Clinton’s comeback in NH was quite a surprise, just as Obama’s big win in Iowa was pretty surprising. It’s early in the campaign, but it’s looking very interesting going forward. You have SC, where Obama has built up a good-sized lead (we’ll see how that holds up, which I think it will) and seems like he’ll get a key labor endorsement in NV. However, Hillary is looking good in MI and FL heading into Super Tuesday.
I wonder — it’s early, but it seems like the developments have made it more likely that we’ll see a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton ticket. I know the “pundits” will say that it’s “risky” because it’s a woman and a African-American candidate, but they both seem to be by far the best two people we have right now, which is saying a lot (especially when you consider Edwards, Dodd, Biden, etc., all of whom are excellent). Nobody is really talking about it, but I think it’s become more likely after tonight.
I think such a ticket (either way) would be dynamite. What does everyone think? Sure, it’s early — but if it does shape up to be a two-person race, as seems to be happening, why not take our top two? I’d be excited about it — regardless of which of the two is at the top of the ticket.
At this point if Obama takes SC and Clinton takes FL and they split the Feb 5th states then a VP deal would one of the few ways to unify a deadlocked convention.
<
p>That said I think this would be a bad idea for either candidate
<
p>first on Clinton/Obama
<
p>This brings in the Kerry/Edwards factors, two candidates with completely different messages trying to focus on a new message. In that race Edwards was the exciting young more liberal candidate Kerry the wonkish, competent, centrist candidate. Also Kerry was boring and Edwards was a solid speaker.
<
p>Now Clinton is a lot more boring and whenever she is passionate she seems like an angry woman which loses voters, moreover she is more centrist and competent than Kerry. And Obama is a much better speaker than Edwards or Clinton so he will clearly one up her and their messages are not aligned. Also I feel she is slighted that her cakewalk became a challenge and wouldnt reward her most ardent opponent.
<
p>on Obama/Clinton
<
p>This has parallels with Bush/Cheney in the sense that you got an insider who is paired to give the outsider sage experience and advice. Except this ticket is more historic, these people are smarter, and would likely do well.
<
p>The big thing preventing this is I am not sure Obama wants to give his most ardent opponent the nod, and she seems slighted so again might not ask or want it.
<
p>Lastly the big thing about VPs is do they balance out perceptions of the ticket or bring in swing states. I see these two liberal, northern Senators doing little to bring in swing states, and their personalities and experience seem to clash so much as to make a nice balance impossible. So I would not expect this ticket.
But it seems that there are other successful examples of two strong candidates pairing up who did not share a message, like Kennedy/Johnson (who hated each other) and Reagan/Bush (the latter with the “voodoo economics” comment). I would think that Obama’s role on the ticket would be add enthusiasm and appeal to independents and young voters, and Clinton’s role to add experience and fire up hard-core Dems. It seems that either way, it would help expand the playing field.
<
p>Obviously there’s a ways to go, but after NH this seems to be becoming our best potential ticket (aside from the “risk” factor of having two firsts on the same ticket, which could be a fatal flaw in the plan).
The Kennedy/Johnson parallel is different in my view because Johnson brought in Souther states, especially its homestate of Texas, that might have been hostile to a Catholic nominee.
<
p>The Reagan-Bush comparison is far more apt in my view. Bush, like Clinton, represented experience, moderation, and the mainstream Republican status quo. Reagan represented a transformational politics towards a new coalition based around conservative principles and was highly charismatic while Bush seemed aloof, technocratic, but more competent than Reagan.
<
p>So thats a very interesting comparison.
<
p>Certainly an Obama/Clinton ticket could be feasible if only she would accept the nomination. And certainly Feb 5th will prove who has the biggest chips in the race.
There will NEVER be a Democratic ticket in 2008 that has both Obama and Clinton…would make no political sense…geographically, demographically or personality…and it will be hard enough to make history (woman/race) at the top of the ticket…a double whammy will not be the strongest strategy for a Dem victory….the VP in either case will be a white male with experience and geographic strength to balance the ticket.
Would be a good pick for Clinton
I think Richardson would be a good pick for either Clinton or Obama. An argument could be made for Biden with Obama, too. (Not a super strong argument, but an argument nonetheless.)
It’s certainly a possibility for either Clinton or Obama, but though he would add a lot of experience to the ticket, he has proven a poor debater/speaker, which could be a liability in the general election if he makes any gaffes.
<
p>It seems the main problem with Clinton and Obama on the same ticket is that it is too risky, as HLPeary suggests. However, Richardson would likewise pose a risk because he is Latino, and polls suggest that while the vast majority of people would vote for a Latino candidate, there seems to be more resistance to it than either a woman or African-American. It seems that if you’re going to take the risk anyway, why not choose a VP with a proven ability to bring in votes?
<
p>I bring all of this up now, because it seems clear that neither candidate is really the “frontrunner” now, and both clearly have large constituencies. An Obama and Clinton pairing would remind me more of a Kennedy/Johnson situation — neither liked each other and they were very different, but they represented the two strongest candidates overall. The more I think of Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama, the more I like it, and as both probably split some victories in the coming days, the more I think it becomes a possibility.
The strategic arguments aside, Bill Clinton’s constant attacks on Obama over the past two days killed any respect left within the Obama camp for the Clintons.