Based on the campaign cycle, why not just move up the election a year?

That said, I do believe she and Obama on the same ticket have a lot more chance of winning in the fall.

Obama winning on his own is all well and good for high school track.  For the presidency of this country with so much at stake, if Hillary increases the Dem's chances of winning (and I believe she does,) then I hope A) Obama offers her the vice-presidential slot, and B) Hillary takes it.

We must not underestimate the neocons and their dirty tricks.  Hillary has as good a shot as any of derailing them while Obama can be the unity man.

I predicted that Obama would win the nomination, in part because the neocons wanted him to.  Yes, he has a true, great following, but I can't explain the Mouth Piece Media's consistent and continuous praise of Obama and damnation of Hillary any other way.  While misogyny is true and real and was ever-present, it also made a nice cover.

I also predicted and do predict that the media will drop their love-affair with Obama and grow increasingly more negative.  Hillary can call them out every time and deconstruct their BS.

Here's the web site:

The problem with Hillary is that she is head and shoulders above him on so many issues and in so many areas.  How does she, for example, go out and sell the Obama health care plan that she knows and 18 million + of us know is inferior to her own?  

If she's in the Senate, she's in a better position to put together health care legislation that she knows will be better than that watered down thing Obama calls a plan.  Maybe, like Jeralyn, her usefulness is in holding Obama to a higher standard, and pushing him on issues he's happy to ignore.

To my way of thinking, what comes out of the Congress will only be as strong as the people in it - and what we have seen in the last 2 years tells me that we are a long, long way from being strong.  Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi need to go and in their stead we need people who understand what leadership is; unfortunately, if Obama wins, you aren't going to see that kind of change - you are going to see the Obama version: more jello.

First, he won't be standing on his own, he hasn't done that for one minute this campaign.

The DNC and Dem Leaders anointed him the Chosen One, and were willing to steal her delegates to do it.  They chose him to lead their purge of all things Clinton, or working class, or feminist, or older, or minority other than AA from the party.  They created their own crucible; let them win or fail the test on their own.

I wanted this to be a Democratic presidency this cycle too.  I did not want 4 more years of Republicans.  But I no longer see that as the choice.  I'd rather trade 4 years of McCain now than 4 or 8 or 12 or 16 years of Republicans starting 4 years from now.  I'm much more afraid of Republicans who have time to regroup and organize themselves for an assault on a Jimmy Carter Redux presidency than to give that role to McCain now.

I believe Obama needs to win the White House on his own, with support from those who believe he's the best choice for the country. While I believe he's a far better choice than John McCain, I don't believe we should force Hillary into thinking she owes it to him or the party to be on his ticket. She's given enough.

Absolutely. I couldn't agree more.

Hillary Clinton's spokesman, Howard Wolfson, sent out this message today:

    "While Senator Clinton has made clear throughout this process that she will do whatever she can to elect a Democrat to the White House, she is not seeking the vice presidency, and no one speaks for her but her. The choice here is Senator Obama's and his alone."

Interesting. Hope it's just a chat--not sure I want her running with him....

Okay, so now that Hillary has issued a statement to the press, I'll elaborate on what I know:

Basically, on Tuesday Hillary spent the day at home calling superdelegates.  In doing so, she discovered that Obama supporters, Uncommitted supers and a few of her supporters had essentially made a pact with the DNC that they would not support Hillary at the convention.  She was essentially told that she needed to get out of the race asap.  Someone told the press that she was going to get out last night, but Hillary didn't want to exit the race when someone else told her to do it (the media) and instead, decided she would exit on her own time, under her conditions.  ...  In fact, during the meeting today, she joked that she had realized that she wanted to be a person who "talked for a living", as you always had work and the things you said didn't even have to be true.  Anyway, apparently, the idea that Obama isn't going to be able to win the nomination came up while talking to the DNC/supers and the response she received was that Obama brought in a lot of new Democratic voters (and ultimately, a lot of new Democratic money) and thus, while the party might lose the election in the short term (the presidential election, that is), the long term would be good, as the party would have lots of new voters and money.  The belief was that even though Obama might not be able to win the presidency, the fact that he had "all these new voters" would help to ensure that the party won the congressional and senatorial seats in play in November.  I asked if Hillary had read the comments posted by her supporters and was told that she did and that if she felt she could win the election (garner the superdelegate support at the convention), she would have stayed in the race.  However , the DNC and supers made it very clear to her that they would not support her and that she needed to get out.

Is that while the platforms espoused by both candidates are quite similar in the basics (and yes, different in the details, practicality, etc), the main reasons why Clinton will not be offered the VP slot, nor would she accept it if offered is as follows:

1. The two candidates truly represent vastly different wings of the party...wings that are not compatible in terms of overarching outlook on how to "do" politics both inside and outside the beltway bubble.

2. The people surrounding the two candidates (consultants, advisors, pollsters, political allies, etc), have extremely different visions about how to run campaigns, how to deal with special interests of various stripes, and how to go about "forging consensus" and with whom to do so.

I don't believe we should force Hillary into thinking she owes it to him or the party to be on his ticket. She's given enough.

Emphasis in quote above is mine.

Unfortunately, the DNC and the Obama crowd are saying otherwise - not that she owes it to them to be the vp, but that it is her job to unify the party.

However, Hillary can't go into the voting booth with 17 million people and force them to pull the lever (or press the appropriate square on the touch screen).

1.  It is NOT Clinton's job to seek this out.

2.  Obama can offer it and then it's Clinton's choice to accept.  Or not.  Her choice.

3.  Regardless of anything else that happens, if Obama loses in November, what does that mean?  It means the wrong candidate was chosen in May.  That's all it means.  It means nothing more than that.  Nothing at all.

BTD believes Obama has a better chance of winning if Hillary is the nominee. That's one consideration, but it's not the only one.

There are a lot of good reasons to pick her...wide support and appeal, intelligence, all her other abilities. There are some reasons not to pick her (Bill being foremost among them).

I think what really matters is: is she able to be president if something happens and can she help with the electoral map.  Clearly, she'd be able to be president....I haven't developed an opinion on the electoral map.  I don't think it's enough to think all dems that voted in the primaries would vote for the ticket.  That may be right, but it feels shallow now.  I'm really eager to see some good analysis on the issue.

Remember, Dubya ran on "changing Washington" too!