Only a Dream Ticket Prevents Democratic Nightmare

Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama might be stuck with each other -- not just for the long haul to the Democratic nominating convention, but well beyond. They might have to run together, whatever the order and whether they like it or not.

The most likely scenario going forward is that unelected delegates, the so-called super delegates, will decide this thing -- and they might not make a choice in sufficient numbers to give either hopeful the nomination before the convention.

If Clinton or Obama cannot find some miraculous way to lock down a nominating majority in the remaining primaries and caucuses, look for undecided super delegates to opt for the easiest way out and urge them to run together for the November election. More on Craig Crawford's Trail Mix

Follow Craig Crawford on Twitter: www.twitter.com/craig_crawford

Comments

[RnR]

Whichever of them gets the nomination (and Obama better get down with some street kids and learn how to fight) is going to have to beat McCain.

I think they should attack him as a feeble minded old man, not quite right in the head...given to fits of rage that just might lead to another Iraq debacle.

I don't think there's any spin in there :)

[Purple Girl]

Again with the failing to of my comment to go through?
I'm a 2x Clinton supporter, a Bill Fan.
Figured Hillary would be a no Brainer
But have seen her now in action in the Senate & Armed Services- at the very least, Dereliciton of Duty.
She, as has Mac, become something I now longer recognize as Honorable candidates. Their actions and inactions during this admin have been deplorable- culpable.

[realitycheck7]

Any ticket that Hillary is on cannot be called a "dream ticket" by any stretch of the imagination

[hepwa]

Not by the delusional, that's for sure. Wake up, haters, she's right for the country in every way.

[derekw007]

Emphasis on the word "RIGHT" no doubt - as in "RIGHT WING". She's a DINO - always has been, always will be.

[serialcoma]

I suspect that Clinton would be better able to work with a divided Congress... Obama would be eaten alive by the repugs as they jockey for better positioning in 2012.

[robXdion]

Hey Craig,

You have been stomping for Hillary this whole campaign and no one gives a rat's furry balls what your neurotic weird blinking a--- thinks.

Obama should stay in the Senate if he looses. Being Hillary's VP pick would undoubtedly help her win, but he would be dirtied in the ensuing Clintonian mess that would come out.
Billary's scandals would become Obama's scandals. He would have to defend EVERYTHING these 2 have ever done. Just like Al Gore found himself doing in 2000.
And by joining her he would be validating all the crap she has pulled in this election. Everything he has stood for would become a standing joke.
Don't do it Obama. Make the witch earn it. Especially since she thinks John McCain is soooooooo much better than Obama. She can face him herself with Evan Bayh and any other no-name passive white male she wants to pull out.

[Subway]

If the nation is hungry for real change, sea change, I can think of no better running mate for Barack Obama than Howard Dean. Dean was endorsed by Al Gore and Jimmy Carter in 2004 and as every Progressive knows, would have made this nation proud as President. His Candidacy changed the way politics is done in America. Since then his "50 State Strategy" and "$100 revolution" were the cornerstone of the 2006 Congressional takeover.

Obama/Dean
Paradigm Change

[WindRiver1]

I almost fell off my chair on that one. Obama is already going to come under serious fire for his heavy union/labor anti-business which will be very challenging as it is, but with Dean the Republicans will be popping the cork and dropping confetti as soon as it is announced.

[jsfox]

Man I wish this had ended last night, but alas no such luck. A joint ticket? I think this could have been a real possibility if Senator Clinton had cleaned up on Super Tuesday and she had all but won the nomination. At that point the electorate was excited about both. Now? I see it the supporters on both sides have become so hardened in their positions that both sides will cry fowl. As a Obama supporter I hope he continues on, but I also realize that if Michigan and Florida are seated and they will have to be Obama will not get the nomination. So America will probably have four more years of a republican in the White House. A number of the moderate independents will move back to McCain as will the moderate republicans. So taking the view that maybe this is good thing, four more years of a Republican in the White House will truly sink the economy, further destroy the world view of the US and finally get them out for a good long time come 2012.

[donw]

Bush = Clinton = McCain.
The pubs have said it time and again that if Hillary is nominee then the pubs win the presidentsy whereas if Obama wins they lose. Conservative hate pundits yell out Limbaugh for Hillary and Coulter for Hillary. For them it's an Obama loss that only matters.
For me I'll never vote for Billary and I won't vote for McCain. It'll be Nader or some other third-party candidate.

[derekw007]

Crawford is kinda wrong when he says what
is the problem with Obama.
A person dosen't need to be a brain surgeon to
Poop out something about Clinton being a
Head

[Marrob]

As a Hillary supporter I think she may need Obama more than Obama needs her. Also believe Obama can't win a general election given the fact that in almost all the blue states in the primary, he could not beat Hillary. This signals to me that there are a hell of a lot of democrats who feel the same way I do, OBAMA IS TO FUCKING SOFT AND WILL GET EATEN ALIVE IN THE GENERAL. So step aside Obama and learn from the Master. Take the VP job and in eight years your testicles will have dropped and you can become preident at the age of 54

[serialcoma]

Obama, as President, would be eaten alive by a Congress that isn't solidly left. Clinton has more of a chance to work with a divided Congress, IMO - something some of these rabidly anti-Clinton Obama zealots should consider.

[pkrbkr]

She'll never get the chance. Think Dukakis. The Democratic party is in big trouble.

[Macready]

no way serialcoma . . .Obama has Ted Kennedy and Dodd . . . the liberal wing of the party .. .hillary doesn't play well with other people . . . Obama has the advantage with Congress not hillary .. .

[FLB]

How can he possibly run on a joint ticket with her after all of these unseemly attacks? The newest ad she put out actually darkens Obama's face-- that's right, to make him look more black.

http://www.americablog.com/2008/03/why-is-obamas-skin-blacker-than-normal.html

This is the kind of thing that the Clinton's do. As an Obama supporter, I would rather have him become a leader in the Senate than watch him compromise everything we love about him to join her poisonous presidential camp (or let her join his).

Key quote from David Axelrod on how they'll defend themselves:
"She has made the argument that she is thoroughly vetted. If the suggestion is somehow that on issue of ethics or disclosure or transparency that she is somehow going to have a better record than I have or could (better) withstand Republican attack, then that should be tested."

Obama '08!

[deadfanclub]

This is so ridiculous. You understand this sounds ridiculous to most people, right? It's unbelievable to think that the whole result of the cinematography and photo editing involved in the making of these ads were to make him look more black? So when they use a shadow effect on white people's negative ads it's just to what - make them look more like ghosts? All negative slanted ads are dark-tone oriented. Or when the Obama campaign uses particular poses that make hillary look unflattering, I should complain that they played up her age flaws and therefore are agist?

Ridiculous.

[derekw007]

Ummm -how can Hillary need Obama more than he needs her and yet Obama be too soft to win the general election?

And "learn from the Master"...you are saything that to a black man?

Is this how Clinton supporters talk and think?

[shinybear]

She would have said "Mistress" instead of "Master" but that's a sore point to the Clinton people.

[JacobSinger]

I've posted this elsewhere and have been censored, so I'll try it here....

Think about this for a moment:

I can see a scenario where the DNC looks at this basically tied horse race and starts to triangulate the best tactics for potential WH domination over the long run. Obviously that would mean a Clinton/Obama ticket, with Clinton running for president. That would allow Obama a potential of eight years wearing big-boy pants [which kills the lack of experience argument], and sets him up for eight years as president-­-potential­ly a combined total of 16 years domination of the WH by the democratic party.

Perhaps Obama will surge late and kill this concept, but Obamaloons take note, as of today, that concept is starting to look good to DNC officials.

[derekw007]

Just like someone else said here - tell the black guy to step back and get in line, huh?

[JacobSinger]

It's got nothing to do with race, and everything to do with political strategy; but it is quite telling that you put that face on it, particularly since there was NOTHING in my post that even broached race as an issue.

[Mollye]

You are really trying to use the race card. Do you think it will help your candidate?

[Lemeritus]

derek, that's the worst kind of unfairness, to JacobSinger, to Obama, and to the discussion. I'm not sure I agree with Jacob, but to cut the debate off at the knees the way you did does no one any good.

[AtlantaBill]

Jacob (by the way my grandson's name),

The Hillary booster club is finally coming out of the woodworks. As an Obama supporter, I certainly don't proclaim to know how Obama would react to such a Billary/Obama ticket but I suspect most supporters would be happy to sit this one out rather than stoop to that level. And as far as Craig Crawford's opinion, who cares --- he is nothing more than a Clinton hack that doubles by taking a salary both from the Clintons and MSNBC. He lost me months ago when he came on tv day after day as a "clinton pawn" pretending to be objective. Maybe, I'd be supportive of a ticket that had Obama at the head but not Hillary. This AA would vote repub for the first time in his life if SDs tried to shaft Obama by robbing him of what he has legitimately won.

[TheWesternBreed]

You might want to work on your approach. Why should Obama supporters pay any attention to someone who calls them "Obamaloons"?

[JacobSinger]

Clearly, not all Obama supporters are Obamaloons [and not all Clinton supporters are Clintonites]. When I use the term Obamaloons, I am speaking of the rabid faction that insists on their way or the highway.

Given how this could potentially play out, those folks will likely be very troubled, and perhaps disenchanted with the political process.

I'm just advocating some realistic perspective here; vote for Nader if you're truly disgusted with the dems, vote for the dems if you want to break the Rethug chain of command, and vote for McCain if you want a continuation of BushCo under a different title.

[MsLiz]

Good point. Only a Hillaroid would call us Obamaloons. Ooops after I just said to can the name calling. I'm just trying to hold up a mirror.

[lwaxanatroi]

Hey, I'm on board with the DNC--or somebody--looking at this thing with the perspective of the general. Who can beat McCain? Who can sweep the stables clean of the Bush muck? I'm not at all sure that this "obviously" means a Clinton-Obama ticket. The Clintons--and make no mistake, they will be treated as a plural candidate--have so many negatives that she was always a tough sell for the top spot. Now there's another factor: the new voters Obama has brought into the tent. I see them revolting loudly and angrily if their man is denied what he seems to have won. They won't vote for McCain, but they won't vote for Hillary either, and their defection will mean that Hillary faces McCain with a smaller base than Obama would. We need every vote we can get come November, and I think that means we need Obama at the top of the ticket. And once he's there, he needs the Clintons out fundraising and speechmaking, but not as VP contenders. Let's turn the page, folks.

[pattyrenee]

Clinton President, Obama, VP
They can beat McCain this way. Obama can run on his own in 8 years and win the Presidency after gaining the experience needed.

This the the best way to go.

[shinybear]

After they've muddied Obama, corrupted him and dragged him down to their level.

Sounds like selling your soul to Satan to me.

Then they will be able to control him.

Don't do it Barack!

[Macready]

hillary has less legislative experience than Obama . . .most of hillary's so called experience has been as a political wife . . .and let us not forget the 35-years that is bogus ...

[WindRiver1]

The Republicans are praying for Obama to win. They seem confident that they can beat him and that it is unlikely they can beat Hillary with her ability to crossover the Rep moderates. I saw where they were actually supporting him in the primaries.

It does seems like both parties are divided. Fundamentalist Christians on the far right for the Republicans and Fundamentalist Liberals on the far left for the Democratic. It may be time to have a new party for the Moderates that seek a balance between the two before the two parties tear themselves apart.

[sef2121]

I have heard this in several of the "open" primaries-they want to knock Clinton out, see that McCain has it nailed so they vote for the easiest to beat-Obama. The Potomac primaries gave actual examples of Republican netroots/grassroots organization to knock HRC out. She is formidable, they know it, Obama will be creamed.
I do think that the 16 year plan is a good idea and a good way to unite the party. Obama needs more experience, plain and simple. He hasn't done a full term in the Senate and no amount of advisors is going to fix that. Clinton has the ability to be the workhorse that she is to turn the country around. Look at all the damage Bush did on vacation-imagine if we had a Democrat, brilliant and talented like HRC, who would work like a maniac.
Also, all the Obamaniacs who profess their hatred for Clinton based on whatever bizarre misogynist or fabricated lies, will have to vote for her with their messiah on the bottom of the ticket. Then, and only then, will they realize that their hatred is ill-founded as she holds many of the same positions as Obama.
Obama, on the other hand, would never choose Clinton for a vp ad I really hope that she wouldn't take it if it was offered. The VP should not be superior tot he prez and Clinton clearly is. It would also undermine his whole attack theme against her as being the "status quo" and him being the big change guy. I am so bored with him, he needs fine tuning and the only way he will get it is if he takes VP, does the right things, lets HRC clean up the Bush house and then, in 2016, runs on her legacy and continues it into a blissful century of Democratic leadership. I can dream, can't I?

[derekw007]

Your use of the MESSIAH line and your horrible political analysis smacks of spin.

For about eight years, every time a Republican puts his children to bed, he tells then a bedtime story. In this story, the evil Hillary R. Clinton is trying to steal the country and the brave republicans save the day.

Clinton vs. McCain - this is the race THEY'VE BEEN WAITING FOR.

[bluevillage]

Craig, You are so out of touch with core realities, you should really consider keeping your opinions, and your nasty attitude toward Obama, as evidenced on most of your TV appearances this last month -- completely losing my respect -- to yourself. Don't you see that Obama and Clinton are at diametrically opposite poles of the moral compass? He couldn't possibly have anything to do with her, even if Bill Clinton weren't an insurmountable obstacle.

[JacobSinger]

And you are out of touch with core POLITICAL PARTY REALITIES. If you think the DNC will roll over on account of Obamaloons throwing a hissy-fit when the propose Obama in the VP spot as a compromise, well, hide and watch....

[murrieta]

In interest of full disclosure - I am an Obama supporter. I read something interesting over the weekend. Hillary has a substantial lead in the Democratic Party vote up to last night. Huh - what?? Well, Obama had a small lead in the overall vote, but more registered Democrats have voted Hillary than Barack. Its Independents and Republicans that have given Barack his lead. So, my question is: Should the convention follow the wishes of Democrats, or of all Democratic primary voters? Again, just a thought from a Barack supporter who at all costs does NOT want McCain....

[derekw007]

Hey Murrieta -

Don't buy the spin. Democrats themselves can't win an general election - see 2000/2004

The independents are much needed.

All thier bluster aside, Hillary Democrats will vote for Obama in the General.

Obama's Independents will vote for him as will some Republicans.

[murrieta]

Well, its not so much buying the spin - just thinking out loud if ONLY Democrats should decide the party's nominee. And another thing - if the DEMS had GOP rules - winner-take-all (like the general election's electoral college) - Hillary would be ahead in delegates having won most of the big states. So, are the GOP rules unfair? Again, I am an Obama supporter who is just trying to remain calm and muse out loud..

[personalpolitical]

That is a nightmare ticket. Any ticket that includes Hillary will be a disaster for the Democrats in November. She is polarizing and divisive and she will kill our chances in purple and red districts and states all across the country. Obama has an amazing ability to bring people together and pick up independents and Republicans, but Hillary's ability to repulse voters and rally Republicans is even stronger. I'm sorry but those are the facts, and I'm pretty sick of people talking about a "dream ticket" like it would be the best of both worlds, because it would be the worst of both worlds.

And she doesn't even balance the ticket on experience because she has very little herself, despite her lies to the contrary.

[Cathexis]

I disagree, pp. (Disclosure: I don't care which of them gets the nomination, as long as it is a Dem.)

The major reason Hillary is "polarizing," IMO, is because the Radical Right has characterized her as such and too many accept that label with question. I gar-own--tee that any Dem who actually pursues a Progrtessive agenda (or even dares oppose the Right) will become the new Polarizing, Divisive Figure.

That's not to say I endorse Hillary. Or Barak. I just don't like to see either get slimed with Rightwing-origin muck.