Breaking News: Barack Obama rejects VP idea
Campaigning in Casper, Wyo., Friday night for the 12 delegates to come out of Saturday's Democrat
ic county caucuses, Sen. Barack Obama refused the notion of becoming the vice presidential candidate on this fall's party ticket.
Obama was asked by a television reporter, "Can you ever see yourself on the same ticket as Sen. Clinton?"
And the freshman Illinois senator replied: "Well, you know, I think it’s premature. You won’t see me as a vice presidential candidate. You know, I’m running for president. We have won twice as many states as Senator Clinton, and have a higher popular vote, and I think we can maintain our delegate count."
Many Democrats have long thought of Obama-Clinton or Clinton-Obama as a dream ticket, offering both the first serious female candidate and the first serious African American candidate for the nation's top two political offices.
Clinton surprisingly broached the idea Wednesday morning after she won the popular vote in Texas and Ohio to regain some momentum after 11 straight ...
losses, though she still lags far behind in pledged delegates. She mentioned the possibility of a joint ticket again Friday morning during a campaign appearance in Mississippi.
Last night was the first time Obama commented on the idea.
It's political protocol when presidential candidates are asked about the vice presidency to twist the question back around to the top office and avoid a direct answer. But Obama's response last night was unusually direct and dismissive.
The 46-year-old candidate is expected to do well in Wyoming today, as he has done in virtually every caucus state. Wyoming, as The Ticket noted here in detail Friday, is not the most hospitable territory for Democrats.
Eleven months ago during an appearance on "The David Letterman Show," Obama said, "You don't run for second place. I don't believe in that." See his Friday statement for yourself on Billings TV station KTVQ, but only if you can sit through an interminable local vinyl fence ad with Danny, who seems strangely eager to hide his face beneath a dirty baseball cap.
(UPDATE: For the latest Wyoming caucus results -- Obama was victorious -- The Times' Robin Abcarian has full details in her story from Cheyenne here.)
-- Andrew Malcolm
I fully agree why should Barack Obama want to be VP and have a joint ticket with Clinton. I
t s Barack as he points out who even after Ohio and Texas is still well ahead in the Delegate Count and No it is not necessary to change the rules that where agreed just to please Hilary with Michigan and Florida.
Posted by: John B Sheffield | March 08, 2008 at 01:36 AM
He had to put an end to the Clinton-Obama speculation -- and most of all Clinton's "maybe Obama will be my VP" gestures. He needed to force the choice: Clinton or Obama and not let voters weasel out of that choice by voting for Clinton on a two for one assumption.
Plus, do you really think he wants to be VP for someone who's just spent the last week telling everyone who will listen about how McCain is a better choice for president than him? I mean, let's get real: she's been saying Obama is manifestly unqualified for the office with one side of her mouth, and then she turns around and says with the other side of her mouth that Obama should be her VP -- a heartbeat away from the Oval Office and the red phone. the very things she was saying he is totally unqualified to handle!
She can't have it both ways. Neither can the voters. Obama just drew a line in the sand.
Posted by: Callimaco | March 08, 2008 at 02:02 AM
Why would Obama accept a VP nomination even if Clinton got the presidential one? He wouldn't even be able to pretend he had any influence in a Clinton administration. Bill will be acting VP and top adviser no matter who got the VP nod. Better to be in the senate and wait 4 or 8 years.
Posted by: Weston Nathanson | March 08, 2008 at 02:11 AM
If, in the end, Obama has more of the popular vote and more delegates, but Clinton uses her political clout to gain the nomination, then the democratic party will have failed me.
Posted by: Paul | March 08, 2008 at 02:31 AM
If anything, Obama should be at the top of the ticket. But even when he wins it won't be Hillary. It will be either Richardson or Napolitano. Clinton and Edwards might get the sentimental support of some Democrats but even they will realize upon sober reflection that neither of those two get you a state you need. Part of the reason that Hillary's big state argument is so funny is that and aardvark with a D next to its name on the ballot could win in California and New York. No what we need is some Southwestern love and that means taking NM or AZ. With Iowa trending strongly towards Dems again we can get to 270 without the Ohios an Floridas (read broken)states
Posted by: Andrew Benjamin | March 08, 2008 at 02:37 AM
Obama should be honored to be chosen as a vice presidential candidate just as Hillary should be honored to be chosen as a vice president. I could see 16 years of a progressive White House if Clinton were president and Obama vice president. Then Obama could run for president from a position of even greater strength as a vice president. It seems really difficult to unseat a sitting president and a vice president running for president is very difficult to beat. In any order, I would like to see both of them on the ticket. Would hate to see an Obama and Lieberman ticket (I know, he would not pick Lieberman; but, what if he chose some other doofus with demo-conservative credentials?).
Posted by: Bob | March 08, 2008 at 03:13 AM
Arrogance. nothing else.
Barack is an empty rhetorical display of what a political sleaze is. No substance needed. Media darling. Hype maker and elite backed.
Hillary's been there done that, survived media savagery, resurrected after so many near deaths,victim of unpleasant marital scandal , withstood years of GOP crap and even a crappier FOX NEWS team, a Senate star, a kinder gentler face vs Michel or Oprah.
I prefer her. Obama is shallow. McCain is a Bush rehash.
And there is no darn perfect persona like Santa running.
And yes, do not put too much spin. Politics all around is crap.
Posted by: excel | March 08, 2008 at 03:14 AM
If Hillary and Bill Clinton have been thoroughly vetted, then why don't we have answers for:
1. What sort of firewall will Hillary place between herself and her husband's Russian, Chinese, Indian, Kazakhstan, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, Brunei et al clients?
2. Do the Clinton Foundation's and Clinton's income tax records show a proper accounting for the funds received for charitable, political and public purposes versus the Clinton's private income?
3. Unlike her husband who before leaving office pardoned of Viktor Bout's partner Marc Rich, will Hillary Clinton "reject" any pardon request for the merchant of death Viktor Bout if she becomes president?
Contemporary historians must be amazed at the genius and sheer audacity of the Clintons' performance as they repeatedly make fools of the public. However, as the records of the Clinton administration are revealed, it may be left to later historians to write about the lowly purposes to which the Clintons applied their genius.
Posted by: John Patrick Smith | March 08, 2008 at 03:16 AM
Obama needs to reset the campaign. Hillary is tricky and wouldn't think twice about stealing the nomination any way possible. Obama needs a serious Pennsylvania plan. If he can take PA that may seal the deal for him.
The games HRC plays are sickening. First she says McCain would be better than Obama and then she wants him as a VP? Obama needs to clearly define himself. By casting BO in so many different roles, HRC succeeds in confusing the electorate, and if voters begin to wonder who he is they won't vote for him. BO needs to take back the narrative before it's too late.
Posted by: Karen Cleveland, Ohio | March 08, 2008 at 03:20 AM
I agree totally with Sen Obama. He is running for President not Vice President. As Vice President to Hillary he will have to kow-tow to her vision and compromise his, which she does not share. He is calling for a different way of doing politics. The only way he can realize that vision is by being President or waiting four years and trying again. And besides, why will he have to settle for VP to her when he is the more popular candidate, the one who is ahead in the delegate count, the one who has universal appeal and who can draw out sectors of the electorate that otherwise would not vote? If anything a compromise situation should be the other way around with him in the Presidential slot and she in the VP slot. But shouldn't a presidential nominate choose a running mate who shares his/her vision? The suggestion that he should be her running mate in the VP slot sounds to me like a ploy to get his supporters if not now, in November. I think by drawing the line clearly in the sand he is doing the right thing. He is not about personal aggrandizement at any cost even if it means sacrificing his vision. He is a leader, not a follower, and a leader with a world-changing vision and a firm belief that this change is possible.
Posted by: KPLewis | March 08, 2008 at 03:23 AM
I knew Obama would reject the idea of being Hillary's VP. It's one thing to even consider running with Clinton, it's another thing to be her VP.
Now Obama has to focus on finally defeating Hillary and sealing the Democratic nomination, which he has mathematically done, because let's face it: Hillary is acting like a spoiled brat, and less and less people want her for President. She wants things one way, then she flip flops and wants it the other way, she's worse than John Kerry!!!!
Posted by: Mike | March 08, 2008 at 03:25 AM
I truly believe that the only Democratic ticket that can win in November is either an Obama-Clinton or Clinton-Obama ticket. Only a ticket with both candidates can quickly re-unite the party and galvanize the broadest electorate for the general election. If both candidates sincerely want to bring change to America, they will swallow their pride and be willing to serve the party - as President OR Vice President - for the better of the county.
Posted by: Michael Ladd | March 08, 2008 at 03:26 AM
IF HC wants a threesome in the Oval Office should she not first consult both BO and BC?
Posted by: San Ying | March 08, 2008 at 03:26 AM
After ridiculing the man, Clinton now wants to place him as VP! Poor judgment on her part if she thinks him so incapable!
What she is attempting to do is drag Obama supporters along with her! After her comments that won't ever happen!
Posted by: Robbie | March 08, 2008 at 03:39 AM
The poster Callimaco hit it right on the nail. Obama should run with this. How can clinton say she and Ncain are quaulified and barack is not. The vice pres is supposed to be ready to step in on day one. Why would she select someone who is not qualified?? Answer that you Lesbian carbetbagger.
Posted by: Boriqua in the south bronx | March 08, 2008 at 03:54 AM
Hillary go away...if Obama agrees to run with her on the ticket, then he is just another corrupt politician like she is.
Posted by: Frank | March 08, 2008 at 04:15 AM
Hillary is the past, she still doesn't get it!....
Obama will do better without her, this Country will do better without Hillary.
People are going to vote in masses because Obama....no for Hillary or McCain....just check the numbers.
People want to express their concerns, no just in the federal level, but in the State, Counties, cities.....too many corrupt people are in high places that think they are above the law (Mayor of Los Angeles, Los Angeles DA, Mayor of Detroit, Mayor of SF, Houston DA..and on and on) and moraly dishonest.
I am Republican, but I votes and I will vote for Obama. We need change in all levels...yes we can!
Posted by: pedro | March 08, 2008 at 04:16 AM
His arrogance is very unattractive. If he cannot unite on a ticket, then he is NOT a uniter and is bad for the party.
Posted by: Democrat to Win | March 08, 2008 at 04:17 AM
Barack should be number 1 on the ticket with Hilary and Bill as vice president. Hilary cannot claim independent experience apart from Bill as a wife is not a cabinet member. Bill's position as second vice president is close to the role he plays in the democratic party anyway.
Posted by: Lorne Runge | March 08, 2008 at 04:23 AM
Unusually direct??
All he said is he wants to focus on running for president, that all!
Direct response is, "No, I won't do it. Thanks for asking."
Apparently you obamanites can't accept that your candidate cannot even answer a direct question with a direct answer, so you make an indirect answer into a direct one in you heads.
(Did you really read the item? And you didn't see the lines that said: "You won't see me as a vice presidential candidate." Can't get much more direct than No.)
Posted by: Tony S. | March 08, 2008 at 04:24 AM
When elected Senator, Obama was asked if he was going to make a run for President. He begged off, saying he wasn't ready for the job. His initial judgement was correct. Obama would be a disaster as President. Ron Paul is the only straight talker around. Hillary is the second best man for the job. McCain is cannon fodder for the GOP. They know he will lose. No incumbent party is going to win with an economy in the toilet.
It will take a Clinton to clean-up another mess made by a Bush.
Posted by: Steve Wimer | March 08, 2008 at 04:24 AM
I guess most Republicans would agree if Clinton won the
Democratic nomination, Democrat would lose the
general election for sure. I for one will not vote for
Senator Clinton because she simply does not have the right quality for President.
Posted by: Patrick Chan | March 08, 2008 at 04:27 AM
Hillary doesn't know what she is talking about. Hillarysaid that Obama "was not ready to be President"....therefore he is not ready to be VP, right?.
I am fed up with the Clintons, and their 'double talk"...they think that American people are a bunch of ignorant individuals.
If Hillary becomes President...can you imagine the gridlock she will bring in Washington again. She claims she is a fighter....We don't need someone in Washington looking for fights...We need someone that bring all of us together and do things...Obama is the one , we need new blood in Washington, people with new ideas, with positive outlook about our future.....the Clintons's fear tactics are old dirty politics, we don't want that anymore...American people deserve better.
Posted by: pedro | March 08, 2008 at 04:29 AM
Hillary already has a vice president; his name is Bill.
Posted by: mruth | March 08, 2008 at 04:35 AM
The bottom line is, she CAN NOT win this nomination based on the reality on the ground. She can not catch up with Obama on the delegates count. Her only plausible way to the nomination will be to tear the democratic party assunder and pave the way for president John MCcain.
Posted by: Terry K | March 08, 2008 at 05:00 AM
Hope, hope, hope, I just hope I could buy a mansioin, at least a house, by $300,000 less than its actual value with a free garden. I wish Obama could tell me how he did it. So I can save tons of money.
Posted by: Jared | March 08, 2008 at 05:08 AM
On the subject of a potential Obama administration (or Clinton II's), there is an interesting project in pure democracy just getting started on the web: automated and continuously updated 'approval style' voting on VP, cabinet, and major posts. Approval style voting means you can vote for as many of the choices as you approve. The site will remain open indefinitely for follow up research:
http://puredem.wordpress.com
Phil Jamison (privacy alias)
Posted by: Phil Jamison | March 08, 2008 at 05:16 AM
He is young ,intelligent and with fresh ideas of change.Why on earth will OBAMA join up with an old faded CLINTON ticket ?? It will be a shame to be seen working with clinton dynasty. If he loses he needs to got away and re -orginise to take on John MCain in 2012 . Clinton will never beat Mcain . Can you imagin Clinton debating on Iraq with John Mcain , My messege to OBAMA is , stick to your plan ,Don't listern to the media , You are right on track , just keep on counting those delegates till August , the democratic Superdelegates will never decided against populer vote,
Posted by: sean | March 08, 2008 at 05:30 AM
excel -- With these kind of statements, its apparent that you have, mostly likely, never met the man, Barack Obama.
You act like you know him but you know nothing at all about him, or would not be nod wisely but speak stupidly.
Have you undertaken any study of his life? Have you gone to see him in person? Have you shaken his hand, perhaps looked him in the eye as you asked him tough policy questions? I think not.
I have seen him at least 20 times, shaken his hand several times, and asked him difficult questions which he very adroitly answered. He is loved by his supporters, just as Hillary is loved, but he has intellect, morals, and a conscience -- the character traits of real substance!
HRC has an "out-of-control lust for power". Samantha Powers was right, and Howard Wolfson was right (so he, too, should resign!) -- let the interrogations and fact finding begin!
Hillary doesn't stand a chance against John McCain, because she is also Bush-lite. Our only hope for REAL change in Washington is Barack Obama. Read his books (not ghost written -- they're his own words); study the man and his character; check out what he's done already in his 11-years of being in an elected office. There is hope for you, but you must act quickly. The hour is late.
Robbie, Pedro, Patrick - right on. Skip the drama, vote for Obama.
Posted by: Andrew L in Des Moines | March 08, 2008 at 05:33 AM
Doesn't it give one cause for concern that many are voting for HC because she is a "great role model for our daughters". Regarding this "Dream Ticket" idea. Once again she will say and do anything to win. No doubt she has promised that and other positions in "her cabinet" as payment for her support. It's called POLITICS AS USUAL . Like Obama I feel those that want something better are in the majority. As an elderly white female I don't want or need someone to "fight for me". Would like to do what I can to make this a better place for my grand-daughters in particular and all woman in general. This is about US not about HER.
Posted by: JCP | March 08, 2008 at 05:45 AM
Few weeks back when the delegate numbers were on her side after Super Tuesday, she said only the numbers matter, not the momemtum. Now she has fallen behind, she says numbers doesn't matter. Anyway, what she got post Mar 4th is not momemtum but media hype.
It is simply arrogance to say that Obama should be her VP when the voters assgined him more delegates than her until now. Is she saying that these primaries doesn't matter and that she HAS to become the President because it was her right or because she waited 8 years and it was her turn now?
Obama should focus on winning the nomination and when he becomes the nominee, he should NOT pick her as his VP. Instead, he should go for a fresh face (possibly a woman) as his VP.
Posted by: JDK | March 08, 2008 at 05:47 AM
From the sound of Clinton lately, the dream ticket she is talking about is not Clinton Obama but McCain Clinton.
Posted by: Merrill | March 08, 2008 at 05:49 AM
that woman is too much! she lies the minute she opens her mouth..tthe Clintons are shrewd criminals, nothing else. And tasteless ones too..It is sad to see that this great country buys into this....but then, every nation has the government it deserves..
Posted by: elisabeth | March 08, 2008 at 06:09 AM
Hillary Clinton knew full well that Barack Obama would not be VP when she started using it as part of her stump speech strategy. She is using the statement as a strategy of deception to get votes from the uninformed voters whose vote counts as much as the informed readers of this media. Deception has become the prevailing tactic of Hillary's campaign now.
Orion Culver
Posted by: Orion Culver | March 08, 2008 at 06:13 AM
HRC is a uniter--if she is the Democratic candidate, the Republican party will be united almost instantly, and will be motivated just as instantly. She is the one Democrat who can bring the Republican party together.
BO must get back to his message of a vision for America. If not, he loses. I believe America is tired of living in fear, and is ready for a vision of the future, but fear is a tremendous motivator. The vision has to be clearer and greater than the fear. HRC is, like JM and GWB, a candidate of fear-- "The phone is ringing at 3am..." Be afraid... be very afraid America.
If we are afraid of the world (there be dragons...) then we have nothing to offer the world. What has made America great is our history of marching off into the unknown in the face of fear, not our withdrawing and hiding behind our walls. Along the way, we have lost ordinary people and heroes. Did our space program quit when Challenger exploded? We have always been willing to take risks, to live in the face of fear, but apparently America no longer has the courage to stand up and step out. We want to wrap up in our comfy security blanket, give all our freedom and liberty to the goverment to protect us. Wake up, America. You will not remain great unless you have the courage to get out of bed, leave your bomb shelter, and face the dragons.
Posted by: EJDubya | March 08, 2008 at 06:19 AM
Being Hillary's VP would be the worst job in the world. You would have nothing to do and they wouldn't even let you in the white house. Bill will be doing any VP tasks worth doing and you'd be stuck going to third world countries doing tea and cookie type events that in the past was done by the first lady. Going back to the Senate and being a party leader is a much better idea.
Posted by: mike | March 08, 2008 at 06:23 AM
BO&MO would never settle for less than the top spot.
They believe it is owed to them.
MO has her sights set on the white house and if she cant have that she wont take anything.
She did not spend all that money on her Jackie K makeover to not play the role.
Just like the land they bought from Rezko they had to have it no matter what .
If BO gets the nomination no doubt MCCain will be our next president.
Would BO ask Hillary to fill the VP no way He and MO have no intention of anyone but themselves being in the spotlight
That is really what this is all about attention and power.
The media would follow Bill and Hillary around and report on them every day while BO&MO sat at the whitehouse getting their schooling.
Too much will come out on BO&MO and that is why none of that will really happen
Posted by: Betty | March 08, 2008 at 06:28 AM
I phoned my California Senators and said:
"If Obama wins the popular vote and the super delegates choose Clinton, I will stay home in November."
I hope the Democratic Party listens to
this very difficult, but very real, stance.
Posted by: Cesar Guzman | March 08, 2008 at 06:34 AM
Obama is not winning the states we need in November and superdelegates are getting worried. Supers won't be stealing the election..they'll be doing what they were selected to do and that's make a decision when neither candidate reaches 2025. Having a 100 delegate lead doesn't mean you win. And Obama's strategy of going into GOP states and winning caucuses with small numbers of dems has given him a delegate lead, but it doesn't bode well for November. Again Obama is dismissive because he feels entitled. He's been dismissive of Hillary all along and that's the reason I won't ever vote for the guy. He's like every other man who thinks it's his because he's a man.
Posted by: Paula | March 08, 2008 at 06:41 AM
i can not believe people..who have been thru 7 years of bush..would want 4 more years of the clintons..clinton of course would want obama on the ticket..because she will lose to mccain if she didn't..obama does not..because they are so different in so many ways..and you get 2 for the price of one..clinton needs to release her tax returns..needs to release all transcripts of her days as first lady..i will vote for mccain if clinton wins..ohio.. really blew it tuesday..a few ads about 3am..a false report about the pledge of allegince..and ohio voters ..just are giving the presidency to mccain..lets just hope wy,mi and pa..can get it back on track.
Posted by: tom | March 08, 2008 at 06:48 AM
Hispanics love Hilary as she has promised amnesty to every illegal for every possible reason. Plus she want them to bring their parents, grandparents, cousins, sisters, brothers etc and wants us to pay for each of their education and welfare and hospitilizaton.
Obama wants amnesty as a ploy as Hispanics wont vote for a black, so this is to urge them to do so.
So a vote for either one is a vote for the status quo. 40 million illegals costing us 1 million dollars each over their life here, plus 18,000 for every one of their children each year they spend in school, plus the cost of teaching them english for jobs they cant perform as they are illegal and cant be hired.
So if you want to allow the 41 million illegals here, vote democratic or vote for amnesty Mc Cain. Great chose we are left with. Three bums not worth a damn!
Posted by: zuma | March 08, 2008 at 06:48 AM
Billary has been waging a VERY negative campaign
despite Obama trying his best to stay above that
two things have turned me fully against her
1.the "mccain (a republican) is better for president than a fellow democrat was the ultimate in insanity for me
2 the fact THATT SHE IS TRYING TO CHANGE THE RULES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GAME IN REGARDS TO FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN
IM IN FLORIDA AND MY VOTE DIDNT COUNT.BUT THAT WAS KNOWN FROM THE START.SO BE IT
her trying to get those delegates now that she is behind is VERY sleazy
she will not win the nomination as she is behind
if she tries to use her political clout to persuade superdelegates to go against the will of the people
and gain the nomination I will personally vote for mccain as a protest vote
GO OBAMA!
Posted by: nya | March 08, 2008 at 06:51 AM
It appears a gross lie won Ohio for Mrs. Clinton, but her win has reinforced and laid bare three truths:
(1) Her inability to attract support on her own merits. Like a school-yard bully she has to trash others to improve herself and attract people to her ambitions.
(2) Her frightening lack of judgement in foreign affairs. For the second time in this campaign she has caused trouble in another country. In this case, Canada. In the previous case, Kenya, when she allowed her campaign to release photos of Barack Obama in Kenyan tribal costume with the sinister intention of suggesting a terrorist link.
(3) Her psychopathic inclination to engage in amoral behaviour without empathy or remorse: to knowingly or carelessly engage in or spread lies about her opponents to gain the edge. Like a cornered, whimpering dog, she viciously attacked Barack Obama, for sending out untrue pamphlets, then pulls off this Ohio NAFTA whopper.
She allowed her campaign to disseminate falsehoods about Barack Obama saying one thing to his public about NAFTA, while reassuring a foreign government, Canada, that his public position was just political posturing. She did not check the accuracy of the story; she released it with gusto. Her husband, complicit in the deceit, sent a boasting congratulatory e-mail to her supporters afterwards.
The Obama pamphlets were accurate, and it turns out the Canadian civil servant responsible for the NAFTA story leaked it about the Clinton double-edged NAFTA policy. As the leak moved down the media chain, it turned into an Obama story. Further investigation has revealed that, whoever the principals, there was no fabric to the tale in the first place.
"Vetted and ready," Mrs. Clinton? Heaven help us, if you win the Democratic nomination.
Posted by: Nzoia Jacaranda | March 08, 2008 at 06:52 AM
Obama knows that Al Gore was marginalized by the co-presidency of Bill and Hillary. If Hillary wins, Bill as co-president is not a comforting thought for anyone other than Bill Richardson or Wesley Clark.
The Clintons have so marginalized Barack and the popular movement that is funding his campaign, knocking on doors and reading his policy positions, that we will not be appeased by a spot on the ticket. Instead we will continue to build our movement until 20012. By that time the Clintons will be so wrapped up in scandals of their own making, that voters will be called upon the restore integrity to the White House for a second time. Hopefully they will not have to vote for another Bush to clean up behind another Clinton.
Dynasty politics destroys democracies. I can't wait to restore a two-party system now that the two-family system has resulted in the rearranging of the deck chairs on a sinking ship of state.
Posted by: Michaele | March 08, 2008 at 06:58 AM
Mrs. Clinton needs to respect the intelligence of the American people just a little: this is another not-so-veiled "Jesse Jackson" swift-boating, except now it is to convey that he may be good enough for a VP position, instead of the seasonal ethnic candidate.
I wonder why the Democratic Party leaders are allowing this soap opera to continue, fully aware that she has no chance in hell to win the nomination. Is the leadership such a hostage to the Clinton machine?
Please spare us more of the blood sport the Clintons’ are playing.
Posted by: nmben | March 08, 2008 at 07:07 AM
I used to think an Obama-Clinton ticket or vice-versa would be ideal, the mudslinging, primarily on the part of HRC has compromised any such combo. An Obama-Clinton White House would be marred by a situation where he is undermined every step of the way and on every decision he makes to use as ammo to say, "I told you it should've been me." In a Clinton-Obama White House he would be a lame-duck figurine and only called upon to take credit for the administration's failures. I like to see Obama-Edwards. I think that the ideas of those 2 can mesh and would be a very formidable ticket to run against the Republicans. Edwards, though should step out of the shadows and endorse Obama, before he fades into political oblivion. Edwards is a very likable family man who has some great ideas and would be an asset to Obama.
Posted by: PRH | March 08, 2008 at 07:12 AM
I think HRC is neither for American people, nor her Democratic Part, but for herself (Read Clintonian Legacy). She should bow out to allow the party strategise for general elections. Double talking and at the end of day losing won't serve anyone's interests. She talks of being a fighter, is Washington a WWF ring or a remote battle field somewhere in Iraq? Americans wake up and show her an exit because she could still be asleep after the husband was evicted from the office.
Ouma
Posted by: Fred Ouma | March 08, 2008 at 07:13 AM
The State of California released "official" election returns yesterday.
Obama gained some delegates.
Do I have to go to the "SACBEE" to get this news?
"I am running for President" seems pretty definite to me.
Daschle, today called on her to fire Wolfson for his Ken Starr comparison. Let's see how that goes.
Posted by: ERW | March 08, 2008 at 07:13 AM
If Obama wins the nomination, it will not be in his interest to choose Hillary as a VP because of her baggage.
On the other hand, if Hillary wins the nomination, it will be a plus for her to have Obama as VP.
Posted by: bumi ademuyiwa | March 08, 2008 at 07:13 AM
Besides, he didn't lose Texas; he is now ahead in the caucus vote (40% in) and virtually certain to win majority of delegates. Clinton celebrated too early.
Posted by: 617-838-5437 | March 08, 2008 at 07:21 AM
If Obama really meant what he said on his stump speeches, and it works out that Hillary wins, he would jump at the chance to be second on the ticket. He could spend the time traveling the world, making connections with foreign governments and helping to remake America in the eyes of the world. He could help create that change he keeps talking about. He could use the VP as the platform to cultivate the youngest and next generation of voters, motivating them to become involved in the political process, and helping them to change the way politics is done in this country.
But, you are right, he is arrogant and inexperienced, and would allow his pride to prevent him from seizing a golden opportunity. If he is worth his salt, his change message would transform from talk to action, and he would have the track record he now sorely lacks.
Well, he can always come back here to Illinois and invest the lion's share of his time in voting present and failing to speak out on issues that might be politically risky for him.
Posted by: missy chicago voter | March 08, 2008 at 07:26 AM
Excel: You haven't seen Hilary's face recently, obviously.
"Kinder, gentler", please! With all due respect, this election is not about America, it's about Hilary. She is, yes, unscrupulously formidable and vindictive. You all in America will be electing Bill Clinton for a 3rd term. Obama is only shallow to white racists. It is a good thing you have a so-called democracy, you don't have to vote for anyone if you don't want to. It is the history of America to fight dirty. We here in Canada are far more civilized. This is the reason why the world hates America. Until someone else who wins the presidency fairly and squarely, that red phone will be ringing 24hours from now on. The world has changed and America has become smaller. Good luck to you all.j
Posted by: Lecky | March 08, 2008 at 07:30 AM
Wonderful!
Having Hillary and Obama run together equates to putting Marx and Lenin on the same ticket. This is becoming more and more frightening as each day passes. Get ready for a long, hard, bare knuckles fight.
Posted by: rplat | March 08, 2008 at 07:32 AM
Raise the question to Hilary. Is she willing to be VP. Obama is leading; therefore, the question is inappropriate. The media is turning sour on Obama. Obama is more that qualified, period. In all occasion he has out debated Hilary. Fact, most Americans are able to see through Hilary. She is a front and can’t be trusted. Releasing her taxes is proof .
Posted by: Roderick Hudson | March 08, 2008 at 07:34 AM
Regarding the vetting question:
What about the Clinton's tax returns, Clinton foundation income, $5,000,000. loan..........Conflicts of interest?
Posted by: ann gubser | March 08, 2008 at 07:42 AM
I am glad to see that there are other Americans who can see the utter IDIOCY of saying Obama is not fit to answer a phone in a crisis, and then turning right around and implying that you would have him as your VP in a position where he would what? --- Possibly have to answer the red phone if there were a crisis? Can someone so illogical and hypocritical be trusted to answer the red phone in a crisis?
Posted by: Clif Whitney | March 08, 2008 at 07:48 AM
The comments about Hillary are downright mean and nasty. Where is the humanity among the young generation, have they lost enough contact with human beings and have relied on computer war games and internet chat to feel enough sympathy for any person?
All those talk about records and secrecy. Let me tell you something young folks, someday you would have to deal with making mature decisions too. All those talk about transparency does not work, just look at you right now. If you ever see Rezko's dealing with Obama right now, do you think you would still be with Obama? Of course not, because most of you are idealist fools. Between Hillary putting food on my table and Hillary being ousted for keeping secrets, Id rather have her keep her secrets and put my food on my table. Thats all there is young folks. Stop spending time on the internet, get real human contact.
Posted by: Liv Manto | March 08, 2008 at 07:50 AM
Hillary should not be on an Obama ticket. And Obama should not be on hers. For heavens sake, she is so erratic. First she claims John McCain would be the better commander in chief. Then she wants Obama on her ticket? Obama is too smart to be on the ticket with a candidate like that. She is not running a good campaign. She is not very organized. He knows she would drag down his ticket wither all her potential scandals. She won't even let herself be vetted by releasing her tax returns. And it would be a terrible time being her VP. Just like Gore. He was dragged down in his quest for the Presidency by all the Clinton scandals. Obama is too smart to fall into the same trap.
Posted by: Goldie | March 08, 2008 at 07:52 AM
I see the Obamatons are in here trying their best to spin. Yeah Hillary is behind in pledged delegates but at the end of the day Hillary will have the majority of the popular vote. Then what??? Who should get the nomination???
I know the Obamatons then will scream if Obama doesn't get the nomination even though Americans chose Hillary as the nominee.
Hypocrites.
Posted by: libby | March 08, 2008 at 08:00 AM
The Democrats need to stop blasting each other and take on McCain and his desire to continue the Bush adminstration's torture, illegal spying and this immoral and illegal war in Iraq!
Stop bashing each other and take on the fact that no one is talking about John McCain's flip flops on religion, abortion, even on the War itself. He says we can stay a 100 years for all he cares- our economy is in the toilet from the TRILLIONS they have spent in Iraq! All for Halliburton and Blackwater and Cheney's cronies to make even more filthy money.
Impeach Bush, tell the truth about McCain and stop bashing each other!
Posted by: Linda | March 08, 2008 at 08:03 AM
I think all Obama was saying is he expects to be the presidential nominee. There's nothing really unusual or even direct about his answer. He is right not to fall into Clinton's trap of pretending she'd choose him as VP.
Posted by: Ryan | March 08, 2008 at 08:04 AM
It's all down Hill from here.
Posted by: Tom J | March 08, 2008 at 08:05 AM
I am more concerned about this sham marriage of Hillary and Bill Clinton then I am about anything having to do with Obama. Bill is a security risk for sex...Hillary either knew about it before the public or not. If she didn't know then how does she claim to handle the world when she doesn't know what is in her house. If she knew before and went on national television claiming she would never be with a man who might do that and would leave him if she found out then she is a liar to the public. Why the blinkers everyone? I don't care that he made a decision to be with someone else...I question where he did it in my house and your house.
Posted by: Steve | March 08, 2008 at 08:08 AM
Hillary Clinton will never put Obama on the ticket as VP. This is just bait for anyone who feels that they are on the fence or that all “hope” is lost so they either don’t feel bad about not voting or getting excited about the Obama campaign. I stand by the old saying “If it’s too good to be true, it usually is”.
Obama would be very wise to see this to the end and “if” this does not end in success to try again in 4 years (Ron Reagan, John McCain) my point is not everyone gets the nomination the first time.
I’m willing to wait.
Obama for President!!
Posted by: Carole | March 08, 2008 at 08:09 AM
How come that a great nation like America has often disappointed her people and the world by voting either mediocre or professional politicians, whose main goal is to make bucks, into the White House? Why is it that this nation with such vast human resources has often proven to be a second-rate nation when it goes to the poll? For the past two decade Americans seem to have stuck with Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton. Many enlightened Americans and peoples across the world are saying that “Thank God, America now has a great opportunity to once again elect a great leader”. Sadly, that possibility is now in jeopardy. It will take another century to have this golden opportunity again. If I were Obama, I will resign from the Senate and go back to the corridor of scientia and infuse students with my ideals. History will certainly vindicate him. If one candidate tells you patronisingly “I will fight for you…”, and another one says “I cannot do it alone, but we together we …”, I will definitely vote for the latter. It was the American historian Richard Hofstadter who wrote after the death of JFK: “You never know the value of what you have had until it is gone”.
Posted by: Jesse Kally-Williams | March 08, 2008 at 08:13 AM
Yo,
Do something means:
"
Job cuts were seen in a wide variety of industries in February, suggesting the weakness is spreading far beyond the hard-hit housing sector:
•Manufacturing firms cut 52,000 workers.
•Retailers cut 34,100 workers.
•Construction companies cut 39,000 workers.
•Financial firms, which include insurance and real estate companies, cut 12,000 workers.
"
Posted by: Bush | March 08, 2008 at 08:13 AM
The Clintons are attempting to undermine the Democratic National Party bye disregarding the original rules that was set to govern the State Primary Elections. The Clintons only hope is to steal the Democratic Nomination by 1) Including Florida and Michigan votes 2) Utilizing the same old dirty Republican Politics to marginalized Senator Obama greatness 3) Play the race and gender card at their discretion to win 4) Seal all negative records until after he election, which include tax, political paybacks, corporate lobbyist funds, NAFTA, Watergate, and her claim policy accomplishments as first lady 5) The Clintons are to divisive which is why while her husband was the President of the United States she still could not get the necessary support from the Congress and Senate to pass her flawed Universal Healthcare initiative but for some reason she think she can if she become president. 6) What real experience does Hillary Clinton have that Barack Obama does not have to be President of the United States? The answer is Senator Barack have more real experience and he is the reason why there is a movement to change the same politics that her and her husband are great at playing. 7) The Clintons cannot be trusted because they will do or say anything to deceive the public.8) The Clintons use of fear tactics is the exact reason why 1000s of young men and women are loosing their lives in a war that we cannot win in Iraq. This is the same tactics that Bush use to get us in this mess.
The Clintons time have come and gone and I sincerely think Barack Obama will and should be the next President of United States of America. If America wants to see real change then the only change candidate remaining in the race for President is Senator Obama.
Posted by: James Martin | March 08, 2008 at 08:15 AM
That makes it easier. I was unsure how to vote should there be a Clinton-Obama ticket. Now I know. I will vote for Clinton to be president and support whoever will be her vice presidential choice. Obama scares me just as his followers scare me. Hillary should not take the VP slot even if Obama were to offer it to her (which I doubt it since he is so thin-skinned and mean spirited: remember “likable enough”). In the unlikely scenario that Obama will win the presidency, Hillary just has to wait out 4 years, run against Obama and win.
Posted by: alee21 | March 08, 2008 at 08:19 AM
That makes it easier. I was unsure how to vote should there be a Clinton-Obama ticket. Now I know. I will vote for Clinton to be president and support whoever will be her vice presidential choice. Obama scares me just as his followers scare me. Hillary should not take the VP slot even if Obama were to offer it to her (which I doubt it since he is so thin-skinned and mean spirited: remember “likable enough”). In the unlikely scenario that Obama will win the presidency, Hillary just has to wait out 4 years, run against Obama and win.
Posted by: alee21 | March 08, 2008 at 08:20 AM
Why would he want to associate himself with the highly corrupt Clintons who almost destroyed the party?
look, it's still his race to lose. Come June he will still be ahead in popular, pledged and states won, and she is desperately flailing about.
What's in the 2006 tax returns she won't release until 5 days before PA, if ever? How about those Iibrary donors, the 11th hour pardons?
The guy at the bus stop beat Hillary Clinton in Nov...she knows it...everyone knows it. You can't win a general when half you own party hates you.
Posted by: MikeZ | March 08, 2008 at 08:22 AM
Unity ticket?
The same person who has demeaned black voters, exploited the gap between latinos and blacks, mocked men as weak, and now is using Muslims as her latest boogeyman....
This is the same person who is calling for Unity.
The Democratic Party should be ashamed they've let this kind of candidate get as far as they have. I wonder if she were a white man, if he'd have been able to get away with this.
Posted by: ohjeez | March 08, 2008 at 08:24 AM
The democrats will win in November no matter who is on the ticket. I think a combined ticket makes sense and will maximize the chances of democrats being in control for the next 16 years. I don't think Obama would turn down VP if Hillary gets the nomination.
This race is not over and it is too close to call at this point. I love Obama but his loss in Ohio was significant. Winning caucuses is not the same as winning large primaries. And as people become more concerned with the economy, I think that they will be more drawn to Hillary. So, early wins are not as relevant as late wins.
Posted by: Ann | March 08, 2008 at 08:25 AM
The vice presidency is not Hillary's to give. In fact, she seems like she's campaigning to be McCain's Veep.
One day after John McCain received the endorsement of President Bush, Senator Clinton solidified her endorsement of McCain as well. Her recent outright gifts to John McCain include the "who should answer the 3 am phone," ad, which, I am sure, had many people thinking "John McCain." Or her "John and I have full resumes, while Obama only has a speech." Or her latest clear endorsement, "John McCain and I have crossed the threshold to qualify as the CINC." (Evidently, being married to Bill involved him carrying her over the threshold.)
What kind of strategy is this? It sounds suspiciously like "if I can't win, then let my good friend John win - and the Dems be damned!" It also makes one wonder whether she is no more of a long-range thinker than the current president.
While it may not have been obvious before, it certainly should be by now: Hillary is running for president because - in her mind - Hillary deserves to be president. Perhaps in her view, she's played second fiddle to her wayward husband all these years and - "darn it, she is owed this office." She is willing to do anything she feels necessary to get the nomination, including destroying the Democratic Party's chances in this most important election. She has shown that this isn't about the party or the American people, but all about Hillary and what she feels she has coming to her.
In her mind, "it's me or John," and, with McCain's age as a factor, she likely figures she' have another chance in 2012. If, by dint of the superdelegates, she does get the nod, she'll bring the conservatives out in force to vote against her - and against the Democratic House and Senate candidates that will be needed if any progress is to be made on ending the gridlock.
Why would Obama want to be Hill's VP? He has shown the judgment - and the leadership ability, which is what we sorely need in our next president, while Hillary has shown the same old street-fighting instincts she and Bill have honed so well.
Hillary is definitely a fighter - but is she fighting for us?
Posted by: Andy | March 08, 2008 at 08:26 AM
If HRC wins the nomination I will vote for Nader!! And if Nader is not on the ballot in CA then I will not vote in the general election in November. I would rather not vote at all then vote for HRC!!!
Posted by: fernando | March 08, 2008 at 08:28 AM
With her outsize wins in Ohio and Texas, Hillary now has the big mo. I don't know what Frederick and Malcolm mean by Hillary's being "far behind" in delegates -- 1424 to 1520 -- but after Pennsylvania and revotes in Florida and Michigan, she'll be the one the superdelegates will be taking to the dance, and not some half-term Cinderella man.
Posted by: Hal Bass | March 08, 2008 at 08:36 AM
The real moral and political impasse of the VP hints coming from Clinton is as follows. Clinton has again and again stated categorically that she has been tested and is experienced and prepared as the next CIC of the most powerful nation in the world. That she is what Obama is not. But by the American constitution, as soon as she lays her hand on the Bible next year and swears the oath as the CIC, the VP becomes her second in command. If anything tragic should happen to Clinton even a second after she is sworn in, the VP is quickly sworn in as the CIC. If Obama is so inexperienced as Clinton wants us to believe, why is she risking the security of the American people by wanting Obama to be her VP? So is she telling the voters the truth about Obama’s leadership ability? Clinton’s supporters ought to see these blatant contradictions. The problem lies then not with Obama’s “arrogance” to reject the VP insinuation. Moreover, who is leading in this quest?
Posted by: Dr. Jesse Kally-Williams | March 08, 2008 at 08:38 AM
Let us not forget that we are selecting the president who is the most powerful man in America not to mention in the world. Both Clinton and Obama may be good politicians who know how to excite the people. Excitement and promises don't protect America nor pay my bills. Action speaks louder. I still like McCain and John Kelly ticket if it is all possible. Am I dreaming?
Posted by: Starr | March 08, 2008 at 08:44 AM
Mw wife and I are enthusiastic Obama supporters. But we will not vote for any ticket that includes Hillary Clinton. If she is anywhere on the ticket, we will hold our noses and vote for John McCain.
Posted by: David | March 08, 2008 at 08:53 AM
Hillary will do or say anything to get elected. She does not want to lose the votes that the Obama brings to the polls.
She is not about change... just more of the same old...s**t.
By the way, the phone heard ringing at 3:00am is Monica looking for the Big Dog. She wants to know if he still has a bone to throw her way.
Turn the page people!!!!
Posted by: FMann | March 08, 2008 at 09:00 AM
Running as Clinton's vice-president would only invite more of the same ugly manifestations of her true personality and lack-of-character. Bottom line: she would treat Senator Obama as a "houseman", or "house-Negro".
There has probably never been, in American politics, a more negativitely single-minded person, seeking the Presidency, than Clinton. Her ravenous appetite for the office far exceeds "ambition", and frankly, it is frightening to watch.
She refuses, thus far, to release her tax-records.....and, probably with good reason. Her husband refuses to allow her personal papers, from her "first" Presidency, to be released........citing "national security", etc.
She is incapable of admitting errors, and apologizing........
My question is.........What ARE the American people getting in Clinton?
In my opinion, it's "Bonnie and Clyde", and a smarmy repeat of the 1990's.
Don't we deserve better, as a nation?
Posted by: P. N. Duvall | March 08, 2008 at 09:01 AM
I'm glad he ended the idea. It was clearly an attempt by Clinton to say, "I'm going to pull a Republican attack on him, but then we'll make nice and I'll throw him the VP bone". An obvious attempt to get back in the graces of Obama's voters (like me) she's turned off with her Rovian campaign, and knows won't turn out in November if she steals the nomination. Besides, everyone on Earth knows Bill will be the VP.
Posted by: Harry Grace | March 08, 2008 at 09:04 AM
I THINK IT IS TIME THAT OBAMA LOOK AT THE WHOLE PICTURE,HE WIN'S THE SMALL STATES BUT HAS LOST EVERY LARGE STATE,I THINK A JOINT TICKET NO MATTER WHO IS IN THE DRIVERS SEAT WILL BE THE ONLY WAY TO GET INTO THE WHITE HOUSE,THE FIGHTING BETWEEN THE TWO OF THEM CAN ONLY HURT OUR COUNRTY FROM GOING IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION.SO STOP THE WHO IS RIGHT AND WHO IS WRONG.
Posted by: JIM | March 08, 2008 at 09:06 AM
I think Obama should be the next president he he has what it takes He can talk to people over seas and here He is what we need ayouger person with fresh ideas And not wonting war.Iwill be very disappointed along with many more.
Posted by: Romelee | March 08, 2008 at 09:08 AM
Both candidates have significant strengths and fatal flaws. Rosa Brooks's smug and self-serving arguments that the Wicked Witch of New York should withdraw for the good of the party/country are EQUALLY applicable to the Pied Piper of Illinois. My opinion is that BOTH candidates should step aside and support a compromise candidate -- Al Gore, perhaps? -- who can begin NOW (not in September) to accomplish the essential task of keeping John McCain at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.
Posted by: V. O. Reason | March 08, 2008 at 09:09 AM
It would insulting to BO supporters, if he accepts VP position.
He should not allow the DNC establishment say otherwise.
Posted by: Love bins | March 08, 2008 at 09:25 AM
I think Obama should be the next president he he has what it takes He can talk to people over seas and here He is what we need ayouger person with fresh ideas And not wonting war.Iwill be very disappointed along with many more.
Posted by: Romelee | March 08, 2008 at 09:25 AM
I'm glad he's rejected this idea. Did you see the comments made by Kellyanne Conway on Larry King last night? She said " Hillary and Obama argue about whether she should let him sit on the back of the bus of her presidential ticket". Shame on her! I think an appology is in order. She should be held accountable for her racial remarks.
Posted by: sandra melendez | March 08, 2008 at 09:26 AM
C’mon guys, we have already won OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA “…….We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. We are the change that we seek…….” This was Barack’s super Tuesday theme line and we should never doubt it.
I am 52 yrs old and travels all over the world given the nature of my job. What I have seen all over is this : Right now as we speak, and for the past several months, lives are already undergoing positive transformation all over the world as a result of the inspiration that Barack Obama is bringing, not only to America, but to the entire world. There is electricity in the air and a new beam of light is shinning on the planet. All over the world, people of all ethnic backgrounds, races, colors and religion suddenly and simply seem to be much happier with them selves just because of Obama. The US democratic process this year is up-lifting the world much more than ever before just because of Obama. He is putting in a fresh drop of faith, hope, togetherness and humility and that is having a ripple effect worldwide and this, fundamentally would ultimately work towards world peace. In the current world chaos, Obama, a people’s man, has the communication skills and charisma required to properly handle World Leaders – then imagine the positive impact that would have on world economy and trade. “Obamania” alone, is making these RESOUNDING CALLS, and that is why it is receiving a RESOUNDING YES from even outside America. At the same time, the Clinton premise on the so-called "experience" issue, as they define it, is receiving a RESOUNDING NO.
FIRST of all, if Hillary makes it to the White House, her Vice President risks facing the nightmare sometimes of determining who really were President – Hillary or Bill. Bill’s attitude seems to be showing that already. We used to have a lot of respect for him in this part of the world.
SECONDLY, Hillary should realize that, in comparison with Barack, most of the world leaders she’s had the chance of meeting during some of her travels abroad have been more concerned on being “polite” to a former 1st Lady rather than being factual with her on real issues and promises.
THIRDLY, regarding her premise on “experience”, it seems to us that some very very experienced people have plunged America into a rather sad State of the Union and Strain Diplomacy. Barack Obama, alone, seems to have a different strategy based on good judgment and his ability to RELATE with people for a change of MINDSET.
FINALLY, the ENTIRE WORLD is crying out for DIALOGUE with America and a new American Leadership owes that to WORLD CITIZENS even those leaving under the worst forms of dictatorships always often not of their making. Obama alone seems to understand that most of these Dictators with “Armed Regimes” are basically cowards and always often do not have the least support of even their own people and that what matters in the final analysis is the people and not the dictators.
Posted by: sly | March 08, 2008 at 09:27 AM
How arrogant.
Posted by: Sunshine | March 08, 2008 at 09:28 AM
So much for being a uniter. (Just words?) Guess we should have known this when Michelle Obama said she could not support Hillary if she were the nominee. So much for uniting the party. It appears that OB would rather see John McCain as our next president than try to unite the Dems behind Hillary. Change you can believe?
When are people going to start seeing Obama for what he is?
Posted by: tiredofit | March 08, 2008 at 09:28 AM
Obama's response confirms his arrogancy!
Why should I be the vice president after he won all those states that will go to McCain the fall???
Give me a breek! Whether Clinton or Obama are at the top of the ticket, with Dem voters so evenly split, it's the ONLY WAY!
Posted by: Mimi Schaeffer | March 08, 2008 at 09:29 AM
I appreciate Senator Obama for stating that he has no intentions of being on a ticket as Senator Clinton's VP. Clinton is a life size display of a muckety-muck and I for one do not want her as President or VP. Obama is qualified and ready to lead this country to higher ground.
Posted by: Nancy | March 08, 2008 at 09:31 AM
He's forced to take that stand:
1) Too much like "Driving Miss Daisy". Young talent doing the scut work for old power.
2) Who in their right mind would sign on to be the third wheel in the "Hill and Bill Show"?
3) Hillary is and always has been a loser choice. Why agree to go down with that ship? Hillary needs someone like Obama but she's too stupid or insider corrupt to see it. Obama is too smart to think he needs Hillary even if pigs started flying and he was "offered" the top spot.
I would have preferred Obama as a vice-presidential candidate actually: Edwards/Obama. As it is, he's now our best hope against the horrors of a McCain regime.
Posted by: smchris | March 08, 2008 at 09:33 AM
Obama deserves the right to be president he tring to run a clean campaign and he inspries so many votiers who are tired of the same old way of govering. I`am a senior and I believe we need younger people with fresher ideals. He is capibal e of uniting the rest of the countries.
Posted by: Romelee | March 08, 2008 at 09:34 AM
Hubris is the most divisive of the frailties of man. These guys are running for office as a Democrats. If having both on the ticket would virtually insure a landslide election, isn't it time for either one of them to pledge to do the work of the party, and not the work of their ego, and take a vice presidential position? Obama has a point, but as a Democrat I'm not really totally pleased that in his caucuses Republicans and other have had significant input, and, Hillary is correct in that she has taken all the traditional Democratic Primaries in the big states. Why do their egos have to stand in the way of a united ticket?
Posted by: Jonathan | March 08, 2008 at 09:37 AM
Considering the fact that he is the most junior among the 2008 presidentiables, ruling out the no. 2 position betrays an overly ambitious, arrogant and maybe to a certain extent delusional attitude of this man.It's President Obama or nothing... and I guess it'll be nothing for him.
Posted by: Henry | March 08, 2008 at 09:46 AM
Well that is fine with me. I do not want him as President or Vice President.
His ego would never allow a VP position anyway! His only goal since winning the US Senate seat 2 years ago was to take the pay and benefit from the US Tax Payers and use it as a campaign ground for running for President instead of doing the job he was paid to do. As far as his qualifications for President, well I guess he read the employment ads under CEO NEEDED for the most prosperous nation in the world and then the ad ended with No Experience Necessary.
Hillaryspeaksforme.com
Posted by: PMC | March 08, 2008 at 09:50 AM
Slick Willary is making a calculation that she can attract some wavering voters with the idea that a vote for her will also include Obama in her administration.
Posted by: Bob | March 08, 2008 at 09:51 AM
That's another trick of desperate Hillary who is trying to cheat some dimwits to vote for her. Really, she is a disgusting monster to do anything to get there. She is not qualified for US president job. Period.
Posted by: sukkee | March 08, 2008 at 10:01 AM
It's ridiculous that people think Obama is "arrogant" just because he said he won't be VP. He's running for president and while he is ahead in wins, delegates and popular votes why should he consider it? Anyway, I don't see Clinton saying she would except VP even thought SHE is the one behind not him.
It's also ridiculous that people think he would have a shot at president if he was VP after a Clinton presidency. What, like chance Gore had? He benefited so much from the scandals of the Bill Clinton presidency. If Obama was VP with the Clintons there would be nothing but one scandal after another that Obama would be able to "benefit" from.
Posted by: Mariposa4Life | March 08, 2008 at 10:06 AM
It's ridiculous that people think Obama is "arrogant" just because he said he won't be VP. He's running for president and while he is ahead in wins, delegates and popular votes why should he consider it? Anyway, I don't see Clinton saying she would except VP even thought SHE is the one behind not him.
It's also ridiculous that people think he would have a shot at president if he was VP after a Clinton presidency. What, like chance Gore had? He benefited so much from the scandals of the Bill Clinton presidency. If Obama was VP with the Clintons there would be nothing but one scandal after another that Obama would be able to "benefit" from.
Posted by: Mariposa4Life | March 08, 2008 at 10:07 AM
Obama should tell Clinton that he admires her brazen
behaviour. Her wanting him for VP when she is trailing
so miserably in the polls? Obama needs to lighten up a bit.
He must have a sense of humour. He should put it to work. Make her look foolish. Get people laughing at ( not
with ) her.
Posted by: maurice egan | March 08, 2008 at 10:12 AM
I am amazed that anyone can even contemplate that Obama could consider a VP spot on a ticket headed by Clinton. That would mean the absolute end of his career, and he knows it.
Clinton will never be elected President, with Obama on the ticket or without him. That Democrats cannot recognize this fact discourages me to the point of leaving the Party entirely and registering as an Independent.
Obama is the ONLY Democrat who stands a chance against John McCain. Clinton would be annihilated in the general election.
It is utter stupidity to think that Clinton will ever be elected to the Presidency, that the country would suddenly get amnesia and forget the legacy of America's First Family of Scandal, Sleaze and Slime.
The Republicans would rub Democrats' faces in the Clinton's old mud. They would have a field day at the country's expense, and we would be forced to endure not 4 nor 8 more years of Republican nation-smashing, but probably 12 or 16 more years of their destructive war-mongering and economic malfeasance.
WAKE UP, DEMOCRATS!!!
Posted by: Alexis Masters Gilmore | March 08, 2008 at 10:13 AM
As a lifelong Democrat, I am disgusted with the Clinton campaign's tactics, which seem to be modeled on those of former president Richard M. Nixon. Consequently, there is no way I would ever vote for Senator Clinton, should she win the nomination. Comparing Senator Obama to Kenneth Starr was really the point of no return.
Posted by: peahirider | March 08, 2008 at 10:14 AM
Obama has shown nothing but hypocracy in painting himself as a 'hope & change' without any substance. By paining her as 'most secretive' politician, and painting ill picture of her only basis on the fact that her tax filing is not public yet, by the way, last time I checked, it's still march, he has shown he is no better than the rest. Hello, Hillary, most secretive, really? Last time I checked, Dick Cheney and his buddies are still in the office. If his lack of experience of judegement wasn't bad enough, his lack of judgements also lead me to believe, we will have another ill suited president in the office if he was nominated. I am tired of hype, I want substance, I am ready for change, and I am hopeful Hillary will be our next president.
Posted by: Yoo Lee | March 08, 2008 at 10:22 AM
I'm so glad that Obama didn't fall for that one. Stay focused on what he's trying to acomplish, and forget about the number two spot. What Hillary is trying to do is place the thought of compromise not in Barack's mind, but in the minds of voters in the few remaining primary/caucus elections. Some voters out there might find it easier to vote for Hillary if they thought she was going to put Barack on the ticket.
Posted by: machinecog | March 08, 2008 at 10:25 AM
It's so evident that the two fo them together would be a great team. Of course, it should be Clinton-Obama. She's the strongest presidential candidate in terms of experience and knowledge.
Posted by: Monique from NC | March 08, 2008 at 10:30 AM
Hillary Clinton is an alien in a human suit.
Posted by: Jon K. | March 08, 2008 at 10:33 AM
Barack Obama has the strength and moral fortitude to grow with America into a new era. Clinton has nothing but the same old tired politics we have lived with for far too long. She is the Rovian antithesis - opposite in parallel...the yin to the yang of the dark machine. I will vote against the democratic party for the first time in 20 years if she steals the nomination. I have voted for her family 3 times and finally saw the light when she chose the 'politically expedient' choice of voting us into Iraq. I've simply had enough. - Enough.
Posted by: PulSamsara | March 08, 2008 at 10:35 AM
Barack Obama has the strength and moral fortitude to grow with America into a new era. Clinton has nothing but the same old tired politics we have lived with for far too long. She is the Rovian antithesis - opposite in parallel...the yin to the yang of the dark machine. I will vote against the democratic party for the first time in 20 years if she steals the nomination. I have voted for her family 3 times and finally saw the light when she chose the 'politically expedient' choice of voting us into Iraq. I've simply had enough. - Enough.
Posted by: PulSamsara | March 08, 2008 at 10:36 AM
I fit into the Hillary Clinton likely voters...Woman over 50, Californian (big state), Lifetime Democrat. After the fear ad (the red phone ad using innocent precious sleeping children), the refusal to disclose all current and filed tax returns and all other 'experience' documents, using Ken Starr most recently has awakened me greatly into complete support for Obama for President. If my Democratic Choice in November is not Obama.....I will vote Republican and vote YES McCain. Forthrightness and Character matters at this critical time in America to me.
Posted by: Judy | March 08, 2008 at 10:49 AM
Hillary Clinton is making little sense by floating this idea of making Senator Obama her VP pick.
She constantly questions both his experience and his character. If she thinks he's unqualified to be president, why would he qualified to be her VP?
It's just an example of Clinton's willingness to say or do anything to steal this nomination away from Obama.
I would rather vote for a moderate Republican like John McCain than a shady couple like the Clintons.
Posted by: Monica | March 08, 2008 at 10:57 AM
Barack '16 Hillary '08!!
And the only way for Barack to do that is for him to be VP or Governor of IL.
The Guv part is hard though because that means going against Blagojevich who is another Rezko friend. Hmm maybe that would be a way of breaking free from all those dirty mobbish Chicago friends of his.
Posted by: FJ Stratford | March 08, 2008 at 11:00 AM
The only reason Hillary wants to be on a ticket with Obama is because she knows she can't win without him. After the way she's treated him, I'd wager a lot of his supporters will vote for someone else if she gets the nomination.
It's not a dream ticket; it's a manipulative ticket. She'll do anything to win. I will not vote for any ticket that includes Hillary. It's sickening how she says Obama isn't qualified; yet, she turns around and wants him as a running mate.
Posted by: judy | March 08, 2008 at 11:01 AM
I will NEVER vote for Hillary, and I voted for her husband twice.
She is just one of the deceit monkeys that have become so prevalent and popular with the lemmings of the left in the democratic party. The current DNC is just as out of touch with America as the RNC is, and Hillary is a part of that status quo.
Obama is a breath of fresh air and I don't particularly care if he has a vast pool of experience, in fact, not having any is a strength because it means he won't be encumbered with traditional Democratic box-constrained thinking.
If the Democrats give Hillary the nomination, and thats what it would be because the general public doesn't want her, then I'll vote for someone, anyone, else.
Obama for President!
Posted by: Todd | March 08, 2008 at 11:01 AM
a clinton/obama or obama/clinton ticket is a dream ticket for the republicans - clinton's negatives are so damn high that she could never win in the general election no matter what position she is, prez or vice - as a democrat, I would never vote clinton and most of my democratic friends feel the same way... the clinton/bush dynasty must end NOW...
Posted by: jim | March 08, 2008 at 11:05 AM
Obama has nothing.
His Iraq speech - he wont do what he promised, according to Samantha Powers who was fired after exposing the truth.
NAFTA - he tells one thing to you, another to the Canadians.
His speeches - recycled speeches from DeVal Patrick.
"Yes we can" - stolen from Dolores Huerta (after they dragged her in the mud in NV)
Stop the Drama, Stop Obama!
Posted by: FJ Stratford | March 08, 2008 at 11:07 AM
Hurray for Barack Obama who is standing by his core values. Why in the world would he want to run with a woman who is totally invested in the rich and the corporations, who sits on the board of the worst company in the world - WalMart, and who accepted almost a million dollars for her senate campaign from the wife of the crooked billionaire Marc Rich, a man her husband pardoned in the last few minutes of "their" presidency.
Obama was president of the Harvard Law Review, the most prestigious in the country. She was a mediocre law student who failed her Washington Bar Exam (yes, she did . . . look it up). I'm tired of being embarrassed by our presidents, and Hillary is an embarrassment. She's loud, she's crass, she's dishonest. Obama wants a new kind of political world, she just wants to win. He may well lose to her, but he's reaffirmed my belief in ethics,sincerity, and the goodness in mankind.
Posted by: Judith Harrington | March 08, 2008 at 11:18 AM
Hillary won Texas because of the crossover voting by the Republicans. They don't support her, they just want McCain to win in Nov. Obama has been nothing but honorable in the whole campaign. He will make a great Pres.
BTW: Experience does not make one good, only experienced. Just look at Cheney ...
Posted by: ThinkingMan | March 08, 2008 at 11:39 AM
The VP question was settled in a recent debate when both Clinton and Obama said: NO. Is she senile? She seems to forget everything she has said on just about any subject that has been discussed endlessly through what was it 21 debates and her "hundreds of thousands" speeches.
Day before election she backs McCain. Day after election she claims victory, but, now I changed my womanly mind and would not have Obama as VP. "Shame on you" Barack Attack? She is nuts. I bet his Hope Fund Political Action Committee never donates to her campaign fund again. (2004 election)
She also does not seem to realize people like me would never vote Democrat if she is on the ticket~even in VP spot.
Posted by: mary CA | March 08, 2008 at 11:55 AM
I diasagree totally about a Clinton-Obama or Obama Clinton ticket. The people that vote for Obama do so because they don't want a sleezy politician like the Clintons in the White House or anywhere near there. Obama must choose a more conservative running mate to unite the country and then McCain will be toast. All of Obama's principles would have to fly out the window in order for him to work with Hilary.
Posted by: ScottL | March 08, 2008 at 11:57 AM
Posted by: Tony S. | March 08, 2008 at 04:24 AM: Senator Obama was asked the VP question almost a year ago by a talk show host and has repeated his direct answer many times: I am running for President. You, Tony, seemed to have missed the debate where both Senators nixed a dual ticket.
Hillary is simply trying to create more drama to keep her in the spotlight and keep anyone from talking about her yes vote to the Iran Resolution, how we pay for Iran if we can not afford Iraq; our lack of troops and reality of bringing back the draft; her yes vote to cluster bombs in civilian areas; if it is legal to give Bill a 3rd term in the White House; a Bush/Clinton dynasty; Bill's pending lawsuit with Peter Paul; her constant lies; her past scandals (not to mention Bills).
Intelligent people are not voting for her and will not vote for her in November. The exception is her loyal friends, who I guess are intelligent; many elected officials and high power corporate types.
Posted by: alyce rocco | March 08, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Obama can't possibly accept the vice presidenial spot with Hillary. He has spent the entire year portraying himself as an agent of real change & reform, and portraying Clinton as a representative of the kind of Old Politics he wants to eliminate. To join her ticket, especially in the second spot (where she would be responsible for making all of the key decisions) would be be seen at the height of hypocrisy, and would turn off his supporters (who, by now, are beginning to hate Hillary for her dirty trick tactics). He might be able to accept her as a vice presidential candidate, since he would then make the ultimate decisions, but even that runs the risk of scaring away voters - given Clinton's unique ability to arouse animosity in voters. And then there's the question of whether two "firsts" (the first woman and the first African-American) on one ticket is the politically smart combination this year. Either one might be better off sticking with a more traditional vice presidential candidate, to assuage more conservative voters.
Posted by: Fred | March 08, 2008 at 12:06 PM
Look, this isn't all that complicated. Anyone who runs for President has to have an prominent ego. It's shows up pathetically in McCain, it's well hidden in Obama, but it's painfully obvious in Hillary. It also happens that Hillary's coincides nicely with what corporate America wants.
She's a known quantity. Like Biil, she's a pseudo-liberal corporate shill from the word "Go." The corporate capitalists out of power hope to ride her candidacy back into the saddle.
McCain is also a known quantity. In spite of his sometimes eccentric behavior, McCain's Bush-Lite stances show he is a corporate warmonger and an enrich-the-already-filthy-rich conservative, which makes him appealing to the corporate folks already in power.
Obama has stated explicitly he isn't out to challenge corporate capitalism and "entrepreneurial spirit," but he is still largely an unknown quantity in spite of his rhetorical brilliance The corporate types are (probably unnecessarily) suspicious of his community organizing background, his anti-war stance, and his possible (though barely stated) affinity with the the concerns of Black communities, and by implication, the plight of the poor in general. The capitalists are not going to be willing to take a chance on him.
Therefore, Hillary's role has to become to try to ensure that Obama will not win the presidential race if she can't win the nomination. As I said, her ego corresponds with the corporate pressure on her. Don't expect her to stop trying to destroy Obama, especially with most of the economically powerful in both parties egging her on. It's her destiny to win the Presidency or to be sure Obama won't.
Posted by: Dick Strubbe | March 08, 2008 at 12:09 PM
With all due respect, why would Barack Obama want to be one of 2 vice presidents...Bill Clinton already has a lock on that job.
Posted by: redsoxfan | March 08, 2008 at 12:18 PM
Obama and Edwards--sorry Hillary exchanging House of Bush for House of Clinton will not be the fundamental change we need. Most importantly Hillary's corporate mindset and lack of true leadership on Iraq--VOTING FOR IT?! Puts the nail on her coffin
Posted by: THuy | March 08, 2008 at 12:35 PM
I am not sure that Hilarry Clinton know what she is doing,she has been saying all the bad things about Obama in recent weeks says that He is not quailified and she is now expecting such a person to be her running mate.May be peoples should make her realise that She can,t have a cake and eat it.
Obama is more open and transparent and we need a prudent leader in white house.She should present her tax return to America peoples and she should stop playing a dirty game that can not help her out
Posted by: Anthony | March 08, 2008 at 12:41 PM
Hillary is old news,old ways,old,and business as usual which has gotten us into the mess that we are in. Out with the old....it has shown the new world what it can do to for us...And in the the new and fresh....Don't be afraid as they want you to be....Vote Obama for CHANGE
Posted by: lewis | March 08, 2008 at 12:41 PM
All the other comments pretty well sum up what I had to add. Except what Clinton is saying is ,"If she can't win the Presidency she would just as soon a Republican win it."
Now what kind of party loyality is that?
Hillary Clinton is a carrer politican, out of touch with reality.
If Obama does'nt get the nod, he will the next election.
Posted by: Daniel | March 08, 2008 at 12:45 PM
If Florida and Michigan are allowed to not follow the agreed rules and ,Barack does not come out on top in the end, McCain will win because AA's will feel there has been some back room trickery and they will not vote at all. I'm hearing that all over.We have already had 8 years of the Clintons and Whitewater, give some one else a chance.
Posted by: Denise Jackson | March 08, 2008 at 12:47 PM
Come everyone. Hillary never, never said that Obama is not qualified to be president. She has been saying that she is better qualified. Why do the Obama supporters want to twist what she is saying?
Also, if you think the Hillary campaign is playing hardball, just wait until the right winger in the Republican side go at him. Nothing Hillary says or does not say will change that reality. If Obama can't take Hillary's attacks, how can he stand up to the Republican spin machine?
If she does not win the nomination, Hillary will have at least helped to give Obama a good lesson in presidential campaign politics that he had better learn from.
Posted by: Prapana Smith |