PDA

View Full Version : Obama-Clinton ticket for 2012




charrob
08-02-2010, 03:35 PM
Obama-Clinton ticket for 2012

by L. DOUGLAS WILDER
8/2/10 4:35 AM EDT


With midterm elections approaching, and many focusing on politics, more than a few people want to determine what the tea leaves might mean for 2012 — when the “Big One” is on us again.

It would be good for President Barack Obama and the Democratic Party to address some important issues — now.

The president’s poll numbers can be read different ways, depending on who is doing the reading. One thing is clear, though: He has to improve his favorability numbers, as well as the unsettled national mood reflected in the “right track/wrong track” indicators. Neither is easy. Nor is there a simple fix.

But one thing Obama can do is reconnect with the 2008 campaign themes he used to barnstorm the nation: “audacity’ and “change.”

Since Obama has expressed admiration for the portrait of Abraham Lincoln that Doris Kearns Goodwin paints in “Team of Rivals,” he could do the 16th president one better: He should name Hillary Clinton as his running mate in 2012. That would be both needed change and audacious.

Clinton has been nothing but a team player who has earned good marks since being asked to serve as secretary of state. She has skillfully navigated the globe and been tough and commanding when the moment called for it (with Iran) and graceful and diplomatic when situations required (navigating complex relations with Russia, Pakistan and China).

Has her time as secretary of state been perfect? No. Has she ended these 18 months with the stature of someone ready and able to be president were the moment to call for it? The answer, unequivocally, is “yes.”

Since the heady days of the 2009 Inauguration, middle-class independents have grown increasingly distant from Obama. Working-class voters — always more enamored of Clinton — have grown even more wary and distrustful of the Chicagoan. Both voting blocs pose the danger of serious defection in 2012. Without their support, Obama cannot win.

With this state of political fragility, Obama needs to reevaluate the policy advisers who brought him here. That leads to the threshold question of whether Joe Biden should remain on the ticket. I say no.

One can see why Obama chose Biden. The public debate had long been preoccupied with questions of national security and war. Sept. 11 jolted America out of its second gilded age, and it seemed voters would decide the 2008 election based on security and foreign policy — as in 2004.

Obama turned to a Democrat likely to add this expertise to his standard — Biden, who had chaired both the Senate Judiciary and Foreign Relations committees during four decades in Washington. He could ensure the nation that a Democratic administration understood the gravity and complexity of foreign relations and international security.

But problems emerged from this rosy scenario:

The financial crisis that began in September 2008 fundamentally changed the political conversation. Biden has not distinguished himself, other than to be more prone to gaffes — which had been cited by some skeptics when Obama first announced his choice. Many had hoped a new office and new responsibilities would produce a more serious and sobered reliability in the man. Unfortunately, they have not.

I will refrain from running through the list of Biden gaffes. Not because I dismiss them, but because late-night comedians have made them legendary. I realize many say that he brings some more humanity to this administration. But there are too many YouTube moments.

Even recently, he has continued to undermine what little confidence the public may have had in him.

During Biden’s June trip to Florida, for example, the presumptive Democratic gubernatorial nominee Alex Sink, was so upset that she told POLITICO the whole trip was a “screw-up” and she was “embarrassed” by his speech. The Democratic Party is trying to elect this woman governor of a swing state — one Obama will need in 2012 — during the middle of the oil spill crisis in the Gulf. No vice president should leave such ignominy in his wake.

A few weeks later, Biden comes south and says at a fundraiser, “[T]he heavy lifting is over,” and now the campaigning can begin.

Really? Has the crude oil off the Gulf Coast disappeared? Is the unemployment rate back to its mid-1990s lows? Is the deficit magically under control? Are the president’s approval ratings in the mid-60s? Do large majorities of Americans believe we are on the right track?

I don’t think so. But none of that seems to matter to Biden. People around this country are hurting, and Biden has told them Democrats in Congress and the White House have done all they can or will for them.

As BP chief executive, Tony Hayward said he wanted his life back, then went off on his yacht. The BP board wisely replaced him. What’s so different about Biden saying, in the middle of several crises, that he wants to get back to politics when the people are craving leadership?

Has Biden ended these 18 months with the stature of a man ready and able to be president should the moment call for it? The answer, sadly, is “no.”

I say none of this to detract from Biden’s service to the people of Delaware through his many years in the Senate. But these times demand our country’s best. If Democrats and the president don’t see this, the people will look elsewhere.

Can all the president’s political ills be laid at Biden’s feet? No. But Obama must look through his administration and make a wholesale change. The vice president should not be immune.

Clinton is better suited as the political and government partner that Obama needs.

I suggest this as one who vigorously supported Obama over Clinton in 2008. In fact, I campaigned across the country and engaged in spirited debates with former colleagues. I don’t regret any of that. Yet, now I think Clinton brings bounty to the political table that few can match.

If both John McCain and Obama were given a sip of truth serum, both would admit they made serious mistakes in choosing running mates in 2008.

McCain can’t do anything about his blunder. Obama can and should.

L. Douglas Wilder is the nation’s first African-American to have been elected governor. He served in that office in Virginia from 1990 to 1994.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/40523.html

djdellisanti4
08-02-2010, 03:53 PM
I didn't know Wilder was still alive!

Biden has been a pretty pathetic excuse for a VP so far. I'm not 100% Clinton would take Obama up on the offer though. Also, I don't think the name "Clinton" inspires very much change, but I guess latley the Clinton name has been popular.

charrob
08-02-2010, 03:53 PM
this is a ticket i've long since worried about because i think it guarantees Obama will be with us for 8 years. Additionally, Clinton is more of a war-hawk than all the neocons put together.

i hope i'm wrong; but i don't think so. if the Republicans were smart, they'd elect RP for 2012. That would be imho the only ticket that could possibly beat obama/clinton because you'd bring over the antiwar, pro-civil liberties left. But i won't hold my breath for that either. :(

if RP runs as an independent, he really needs to have a Kucinich VP, otherwise he's just going to split the Republican vote and it won't be enough to beat obama/clinton.

Vessol
08-02-2010, 03:55 PM
I miss having Dick as our VP, the guy was pure evil, even in the way he looked.

Biden is just that weird kid that everyone remembers vaguely, but just sits in the back of the bus and never talks.

Ekrub
08-02-2010, 04:32 PM
I will never understand the Kucinich love on this board. The guys is a socialist.

Vessol
08-02-2010, 04:32 PM
I will never understand the Kucinich love on this board. The guys is a socialist.

And he sold out on Audit the Fed.

charrob
08-02-2010, 04:56 PM
I will never understand the Kucinich love on this board. The guys is a socialist.

the point was that if RP runs indy, doing so with another conservative/libertarian will just split the republican vote which ensures an Obama/Clinton victory in 2012.

to pull more voters into an indep. ticket would probably require someone like a Kucinich to pull in votes from the left.

i really do think if Obama teams up with Clinton we can, otherwise, kiss 2012 goodbye. Clinton pulls in a whole new set of voters, and imho that is a winning ticket. :(

btw: kucinich is a liberal not a socialist.

One Last Battle!
08-02-2010, 04:59 PM
If RP goes Independent, he will be completely marginalized and all the good work we have done in the Republicans will be for nothing.

It is Republican Paul or bust, people. There is NO way for him to win as an Indy if he can't win the Republican primaries, and the fallout from him doing so will trash our cause and anyone he supports for ages.

FrankRep
08-02-2010, 05:04 PM
I miss having Dick as our VP, the guy was pure evil, even in the way he looked.

Dick Cheney ex-director of CFR talks to David Rockefeller
YouTube - Dick Cheney ex-director of CFR talks to David Rockefeller (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbnpN07J_zg)

Old Ducker
08-02-2010, 05:04 PM
the point was that if RP runs indy, doing so with another conservative/libertarian will just split the republican vote which ensures an Obama/Clinton victory in 2012.

to pull more voters into an indep. ticket would probably require someone like a Kucinich to pull in votes from the left.

i really do think if Obama teams up with Clinton we can, otherwise, kiss 2012 goodbye. Clinton pulls in a whole new set of voters, and imho that is a winning ticket. :(

btw: kucinich is a liberal not a socialist.

If RP chose a dem for a VP, it should be Grayson. Paul is just too nice for his own good. He needs an attack dog who will call a spade a spade.

charrob
08-02-2010, 05:11 PM
If RP goes Independent, he will be completely marginalized and all the good work we have done in the Republicans will be for nothing.

It is Republican Paul or bust, people. There is NO way for him to win as an Indy if he can't win the Republican primaries, and the fallout from him doing so will trash our cause and anyone he supports for ages.

So if he doesn't win the republican primary just accept 8 years of Obama/Clinton. :(



If RP chose a dem for a VP, it should be Grayson. Paul is just too nice for his own good. He needs an attack dog who will call a spade a spade.

you have a point Old Ducker ;) . My problem with Grayson is that i've heard he's an aipac tool.

malkusm
08-02-2010, 05:14 PM
the point was that if RP runs indy, doing so with another conservative/libertarian will just split the republican vote which ensures an Obama/Clinton victory in 2012.

to pull more voters into an indep. ticket would probably require someone like a Kucinich to pull in votes from the left.

i really do think if Obama teams up with Clinton we can, otherwise, kiss 2012 goodbye. Clinton pulls in a whole new set of voters, and imho that is a winning ticket. :(

btw: kucinich is a liberal not a socialist.

I agree that if he runs Independent, he needs someone from the left as his running mate. That's why I've been pushing this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Schweitzer

ChaosControl
08-02-2010, 05:21 PM
If RP chose a dem for a VP, it should be Grayson. Paul is just too nice for his own good. He needs an attack dog who will call a spade a spade.

Oh goodness, that'd be fun.

charrob
08-02-2010, 05:22 PM
I agree that if he runs Independent, he needs someone from the left as his running mate. That's why I've been pushing this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Schweitzer

hmmm, it looks like he sure does have a high rating as a governor and good experience... do you think he'd have the name recognition that a kucinich would?

Old Ducker
08-02-2010, 05:24 PM
you have a point Old Ducker ;) . My problem with Grayson is that i've heard he's an aipac tool.

I'll have to check that out. It would surprise me as Grayson is a solid non-interventionist. I'm on his mailing list.

DjLoTi
08-02-2010, 05:27 PM
Who cares about the dems or the dem vp? We're not going to hear about any possible change for the VP until after the republicans are nearly rapping up. In fact, if anything, this should be revealed right before the republican primaries.

Just goes to show all this administration cares about is politics, and holding power, and not about helping our country.

malkusm
08-02-2010, 05:29 PM
hmmm, it looks like he sure does have a high rating as a governor and good experience... do you think he'd have the name recognition that a kucinich would?

He was mentioned as a possible VP candidate for Obama in '08, and delivered a speech on the last day of the DNC in '08. He aligns with almost all of Paul's positions; you could probably call him a "left-libertarian."

He doesn't have national name recognition, but neither did Palin. Neither did Cheney in 2000. I don't think that name recognition for the VP candidate is a huge deal - and it would certainly make headlines that (R) Paul, running on an independent, picked a (D) for his running mate. Especially if you consider that Paul could be polling around 15% in the spring/summer of '12....

charrob
08-02-2010, 05:48 PM
He was mentioned as a possible VP candidate for Obama in '08, and delivered a speech on the last day of the DNC in '08. He aligns with almost all of Paul's positions; you could probably call him a "left-libertarian."
...

interesting... hopefully Obama won't team up with Clinton, but if he does and RP does not win the primaries, beating Obama/Clinton will take alot: that is a powerful ticket.

Golding
08-02-2010, 06:02 PM
I might be wrong, but it seems like Biden's done pretty much what is Constitutionally expected of a VP. Nothing, save be available to tiebreak a vote. To say he's a "pathetic excuse of a VP" makes no sense. Cheney was a pathetic excuse of a VP, because he was trying to play president.

Whether Clinton is on Obama's ticket or not means little to me. I wouldn't expect her to play any bigger a role than Biden currently does. If anything, Clinton's name would probably make it easier for people to vote against Obama. That's a good thing. Biden gaffes, but he also has the ability to make sound points and even (at times) destroy reputations. He's the reason why people still refer to Guiliani as "A noun, a verb, and 9/11".

Imaginos
08-02-2010, 06:35 PM
Screw Obama/Clinton ticket.
Alvin Greene rules supreme over Biden or Clinton.
Obama/ Greene 2012!
:D

djdellisanti4
08-02-2010, 06:41 PM
He was mentioned as a possible VP candidate for Obama in '08, and delivered a speech on the last day of the DNC in '08. He aligns with almost all of Paul's positions; you could probably call him a "left-libertarian."

He doesn't have national name recognition, but neither did Palin. Neither did Cheney in 2000. I don't think that name recognition for the VP candidate is a huge deal - and it would certainly make headlines that (R) Paul, running on an independent, picked a (D) for his running mate. Especially if you consider that Paul could be polling around 15% in the spring/summer of '12....

Just read his wikipedia page and found a nice quote.

" "[i]n times when our country is pushed to our limits, those are the times when it is most important to remember individual rights."

I like him a lot better than Grayson or Kucinich. They might dilute the freedom message in a VP debate, if an independent candidate gets invited to debate.

libertybrewcity
08-02-2010, 06:44 PM
Clinton just won't stop until she is president. She has been a part of the Obama administration as much as Obama has. If Ron Paul gets the nomination we can pin her with a lot. Dems are toast if we are battling them. In a debate, Ron Paul's VP would call her out on everything she has done to hurt the American people. God help her.

Vessol
08-02-2010, 06:57 PM
Dick Cheney ex-director of CFR talks to David Rockefeller


I don't say it cause I like the guy, just that he was easy to hate.