MyDD :: Where to go from here

Where to go from here

by Trey Rentz, Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:07:13 AM EST

Ok, where we all have to go from here is pretty clear, to me.
So I thought I'd share this with you - maybe some Clinton supporters are wondering what will happen next.

It's pretty simple. Your candidate is going to be the Vice President, what the Bush administration has fashioned to be , essentially - the CEO of the United States. A powerful position that reflects the strength of the candidate and her skills put to good use. President of the Senate. Behind the scenes work.
Drains the Cheney quagmire and makes the office workable again.

Then, we're going to put John Edwards in as Attorney General. The man has made a career out of righting wrongs. With John "let the eagle soar" Ashcroft and Alberto "top gun" Gonzalez outgoing, there's enough work there for a young lawyer from North Carolina, to keep him out of trouble. Besides, his wife is hot. Did I say that? You bet I did.

Finally, we've got to have Bill "put the north koreans in their place" Richardson as Secretary of State. Condi "bin laden determined to attack US" Rice has served well under the Bush administration, she's done almost everything they wanted her to do. But Bill Richardson, who's hailing from a state where the worlds first commercial spaceport is being built - is the man for the job.

Finally, Jerome needs to put me back on the front page!

Tags: general election, fixing the world, for the win (all tags)

Permalink :: 23 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Clinton won't be VP (2.00 / 2)

She overplayed her hand and as a result it would now be a sign of weakness if Obama puts her on the ticket.

Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius

by Blue Neponset on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:10:12 AM EST

You have got to set aside your bias (none / 0)

if you have any reasonable expectation of Clinton supporters doing the same to support Obama, and at this point, your side of the equation has considerably more lose. Unity is everything, not only for this election, but for the good of the party after it.

by phoenixdreamz on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:17:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You have got to set aside your bias (2.00 / 1)

No, our side doesn't have more to lose.

Everyone in this country has something to lose if disgruntled Clinton supporters help to elect McCain.

by emptythreatsfarm on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:25:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

All I can ask is that you please stop (none / 0)

framing everything so negatively. I could turn that around and say the same basic thing - that we lose everything if disgruntled Obama supporters don't stop acting like sore winners they help elect McCain. Unity 1st and foremost now.

by phoenixdreamz on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:31:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You have got to set aside your bias (none / 0)

Clinton supporters will get behind Obama's nomination because it is the right thing to do, not because of anything I say or do.

Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius

by Blue Neponset on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:44:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton won't be VP (none / 0)

Let me start by saying I'm not sure I think that offering Clinton VP is a good idea. I would prefer several other possibilities.

However, if it is required to win the election, he needs to do it. I don't think he'll appear weak. He won.

The VP has not traditionally been a very strong position - the office has as much authority as the President gives it.

If Obama wanted to give Clinton a project like healthcare and a strong leadership role he could.

If Obama wanted to make it a weak position that focused on the traditional meet, greet, and visit politics of past VPs, he could.

What is everybody worried about?

by emptythreatsfarm on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:23:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton won't be VP (none / 0)

What worries me is:

1) The possibility that Obama caves in on the VP slot for Clinton. It would make him look weak.

2) The possibility that Clinton will push Obama so hard on the VP slot that he has to push back even harder and Clinton takes this to the convention.

3) Clinton is running for 2012, and the VP talk is an excuse to take this to the convention.

I don't trust Clinton. Her speech last night made me realize I don't distrust her enough.

Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius

by Blue Neponset on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:52:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton won't be VP (none / 0)

on point 1 - actually, he would look strong - it could send a message that he isn't afraid of Hillary and Bill taking over the show (which I doubt they would)

I think he would look weak at this point by not offering it, as she stated she was open to it, because it would look like he is scared of them.

by colebiancardi on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:54:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

whatever it takes (none / 0)

I lean in agreement toward your point about making him look stronger.

But I'll repeat, if the Obama team's calculus doesn't show an electoral advantage for putting Clinton on the ticket, I think she should respect that decision and ask for influence in other arenas.

by emptythreatsfarm on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 11:22:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Where to go from here (none / 0)

"Your candidate is going to be the Vice President"

I sure hope you're right. Besides providing an instantly unified and enthusiastic party, there simply isn't another person anywhere in the country who could be as competitive for Obama as she was against him, and combined with an equal number of passionate and dedicated supporters from nearly every critical swing state, Hillary has got to be at the top of Obama's V.P. short list, and then there's everybody else.

by phoenixdreamz on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:12:54 AM EST

Re: Where to go from here (2.00 / 2)

I was going to write a diary about this very topic.

As you know, I am a strong and passionate HRC supporter, who will vote for Obama, but not with the type of vigor I would have with HRC.

If HRC is on the ticket, just think of the millions like me who would then be re-energized and now pour our heart & souls into this campaign.

selfish - nah. I didn't vote for BC in the 1992 primaries. He got the nomination and I would vote for him. But when he put Gore on the ticket (I have had a long admiration for Gore since 1988), I was energized for the Clinton/Gore ticket.

So much so, that when BC came to Southern Cal in Oct of 1992 and held a rally, I was a convert to Bill Clinton. And have been ever since.

so, yeah, I will vote for Obama. but just think of how the party will be energized if you have the 2 sides together and believing in one another.

I know there are some who voted against Hillary and not for Obama. That is not the best way to pick a person. I think those folks are the minority - the Hillary haters - in the Democratic party. They just are shrill and loud.

by colebiancardi on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:31:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't see it... (none / 0)

I just don't see Hillary as VP. For one, I don't see her accepting it even if offered.

The writing was on the wall after Super Tuesday that Obama was going to be the nominee. If, at that point, Hillary had worked hard building herself up and tearing down McCain, instead of building herself and McCain up and tearing down Obama, THEN she would have a shot at the VP slot. She doubled down, went all in, etc, etc, to win the nomination.

Check out the ad the RNC made, full of HRC & Bill ripping on Obama:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2DECDKOF nw

They picked out seven quotes - five are from Bill or Hillary.

Remember Edwards in '04? After it was obvious Kerry was going to win, he had nothing bad to say about Kerry. He'd rip on Bush when someone would ask him his favorite color. That is how you get offered the VP slot. Not by poisoning the well.

by grover738 on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:38:28 AM EST

Re: I don't see it... (2.00 / 1)

ah, remember when Bush went to Israel and made the comment about appeasers?

Hillary ripped into Bush on Obama's behalf as well.

by colebiancardi on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:41:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

true (none / 0)

And that was really good of HRC to do. But comments like that were the exception, not the rule.

And one minor point - that statement was after the IN/NC primaries, when it was really, really obivous it was over.

by grover738 on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 11:09:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: true (none / 0)

and now the primaries are over.

It WAS a primary - two people fighting like crazy - why is it that people think primaries are all about pink ponies and flowers?

it isn't. Dean got hosed in 2004 by the others. But I guess because it was Dean and not Obama, it doesn't matter.

by colebiancardi on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 11:16:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: true (none / 0)

Since you brought up '04, just go ahead and give me one example of Dean's rivals praising Bush while tearing down Dean, and I'll concede your point.

(crickets)

by grover738 on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 11:50:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: true (none / 0)

oh, so morphing Dean with OBL wasn't nasty enough

got it

(crickets)

she didn't "praise" McCain - she stated he had experience, which was clarified as the wrong type of experience, but experience nevertheless.

lord, if that is praising, then I guess Obama really DOES love Reagan.

by colebiancardi on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 12:23:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: true (none / 0)

As for the Dean/OBL morphing, which democratic candidate was behind that again?

How this this not praising McCain -

http://youtube.com/watch?v=o10lQUm5gKM

A prepared statement in a news converence, 40 seconds long - a long soundbite, around the limit that the news stations will play uninterrupted.

I don't doubt that she "qualified" her statements later by saying McCain has the wrong type of experience. But you and I and certainly HRC & her staff know how the media works. Her qualifying statements didn't see the light of day, and she knew they wouldn't.

Bottom line is that you don't build up the Republican while tearing down the Dem. That's what HRC did, and she conciously chose to do it in a prepared statement. But it didn't work well enough, she lost, and now she's going to have to live with the consequences of that decision.

Like you stated above, primaries are not about pink flowers and ponies.

by grover738 on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 12:53:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: true (none / 0)

Dick Gephardt (the dean smear). I believe Kerry also worked with him on that.

by colebiancardi on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 01:22:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: true (none / 0)

Not even close to as direct as Hillary. Some people who had connections to Gephardt and Kerry's campaign were associated with a 527 that put together an ad that showed the time magazine with OBL on the cover while questioning Dean's readiness.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/12/1 7/elec04.prez.dean.osama/

No morphing - that was an RNC ad against Max Cleland.

And let's not forget that HRC ran an ad (her campaign, not a 527) that used OBL in much the same manner as the ad above.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsm emo.com/2008/04/new_hillary_ad_shows_bin _laden.php

Sure, it was brief, but the fearmongering messages were the same - Osama is out there, and Dean/Obama won't keep you safe.

Again, just so I'm clear - I don't fault HRC for running so hard against Obama. Not at all. She went all out for the nomination, worked her butt off, did everything she could to win.

Where she crossed the line, where she lost the opportunity to be VP, was when she praised McCain at the expense of Obama. We'll be watching RNC ads the rest of the year with her saying those words.

by grover738 on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 03:09:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Where to go from here (none / 0)

I don't believe Hillary will be offered the VP spot.

Why?

Because you have to have a good working relationship with the VP, as president. And I don't believe Clinton would ever truly understand that she's number 2, and has to follow his lead. Every time. I've had enough of the VP running the government, thanks.

by Lawyerish on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:41:32 AM EST

Re: Where to go from here (2.00 / 1)

oh come on.

he gives her UHC and she will run with that. That is what JKF did with LBJ - JKF gave LBJ Civil Rights and LBJ was a powerhouse to twist arms and get it done

by colebiancardi on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:44:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Where to go from here (none / 0)

Traditionally, when there is a close primary fight, the endgame becomes a negotiation between the winner and the runner-up. The winner needs a united party, the loser wants influence and a need to satisfy his or her supporters.

It's been a long time since there has been a close primary fight. The last somewhat close primary fight was in 1988 between Michael Dukakis and Jesse Jackson. Thus, this process potentially is going to offend a lot of Democrats who have never witnessed this type of situation because the act of bargaining hard may be misinterpreted as being disrespectful and sour grapes.

So What will Clinton seek? At the minimum a prime time speaking spot at the national convention. If Obama cannot even accomodate this, then the Democratic Party will be divided in the fall. She will also seek help in raising money to pay off her primary campaign debts. She may also seek the vice presidency or at least influence on who should be vice president.

So what will she offer? Even though Clinton will support Obama no matter what, the intensity of her support will be determined by how much Obama accomodates her without kissing up to her. Even Clinton would become annoyed and lose some respect for Obama if he kisses up to her too much. She also has millions of dollars in her bank to be used for the general election.

Whether Obama can unite the country is a big test for him. Obama's theme is that he can unite the country. If he can unite the Democratic Party he'll pass the first test.

Dizzy Zzyzzy

by Zzyzzy on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:55:45 AM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.