-evaluate the most.
You, like most Britians at ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ, are a typical Clinton sycophant. Your slanted views for her are clear in your recent posting.
What planet are you from. Barack comes from way back to achieve parity in Texas. Currently has more delegates. So what is the basis for accepting a VP slot?
Can I add comment #12,688 that says, "What the hell are you talking about?"
Obama is WINNING. Why should the WINNER talk about bowing out and taking a VP position, especially when he's the WINNING candidate?
I swear to God, I'm going to have to stop reading the Beeb and every major news outlet that drums up this nonsense. You guys are beyond ridiculous.
This is quite surprising - only yesterday I was thinking the same thing, only the other way round - I was imagining Obama offering the vice-presidency to Clinton. A sort of American Dream Team the way they love it over there.
This is the closest race I can remember (ever?), so what could be better than a double ticket, as you say, that represents ALL of the Democrats votes (bar a few for Edwards)? They've said as much themselves, they preach from the same book so why couldn't they work together? If reaching across the aisle is easy for Obama, holding hands with Hillary should be a snitch, no?
After all, the presidency is very much a figurehead role (I seem to remember a piece on your blog about "do they really run the country?") and as a figurehead Obama is perfect - let him meander messianicaly round the world preaching hope and peace. It would make a nice change to the last one.
During this time Clinton could roll up her sleaves at home and wipe the floor... with the republicans of course. Woman behind the throne sort of thing - the REAL mover and shaker. Not that I'm saying she's not suited to be president (they've both more than proved that), but she seems to revel into the nitty gritty practical side of politics which seems more linked to the vice presidency (Dick Cheney anyone?). Too high profile I hear you say. I say - and Obama isn't?
I just can't help getting the feeling that Clinton is four years too late. I remember in 2003/4 crossing my fingers hoping that she would run. It would have been a scrap but I still think she could have done it. There was an article at the time saying that she would rather bide her time and then breeze in once the country was fed up to the teeth with Bush and the Republicans, as a sort of saviour.
Bad luck then that Obama seems to have trumped her on that one.
WAIT A MINUTE!, this is no rocket science, the gentle man OBAMA is leading with delegate and more states than hilary, now tell me why ono earth do suggest that he backs down for her, if it was the other way round it would have made sense.
Listen, America claim to be a democratic society, please keep race out of this, it is clear in recent states primary more white states have voted for OBAMA because they tired of bush-clinton-bush and then another clinton again, please is the bush and clinton family turning AMERICA TO A FAMILY AFFAIR??? PLS AMERICA RETHINK YOUR FUTURE. having said that we all know whats going to happen, its going to go all the way to the national convention and the RACE CARD WILL BE PLAYED. THANK YOU AMERICA
Why should Barack Obama want to be Vice President? it is Hilary that is still well behind in the Delegate Count. She may have had a "one night" of Victory in Ohio and in Texas (little like the Neil Kinnock UK Labour Part infamous Sheffield Rally) - but we have to remember how much the gap was closed by Obama from a few months back and at the end of the day with caucus delegates in Texas how victorious was it then really for Hilary?
The last week Hilary's campaign has been based on Lies, Nasty Personal Attacks and Scare Mongering, why not Policy? - Gavin you must see and know in speeches she depends on scripts, IF she ever did have to answer the phone at 3am, while our children are asleep who would write her script then? who would do her make up and hair?
If the Grandee's of The Party do go against the will of the Voters, they could face damage like they have never witnessed before to the Party, are the Clinton's and the "old boy network" so important which the Washington politics of The Past is what the voters want CHANGE from.
What is this media "love in" with Hilary?
Justin what is it that both you and your colleague Gavin seem to be pushing the same message?
How in this civilised world can we still have such thinking. on what grounds should Obama Suddenly shrink to this level of submission the Guy is on top for Christ's Sake. he closed the gaps from what the polls said about ohio and TX just 2 weeks ago.Doing so will cost the dems the presidency.we can bet if you dare wait until november. Make no mistake, this campaign is about change and that is the biggest contrast bebtween the Dems and Reps. Its not Rocket Science that Obama is notches above both HRC and JM when it comes to that. The man can better run america and the world by far than the other 2 hangers-on. Where is the clinton experience if all she has given us to this date is to doubt ourselves and be haunted with fear. Where is the experience if all we have seen is a lousy organisation of her campaign generating milage on falsehods and secretes about her tax returns. where has she trashed our belief that governance does not hinge on one man's experience but the collective responsibilitiy that we have towards each other as humans? She is destrying the dems for personal gain imagine the Reps puling put her ad on the 3am call in november should BO be the nominee (which he will) this woman is tearing the party apart.
The Clinton campaign today maintained that βthe vetting of Barack Obama has just begun.β The truth is, more than a year into this campaign, some very simple vetting of Hillary Clinton has yet to start.
In the face of her unwillingness to release her tax returns, Hillary Clinton has made the false case in this campaign that she is more electable because she has been fully vetted. When it comes to her personal finances, Senator Clintonβs refusal to release her taxes returns denies the media and the American people the opportunity to even begin that process. Though her campaign has tried to kick the issue down the road, Democratic voters deserve to know, right now, why it is she is hiding the information in her tax returns from last year.
The Clinton campaign has said that they have released copious amounts of financial information but there are many questions about their private dealings that could be answered in their tax returns but not in the information that is currently available. For example, here are eight pieces of information that could be learned from her tax returns, the accompanying schedules, and attachments:
* Effective tax rate β including whether or not any tax shelters were used to reduce it
* Amount of income for spouses by source
* Amount of stock gains and losses
* Gross income for the couple
* Amount earned from stock dividends
* Amount of household employment taxes paid
* Personal exemptions taken
* Charitable contributions made
Senator Clinton has also claimed that she is too βbusyβ to release her tax returns. Given the fact she is able to loan her campaign $5 million, you would think the Clintons would be able to hire an accountant. The reality is that she wants to keep this information hidden from voters. The people of Wyoming, Mississippi, Pennsylvania and the rest of the country should wonder why.
The Clintonsβ record on releasing tax returns:
FEBRUARY 2008: Clinton Reiterated That She Would Not Release Her Tax Records Until She Is The Nominee And Not Before Mid-April. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton says she won't release her tax returns until she has the Democratic presidential nomination in hand, and not before tax filing time comes in mid-April. "I will release my tax returns," Clinton said during the debate. "I have consistently said I will do that once I become the nominee, or even earlier." Pressed about the timing of releasing her tax returns, campaign aides were more reticent Wednesday, indicating that Clinton would not release the sensitive financial data during a hotly contested primary, but only at tax filing time. [AP, 2/27/08]
JUNE 2007: Clinton Does Not Plan to Release Her Tax Returns Until Next Year. According to the Washington Post, Clinton said through a spokesman that, βlike past presidential candidates,β she will βrelease tax information in the election year.β [Washington Post, 6/19/07]
APRIL 12, 1996: Clinton Released His Tax Returns. President Clinton and his wife earned $316,074 in 1995, including the president's $200,000 salary, according to tax returns released Friday by the White House. The public release of the tax returns, three days before the April 15 filing deadline, shows that Clinton and first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton are owed a refund of $5,656 on the $81,093 they paid in taxes, and will apply that refund to their 1996 income taxes. [UPI, 4/12/96]
April 15, 1992: Bill Clinton Made His Tax Returns Public. APRIL 15, 1992: Bill Clinton made his tax returns made public. [Los Angeles Times, 4/16/93]
Bill Clinton Released His Tax Returns In 1992 But Refused To Release Their Tax Returns From Before 1980. During the 1992 campaign, the Clintons claimed to be coming clean by releasing their tax returns from 1980 forward. But they steadfastly refused to release their returns for prior years, and only later did we learn that 1978 and 1979 were the tax years when Mrs. Clinton reported her 10,000% cattle-futures trading profit. [WSJ, 2/22/08]
The republicans are looking for a Hilary Clinton nominations. The reason Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh are supporting Hilary is because that is opponent they can drag through the mud. Bill's history with White water and Monia Lewinsky will be used against her.
So she needs Barrack as a running mate, if she gets the nod. Now on the other side, she would hurt Barrack, if he gets the nod. He would more than likely pick Edwards over Hilary.
It is weird Hilary is talking about a Hilary/Barrack ticket at this time. Especially with the uncertainty with the nomination and her being behind in delegates.
This runour was started by Hillary and Bill Clinton's people, as one of the means they are using to undermine Barack Obama by implying, subtly, that a Black American has no chance to becoming America's president. This, and other related tactics, has a name. It is Dirty Tricks. Last night I saw an extraordinary interview given by Hillary Clinton. Her face suffused with contempt, she spoke of Obama in the most disrestpectful dismissive manner that one could imagine. I am convinced she now hates him for getting in the way of her and Bill Clinton's obsessive dream of returning to the Oval Office. These two specimens have completely lost my respect. What do you get if you educate two rednecks? Two educated rednecks.
he might......as John McCain's running mate
Excuse me! Simple math.
Hillary is trailing Barack.
Why should he be VP?!
And why should he choose her? She has resorted to fear mongering lies... no respect... no integrity!
The world is watching!
Robert Novak! Remember Valery Plame?
Now think about Novak's credibility...
Strangely enough the left wingers (who by the way are trying to kidnap the leadership of the Democratic Party) have made an alliance with the extreme right who are afraid of another Clintonian success on how to sabotage as much as they can Hillary's candidacy...
Is it working?! To their surprise she is still very much alive, and a formidable fighter...
strategically hillary-p & obama -vp is better for the democrats long term. a total of 16 uninterrupted years for the democrats that way.
this charade gotta stop fast.
You ask if Obama should be Vice President , well I do not think this campaign will finish in that order!
As far as the other partys tax returns, seems like they had enough time to try to alter them dont you think, more dirty politics.
Why would Obama agree to run as V P?
1) He is leading in delegates.
2) Any action that did not recognize that Obama has out polled Clinton would fracture the party and alienate all of the new people that he has brought to the party.( Which Clinton could care less about)
3) If he were to to have a brain freeze and agree to such an arrangement, he would in effect be agreeing to become the most insignificant person in Washington. The Clinton's would not send him out even to get coffee.
4) Any chance for stopping the "old politics" would be forever lost, because what Hilliary would do to McCain would be too obscene to print.
5) It's what the Republicans, such as Mr Novack, would want.
Why would Obama take Clinton as a VP?
1) Its not possible, Obama would have to be in a coma to make such a bad decision.
2)Hilliary and Bill would undermine him at every Turn.
3) All of his supporters would vote for "none of the above".
4) It's what the Republicans, such as Mr Novack, would want.
If Hillary wins the nomination then she will run with someone other than Barack. Barack will not get sucked in and sullied by Clinton politics.
If Barack wins the nom, I am betting that he will run with a repub that is centrist but strong on foreign policy as vp. At first I thought he would run with one of the (R) ladies from Maine (Collins or Snowe) but they don't have the foreign policy experience.
My current guess is Dick Lugar (R) Indiana as VP. Barack & Dick went to Russia together to inspect Nuclear facilities.
Obama/Lugar is the ticket I see.
By the way folks, Obama has actually won Texas, not Clinton!!!!!
The 3 am ad worked because it played on real unknowns about Obama - the extent of his grit and judgement. He has to allay that fear by showing that although he may not start a fight, he knows how to finish one. If he gives up the nomination battle now, when he's leading, I don't believe Americans will ever trust him to lead the U.S. as President.
Is this a way to bring back Jim Crow in the U.S.? A black man has won significantly more states, has created a buzz that results in record registration of new voters, and has more delegates.
But has to take a back seat to a white woman.
That was the 60's. This is 2008. Get with the program.
Democracy means just that - majority wins.
Hilary as VP, if that's what has to be done to stop the current stupidity. The other way around is plain wrong for the many reasons given above and would be suicide for Obama: he'd be dragged down and he'd never see the presidency after her. But the other way around, Barack would have an attack dog who could do the dirty stuff he doesn't like doing. Just make sure that dog is given a strong muzzle.
Obama will still be ahead in delegates, states and popular vote after Pennsylvania even if Clinton won 65% of the popular vote and delegates there and if she does well in Mississippi this Tuesday. How could Obama adopt the 'moral high ground' by accepting the VP running mate position when he'll still be ahead on all counts? Clinton could take the moral high ground and take the VP slot - the question is whether she would personally.
Note that the above calculation is true even if Florida were to be included with it's previous counts (Given that Clinton only received 55% of the vote in Michigan yet Obama was not on the ballot a rerun in Michigan would likely be close or in Obama's favour). The only way the maths works in Clinton's favour is if the Superdelegates reverse the decision of the voters. This race is still Obama's to lose. The Democratic Party has committed political suicide before but is usually more subtle about it.
IF OBAMA WINS THE NOMINATION, HE WILL CHOOSE JOHN EDWARDS AS VICE PRESIDENT BECAUSE EDWARDS DOES NOT HAVE ANY OF THE CORPORATE BAGGAGE THAT HILLARY HAS.
So far as I can tell, although she won the popular vote, Clinton looks likely to lose the overall Texas delegate count - is there a reason why there has been little or no comment on this or why the Democrat results in Ohio and Texas are still not up on the "mapping the vote" page?
Whoever wrote this has a lot of nerve! Why should the front-runner even consider the number 2 position?
Because he's black and people are surprised that he got this far?
Obama has said that he would not even consider running a second time if he lost, so why would anyone think he would take the number 2 position?
Today's New York Daily News captures the essence of Hillary best:
"Hil's Chutzpah: ..Offering Obama the
No.2 spot is like selling a house you don't own."!!!
You have to be joking right? Why would he be vice president and he is winning this thing? Are you playing the race bait card like Clinton? Clinton knows she lost this one and her's are the last kicks of a dying donkey. Barack and Clinton will probably split Florida and Michigan. She might win Florida and he Michigan. That will give him over 90 delegates and some change to bring his case to the super delegates. If Barack is not the nominee, the democrats may just as well wait for 4 more years. Vice president? You kidding me??
Isn't this just the West Wing being played out right before our eyes. See Seaon 7 for American history in advance up to and including Novemebr 08!
Tried posting this before but it didn't go through. I don't think Obama would accept the Vp slot but the 'moral high ground' argument for him doing so is that the Clintons will go to any lengths to win the nomination, they will summon battalions of lawyers to argue over Florida/Michigan, split the Democratic party, hell burn down the convention hall. Saving the party from perhaps irreprable damage would be the 'high ground'. Please note I don't agree with this argument and I doubt Justin does either but part of his job is to provoke debate and from the number of responses I would say he has succeeded.
If Obama bows to H. Cliton then we want to question his intent for starting the race with her.