Obama/Clinton ticket possible - Just ask Bill Clinton

HollyweirdHollyweird Posts: 197
edited March 2008 in A Moving Train
Yup. He said it today. Already jockying for the convention. He makes a good argument. Obama would carry urban areas and Clinton could shore up the rural areas she won. Question is who would be #1 and who would be #2? Would Hillary take the VP? Would Obama? Sounds possible now. Is it smart? Hard to say. Ticket would be be very vulnerable on National Security. BUT whoever loses this campaign may have alot of disenfranchised voters. And if Clinton loses and is not on the ticket look for some of those people and moderates to go to McCain. I can see that ticket winning actually. I think if you can unite the Obama people with the Clintons on the campaign trial with them, could be hard to beat.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • PaperPlatesPaperPlates Posts: 1,745
    Drugs are bad mmmkay?
    Why go home

    www.myspace.com/jensvad
  • NevermindNevermind Posts: 1,006
    Drugs are bad mmmkay?
    Theyre really not......
  • poto101poto101 Posts: 406
    Hollyweird wrote:
    Ticket would be be very vulnerable on National Security.


    yeah but with bush out of office other countries might not hate us as much. i remember reading somewhere how much oral support obama gets from international communities
    It's all happening....

    East Troy 2003
    Chicago x2, Summerfest x2, 2006
    Chicago THE VIC, Lollapalooza, 2007
    bonnaROOOOOOO 2008
    Chicago x2 2009

    (EV chicago 2008 night 2)
  • HollyweirdHollyweird Posts: 197
    poto101 wrote:
    yeah but with bush out of office other countries might not hate us as much. i remember reading somewhere how much oral support obama gets from international communities
    I think you have your politicians confused. Bill Clinton had the most oral support...
  • Funny.
    Alex Jones has been saying it's going to be a spilt ticket for a few months now.

    Clinton\Obama, after Hillary cheats Barack for the nomination, and Barack graciously accepts the VP slot instead of protesting like a guy with the balls he says he has.

    We'll see, though.
    ;)
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • NevermindNevermind Posts: 1,006
    Funny.
    Alex Jones has been saying it's going to be a spilt ticket for a few months now.

    Clinton\Obama, after Hillary cheats Barack for the nomination, and Barack graciously accepts the VP slot instead of protesting like a guy with the balls he says he has.

    We'll see, though.
    ;)
    Alex did predict that there would be an attack 2 months before 9/11 and he also predicted Osama would be the boogeyman.
  • Nevermind wrote:
    Alex did predict that there would be an attack 2 months before 9/11 and he also predicted Osama would be the boogeyman.

    Yeah right.
    :rolleyes:

    Alex Jones is a fucking idiot.

    Really makes you wonder how such a "kook" could have figured out that there would be an event involving airplanes, Bin Laden, and the World Trade Center, but the Government claims it was totally caught of guard.
    Yeah fucking right.
    ;)
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • poto101poto101 Posts: 406
    Hollyweird wrote:
    I think you have your politicians confused. Bill Clinton had the most oral support...

    never said he didn't, but this was obama being reported by the media so its not unlikely they left that part out
    It's all happening....

    East Troy 2003
    Chicago x2, Summerfest x2, 2006
    Chicago THE VIC, Lollapalooza, 2007
    bonnaROOOOOOO 2008
    Chicago x2 2009

    (EV chicago 2008 night 2)
  • mbangel10mbangel10 Posts: 548
    In all honesty, I've been saying we'll have a Clinton/Obama (or vice versa) ticket since the get go. Right now those two are battling it out for the nomination but once that's decided, then it's doing what's best for the party to win the election. Combining forces would be the way to do it. If it's just Clinton or Obama a lot of votes will go to McCain out of fear, uncertainty, etc... but if you combine them they'll lock in those votes and a Democrat will once again head up the white house.

    I'll be shocked if it doesn't happen.
    Pitt 98, Pitt 00, Cleveland 03, Pitt 03, State College 03, Toledo 04, Toronto 05, Pitt 05, Cleveland 06, Pitt 06 & Chicago 07, Chicago 1&2 09, Philly 2,3,4 09, Cleveland 10, Columbus 10, Alpine Valley 1& 2 11
  • MasterFramerMasterFramer Posts: 2,268
    I'll drop all my support of Obama if he runs with Hillary...
    10.31.93 / 10.1.94 / 6.24.95 / 11.4.95 / 10.19-20.96 / 7.16.98 / 7.21.98 / 10.31.00 /8.4.01 Nader Rally/ 10.21.01 / 12.8-9.02 / 6.01.03 / 9.1.05 / 7.15-16,18.06 / 7.20.06 / 7.22-23.06 / Lolla 07
  • ledveddermanledvedderman Posts: 7,761
    Don't worry Framer, a Obama/Clinton ticket would make no political sense for Barack Obama. Why would he want to bring the Clinton baggage along in a change election. The doesn't even count having 4 years of Bill second guessing you and lurking over your shoulder the whole time.

    I think Hillary needs Obama on her ticket a lot more than Obama would need her. He doesn't at all, and it would go against his who campaign.
  • cornnifercornnifer Posts: 2,130
    I'll drop all my support of Obama if he runs with Hillary...
    i won't drop all my support for him, but if hillary is the nominee, and Obama accepts a VP spot, i still won't vote for her. i can't. i despise the woman. That being said, i don't think it will happen in either situation.
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • HollyweirdHollyweird Posts: 197
    I'll drop all my support of Obama if he runs with Hillary...
    That just shows your supporting Obama simply because our disdain Clinton. That says alot about his lack of substance.
  • ledveddermanledvedderman Posts: 7,761
    Hollyweird wrote:
    That just shows your supporting Obama simply because our disdain Clinton. That says alot about his lack of substance.

    Does it? I don't know if you look at the issues, nut they're 98% the same. Some of us believe there should be more than two names at the top of a Presidential ticket for almost 30 years.
  • HollyweirdHollyweird Posts: 197
    Don't worry Framer, a Obama/Clinton ticket would make no political sense for Barack Obama. Why would he want to bring the Clinton baggage along in a change election. The doesn't even count having 4 years of Bill second guessing you and lurking over your shoulder the whole time.

    I think Hillary needs Obama on her ticket a lot more than Obama would need her. He doesn't at all, and it would go against his who campaign.


    No matter who wins the other candidates people would be very very disenfranchised and may not vote at all. Just ask the two Obamabots on this thread. I highly doubt that when all is said and done Obama people are going to vote for McCain or not vote if their man is not on the ticket. It's all talk. I think Obama gains more than Hillary by putting her on his ticket or vice versa. Clinton won the big populous states. Obama won the Red states. Hillary needs a national security VP to have a chance with moderates. But I think she would chose him if it meant having a unified party with no one disenfranchised going into the general. It just means someone will need to check their ego and at least Bill Clinton is smart enough there will have to be a deal at the convention. Highly unlikely Obama wins straight up before convention. Clinton will have the VP if she wants it. Obama has no choice if its offered to him in exchange for withdrawing from a convention fight. So you want to re-think never? Its more likely than not.
  • ledveddermanledvedderman Posts: 7,761
    Hollyweird wrote:
    No matter who wins the other candidates people would be very very disenfranchised and may not vote at all. Just ask the two Obamabots on this thread. I highly doubt that when all is said and done Obama people are going to vote for McCain or not vote if their man is not on the ticket. It's all talk. I think Obama gains more than Hillary by putting her on his ticket or vice versa. Clinton won the big populous states. Obama won the Red states. Hillary needs a national security VP to have a chance with moderates. But I think she would chose him if it meant having a unified party with no one disenfranchised going into the general. It just means someone will need to check their ego and at least Bill Clinton is smart enough there will have to be a deal at the convention. Highly unlikely Obama wins straight up before convention. Clinton will have the VP if she wants it. Obama has no choice if its offered to him in exchange for withdrawing from a convention fight. So you want to re-think never? Its more likely than not.


    16 years years of White House baggage? You think Barack Obama wants to answer questions about Marc Rich on the campaign trail because Hillary got him a pardon while her husband was the President. Do you think Barack Obama wants the pundits making cracks about Bill not having anything to do in Washington? Do you think Barack Obama wants 35 years worth of shady business dealings by the Clintons bringing down his campaign? A word the Obama has been too good to mutter in this election cycle...Whitewater. Do you think Barack Obama wants Bill Clinton telling him for the next four years how he would have handled the situation? This isn't even cracking the surface into the smear that would come to Barack Obama if he chose Hillary Clinton as a running mate.

    Yes, Hillary won the big populous states. New York, New Jersey, Mass., and California. Guess what though? Those states will be blue in November no matter what? Not a great argument if you are in the Clinton camp. She's also won Texas, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Oklahoma. Do you really think that those will be blue states in the fall? No chance. Al Gore couldn't even deliver Tennessee for the Dems and that is his home state.

    Swing states that Hillary has won. Ohio. That's it. Barack Obama has won Virginia, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Missouri. Missouri is a big of a swing state as Ohio, so they should cancel eachother out. Don't even bring up Florida. Barack Obama did not campaign there. One thing you realize when you follow this is that she has started off with 20+ point leads in state after state after state. Once Barack Obama visits those states, the numbers start swinging in his favor and he closes the gap there within weeks.

    No candidate will have the needed delegates before the convention. Obama will go in with the most states won and the most total delegates at that point. If he goes in with the popular vote lead too, the Democratic party cannot afford to pull a George W. Bush supreme court victory with the super delegates trumping the will of the people.
  • KDH12KDH12 Posts: 2,096
    my take, is that Hillary needs Obama more than Obama needs hillary. I do not think that Obama would pick her

    I also think Hillary talking about a split ticket is B.S. she is trying to tell Obama supports "vote for me I will keep your guy around" only to pick someone else later on.....
    **CUBS GO ALL THE WAY IN......never **
  • HollyweirdHollyweird Posts: 197
    16 years years of White House baggage? You think Barack Obama wants to answer questions about Marc Rich on the campaign trail because Hillary got him a pardon while her husband was the President. Do you think Barack Obama wants the pundits making cracks about Bill not having anything to do in Washington? Do you think Barack Obama wants 35 years worth of shady business dealings by the Clintons bringing down his campaign? A word the Obama has been too good to mutter in this election cycle...Whitewater. Do you think Barack Obama wants Bill Clinton telling him for the next four years how he would have handled the situation? This isn't even cracking the surface into the smear that would come to Barack Obama if he chose Hillary Clinton as a running mate.

    Yes, Hillary won the big populous states. New York, New Jersey, Mass., and California. Guess what though? Those states will be blue in November no matter what? Not a great argument if you are in the Clinton camp. She's also won Texas, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Oklahoma. Do you really think that those will be blue states in the fall? No chance. Al Gore couldn't even deliver Tennessee for the Dems and that is his home state.

    Swing states that Hillary has won. Ohio. That's it. Barack Obama has won Virginia, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Missouri. Missouri is a big of a swing state as Ohio, so they should cancel eachother out. Don't even bring up Florida. Barack Obama did not campaign there. One thing you realize when you follow this is that she has started off with 20+ point leads in state after state after state. Once Barack Obama visits those states, the numbers start swinging in his favor and he closes the gap there within weeks.

    No candidate will have the needed delegates before the convention. Obama will go in with the most states won and the most total delegates at that point. If he goes in with the popular vote lead too, the Democratic party cannot afford to pull a George W. Bush supreme court victory with the super delegates trumping the will of the people.

    Dont be so sure Obama can carry California, New York or Florida. Clinton support is very strong is these states. Here is more support for the argument of a split ticket. Dont blame me this time, blame the press.
    Moderates will vote for McCain if Obama wins.

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/119953/page/1
  • ledveddermanledvedderman Posts: 7,761
    Hollyweird wrote:
    Dont be so sure Obama can carry California, New York or Florida. Clinton support is very strong is these states. Here is more support for the argument of a split ticket. Dont blame me this time, blame the press.
    Moderates will vote for McCain if Obama wins.

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/119953/page/1

    So you don't think Clinton supporters would back Obama? She's telling her supporters he's a strong enough candidate to be one heart beat away from being President as a VP, but not as a candidate?

    To assume that Barack Obama couldn't win California or New York is beyond insane. Lets pretend that California had a primary on it's own date and not with 21 other states. Hillary Clinton had a 20+ point lead in the weeks leading up to Super Tuesday. While Obama was visiting many other states and not putting all his eggs in one basket, he STILL managed to narrow her margin of victory significantly.
  • HollyweirdHollyweird Posts: 197
    So you don't think Clinton supporters would back Obama? She's telling her supporters he's a strong enough candidate to be one heart beat away from being President as a VP, but not as a candidate?

    To assume that Barack Obama couldn't win California or New York is beyond insane. Lets pretend that California had a primary on it's own date and not with 21 other states. Hillary Clinton had a 20+ point lead in the weeks leading up to Super Tuesday. While Obama was visiting many other states and not putting all his eggs in one basket, he STILL managed to narrow her margin of victory significantly.

    Well since I live here and around alot of political people I can tell you what the buzz is. I am not saying he would not win, I am saying he is vulnerable in those states. He already fucked himself in Florida with his comments about Castro and the embargo, so mark that state Red already. California has a strong and popular REPUBLICAN governor. A little guy named Schwarzeneger who is all about McCain. New York has Guliani. Dont believe for a second that people in the Big Apple aren't still about national security. So....if Obama has an opportunity to put Clinton on the ticket and decides to fight, dont count on it. That would put Clinton people who are far more centrist than Obama people, potentially over to McCain. Myself included. If everyone kissed and made up, if Obama leads in the delegate count and popular vote going into the convention AND offers up VP to Hillary in exchange for dropping the convention fight I, as a Clinton supporter, would vote for that ticket. Otherwise, probably not. This almost has to happen at this point assuming no one gets to the magic number and I dont think the Clintons would divide the party at the convention if they knew they could not win. Cant say the same about Obama.
  • HollyweirdHollyweird Posts: 197
    So you don't think Clinton supporters would back Obama? She's telling her supporters he's a strong enough candidate to be one heart beat away from being President as a VP, but not as a candidate?

    To assume that Barack Obama couldn't win California or New York is beyond insane. Lets pretend that California had a primary on it's own date and not with 21 other states. Hillary Clinton had a 20+ point lead in the weeks leading up to Super Tuesday. While Obama was visiting many other states and not putting all his eggs in one basket, he STILL managed to narrow her margin of victory significantly.

    And all BILL CLINTON said was that it would be a formidable national ticket. Frankly I took it to mean that they might be willing to accept VP themselves. They never said Obama would be the VP.
  • ledveddermanledvedderman Posts: 7,761
    Hollyweird wrote:
    Well since I live here and around alot of political people I can tell you what the buzz is. I am not saying he would not win, I am saying he is vulnerable in those states. He already fucked himself in Florida with his comments about Castro and the embargo, so mark that state Red already. California has a strong and popular REPUBLICAN governor. A little guy named Schwarzeneger who is all about McCain. New York has Guliani. Dont believe for a second that people in the Big Apple aren't still about national security. So....if Obama has an opportunity to put Clinton on the ticket and decides to fight, dont count on it. That would put Clinton people who are far more centrist than Obama people, potentially over to McCain. Myself included. If everyone kissed and made up, if Obama leads in the delegate count and popular vote going into the convention AND offers up VP to Hillary in exchange for dropping the convention fight I, as a Clinton supporter, would vote for that ticket. Otherwise, probably not. This almost has to happen at this point assuming no one gets to the magic number and I dont think the Clintons would divide the party at the convention if they knew they could not win. Cant say the same about Obama.

    Since national security is a big issue in New York still, what is Hillary's national security experience?
  • HollyweirdHollyweird Posts: 197
    Since national security is a big issue in New York still, what is Hillary's national security experience?

    You dont need to regurgitate Obama's campaign talking points. I was talking about McCain. That's they guy you are running against in the general election. I dont need to remind you of his credentials do I? Neither Obama or Clinton have National Security experience. Personally I thought Clinton should run with Jim Webb to shore up that issue. But that doesn't look like it will happen. Dual ticket is going to happen absent a dramatic turn of events between now and June. Both candidates have big problems on that issue. But the way things are going its going to be about the Economy anyways in which case edge to the Democrats. Joint ticket makes sense in that area. You have to agree that a united party will be far better than a divided one come November.
  • KosmicJelliKosmicJelli Posts: 1,855
    Hollyweird wrote:
    I think you have your politicians confused. Bill Clinton had the most oral support...

    We all know "BillyBoy" had plenty of oral support in the Oval office
  • prismprism Posts: 2,440
    KDH12 wrote:
    my take, is that Hillary needs Obama more than Obama needs hillary. I do not think that Obama would pick her

    I also think Hillary talking about a split ticket is B.S. she is trying to tell Obama supports "vote for me I will keep your guy around" only to pick someone else later on.....

    that's exactly the first things that crossed my mind when I heard her talking about a split ticket. perhaps because she is always talking out of both sides of her mouth and she will say anything to win.
    *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
    angels share laughter
    *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
  • HollyweirdHollyweird Posts: 197
    We all know "BillyBoy" had plenty of oral support in the Oval office
    That was my point. No one got the joke.
  • HollyweirdHollyweird Posts: 197
    prism wrote:
    that's exactly the first things that crossed my mind when I heard her talking about a split ticket. perhaps because she is always talking out of both sides of her mouth and she will say anything to win.
    You people are so fucking jaded. She is acknowledging the political reality of the situation. That's what I am talking about with Obama people. The just dont operate in reality. Obama is NOT going to win on delegates. So a deal has to be done and the Clintons know that. Thats experience.
  • jeffbrjeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    To assume that Barack Obama couldn't win California or New York is beyond insane.

    It really isn't insane to think that Obama couldn't carry California. The only major state he's carried is his own.

    There are lots of pundits who think he'll have trouble. Here's an interesting analysis:
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/obama_is_weak_in_key_general_e.html
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • prismprism Posts: 2,440
    Hollyweird wrote:
    You people are so fucking jaded. She is acknowledging the political reality of the situation. That's what I am talking about with Obama people. The just dont operate in reality. Obama is NOT going to win on delegates. So a deal has to be done and the Clintons know that. Thats experience.

    but neither is Clinton going to win on delegates, not with Obama ahead by over 100 plegded delegates, the super-delegates are not going to swing things Clinton's way because of what going against the will of the people could mean to their own political careers. so for a convention compromise of a split ticket that would mean Clinton having to take the VP spot...do you honestly think she'd take playing a distant second fiddle to anyone?
    *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
    angels share laughter
    *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
  • MasterFramerMasterFramer Posts: 2,268
    Hollyweird wrote:
    No matter who wins the other candidates people would be very very disenfranchised and may not vote at all.

    Your agrument is flawed. You havnet been reading the exit polling data as of late. The majority of clinton supporters show strong support for Obama when asked the question would you still vote with Obama as the nominee. When Obama supporters are asked the same question a significant number say they will "stay home" or not support Clinton.
    10.31.93 / 10.1.94 / 6.24.95 / 11.4.95 / 10.19-20.96 / 7.16.98 / 7.21.98 / 10.31.00 /8.4.01 Nader Rally/ 10.21.01 / 12.8-9.02 / 6.01.03 / 9.1.05 / 7.15-16,18.06 / 7.20.06 / 7.22-23.06 / Lolla 07
Sign In or Register to comment.