Why an Obama / Clinton ticket is better than Clinton / Obama

[boricua79]

Simple folks

An Obama / Clinton ticket would:

1. Get the support of independents who are inspired by Obama and are willing to support any party. That's why he's winning states that usually have high independent / Red State politics. Many Republicans are also supporting Obama.

2. It would unify the Dem base. I don't see many Clintonites refusing to support Obama, but the opposite is not true. There's many people who are voting Obama who previously supported Biden, Edwards, Dodds, Kucinich, and who do not want to support a Clinton candidacy. If she's VP, that wouldn't be a problem. Obama voters and Clinton voters would both get something in the ticket

3. No anti-Hillary rallying cry on the Republican side.

Turn the ticket around:

Clinton / Obama

1. you lose independents who don't like Hillary. you get little if any Republican aisle crossers.

2. Dem base gets disunified. Many Obama supporters (and stragglers from the other anti-Clinton dem candidacies) are disatisfied and decided to stay home or vote Republican.

3. The Republican base becomes unified on more of an anti-Hillary than a pro-McCain candidacy. McCain, who does not have the support of conservatives, profits from an anti-Hillary "sympathy" vote for his candidacy.


It's simple. The winning ticket is Obama as Prez, Hillary as VP.

[TexasObserver]

1. Winning ticket is Obama-Someone other than Clinton

No matter how much 40% of the primary voters in the Democratic primary want Hillary on the ticket, she is not a candidate who will help on the national ticket, IMO. Half the party despises her and pretty much everyone not in the party despises her.

The VP nominee needs to be someone who can help the ticket win.

[boricua79]

3. I would prefer Edwards as VP

but given political realities, between the two choices I outlined, Obama as Prez is the better choice.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

2. Neither is going to happen

and I am glad it won't. There is too much animosity between them and plenty of other talent (and better strategic choices) for them to choose from.

[roesch]

4. other choices

O clearly brings independents and progressives to the game, while HRC appeals only to the base---I think O should lead the ticket, but frankly Richardson would be a very wise choice.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

6. I see Richardson with Clinton

and Edwards with Obama.

[Lilith Velkor]

5. Good points

Besides, racism is less socially acceptable than sexism.

[awaysidetraveler]

7. Obama won't rally with Clinton or vice-versa. He'd stand a better chance again in 4 years.

There's no way I'd vote for HRC. No way in hell.

[frogcycle]

8. that would be like the bush/cheney formula

put somebody relatively inexperienced in the oval office to hold down the fort and deliver the party-line messages; maybe make an opinionated comment now and then; have the VP behind the scenes running the country

[boricua79]

9. yeah, except, Obama is not a dolt and won't deliver party messages

and the VP will most definitely will not be running the country.