Clinton as V-P? That is the Question.

And oh what a question!  Waddya think, mamas?  Me, no way.  But that's just me.  She's open to it, of course, as we see in today's NYT article, Next on Agenda Is Clinton's Role:

Mrs. Clinton used her final hours of the long primary season to make clear that she would be open to being Mr. Obama’s running mate. If there was ever any hope in Democratic circles that she would let Mr. Obama off the hook with an evasion or a flat declaration of no interest, Mrs. Clinton dashed it on Tuesday.

But if she's not his running mate, what's a guy to do about winning the hearts and minds of her supporters? 

Comments

[hau]

I'm curious as to why "no way"? Too much of a power struggle? My first reaction is, absolutely! She's well qualified and Obama would certainly benefit from your experience on a myriad of issues.

[Makeshift Mama]

Ugh. People pick on Bush enough for having Cheney in the background running the show. Can you imagine having a pushy, obnoxious woman like that driving Obama nuts for four years? After all the things she's said about him during her campaign (inexperienced, etc.), how much is she going to harass him and try to make him do whatever she wants in office? Sorry to be abrasive, but I just shudder when I think about her as a VP.

[LTF]

I think no way b/c she represents the old and I want new. Also, and more substantively, I don't care for her approach - top down v. Obama's ground up. I want to see things happen, and I don't think her closed-door policy wonk style works b/c she doesn't get enough buy-in during the process to get to the finish line. I am no expert on political history and past combos that work well in terms of electability and good working partnerships. Anyone? Also, it's time to move on from the primary politics and I think leaving her off is one good way to do that. Just my two cents.

[JGreen]

The war was a mistake and those that voted for it failed on the single biggest test of political leadership in our time. Having anyone on the ticket who supported the invasion would dilute Obama's ability to debate McCain and the Republicans on that critical issue.

No one is talking about him but I think that the Obama campaign should consider as VP, Former Republican Senator Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island. As the only Republican that voted against the war Sen. Chafee would be a walking talking example of a Republican that got it right and who was a true maverick who has not turned in his convictions to cater to the extreme right of his party.

Chafee would be a strong draw for disenfranchised Republicans and unlike Hagel, the fact that he is pro-choice, pro-basic rights and an early supporter of Obama's candidacy means little down side for progressive Democrats.

In his new book: "Against the Tide: How a Compliant Congress Empowered a Reckless President" Chafee advocates the kind of bi-partisan change that Obama has made central to his candidacy.

[Andrea P]

I think no too. I'd like to see her involved in another way. Maybe Secretary of HHS? Working on universal health care. But in general, I think Obama and Clinton have very different approaches to working in Washington, and I'm not sure she could work for Obama's best interest in that regard. She does represent the old guard in Washington and has approached her campaign very much like politics-as-usual. I have loved Obama's 50-state approach, the grassroots community-organizing nature of it. She doesn't represent that kind of political thinking. Plus, what would Bill do? He'd have a hard time not undermining the efforts of a new kind of White House.

Mostly, we've had a Clinton or Bush in the White House since 1980, it's time for new leadership.

[elizabeth]

Andrea I totally agree on your last comment about our 1980 Clinton/Bush legacy- time for new leadership & a new approach.

BTW Has anyone heard President Carters comments about how disasterous a Obama/Clinton ticket would be? Pretty amazing comments!

[Kristin]

I like Chaffee too! Chaffee, Chaffee! It would send a strong message to all of the centrist, socially liberal Republicans that they may just have a place after all.

I don't think the VP slot will go to Clinton if only because Obama just picked Caroline Kennedy to be on his VP selection committee. Considering that Ted Kennedy has been one of Obama's biggest supporters and considering that Clinton recently envoked assassination images of Caroline's uncle, it seems as though choosing her is sending a subtle but unmistakable message to Hillary that it isn't gonna happen.

[LTF]

I, too, like the Chaffee idea. I also like the possibility of Sen. Clinton as HHS head. Not sure she'd go for it, though. As for her working on health care? I'm gunshy after our last experience with her at the helm of a health care overhaul effort, and I think I'm not the only one who would have negative flashbacks.

[LeeAnn]

Oh, hell. I didn't support Hillary in her bid for the presidency, and I don't think she would make good "fade into the wallpaper" VP material, but I have to object to calling her "pushy." She obviously moved a lot of women, especially women of my mom's generation. I strongly disagreed with some of her tactics, but whenever I hear a powerful and assertive woman in ANY line of work being called pushy, I have this very visceral reaction... She broke the glass ceiling, ladies, and let's give her some credit for that. There was an interesting piece in the paper lately by a columnist named Marie Rocco, I think, about how in numerous other nations it's no problem at all to see a woman rise to power in part thanks to her family connections. While I don't like Bill Clinton and while I don't like dynasties, the reality is that Hillary was the best-placed woman to make history the way she did, and now it will be a little easier for anyone's daughter to become President one day. So let's give Hillary a break, esp. all of you who consider yourself Dems, and move towards party unity. Calling Hillary "pushy" ain't the way to do it. High road, please.

And again, I am and have been an Obama supporter, so please don't tell me my post is sour grapes talking. Although I too am what you might deride as a "pushy woman."

(Realizing this doesn't address the VP query... I say Jim Webb, the anti-war, military professional junior senator from Virginia. Obama's a little light on the military experience...)

[Eric Miller]

I can't imagine Bill NOT being present in a Hillary-run VP's office. Being a Papa and not a Mama, I won't comment on how "pushy" or difficult Hillary might be as a veep, but add Bill into the mix, and the Clintons would be a barrier to the new brand of politics that Obama represents.

I hadn't heard the Chaffee idea before, but I like that, A LOT! Such a move would hark back to administrations like Lincoln's that included individuals from both parties (even aside from the fact that the VP was the one who got the 2nd most votes). What better way to be "centrist" in a new model for politics, and simultaneously be sure to have perspective from all sides when making executive decisions? What better way to start healing the blue-red divide?

[hau]

Activistas, thanks for expanding on the "no way". I also agree that it's time for a change as well. Though, I voted for and still support Obama, I am also sort of clinging onto the hope to get a woman in a higher power of position. Alas, maybe this is not the right time or opportunity. I can certainly wait a bit longer if that means a better change in the current administration.

Any Clinton supporters out there with a different perspective to share? I always like to hear from different viewpoints.

[mom22]

I agree with so many of the comments so far, but also have to add that I'm not certain why she would want it. Doesn't she realize that she could be far more powerful (and I mean that in the best of ways) elsewhere? Seems to me that the VP is typically the person attending funerals. Isn't her role as Senator a better use of her skills?

[LeeAnn]

Dick Cheney a/k/a the Dark Lord proved that the VP role can in fact be quite powerful.

Not sure what other role Hillary Clinton is in fact eligible for -- Harry Reid's not going anywhere as Senate Majority Leader, and remember, she's still the Junior senator from NY -- I think she's far down the line for any prestigious committee chairs.

(Supreme Court) Justice Clinton, anyone?

[lauralye]

Maybe it is due to my age, but I think the labeling of Clinton as pushy and obnoxious is both inaccurate and irresponsible.

Hillary Clinton has had to be vocal because she was born into a world where Roe v. Wade hadn't happened yet, and even some married women weren't properly informed of birth control until after their third child was born and the doctor deemed it was appropriate.

When speaking to many women 40+ who struggled to obtain advanced degrees and positions, you will hear stories of blatant sexism that not only hurt, but cut them off at the knees before they had even begun the race.

You say Clinton is part of the old, but I find it ironic that people must be reminded that to have a woman president or vice-president would be a profoundly new event. Moreover, no woman without Clnton's background and prestige would have had a hope in hell of making it as far as she did. To judge a women for pushing through barriers is dangerously close to shutting any woman out of contention in future presidential races. If a woman does not push, she is seen as subservient or weak. Clinton had to prove she was strong, intelligent, and qualified. If a man had done the same you might call him something less than flattering, but never obnoxious or pushy.

As far as the Bill factor in the VP race, well that is a valid point and one I had not considered.

Anyway, it simply does not sit well with me and you can call me an old lady if you like. After all, if Obama is expected to deal with the conflicts and tragedies of the Middle East, he certainly should be able to deal with one assertive and intelligent woman acting as a chief counselor. In fact, he should value the opportunity to make use of her knowledge and expertise.

[LeeAnn]

Thank you, Lauralye.