Hillary for Veep...a realistic scenario!

I'm not opposed to seeing a Republican in the White House, but I'm opposed to seeing any of these Republicans in the WH with one notable exception (Huntsman) and he'll never make it to the November ballot.

Just starting to read that, thanks JfC.
Makes me wish anew that Blatham and Lola would come back into the fray. As I remember, Lola was very pro Hillary and Bernie was, though maybe not as strongly.

I'm still digesting all this, if it would ever come true. I was anti Hillary. I took Obama as more tuned into me, but past that didn't like some of her behaviors and still don't, as in her expressing hope that Khaddafi would be killed. Turns out neither of them are particularly tuned to me, but I take him still as more so. Call it the Slight Tuning Effect.

Perhaps I don't know enough about Biden, but I am more comfortable with him at State than Hillary.

Thanks for the link, Joe...but ALEX PAREENE apparently does not know how to read. Keller did NOT, as Pareene asserts, write about how Hillary will replace Biden. Keller's article was about what could happen; and about what some people are agitating to happen; and a scenario for it happening in a reasonable way. Pareene is way off base.

But as the other Joe mentioned just below you, it probably won't happen. I agree, it probably won't. (Did he actually use the qualifier "probably?")

I am afraid the Republicans are going to win the White House. I think their chances are a lot better than many liberals and progressives are willing to acknowledge right now. The base is in shambles...often with the best they can say is some variation on "I will vote for him as the lesser of two evils."

That sounds defeatist to the huge center of the political spectrum who are looking for optimism.

I'm still anti-Hillary too, osso. She just has too much Clinton baggage. I'll give her props, though, for her work as SoS.

On an unrelated note, Bill Daley has resigned as Obama's Chief of Staff.

Frank, I had to ask myself, "which base?" when you wrote about the base being in shambles. The Republican base is in no great shape either. I'd say it's in bigger shambles than the Dem base. If it's Romney then the Dems have the perfect 1% candidate to campaign against. If it's any of the loons then the Dems have a loon to campaign against. If it's Huntsman they'll have a battle, but it won't be Huntsman.

(All that I write next will be supposition and personal opinion based on discussions in several forums and personal contact with man-in-the-street politically active individuals)

I agree that it won't be Huntsman...mostly because I like Huntsman and he makes the most sense of the group. No way the Republicans will choose someone like that.

The base of the Republican party, as you noted, is split from here to Hell and back. But they have a tendency to unify when push comes to shove. They intend to get Obama out of that office...even if Genghis Khan were their candidate. The Republican base absolutely loathes Romney, but if he is their candidate...the vast majority of their base will vote for him. The Republican base wants Obama out more than anything in the world...which is why they are willing to trash our country rather than give him any help in needed legislation.

The Democratic Party base is so far out in left field, they can't even see home plate. There are HUGE numbers of liberals so furious with Obama (mostly because of their unrealistic expectations of him) that they want him out of the Oval Office MORE than the Republicans do.

With minor exceptions, the best I have heard from hard-core liberals about Obama is--he is one of the biggest disappointments ever, and I guess I will vote for him only because I despise the Republican candidates.

JPB, this is not a recipe for a victory!

At least, that is my opinion. I think there is a lot more trouble afoot than most Democrats want to acknowledge.

Replying to myself - I'm aware that I said near to immediately after Bin Laden was killed, that I was glad it was done.

And I guess I was, it had been a long time. My better self does not believe in assassination, and would have wanted him to go to trial. Which of course would be a circus of one sort or another. Still, I'd have been more pleased with capture.
Thus my thing re Khaddafi's death. Having our Secretary of State wish for it was repellent to me.

Which is why I think the VP (getting back on topic) is so important. The Dem base and the Rep base will all be holding their noses while trudging to the polls to keep the other guy out. This isn't an election to win; it's one not to lose. So, how can Obama lose? By picking Hillary (or someone else) over Biden, or if Romney snubs his nose at the Christian Right and picks Chris Christie as a running mate. Sarah Palin cost McCain the moderate/indie vote. CC is the current media/moderate darling. He's campaigning heavily for Romney. He could swing the indie voter to the R side and he could generate enough interest in the Rep base to entice more of them to get out and vote.

You wrote Chris Christie there, where you really meant to write Marco Rubio. Christie isn't going to bring NJ for Romney and he's a polarizing public figure.

Cycloptichorn

Polling does not support this assertion. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Cycloptichorn

Well spoken, inexperienced, junior Senator from FL. It might excite the base but I don't think it wins him the indies over Obama.

It will likely bring FL to Romney, Rubio is very well liked there. It could also help a bunch with the Latino vote which is going to be a huge problem for the GOP this cycle as it is. That alone is worth more than everything Christie brings to the ticket.

I'm not sure VP is an area where voters traditionally look for someone who is super-experienced.

I don't know why you think Christie would help win any independents...

Cycloptichorn

The indie voter is probably more likely to look at the full ticket than a party loyalist. Indies and swing voters tend to represent about 8% of a national election -- enough to determine the outcome in a close (or stay-at-home) election for the bases. Swing voters got behind the TPers in 2010. They got just what they voted for, although they didn't really think that total gridlock was on the horizon. I predict they'll bail of the Rs in large numbers and take a serious look at the entire ticket before casting their ballots for P/VP in November.

A small point against Hillary: she's getting older. Obama can't stand for reelection if he wins this one, and her age would be really working against her in another four years. Democrats will lose the advantage of having a sitting president, and might not gain from veep.

Because he's a conservative governor of a liberal state and has a reputation of getting **** done. He's not my R governor of choice (I'd prefer Buddy Rommer, Gary Johnson, or Huntsman) but there's an experience theme there that's appealing to indies/moderates.

Speaking of Palin, Todd Palin has just endorsed Gingrich....

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/todd-palin-endorses-newt-gingrich/

His reasons for doing so?

I just quickly read Parene - agree with him Hillary is no guarantee of drawing a flock. Whatever is decided re Biden being vice presidential nominee again (I'm for, I think), I'm more for her already stated plans (no link). The trouble with a trade is that she could be president. It's not that I'm against a woman, and I'd prefer her as a specific woman to the monkey's uncles in the lineup. Oh, wait, that might be an anti-assassination point.

I still sorta like Johnson, but he's out of it, and I don't know enough anyway - I've a semi libertarian bent, but have my social ways.

There is probably a larger number of the Democratic base and independents who would not vote for President Obama were he to replace Biden with Hilary.

He respects him for what he went through in the 90s?!?!?!?! Ay, yi, yi!

BBB thinks if Romney is the Republican nominee, he will select New Mexico's governor, Susana Martinez (first female Hispanic governor in the US) for his V.P.