Image and video hosting by TinyPic














Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Hillary for Veep...? NO!

(Late added note: Corrente is back!)

U.S. News and World Report claims that Obama's low job approval rating (43% -- a worse number than that earned by any previous president at this stage) -- might tempt him to ask Hillary Clinton to take Joe Biden's place as Vice President.

I find that suggestion hilarious: Four years ago, the Obots embarked on a propaganda barrage designed to convince voters that the Clintons are evil racists. Now the Obama team wants Hillary to bail out our sorry failure of a president. Well, it won't work.

People are angry about many things right now, but Joe Biden is not one of them. Switching him out would be like putting a new paint job on an exploding Pinto.

Besides, the choice of running mate has little impact on the voters' feelings about the man at the top of the ticket. Look at Quayle in 1988. Look at Cheney in 2004. Hell, how many people truly liked Bush back in 1980 and 1984...?

A veep switch now will simply make Obama look desperate and weak. Biden is not terribly beloved, but neither is he despised. If he gets the sack, everyone will understand that Obama is flailing like a de-ponded trout.

I don't think that the Republicans will be silly enough to choose Newt. If they make so hideous an error, Obama may yet win re-election. The GOP base dislikes Romney, but Republicans will eventually reconcile themselves to him: They need someone who can win.

If the Dems want a chance, the leaders of the party need to plead with Obama to step down. At the same time, they must plead with Hillary to step up.

I'm not a blinkered Hillary supporter -- frankly, I'm still angry at her -- but the situation is what it is. Only Hillary Clinton can galvanize what we might call the "99 percent" vote. Only she can bring back the sense of optimism and enthusiasm that was foolishly wasted on the Obama campaign in 2008.

Even if her campaign failed, she could return the party to its New Deal ideals -- and subsequent opposition to a President Romney would not be mired in a pointless defense of Barack Obama's pointless presidency.

(Who should be Hillary's veep? Now there's a fun thought experiment...! I'd like John Conyers.)
Comments:
All I got to say is Lyndon Johnson not running gave us Nixon. Obama not running will give us Gringrige.
 
Anon: People forget that Humphrey came THAT close to winning. He would have pulled it off, had he distanced himself from LBJ earlier. If LBJ had run in '68, he would have lost big.
 
Warren or Franken.
 
Warren, Franken -- both good choices. But either one would endanger the Senate.
 
I should rephrase: If Franken left the Senate, the Republicans would probably take his seat. If Warren dropped out of the race, Scott Brown would surely win. There are, of course, lots of Republicans much worse than Brown. But I don't want the Republicans to control the Senate.
 
I can't see Hillary Clinton agreeing to 'save Obama's ass' for 2012. Why in God's name would she take a step down to VP after the Dem leadership turned their backs and basically spit in her face in 2008? Hillary has said there's zero chance of her running as VP or running a primary against the O man. I believe her.

Now, if Obama were to step down [for the good of the country hahaha], all bets are off. But I don't see that happening either.

We're caught between a rock and hard place: zero leadership on the one hand and crazy on the other.

I'll go 3rd party or write in 'none of the above.' But I will not support the Corporate Uniparty and/or the current choice of frontmen/women.

Peggy Sue
 
Ask your self this, when Chris Matthews got a tingle for Obama, or when Keith Olbermann suggested that a high ranking Dem assault Hillary in a back room who benefited?

Was it Joe or Jane Sixpack or Wall Street and Corporate America?

Again when Op-Ed writers at the NYT and WaPo mocked and vilified Al Gore and then John Kerry who benefited?

Was it the average American or the special interests?

Do you really think that the "journalists" in the print and broadcast media will go against their masters?

There is no way in hell they will allow Hillary anywhere near the White House.
 
wes clark for veep?


catlady
 
I don't believe that Hillary likes Obama, and suspect she's tired of working for that incompetent. She's a savvy politician who knows Obama is done. Hillary wants to be president for what she can do, not a four year vacation. She would have taken the V.P. back in 2008, not now, and not to save Obama's sorry a$$.

The Democratic establishment a.k.a. superdelegates who were determined to elect Obama and those who voted for him should tell Obama not to run and promise not vote for him in 2012. There is time to stop Newt if Hillary or another good Democratic candidate runs against Newt. Otherwise, 2012 is the just desert for fixing the 2008 Democratic primary.
DM
 
Joseph, the senate is lost already. 2012 is going to be a Democratic Party wipe out because the economy will be lots worse in 2012, maybe a depression or close to one. Voters will not forgive Obama and the Democrats for the horrible economic situation. I suspect both houses of congress will be under the control of the G.O.P., and for sure a Republican in the WH. Those who don't want Newt might want to vote in the Republican primary, help decide the nominee that way. If Obama is the nominee, I will not vote for him, even if Newt is the nominee.
DM
 
Anonymous, Nixon was a very popular President and represented very moderate positions- he just was corrupt with the whole Watergate thing. A better analogy to think about is that Carter led to Reagan or that Wilson led to Harding- when Democrats nominteed again a person who was arguably communist, the next President was as conservative as they come.

The Democrats would be better with Clinton- and would have been better with Clinton. Just like the GOP would have been better with Romney in 2008, and might be better with him as their nominee now. Smart and experienced is the way to go for President, not flashy and ideological.
 
Con teacher -- Wilson and Carter were COMMIES? Where do you GET such ludicrous distortions of history -- Glenn Beck? Do you have any idea how nutty you sound to sane people?

Nixon was a moderate by our modern veering-toward-fascism standards. By the we're-all-Keynesians-now standards of his day, he was as far to the right as it was possible to be and still attain high office.

God, I hope you're not REALLY a teacher. Whenever I run into some fruitloop spouting conspiratorial horseshit about Wilson (who was, incidentally, despised by actual American communists), I fear for this country.
 
Yup, that's Beckesque history. T.Roosevelt, Wilson, FDR, Carter, Hillary, even McCain [the list is always expanding]--anyone that used the word 'progressive,' might have had a progressive bone in his/her body or stood beside someone muttering the word is not only a Commie but evil, Satan-evil. It's as nuts as claiming the Founding Fathers were all dedicated Holy Rollers, their true natures reshaped, their heartfelt sentiments rewritten by Godless Lefties.

Clown college is in session.

Peggy Sue
 
That claim stating that LBJ dropping out of the race gave us Nixon has always frustrated me. It always ignores the assassination of Robert Kennedy.

LBJ dropped out of the race because -- he couldn't win.

I've always believed that if RFK hadn't been assassinated he would have been elected. And things would have been very different.
 
I am convinced as well the RFK would have won, katiebird.
 
"If the Dems want a chance, the leaders of the party need to plead with Obama to step down."

They need to DEMAND he step down. And if they enabled his "win", they should join him! After they get on their knees and BEG Hillary to run.

(I like Wes Clark for her VP also.)

Now, back to reality... : )

Peg
 
We're gonna really hit rock bottom come this next election. I can't see Hillary runnin unless she is begged by the powers of the DNC demanding Obama step down. He doesn't like the job. Only his ego stands in the way. But he's gonna get a shellackin' either way deservedly so. He might want to avoid the embarrassment. Still Hillary wpon't run this time. Maybe 4 years from now after the Obots grow up and realize what they've done. Don't hear much from TPM btw. I never read em but what's their view? Anybody heard from them?
 
Here is the odd thing about history, there are many paths but only one path is taken at each junction. Nothing is inevitable. If Johnson had run he would have changed his position on the Vietnam war and he and Humpry would have won. Kennedy would not have been killed, and Nixon would not have been president.
If Obama does not run the Republicans will win the House, the Senete and the White House and all future history will be on a different path.
 
Methinks you got your 60s history a bit muddled there, chronology-wise, Anon.
 
If LBJ had changed his position on the Vietnam war he would have run and he and Humphrey would have won. RFK would not have been running and hence would have been killed, And Nixon would not have been elected president.

History would have taken a completely different path, not necessarily for the better.

We know that we the 99% will not fair well if the Republicans take over so we better elect a Democrat (Obama).
 
The problem with your Conyers fantasy ....he was the one spreading those hateful flyers in MIchigan in 2008: "Just write in "Nobody" to have Hillary lose to Nobody"
Beyond that, now that I realized the 1% grasp on power, I realized that Hillary had the exact same chances to win as Mike Gravel, Al Gore, Wes Clark or Dennis Kucinich: ZERO. Bill Clinton was the last fluke - they'll never allow one who's not beholden in again. (from either party)
 
The problem with your Conyers fantasy ....he was the one spreading those hateful flyers in MIchigan in 2008: "Just write in "Nobody" to have Hillary lose to Nobody"
Beyond that, now that I realized the 1% grasp on power, I realized that Hillary had the exact same chances to win as Mike Gravel, Al Gore, Wes Clark or Dennis Kucinich: ZERO. Bill Clinton was the last fluke - they'll never allow one who's not beholden in again. (from either party)
 
Conyers has done one hell of a lot of good, and he was one of the first to criticize Obama from the left.

http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2009/08/john-conyers-racist.html

I think he simply let himself get caught up in a sort of madness back in 2008. As I said in my post: If you want an "O must GO" movement to work, then you're going to have to rub shoulders with a lot of people who did and said a lot of awful things during the last presidential election.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home


This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?


























Image and video hosting by TinyPic


FeedWind



FeedWind




FeedWind