Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama?

9 03 2008

I’m randomly looking about at political news this morning afternoon (I slept until noon. An old broad has to get her sleep but I never do that so I’m somewhat surprised myself.)

A couple of things crossed my mind as I sipped my first cup of coffee for the day.  First of all, Dennis Hastert, of course, resigned and his seat is now held by a democrat. This is bigger news than you would think.  Bill Foster won the seat and will head to Washington.

But there is an underlying issue here that is impacted by national politics. Obama campaigned for Foster, John McCain campaigned for Foster’s GOP opponent, James Oberweis. It may appear like a small matter but it’s not. Hastert’s old seat was rooted deep in the middle of Republican country. And apparently Obama pulled more weight with voters than McCain. Oberweis was apparently well-known in this part of Illinois although he had lost in the past. But the thing is, in politics, there is this old thing sort of like the Academy Awards where people feel it’s that candidates “time.”

He, in all honesty, should have won. He had more money (1.2 million from the GOP and only $620,000 for the Dems) and more face recognition.

He didn’t.  And now it’s in the hands of the blue.

It goes without saying that every vote is necessary right right now. Obama won Wyoming yesterday which halted some of Hillary Clinton’s momentum, but it just created more of a speed bump. You guys know where I lean and I’m watching this.

It’s because every vote counts.

These elections are like driving on a back road covered in hidden ice this year. You don’t know which way your car is going to go as it could either way. But the most interesting thing from yesterday from a national perspective is what Bill Clinton said.

In Mississippi, Clinton brought up a Clinton/Obama ticket. I don’t think this is going to happen but the big question is why? Why is the former president bringing this up?

He said:

“You look at most of these places — he would win the urban areas and the upscale voters, and she wins the traditional rural areas that we lost when President Reagan was president,” he said. “If you put those two things together, you’d have an almost unstoppable force.”

Clinton moved then to take another question, before he returned to the subject, saying he didn’t blame either candidate for not wanting to put the matter on the table now. “Nobody wants to give up the top spot until the voters get done voting,” he said. “[But] if you got the assurances of ultimate unity, then it’s a great mistake for other people to try to shut this process down early. I mean, the last primary is June the 7th. I didn’t get the votes in ’92 to be nominated until June the 2nd. We don’t need to be in any hurry, let everybody vote.”

I don’t see it. But then again, I thought Betamax machines would still be around in 2008. I find this interesting. I don’t think it’s going to happen because would Clinton be alright with an Obama/Clinton ticket? I’m thinking not.

But Bill knew this would get some national play. And a Clinton never says anything without there being some reason behind it.

Interesting.

Advertisements

Actions

Information

7 responses

9 03 2008
Sean Braisted

They are saying it because they think it will be an argument for the super-delegates, who they will need to steal this election away from Obama. If they can sufficiently trash Obama between now and the convention, they’ll say he can be seasoned as her VP if they only pick her.

Of course, to me this seems a little like the “back of the bus” mentality…but that is what I’ve come to expect.

9 03 2008
DB Carden

Obama has already stated publically he would not be VP.

I think it is the internal politics of the party that we don’t necessarily see in public. I think there may be rumblings of the superdelegates wanting to put an end to this now by pledging to Obama. Obama has already closed that superedelegate gap considerably (Realclearpolitics has it 242-210 for Clinton in Superdelegates as of 3/9/08 2:45pm) over the last couple of weeks.

The end of Bill Clinton’s quote is quite telling in that regard. They want to hold out until June hoping for an electoral comeback or a backroom deal to be made in Clinton’s favor. I don’t see that happening based on the remaining states to vote. Obama has demographic advantages in 7-8 of the 10 remaining contests.

All that said, I don’t really have a clue. I agree with you though that a Clinton never says anything without some purpose.

9 03 2008
newscoma

I agree about a backroom deal.
I saw after I wrote the post that Obama said No, No, No.
But then again, remember when Kerry and Edwards were whacking at each other in ’04.
Anything can happen, but I’m leaning toward no.
It’s a new political world.

9 03 2008
Pete

Vote for Obama. Look at his record regarding the Katrina aftermath. I bet HIllary is not even on the radar.

http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2007/08/29/when-the-cameras-are-off-barack-obamas-hurricane-katrina-record/

9 03 2008
captainkona

The Clintons have disgraced us. Whitewater, Bill’s unbecoming behavior in the White House, both of their conduct recently. His Lee Atwater style rhetoric, her blatant lies and manipulations….

Neither of them deserve to represent this country any more than a Bush does.

The Democratic party would do well to deactivate them both once and for all. They have become our collective bane.

10 03 2008
Tomagam

Hilary – NO RELEVANT EXPERIENCE FOR PRESIDENT

Please see following
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/08/wuspols108.xml
It shows that Hilary clinton, despite being
in senate for about 5 years, HAS NO FOREIGN
POLICIES EXPERIENCE.
I have posted this note to foxnews.com,
and it has appeared. Is there any conspiracy.
I feel that OBAMA organization should CLINTON
ORGANIZATION FOREIGN POLICY and NATIONAL EXPIRENCE experience claims. CLEARLY HILARY HAS
NOT GOT ANY RELEVANT experience TO think she is
better than BARACK. Fellow americans, Stand back and think about it.
Hilary has no experience apart from emotionally supporting her husband bill clinton
during his presidency. Obama compain team should examine the ludicrous claim of 35 years experience !
Please see following
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/08/wuspols108.xml

14 03 2008
Robert Rickover

Obama-Clinton, Clinton-Obama – either dream team is McCain’s worst nightmare. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama can easily make that nightmare a reality for him right now. Here’s how:

Both publicly pledge that if are nominated for President, the other candidate will be their first choice for the Vice Presidential spot.

This immediately puts a stop to attacks on the other, or calling their ability into question. They can still debate the issues and clarify their differences, but the main focus of their anger and outrage can now be directed at the Bush-McCain policies of the past 8 years.

The enthusiastic support of the other is exactly what each candidate will need to win in the fal.. Each appeals to the voters the other has the hardest time attracting. If they combine their strengths – “hope” and “work” – they both will almost certainly be in a position to lead America out of the mess we are in.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: