Why Obama could never be Hillary's VP.

[Meldread]

I believe Obama is going to win the nomination, so this post is really divided into two parts. The first is the argument against Obama being Hillary's VP and the second is the argument of why Hillary could potentially make a good VP for Obama.

There is really only one good reason why Obama should not accept the VP slot if Hillary wins the nomination: Bill Clinton. Anyone who doesn't know how things went down between the Clinton's and Al Gore, and why Gore has very little love for the Clintons should http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/11/clinton200711">read this Vanity Fair Article. It is long, but well worth the read. That is why Obama should turn it down, in a nutshell.

However, if Obama wins the nomination, as I believe he eventually will in the end, Hillary may not bring him any states he could not already capture himself. There is a possibility that her presence on the ticket could even alienate some swing voters. However, there are some benefits that she does provide and I believe that they synergize well with one another.

We all know that Obama and Hillary are fairly identical when it comes to their policy proposals. What we are really voting on is electability and leadership style. That is the key difference between the two. Everyone knows that Obama is the type of leader who comes up with an idea, then forms a team to hammer out the details. Everyone also knows that Hillary is the type of woman who loves to dive head first into the details herself - she is a policy wonk.

Hillary Clinton could make a potentially good VP choice for Obama because...

1. She can let the Big Dog off his leash. With Obama at the top of the ticket, there is no danger in the insinuation that he will be the one running the White House through Hillary. Obama ineffectively blocks that from happening due to his presence at the top.

2. With Bill off his leash he can do what he loves to do: attack and campaign. VP's are generally your hatchetmen, and Obama gets two for the price of one with Hillary. Both Bill and Hillary love their hatchets, and that allows Obama to be the candidate of hope and change, whereas Hillary is the VP of 'fall in line or suffer the consequences.'

3. Obama is the idea guy, the guy focused on the big picture. Hillary is the details woman, focused on making the wheels turn, busting kneecaps if necessary.

4. It leverages both their strengths while minimizing both their weaknesses. Hillary's meme is that she is the candidate of experience. Both the General Election and the Primary Election are elections of change and new ideas. That's Obama's meme. An Obama weakness is that he can be smacked around with a lack of experience, but Hillary buffers him against such attacks.

5. Both of them get to make history together. Obama would be the first Black President. Hillary would be the first woman Vice President.

6. Her negatives become less of an issue. One word: Cheney. He is a man so hated, that even most of his party hates him. If Bush could win with him on the ticket, Obama could win with Hillary on the ticket.

7. It helps Obama with hispanics, and angry Clinton supporters who would stay home otherwise. It helps unify the party quickly after a potentially damaging primary season, preparing us for the fight against McCain.

8. Obama can block a DLC take over of the DNC and prevent the blocking of liberals, progressives, grassroots and netroots from the party.

Now, let me be clear. I do not think Hillary would ever accept the VP slot. There is too much ego and pride. There is a possibility, though, that Obama could accept a VP slot from Hillary. If he is wise, I would advise him against it. Not only because of what is revealed in the http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/11/clinton200711">Vanity Fair article, but because I think it could be damaging to his career. Additionally, the strengths that an Obama / Clinton ticket provide are negated when it becomes Clinton / Obama.

Those are my thoughts.

[anamandujano]

1. "What we are really voting on is electability and leadership style."

Sounds like the W campaign.

They are not identical in health care or competence to fix all that is broken.

[RaleighNCDUer]

6. True.

Hillary has NO experience in fixing those kind of problems. When Bill was in the WH he stopped the investigations into BCCI and Iran/Contra and CIA drug running, and did no follow up of the Bushco scam that made millions in the collapse of the S&Ls.

Our candidate has to be free of those kind of compromises.

[Skittles]

2. what exactly does the article reveal

besides the fact that Hillary did not want to be a Stepford wife/doormat First Lady?

[silverweb]

3. Actually...

I kinda liked the idea someone floated the other day of naming her to the Supreme Court. I think she'd do a lot of good and likely thrive in that environment.

Then again, she may really love campaigning every few years, so solidifying her power and "busting kneecaps" in the Senate might be her preference.

Of course, none of it's up to us, anyhow... but speculating can be fun. ;)

[Meldread]

4. Yes, I have also given that thought as well.

Hillary would also make a good Senate Majority Leader. There needs to be unity within the Senate, and I believe she's the type of woman that would twist arms until they break and force Senators to fall in line. That has always been my primary source of respect for Hillary - her determination and willingness to fight, tooth and claw, until the bitter end, cutting the throats of trusted friends if necessary to achieve victory. She has a warrior's spirit that is both admirable and frightening at the same time.

[RaleighNCDUer]

7. Sorry, the DLC has enough power as it is - I don't want a Majority

Leader that will break arms on its behalf.

Prefer someone who will look out for the whole party, not just the republican wing.

[anamandujano]

5. She should be president and Obama can keep learning in the senate.

He is not ready for prime time, certainly not dumb like Bush but as arrogant as the day is long.

He also embraces more Repuke stances this side of Lieberman.

Out with the old, in with the new, like Kennedy, Kerry, Clinton's policy makers, etc. Ok, whatever you say.

[splat]

8. I agree, because two groundbreaking candidates on the ticket is too much