home

Hillary, Caroline and Obama Fly to New York Together

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:18:30 PM EST
Tags: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton 2008 (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Maybe Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic Vice-Presidential candidate after all.

Democrat Barack Obama and his former rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton, flew to New York on Wednesday along with his vice presidential searcher Caroline Kennedy.

The flight came on a day in which Obama touched off new speculation about his choice of a running mate by making an unannounced morning stop at the downtown building where another member of his vice presidential search team, Eric Holder, works.

..."I'm not going to tell you," the smiling likely Democratic nominee told reporters when asked who he met and what they discussed as he exited the office building that houses Holder's law firm some two hours and 20 minutes after entering. He had two top aides — campaign manager David Plouffe and chief strategist David Axelrod — at his side.

While I've never been one of those pushing a joint ticket, it seems to me now Hillary on the ticket would vastly improve Obama's chances in the general election. It certainly would get me more enthused about the election.

< Bad Argument For Obama Fans | Medicare Cuts Aborted, Funds Restored >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Hillary, Caroline and Obama Fly to New York Together | 195 comments (195 topical)
    I would never (5.00 / 5) (#1)
    by oldpro on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:21:06 PM EST
    be enthused about it but Hillary on the ticket is the only possible way to get my vote this fall.

    ditto (5.00 / 2) (#91)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:47:50 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    What's two times (none / 0) (#132)
    by pie on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:57:53 PM EST
    more than eighteen miilion votes?

    Compare that to the republican primaries.

    [ Parent ]

    In All Fairness (none / 0) (#134)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:05:08 PM EST
    Republicans in all 50 states did not get the opportunity to vote like the Democrats -- especially in states with closed primaries. McCain became the presumptive nominee after Super Tuesday Part 4 (TX/OH...) But, I get the gist of your post.

    Getting back on topic, I'm hearing murmurs that Charlie Crist, Mitt Romney and Carly Fiorina have been narrowed down as McCain's top 3 choices for VP.

    I wonder what happened to Pawlenty, Jindal and Sanford? Probably too young?

    I can't say I'm surprised, but those top 3 really do put heat on Obama to choose wisely.

    [ Parent ]

    In all fairness, (none / 0) (#137)
    by pie on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:16:47 PM EST
    do you think the republicans would have gotten similar numbers if the primary had lasted as long?  Such a stellar group.

    You needn't answer.

    We are gisty.  :)


    [ Parent ]

    I am baffled (5.00 / 6) (#2)
    by Steve M on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:22:54 PM EST
    by the people who claim that Hillary's vote on FISA means that she can't be the VP now, or that she did it to make Obama look bad, or whatever.

    Gee, I'm sure never before in history have there been two candidates on the ticket who disagreed about something.  What will Clinton and Obama do when the media confronts them with the fact that they voted opposite ways on the FISA bill?  Gee, they might have to say that they had different opinions about whether it was a good bill!  End of the world, clearly.

    Clinton's FISA vote helps Obama. (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by phat on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:25:04 PM EST
    It pushes him to the middle in people's perceptions.

    Look who he voted with and who he didn't vote with today.

    He voted with Ben Nelson and not Hillary Clinton.

    I don't know how much that has an influence on the VP pick, but her vote does not hurt Obama.

    [ Parent ]

    Whoa ,that's not the middle I'm in the middle his (5.00 / 5) (#49)
    by Salt on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:01:16 PM EST
    vote is a move to the Right.

    [ Parent ]
    Well sure (none / 0) (#67)
    by phat on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:29:09 PM EST
    So is Clinton.

    That's my point.

    [ Parent ]

    What-!#@!*&! (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by talex26 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:53:42 PM EST
    Clinton is a move to the Right!!

    Ah, NO!

    [ Parent ]

    That's not what I meant (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by phat on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:44:54 PM EST
    Her position on this is the center.

    [ Parent ]
    She voted NO (none / 0) (#138)
    by talex26 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:19:38 PM EST
    and that is Center??

    Do you even know what you are talking about?

    Did you even read her statement today? I don't think so.

    [ Parent ]

    Frankly, I think NO may be the center (5.00 / 6) (#141)
    by RalphB on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:25:38 PM EST
    now for the population at large.  People don't really want to be spied on and are not so afraid anymore.

    It must seem far left to Democrats in Congress though  :-)

    [ Parent ]

    Well (none / 0) (#187)
    by phat on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 09:34:54 PM EST
    Is "no" on this a far-left position? No, it's not.

    I'm talking relative position as perceived by the public.

    McCain not showing up for the vote places him somewhere outside of this whole thing. Outside the mainstream, maybe?

    He made a mistake.

    Again, this puts Obama to the right of Clinton on this. If there is a more "centrist" politician on the national stage, I don't know who it is.

    She's not a right-winger and she's not a liberal.

    If Obama can position himself between Clinton, the     middle, he's closer to the middle than McCain is. I do believe the buzz-word for this is "triangulation".

    It's classic politic strategy.

    This helps Obama more than it hurts him.

    If the vast majority of Americans didn't think this was minutiae than it would be different.

    Put her on the ticket and he shores up the left and frames himself as between Clinton and McCain.

    [ Parent ]

    Again, when you hear the click (5.00 / 1) (#201)
    by zfran on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:35:57 PM EST
    click, click sound on your telephone, you'll know it's the gov't listening illegally to your conversation w/out authority to do so and no on watching what they are doing. Obama not only voted to give himself this power should he be elected, he just gave it to a Pres. McCain. We, as americans were protected from this....now we are not. Maybe you don't care, but I do.

    [ Parent ]
    P.S. This is left, middle or right.... (5.00 / 0) (#202)
    by zfran on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:37:09 PM EST
    This is American!!!!!!

    [ Parent ]
    Yes! (5.00 / 0) (#205)
    by RalphB on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:49:13 PM EST
    part of the freakin Bill of Rights for God's sake.  I'm livid about this.  I don't understand why everyone isn't livid.  Jeez.


    [ Parent ]
    This should be This is NOT (none / 0) (#203)
    by zfran on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:45:04 PM EST
    about left, middle or right. This is American!!!!

    [ Parent ]
    If you think (none / 0) (#204)
    by phat on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:47:14 PM EST
    that my discussion of possible strategic reasons for these vote means I don't care about these votes, well I don't know what to say other than you don't know me and it's likely that you missed my post last night that I would be proud (as an alternate delegate for Clinton in Denver) if Clinton voted NO.

    In the context of Clinton being on the ticket, which is, nominally, the topic of this thread, I think this points to that possibility and the possible strategies behind the votes illuminates that.

    I don't think that Obama needed to vote the way he did. I can see why he may think he did.

    That doesn't mean I support his vote.

    I suggest you do a search for my posts on this blog in past to see where I stand on this.

    [ Parent ]

    phat: I have no problem with what (5.00 / 0) (#207)
    by RalphB on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:51:32 PM EST
    you wrote or with you at all.  My anger is strictly with the FISA vote itself.  

    [ Parent ]
    Zfran (5.00 / 0) (#208)
    by phat on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:56:39 PM EST
    and talex seem to be upset at me.

    I'm not that worried about it. And yes, I'm a little bit upset at the vote.

    Well, actually, I'm a lot upset about the vote, except for this.

    I expected this to go down the way it did from the beginning but didn't expect Clinton to vote the way she did. I never expected Obama to vote NO on this FISA bill. I've thought about it and calmed down. That doesn't mean I like it.

    [ Parent ]

    Phat, I appreciate your (5.00 / 1) (#211)
    by zfran on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 11:08:56 PM EST
    clarification of your comment(s), however, to capitulate why he voted this way is nonsense, imo. He either votes for us, or against us. I believe he chose against us and for his interests. We've not had a situation where a sitting senator who votes to make law is running for pres. and is voting for the laws he/she will have to follow if elected. If he has to "calculate" his vote because as BTD puts it, a pol is a pol, then America, my country, deserves way, way better, and I'm really upset at this vote as well.

    [ Parent ]
    In the context of the VP pick (none / 0) (#213)
    by phat on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 11:21:13 PM EST
    This is how I look at it.

    Of course it's nonsense, on some level, it's Kremlin watching, really.

    Ask my friends and my penchant for nonsense might be a particular topic that comes up.

    But seriously.

    Who can Obama pick for VP now?

    Biden? Richardson? Sebelius?

    This vote points to a pick, at least given the context of the thread we're discussing.

    It just so happens that my slightly OT reply which started this whole mess seems to point to Clinton as a choice for VP.

    I, for one, would be ecstatic about this.

    [/attempt to get back OT]

    [ Parent ]

    or he doesn't vote at all... (none / 0) (#219)
    by kimsaw on Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 06:38:27 AM EST
    let's not forget MoveOn!

    [ Parent ]
    You have no idea what (none / 0) (#191)
    by talex26 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 09:47:53 PM EST
    you are talking about.

    According to you Feingold who voted no didn't make Left vote. No one did according to you. That's really laughable.

    [ Parent ]

    This is an interesting point. (none / 0) (#199)
    by phat on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:23:47 PM EST
    Is the "left" position on this outside of the mainstream? You're assuming it is.

    [ Parent ]
    Oh (none / 0) (#200)
    by phat on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:33:42 PM EST
    and I don't think voting NO would have hurt Obama. But I can guess why he did it.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes (none / 0) (#20)
    by Steve M on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:35:29 PM EST
    If Obama's goal was to run to the center with this vote, she did him a huge favor.

    [ Parent ]
    The Middle (none / 0) (#30)
    by phat on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:42:47 PM EST
    What's the easiest way to look like you're closer to the middle?

    Get in between the middle and your opponent.

    Or, vote with Ben Nelson.

    [ Parent ]

    My tinfoil hat theory... (3.00 / 2) (#143)
    by waldenpond on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:26:45 PM EST
    Clinton and Obama did it on purpose.  Bad cop, good cop.  He did a vote his base would not agree with, while Clinton made a vote his base would support.  Weakens Obama supporters argument against Clinton.  

    Sorry, that's the best I can come up with.

    [ Parent ]

    That's plausible, for sure. (3.00 / 0) (#147)
    by Pegasus on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:31:18 PM EST
    Peter Daou dropped by dKos today with her statement on her vote... bringing the message to Obama central, priming his most passionate supporters to welcome her.

    [ Parent ]
    He posted that on HuffPo, too. (5.00 / 0) (#214)
    by shannon on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 11:24:24 PM EST
    Many good comments, but an unfortunate number of Hillary-hating ones, as well. Many of those belittled her vote by saying that she never would have voted that way if she was the nominee, etc. A particularly nasty one came from a person who ended the comment saying that she "owed us" the FISA nay vote since she voted yea on the 2002 authorization vote.

    Me, I admire Hillary Clinton more each day.

    [ Parent ]

    The question will never come up (none / 0) (#8)
    by andgarden on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:26:24 PM EST
    They called George Bush Sr. "Rubbers" in the House before he accepted the VP nod from Reagan.  

    [ Parent ]
    Rubbers? (none / 0) (#127)
    by Emma on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:37:56 PM EST
    I don't get it.  Condoms?  Bridge?  Cats?  Boots?  What?

    [ Parent ]
    Condoms (none / 0) (#133)
    by andgarden on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:58:24 PM EST
    Point being, he was pro choice and everyone knew it. Then he got on the ticket.

    [ Parent ]
    It depends on how he is doing come Novem ber (5.00 / 4) (#4)
    by Saul on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:23:39 PM EST
    If he is way ahead in the national pols it really doesn't matter who he picks for VP.  However, if he is in a dead heat or McCain pulls ahead then Hilary is his ace in the hole to cinch the election.  Just don't like how he is using her.

    November means nothing (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by americanincanada on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:25:58 PM EST
    he has to pick and anounce his VP before the convention.

    [ Parent ]
    Still it depends on how he is doing nationally (none / 0) (#24)
    by Saul on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:37:12 PM EST
    on the day he picks the his VP Here again if he is hurting he will pick Hilary to cinch the election

    [ Parent ]
    I don't believe that is the case (none / 0) (#173)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 09:20:59 PM EST
    I don't think the pick "has" to come before the convention or even at the convention. It has just become customary to do so in recent years.

    [ Parent ]
    VP is voted on at the (none / 0) (#210)
    by waldenpond on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 11:01:26 PM EST
    convention.  The nominations of the VP have great history.  .. '49 Barkley;  '56 vote; currently, it's an affirmation of the Pres choice, but there is still a voice vote...here's Kerry in '04... vp on Wed to be followed by Kerry on Thurs.

    A press release for VP choice would be inappropriate, the cost of another event wasteful.  Also, it would detract from the Pres nomination to then have an later event to affirm a VP choice.

    [ Parent ]

    I Agree (none / 0) (#215)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 11:38:32 PM EST
    It used to be done at the convention and lately (more often than not) has been done just prior to the convention, but there is no rule saying it must be done that way. With the convention beginning August 25th, I would look for a VP to me named between August 18-20. The only reason or benefit to naming one earlier is if it is Hillary but even then not before August.

    I suspect a day will be picked for maximum exposure, with little time in between for McCain to get much attention should he choose to name his pick in the days between the Dem pick and the start of the Dem convention.

    [ Parent ]

    I think it's about money, not VP (5.00 / 9) (#5)
    by nycstray on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:23:55 PM EST
    and I wouldn't put it past Obama to keep a Clinton VP in speculation in an effort to get more $$$$. There's a fundraiser here tonight.

    Just my jaded view  ;)

    Big Money (none / 0) (#68)
    by The Maven on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:30:03 PM EST
    Tonight's fundraiser is a minimum $1000 just to get in the door, and it goes up from there:
    Host Committee Member: Raise/Write $50,000*
      *This includes photo line at 6pm
    VIP Seat: $4,600 per person
    Premiere Seat: $2,300 per person
    Attend: $1,000 per person
    Tomorrow morning's Breakfast with Barack is the "smaller donor" event:
    Table Hosts: Raise/write $23,000; $10,000, $5,000; $2,500
    Attend: $2,300; $1,000; $500; $250 per person
    It will be interesting to hear how much they'll actually net from these events.

    [ Parent ]
    The Wall Street Journal (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:35:35 PM EST
    had a great story about how the high-rollers who supported Hillary, many who live in the Tri-State area, are reluctant to contribute to the Obama campaign. I wonder who, and how many, are invited for these fundraisers.

    [ Parent ]
    fundraising is not the topic (none / 0) (#94)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:50:24 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Pardon me ... (5.00 / 0) (#168)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 09:08:58 PM EST
    but in politics fundraising is ALWAYS the topic.

    ;)

    [ Parent ]

    Why, why, why (5.00 / 6) (#10)
    by seeker on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:28:50 PM EST
    would Hillary WANT to be VP on that ticket?  Try as I might, I cannot find a satisfying answer to that question.  But it might be the only O gets my vote.

    Because she really does want a Democrat to win (none / 0) (#62)
    by jb64 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:16:34 PM EST
    and if being on the ticket insures that, I'm certain she'll gladly do it. I've felt all along that this is probably the ticket, barack "moving to the center" only reinforces this feeling of mine. The truth is, Obama has already thrown most, if not, all of his supporters under the bus because he knows he has their vote, but putting Hillary on the ticket not only unifies the party, but it creates the possibility of an enormous landslide in November. Imagine the image of a unified party in Denver, where Hillary as the VP nominee gets her due, and then some. Imagine Bill Clinton on the stump for a unified ticket. It's not only logical, but IMO, likely.

    [ Parent ]
    I agree that she would do it (5.00 / 5) (#82)
    by angie on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:42:06 PM EST
    for "the greater good" of the party, but I disagree with your statement that her being VP would be "getting her due." Getting her due would be her on the top of the ticket imo.

    [ Parent ]
    And i agree with you (none / 0) (#97)
    by jb64 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:52:52 PM EST
    that she should be on the top of the ticket, but she's not, won't be, and that's that. But as the VP she gets an opportunity to unify the party and give people like me who are lukewarm at the most about an Obama nomination a reason to get excited about the ticket. Plus, she gets the opportunity to bask in the warm glow of a unified convention that ultimately she will be responsible for. That's all i meant.

    [ Parent ]
    Are Your Serious? (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:00:52 PM EST
    a unified convention that ultimately she will be responsible for.

    Responsible in what capacity? Please explain.

    This never-ending meme about Hillary Clinton being THE ONE to unify the party baffles me, and frankly, infuriates me more.

    [ Parent ]

    Meaning (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by Steve M on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:19:00 PM EST
    responsible in a good way, I think, since she will be the one to create the unity by joining the ticket.

    [ Parent ]
    Thanks, what I meant all along (none / 0) (#121)
    by jb64 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:28:24 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#198)
    by tek on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:23:05 PM EST
    as VP will not unify the party.  That boat has sailed.  if anything, it's getting more fractured with Obama as nominee.

    [ Parent ]
    The problem is that (4.00 / 4) (#90)
    by weltec2 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:46:55 PM EST
    for four years he will be in charge. I fear that four years of Obama is all the American people will put up with. Then she will be saddled with his legacy. The Repugs will do the same thing that we do with McSame. They will conflate the two in every possible way they can. A Clinton / Obama ticket I could tolerate. She could give him some menial tasks until he learns what its all about. But an Obama / Clinton ticket... that's just not a good idea, I don't think.

    [ Parent ]
    Agree. (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by 0 politico on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:23:01 PM EST
    That is why I hope she does not take the second position.  It might win the ticket some votes.  Enough to win?  Maybe.  But, if the Big O turns into the Big Dud, which I fear, I can see 12-20 years of GOP administrations if the Dems get it wrong this time.

    Right now, the indicators are not highly positive.  And, with Democratic led Congress getting even lower approval ratings than W, that does not mean a Dem victory is certain.

    [ Parent ]

    How degrading. 'Menial' ? (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by andrys on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:26:40 PM EST
    Even I (a Hillary supporter) would have wanted her to give him extensive, meaningful projects as a communicater, which is his strength.  No way a man who has done what he has deserves the idea of "menial" duties, which I find a need to demean him, so to speak.

    [ Parent ]
    You're quite right. (5.00 / 2) (#159)
    by weltec2 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:48:32 PM EST
    "menial" was inappropriate. My apologies. I'm not sure that Hillary should let him use those speaking skills just yet though... not until he has some meaningful content to put in those speeches.

    [ Parent ]
    I was thinking that way for a while (5.00 / 0) (#186)
    by sj on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 09:34:16 PM EST
    and then I remembered what a work horse she is.  And what a work horse he is not.  She doesn't care who gets the credit as long as the work gets done.

    It could work.

    Do you think I've used the word "work" enough times in this short comment?

    [ Parent ]

    To be the first woman VP (none / 0) (#164)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:57:04 PM EST
    That is something.  

    God, she has to get a higher rank than Nancy Pelosi, don't you think?

    [ Parent ]

    Well, that would be a big plus (5.00 / 3) (#167)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 09:06:12 PM EST
    Almost enough for me to want her to be VP.

    The thing is, what I'd really like is for Hillary to be VP, Speaker and Majority Leader altogether.  Then things would really get rolling!

    [ Parent ]

    Ha (5.00 / 0) (#176)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 09:23:29 PM EST
    Like the old SNL Chicago Superfans talking about Ditka - is that the mini Hillary or the full-size Hillary?

    [ Parent ]
    If she gets the VP slot her job (none / 0) (#217)
    by hairspray on Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 01:00:30 AM EST
    will be to work with the hill and get the work done. Obama, who doesn't like hands on stuff, can give speeches and "create the big picture".

    [ Parent ]
    Well, she is the only VP choice (5.00 / 7) (#14)
    by Radiowalla on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:33:00 PM EST
    who would add any excitement to the ticket.  Face it, any of the other possibilities would generate no more than a ho-hum.

    Can you see anyone leaping out of their chairs if he announced Biden or Richardson or Bayh or.....

    Nope! (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:55:14 PM EST
    Considering that no other candidate this cycle got as many votes as Mr. Presumptuous, no one would be able to rock the boat like Hillary Clinton.

    Speaking of Bayh, I really like him, but he caused me some heartache today when he voted FOR the FISA legislation. But I'm so glad BOTH Senators from my homestate of Michigan voted with my favorite Senator of all (hmm, wonder who?) AGAINST it. But I digress...

    Back to the VP subject, Mr. Edwards is back to "seriously consider[ing]" the post if asked.

    Good god John, make up your mind! Wait, can you hear that ....

    Flip-flop! Flip-flop! Flip-flop!

    Aaah, birds of a feather would, indeed, flock together.

    [ Parent ]

    Are we surprised? The position was dangled as (none / 0) (#220)
    by suzieg on Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 07:04:25 AM EST
    it was for Richardson in order to get their support at the opportune time. I don't know if I'm willing to forgive anyone of them for their actions!

    [ Parent ]
    It will take the top of the ticket for me too (5.00 / 12) (#19)
    by athyrio on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:35:20 PM EST
    because I don't see Hillary being sidelined as a VP when she can be of much more use as a Senator..For Obama to use her to gain his presidency would just tick me off probably...

    Athyrio...it would tick me off ROYALLY!! (4.33 / 6) (#23)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:37:07 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Me too.....Was trying to be diplomatic...lol...but (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by athyrio on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:39:39 PM EST
    if Rush Limbaugh is correct, don't give up yet lol....

    [ Parent ]
    It is my great hope she will still come out (3.60 / 5) (#28)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:41:31 PM EST
    the nominee...In the immortal words of Lenny Kravitz:  "It ain't over 'til it's over"

    [ Parent ]
    Have you seen the new Hillary T-Shirt (2.00 / 1) (#52)
    by MMW on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:03:38 PM EST
    for a $50 donation it says something to the effect..For anyone who's ever been counted out..something something something... this one's for you. There's a shadow of Hillary standing in silhouette. Her hands are clasped in front of her. Coolest T-shirt. But can I just say, I swear I imagined that her hands clasped in front - looks like (or should be) a penis pissing on an elephant and a donkey.

    I said it looked like it not that it was and I have never claimed to not have issues.

    I think she's riding back to make him look good, after his abominable showing. She wasn't willing to follow him on the vote, so she agreed to the plane ride. No VP read here.

    [ Parent ]

    Do you have a link? (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:21:58 PM EST
    Wasn't on the main site when I was there...

    [ Parent ]
    got it via email (none / 0) (#103)
    by MMW on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:04:23 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I will get it then (5.00 / 0) (#212)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 11:14:50 PM EST
    but I get all my Hillary emails literally hours and hours after everyone else.  I have gmail, and I think Google holds them back on purpose because they are pro-Obama!

    (I'm just kidding, folks).

    [ Parent ]

    dream a little dream....never say never... (1.00 / 0) (#107)
    by halstoon on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:13:07 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Agreed w/ Both Of You (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:45:50 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Rush Limbaugh said today on his show (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by athyrio on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:38:08 PM EST
    (according to another lady that blogs) that he predicts that Hillary will be the Democratic nominee by the first of August due to really bad luck hitting Obama then...Something about his astrology chart lol....

    Please Do Not Play With My Emotions (5.00 / 4) (#34)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:45:21 PM EST
    So do I take it that I need to take the week of the DNC Convention off from work to hold a celebration party?

    :)

    [ Parent ]

    JimWash....if Hillary is the nominee, we are (5.00 / 7) (#48)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:00:47 PM EST
    all coming over to celebrate!!

    [ Parent ]
    I WILL Find A Way (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:05:02 PM EST
    To fit ALL of you into my tiny DC 1-Bdrm apartment. No worries. Hell, you can stay over till Inauguration Day too!

    [ Parent ]
    Party at Jim's Place....$20...all the beer (5.00 / 3) (#76)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:38:42 PM EST
    you can drink!!

    [ Parent ]
    Jim - no worries! (5.00 / 5) (#80)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:41:19 PM EST
    We're all used to being squished together under the bus!

    [ Parent ]
    Valhalla...move over, I can't breathe :) (4.00 / 4) (#116)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:23:06 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    sorry (5.00 / 2) (#122)
    by ccpup on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:28:31 PM EST
    I think that was me.

    Better now?

    Okay, WHO'S been eating chili?

    (cough)

    [ Parent ]

    Well, tossing Jesse Jackson under (5.00 / 0) (#175)
    by Cream City on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 09:22:43 PM EST
    the bus today made it more crowded.  He always has a cortege. :-)

    [ Parent ]
    you will be able to hear (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:44:32 PM EST
    me celebrating no matter where you are.
    as far as Rushs prediction, I hate agreeing with him but I still cant make myself believe the party is really going to do this.
    again.


    [ Parent ]
    If What's Been Reported Is True, (5.00 / 4) (#96)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:52:06 PM EST
    It won't happen because Hillary's name won't even be on the ballots.

    Which makes me extremely upset. Candidates with worse standings (and her 2nd place finish was nothing to brush off. ever.) have been on past convention ballots. Why should she be left out this year?

    Psst! Is it because she's a woman? Or, maybe, she actually would WIN the nomination?

    All bets are off if she isn't on the ballots (which is incidentally a topic that was broached in a WSJ story and AP story I read today about "bruised" feelings among many Clinton supporters.) Ha, that's not news to me!

    [ Parent ]

    "Psst! Is it because . . " (5.00 / 2) (#100)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:57:00 PM EST
    Ill take door number two

    [ Parent ]
    Jim....I think it is a little of both and a big (4.20 / 5) (#115)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:22:32 PM EST
    dose of Reid, Pelosi, Dean, etc. not wanting to have to fall into line.  They have become drunk with power.  Hillary would whip them right into shape.  As VP, I am sure she could not do much.

    [ Parent ]
    Halstoon....thanks for the "one", but (1.00 / 1) (#131)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:52:53 PM EST
    you know what I say is true.  

    [ Parent ]
    What? What you say is far from true. (1.20 / 5) (#136)
    by halstoon on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:15:37 PM EST
    You seem to think Hillary is so much different from Barack, but guess what: she's not, and she never was. If anything, Barack is simply stealing the Clinton thunder and riding it to 1600 PA Ave.

     As for thinking she still has a feasible shot at being president in 2009, you are far from reality, and I think deep, deep down (if you go more than a couple layers) you know that her White House hopes are dashed, not just now, but forevermore.

    [ Parent ]

    Just another piece of evidence (4.33 / 6) (#144)
    by Steve M on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:27:23 PM EST
    for why the Obama supporters will be trying to elect their candidate this year without the help of many, many longtime Dems.

    [ Parent ]
    That's not so bad, especially if it means (1.00 / 3) (#149)
    by halstoon on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:35:53 PM EST
    ridding the party of a bunch of ideologues and demagogues.

    [ Parent ]
    That's right (4.50 / 8) (#154)
    by Steve M on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:42:42 PM EST
    my grandfather who has voted for every Dem since FDR is really someone you want out of the party.  Good call there.

    [ Parent ]
    It's not personal. (1.00 / 3) (#158)
    by halstoon on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:48:25 PM EST
    I could just as easily cite all the new people who you guys want to barricade out of the party, but I don't, because it's not about any one person.

    If your grandfather refuses to support Obama, then my position is that we must move on without him. At least this way the party is bolstered by winning the White House.

    Okay. That's 21 for me today, so I'm done.

    See y'all tomorrow.

    [ Parent ]

    Just wondering (5.00 / 2) (#161)
    by Steve M on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:51:27 PM EST
    whether you consider him an ideologue or a demagogue.  Maybe tomorrow you can let me know.

    [ Parent ]
    Halstoon, The desperation by obama (4.20 / 5) (#148)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:32:55 PM EST
    followers is what leads me to believe you are wrong.  obama should not have to be working this hard...
    Go HIllary...no VP for you...top spot or nothing

    [ Parent ]
    And how is it that we're called Obamabots (3.00 / 2) (#152)
    by halstoon on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:40:49 PM EST
    and cultists when Clinton supporters still think she has a chance to win this thing. That is the definition of delusional if you ask me. It's also an extreme example of cult psychology. You refuse to accept the truth, no matter how clearly it is recited to you. She will not be nominated for president in 2008.

    [ Parent ]
    Then (5.00 / 3) (#197)
    by tek on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:21:03 PM EST
    2012!

    [ Parent ]
    A. How is Obama overworking himself? (1.00 / 0) (#151)
    by halstoon on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:38:41 PM EST
    B. Do you sincerely think Hillary has a shot at the top job?

    If anything, I would think you might accuse Obama of not working hard enough to unify the party. He seems to be putting forth very little effort to solidify the 'base' while following through on his promise to compete in places like GA, my home state, and Montana, which is where the man I think should be his VP currently governs.

    If you really think Hillary Clinton will take the nomination or the election, then that explains a lot, really.

    [ Parent ]

    It will unfortunately never happen because of the (none / 0) (#221)
    by suzieg on Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 07:08:42 AM EST
    ongoing narrative about Obama accepting the nomination of the very same date as the MLK "I have a dream" speech. Obama has made it next to impossible for the delegates to vote against him and for Hillary!

    [ Parent ]
    You don't have to take it from Rush (5.00 / 0) (#71)
    by angie on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:33:54 PM EST
    Michelle Whitedove (psychic) predicts that Hillary will get the nomination in November. You can read it for yourself on her site.
    (And yes, I am ashamed to admit that I know about this site -- but I'm taking what I can get right now).

    [ Parent ]
    um, that should be "in August" (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by angie on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:36:40 PM EST
    not November, and will win the election in November.

    [ Parent ]
    putting your faith in psychics (5.00 / 5) (#84)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:42:46 PM EST
    is not that different from putting your faith in pollsters IMO.


    [ Parent ]
    Aaah, OK. :) (none / 0) (#78)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:39:18 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Heh (5.00 / 2) (#126)
    by Emma on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:36:51 PM EST
    That's fabulous.  I'm going with Whitedove.  If she's right, maybe she can be a presidential advisor.  :b

    [ Parent ]
    Angie....we will take any good news at (3.00 / 2) (#77)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:39:13 PM EST
    this time...

    [ Parent ]
    Omg, you take that seriously? (1.00 / 1) (#140)
    by halstoon on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:24:10 PM EST
    So if it doesn't work out that she's right this year, then she definitely sees Hillary beating an incumbent Obama in 2012? And you think she's for real?

    I love how she puts up her disclaimer about being purely objective and then delivers a completely subjective--and insubstantial--'reading.'

    If you want a real prediction, here's one you can count on: Barack Obama will deliver an acceptance speech in front of 75k+ people in Denver with Hillary Clinton watching from the front row. She will not be VP, and Obama will win the general over John McCain.

    I can't wait to see which of us 'psychics' is right.

    [ Parent ]

    If the choice is between (5.00 / 8) (#145)
    by RalphB on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:30:23 PM EST
    the Psychic and you, I gotta go with Generic Psychic.  You're just too obnoxious to bet on.

    [ Parent ]
    Best comment of the night, Ralph. :-) (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by Cream City on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 09:24:29 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Thank you. Thank you very much :-) (none / 0) (#194)
    by RalphB on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:05:15 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Make your bets. (1.00 / 0) (#155)
    by halstoon on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:42:51 PM EST
    I'll be the one enjoying the free chicken dinner.

    Thanks for the compliment. If you think I'm obnoxious, then I'm doing something right.


    [ Parent ]

    If that's your goal (5.00 / 5) (#170)
    by RalphB on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 09:12:54 PM EST
    you certainly succeed.  Congratulations on helping Obama to lose a few more votes every time you open your yap.  I like that by the way!

    [ Parent ]
    It's amazing (5.00 / 6) (#183)
    by Steve M on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 09:29:43 PM EST
    What kind of candidate supporter goes around deliberately trying to antagonize potential voters?  I don't know that Obama deserves to lose the election, but his childish supporters sure do.

    [ Parent ]
    HaHa (5.00 / 4) (#193)
    by RalphB on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:02:22 PM EST
    It's not just a couple either.  Seems like I bump into them everywhere.  I'm coming to the conclusion that this is less about Obama than some kind of odd personal competition.  So much of this stuff is like the receiver doing the funky chicken in the end zone.  Scored one but may not win the game.


    [ Parent ]
    Maybe we should consult with Nancy Reagan's (none / 0) (#222)
    by suzieg on Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 07:15:09 AM EST
    psychic Jean somebody - it seemed to have worked for the Reagans!

    [ Parent ]
    In November? (none / 0) (#75)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:38:28 PM EST
    Seriously? Which date; 1st, 2nd or 3rd?

    If it happens -- which it won't -- it has to happen by the end of next month.

    [ Parent ]

    Oh lord. Now I have to wait 'til it's dark (5.00 / 4) (#42)
    by Cream City on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 05:53:34 PM EST
    and go peer at the heavens tonight and see what's in the stars for this campaign season.  I would find out more by measuring moon rays than I would listening to Limbaugh, anyway.

    [ Parent ]
    don't laugh (5.00 / 6) (#108)
    by ccpup on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:14:24 PM EST
    I do astrology and her chart just screams an ascent to the Presidency in January.  Much more than his or McCain's does.

    He IS in for a bumpy ride starting next week and lasting until late-July, so we'll have to see how that manifests.

    Back to Jeralyn's thread, Hillary is no fool.  She sees the mistakes he's made and continues to make, she has her ear to the ground and is hearing the uneasy grumbling of those SDs who regret their decision to support him and could switch at a moment's notice and she's not dumb enough to commit to being Obama's VP if there's a chance she'll actually sprint past him to grab the Brass Ring itself.

    With the race he's run so far, it wouldn't surprise me if the Democratic Party -- and the Country! -- was electrified by an out-of-the-blue August Surprise.

    [ Parent ]

    Straws? Grasping at straws? Indeed! (5.00 / 4) (#111)
    by jawbone on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:17:18 PM EST
    I'll take any hope she becomes our nominee.

    [ Parent ]
    The bad (5.00 / 3) (#119)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:23:49 PM EST
    luck has been hitting him since he became the nominee. Of course, most of it is of his own making. We're stuck with Obama unless there's a bunch of nervous super delegates who aren't talking to the press.

    [ Parent ]
    Who's more unbelievable? (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by ruffian on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 08:46:13 PM EST
    Rush, or the psychic?  Tough choice.  I can understand the need to believe there is some way for Hillary to get the nomination, but I believe that if Obama was struck by lightning tomorrow, the DNC would still nominate someone other than Hillary.

    [ Parent ]
    No (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by daring grace on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 09:25:14 PM EST
    If something happened to Obama or if he voluntarily withdrew before the convention, the nominee would be Senator Clinton.

    There is no way it could not be unless something happened to make her unable to serve or run.

    To do anything else would shred the party, and hand it to McCain because even many Obama supporters (like me) would be outraged and would strongly protest.

    I might come along half heartedly, and many of my fellow Obama supporters may sit it out or grumble from the sidelines, but that's pretty standard operating procedure for folks whose candidate isn't the nominee.

    [ Parent ]

    Sadly, I think that's true. (none / 0) (#169)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 09:11:03 PM EST
    I believe they'd choose McCain over Hillary, they hate her so much.  And it's not like it w