1968, AGAIN? How an Obama-Clinton Ticket Can Stop the Next Nixon and Put 2 Dems in the WH

[leveymg]

I woke up this morning afraid - this is too much like '68. Remember that year, that Convention, THAT Presidential election? I do, and I never, EVER want to go through THAT again.

A bitter Democratic campaign and election fought out in the midst of a divisive war and a wartime recession. A divided country, divided party going into a violently contested convention, winner-takes-all. Nixon wins.

Not again. Fortunately, there’s a way out of this nightmare.

Let’s discuss that, below . . .

Here’s the deal, one that gives Obama and Hillary each a key to the Oval Office. They would have to agree to a two-key system, like the launch controls on a nuclear submarine, on the powers of the Presidency.

Would that be acceptable to both sides if it avoided the sort of intra-party bloodbath and brokered convention that denies both the election? Perhaps, but is it possible?

***

First, we have to ask and answer a base-line question: What will happen if both sides push the button during the primaries, and go nuclear in the remaining Denocratic primaries before the convention?

For that, we have to take a cue from the Cold War Doctrine of Mutually-Assured Destruction. A mutual scorched-earth campaign risks poisoning the Democratic candidate, whoever that might be, in the general election.

Whatever the themes of attack are, those that seem to work best will surely be amplified by the McCain noise machine. Should we really give the GOP a head start and manual for nuking the Democratic candidate?

That raises a couple more questions: What would be the likely outcome if the party big-wigs end up deciding the candidate in a deadlocked convention. Seems like a prescription for disaster.

• What are the chances of a brokered convention, decided in the back rooms at the Denver Pepsi Center by Supers? Seems pretty high at this point, actually. If things continue as they are today, neither side will have sufficient delegates – pledged and supers – to achieve the magic 2025 needed to take the nomination on August 25. The whole thing may then come down to the decision made in the following three days about how the delegates from the disallowed Florida and Michigan primaries are split up. There’s no way that such a process is going to not set off a riot by those who lose that power struggle.

• What are the delegate totals at this point?
(lizardbox did part of the math).

Pledged Delegates
Obama: 1384
Clinton: 1230
----------------
Diff: 154 (Advantage Obama)
Super Delegates:
Obama: 198
Clinton: 243
-----------------
Diff: 45 (Advantage Clinton)
Total Delegates:
Obama: 1582
Clinton: 1473
-----------------
Diff: 109 (Advantage Obama)

Here's what's still up for grabs: http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/primaries/democraticprimaries/index.html
WY - 18 delegates
MS - 10
PA - 188
Guam - 9
IN - 84
NC - 144
WV - 39
KY - 60
OR - 65
MO - 24
SD - 23
PR - 63
________
727

Wildcards:

FL (redo? proportionate?) - 210
MI (redo? proportionate?) - 156

There are 794 (not including Michigan and Florida) total Democratic superdelegates.

Bottom line: If they split the remaining primaries 50/50, neither side will come anywhere close to the number of pledged delegates needed to nominate.

Then, if they split remaining supers, that still doesn't decide it. That moves the final, deciding decision to what to do about FL and MI, which may not be decided until the convention. Or, the issue may go to federal court. That sort of thing surely won’t go over very well with voting public.

A brokered convention will be a base-killer, no matter which side wins. A convention decided by party insiders would be the worst possible outcome, particularly if it follows a scorched-earth primary campaign. Expect a sharp drop-off in manpower and money to the Democratic candidate. By at least 20 percent. Given the high negatives carried around by both candidates, that would likely have the effect of handing the election to McCain.

If things continue on the same trajectory as last night, the result will be Mutually-Assured Destruction in Novemember. Both camps might, therefore, consider a co-Presidency deal, while such a deal can still be struck.

What is a Co-Presidency?

A co-presidency agreement is a legal contract signed by both candidates that lays out the terms of the relationship, assuming a Democrat wins the election, between the President and Vice President. Without changing existing constitutional arrangements, they could agree to give the Vice President effective veto power over virtually all key Executive Department decisions:

• joint-selection of Cabinet officers, Ambassadors, Supreme Court nominees, and other appointments;

• mutual agreement on the language of Bills submitted or signed by the President;

• and inclusion of the Vice President on the National Security Council and any other significant national security or domestic policy bodies

***

Is the prospect of an Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ticket really so-fetched? Apparently not, as neither would rule the possibility out when asked about it by the moderator during the debate on January 31: See, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18599483

Moderator Wolf Blitzer of CNN asked the rivals whether they might wind up forming a "dream ticket." That seemed out of the question after the bitterness of the last few weeks — but maybe not:

"Would you consider an Obama-Clinton or Clinton-Obama ticket going down the road?" Blitzer asked.

"Well, obviously there's a big difference between those two," Obama replied. Clinton joined in the laughter that greeted his response.

Obama tried to sidestep the question, saying it was premature and presumptuous to speculate about vice presidents. But pressed further, he allowed that "Hillary would be on anybody's short list."

"Well, I have to agree with everything Barack just said," Clinton added, to more laughter.

After the debate was over, Obama and Clinton huddled on stage, whispering into each others' ears — and their body language seemed to suggest that these two candidates really liked each other.

It was as if both Clinton and Obama had decided there was too much to risk by repeating the harsh attacks of their last debate in South Carolina.

Do they still like each other enough two months later to consider really trying such a thing. One thinks they would, if they both recognized that either of their chances of occupying the White House may very well depend upon it.
________________________________________________
Cross-posted at Daily Kos: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/5/121330/2081/246/469610