Will Obama Give Hillary the VP Nod?

he might, but he's not going to get the nomination...

I appeal to all the voters to vote any TOM, DICK and Harry from republican party
and ask the elected president
to clean the soup kitchen and Toilet
in WHITE House if not the whole USA

yeah right.

and to you Bear...Keep Hope Alive.

I'm keeping hope alive. (Just donated again through the matching thingie, my match was in Madison, we chatted a while, it was fun.)

I think no, though, for a lot of the same reasons that I think the other way round won't happen. They have too many of the same positives and too many of the same liabilities. The VP -- either way -- is likely to be old, white, male, and extremely experienced, to provide ballast to the atypical and relatively inexperienced Presidential candidate. (And despite her campaign's excellent effort to convince people otherwise, yes, Hillary is relatively inexperienced as well.) Southern preferred but unlikely given the possibilities, I think.

Will Hillary Give Obama The Vice Pres Nod?
Just a rebuttal,

1. I believe there will be economic fall out if Hillary is elected, but I would love to see her come out of the closet.
2. I don't think Obama would have to wait that long to get elected into an official post (Not talkin' home owner's association).
3. God help us if Hillary is elected and RE-elected. We'll all be in Hell together at least.

I do agree that Obama is going places, I think he'll get the "Experience" he needs waiting in the wings a few years. He won't be idle that's for sure.

I think he'll find something to suit him and come out swinging. Just hope it's the right thing to fight for.

Hillary is going to be a great president, and good for America.

of course after bush... barney fife would be good for America.

barney fife

No, for pretty much the same reasons as the other way round.

He was a weak sister on tonight's debate I can tell you....

yeah. all we have to do is wait till ernest t. bass leaves office.

Yup, Obama was weak as usual....but Hillary....Russert had her tap dancing all over the stage trying to get her to give a straight answer.

She has that new laugh she lets out just before one of those answers she don't want to give. Since she's trying to be so centrist during this campaign all of her comments she made over the weekend and last night when compiled make her look flimsy.

Bush portrayed himself as a conservative and a uniter, then he forgot what a veto is and started a unnecessary divisive war.

If you want more of that kind of posing as one thing whilst being something completely different vote for Hillary.

I thought Hill did well... as for avoiding stupid hypotheticals designed to bite you in the ass later in the general.... she was smart to give them no attention.

The look she gave Russert when she told him Bill wasn't there after his flimsy trick question was priceless, humorous, humanizing and very presidential. That look withered Russert and grabbed the biggesst round of applause of the night.

As Pat Buchanana said, Hill didn't lose, therefore she won.

I thought Edwards was impressive and as usual Joe Biden was the starightest shooter. I like him and I'd like to see him on the ticket.

And this Gavel guy.... fabulous comic relief.

No, never.

If he offered her the VP spot she would turn it down.

He has no chance of ever becoming President of the USA and so it matters not who he might consider for VP.

As for Hilary's pathetic resistance to answering "hypotheticals," her candidancy is a hypothetical. How can we judge candidates if they will not respond to hypothetical questions?

Hilary is not really incapable or unwilling to answer hypothetical questions. She is at a position where her party nomination seems assured (and it is) and now she is making the perfectly correct political ploy of responding to questions with the general election in mind.

Candidates in either Party have to decide when they can break free from the monolithic preferences of their Base, and when they can try and appeal to a broader audience.

Clearly, Obama and Edwards have an all or nothing strategy in mind. They are more than willing to pander to the Democratic (Leftist) Base, and then worry about how they will win the general election once they get the nomination.

Neither of them will.

What is alarming is that Hilary has come to the realization that the nomination is hers and that now she is seeking a far more broader base of support.

As a conservative, I would prefer that she do battle with the phony populist Edwards and the cub-reporter Obama in seeking to appease the left wing of her party. This would give "us" all sorts of sound-bytes to exploit.

Unfortunately, Hilary is nothing if she is not a savvy politician. After all she has Bubba at her side, and he is a political genius (to the extent that such an appellation is realistic).

The heart of the matter is what any of these candidates will be when elected.

We can reasonably assume that:

McCain will be the McCain we all know and love/hate.

Romney will be more liberal than he heralds himself today, and do anything and everything to assure a second term.

Rudy will be as conservative as he needs to be to win the nomination, and as liberal as he thinks such a mind-set will benefit the nation.

Thompson? Who the hell knows what he believes?

On the Left:

Edwards will be a disaster

Obama will be a disaster

Sad to say, but I support Hilary if a Democrat must win.

I know she will revert to her Leftist nature and ignore all of her pre-election promises, but so will Edwards and Obama.

The difference among the three candidates is that Hilary is actually contemplating what she might do as president, while the other two clowns are scrambling for the nomination and would sell their grandmothers to obtain it.

God help us if the Democrats reach the White House, but we will need even more help if the next president is Obama or Edwards.

Have no fear, neither will be.

Hilary (most certainly) vs Guilliano (not so assured) in 2008.

President Rudy takes the oath of office in Jan 2009

Bet on it.

Talk is cheap but that is all Obama has going for him. He has neither the experience or record to backup anything he says'. Except of course his claim to fame, he was against the invasion of Iraq. I too was against the Bush invasion does that qualify me to be a candidate for the presidency of the US.

What has he said, specifically, that you feel he doesnt have the record to back up? Can you give an example?

It looks as though Hill will get the nomination, and the rumor is that she will pick Evan Bayh. Bayh is a moderate Dem, well spoken, very presentable, carrying little baggage, and smart.

Seems like this time in 2003 we were banking on Howard Dean getting the nomination...

not a "what he said" here, but a "what he didn't do"... which is that he didn't bother to vote for or against the labeling of the revolutionary guard as a terrorist organization last week.

that's disappointing.

No, and neither you or Obama will be our next president.

Thsanks God for the latter.