Make HuffPost Your HomePage
Get Email Alerts
Obama's Running Mate: Party Unity
No political endorsement is altruistic. Sure the public figure might honestly believe in the candidate, but there's always more. Maybe it's the headlines and the free media that come along with the public announcement. Or as Jonathan Alter recently suggested, maybe it's about the money. Those who came out for Obama might get access to his massive donor base. And for others, it's the thought of a possible future payback -- such as a political appointment.
Everyone wants to be with a winner, and plenty of high-profile Democrats have seen the writing on the wall. How else to explain Bill Richardson abandoning the Clintons and John Edwards endorsing way after his support would have an impact. Support at this level always has the whisper of a VP slot. But endorsing Obama might actually have the opposite impact this time around.
There has been much talk about the "Dream Ticket" -- having Obama at the top, with Hillary as vice president. I'm not fully convinced that she wants that position. But if Obama really believes the party is divided, it might not be Hillary whom he picks as his number two, but a Hillary supporter and perhaps the stronger the better.
Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell is still stumping for her more than a month after his state's primary. "I think the message is clear to superdelegates. Hillary Clinton is our most electable candidate, and that's what conventions are all about, finding our most electable candidate," Rendell said on Fox News this week.
Another great example would be Ohio's Ted Strickland. He hasn't been hitting the media as hard as Rendell, but that doesn't mean his support is at all lackluster. He appeared in an ad for Clinton. And the Cleveland Plain Dealer says Strickland made 17 appearances for Clinton before the primary.
And though it's unlikely Obama will choose another senator, he might want to think twice about Indiana's Evan Bayh. If I remember correctly, Bayh was the first one to use the argument that Clinton leads in electoral votes as a reason for her to be the nominee.
So while these are suggestions as to why Clinton might pick such supporters for her VP candidate, they're even more reason why Obama would choose one of them. If he's truly worried about Clinton supporters staying home on Election Day, he'll put her endorsers at the top of his list. Delaware Senator and former presidential candidate Joe Biden only becomes attractive as a VP candidate if Obama believes he doesn't need help uniting the party.
John Edwards says he doesn't want to run for vice president again and by backing Obama, he might have made that wish come true.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Um, unity isn't going to come about by rewarding those who have lied and fought dirty on Clinton's behalf. Not to mention that most Americans can't stand her right now, and aren't looking too favorably upon her supporters either. Or do you not pay attention to other political actions?
There is really only one resolution to the current mess: Unity ticket!
Let's be clear that there have been plenty of slights (real and/or media-driven) on BOTH sides. But seriously folks, this was/is a political campaign, not the freakin'Mickey Mouse Club! And now it's time for Hillary and Barack to kiss and make up. In most primary election scenarios, pairing these two talented, historic candidates would be a no-brainer. It should be here as well. Please don't tell me that Bill is the problem. Or that the Clintons will somehow engineer President Obama's demise. Or that she is too evil for the pure (!) Obama, and will undermine his message. What sheer and utter nonsense!
Hillary has won at least half of the votes cast in 2008 and almost half of the delegates. To heal rifts in the party, she MUST be offered VP; it should be up to her to decide whether or not to accept. PERIOD!
Campaign advisers, Dr. Dean, Senator Reid, and Speaker Pelosi: GET ON THE STICK AND MAKE THIS HAPPEN, SO WE CAN GET ON WITH IT AND WIN BIG IN NOVEMBER!
You do not run the kind of vicious, divisive campaign that Hillary Clinton has run (and is still running) and expect to be the face of the Democratic Party in November. That's just not going to happen.
Rendell and Strickland bring little to the table as VPs. Sure, Strickland might land Ohio, but they are just pasty, boring middle aged white guys. They have no impressive skills, and why would Obama want to be saddles with either of them for 8 years?
The VP isn't an election card game. It's a political marriage for 8 years. Gore was a great asset to Clinton for 8 years. Cheney has perverted the Bush administration into something worthy of a Sith Lord. Quayle made everyone question his judgement.
Obama needs to pick someone he wants to work with for 8 years, and someone he wants to campaign for as his successor in 2016. He needs a good adviser with brains and strong political skills. While Rendall and Strickland seem alright, Obama could do much better.
Huh?
"Strickland might land Ohio, but they are just pasty, boring middle aged white guys"
Who cares? It's Ohio!
BTW - About 99% of his choices are "middle aged white guys."
Middle-aged white guys are already voting for Obama.
It's a very small faction of women who aren't (and blue-collar white workers in Appalachia). They voted for Bush over Kerry in 2004, and wouldn't likely vote for a woman in the general.
I'd put a hispanic on the ticket.
Perhaps it might be the best way in one sense, in the near term.
In another sense, in the long term, I think it would be a mistake, as Hillary Clinton would attempt to undermine the more sensible policies Barack Obama would try to pursue (e.g., directing this country's foreign policy in a more flexible and less dogmatic manner), in my view.
I write this, in part, because Senator Clinton is nothing if not a strategist, and she will settle for nothing less than the Presidency.
Were Hillary Clinton to become Vice President, I do think she would continue to be a divisive and negative influence.
There are many great women from among whom Senator Obama could choose as his running mate.
Shotgun weddings don't make for the best marriages. Obama doesn't want to be responsible for what the Clintons say and do for the next 8 years. She has proven herself too unreliable a figure to wed politically.
I wouldn't trust Ed Rendel as far as I can thgrow him, and I'm not all that strong.
Strickland would be easier to take, but I don't think he would really help.
I prefer a team that is headed by people I can trust to be with me.
Hagel would be such a one. And he could help bring in independfents and Republicans.
More importantly, he wouldn't be a problem in the adminnistration but a good teammate.
People should read his book, aand compare it with the thinking erxpressed by Obama in "Audacity of Hope."
Ed REndell is implicated in the Paul v. Clinton case in California, and, he just looks like a crook. Hillary is prolonging this because she is waiting for some big skeleton to come out of Obama's closet. What about Clinton's closet??? What about the Paul v. Clinton case??? It would do her in! If she became the nominee she'd be toast. Furthermore, she has very few surrogates Obama would want. It's got to be Richardson, maybe Dodd or Biden.
I had to re-read this to make sure you weren't kidding. You want him to offer it to Hillary, and after she says no, to bypass all of his supporters in favor of somebody who opposed him vision of leadership from the start.
If he likes one of these in spite of their work against him, so be it, but to choose them because of it is crazy. You're even suggesting Evan Bayh specifically because he advanced an argument that was bogus and very inconveniencing to Obama.
Today, Ed Rendell announced that Obama was the likely winner. Here were his words:
"I don't think the DNC is going to fairly adjust what happened in Florida. . . .. So I think it's very unlikely that Senator Clinton can prevail. I think that means we're not going to field our strongest candidate."
He also said:
"I kid around and say I'd be a great running mate for Senator Obama. I wear a flag pin, so [it would] be a balanced ticket," he said.
So in admitting that Obama would be the likely candidate of his party, he said
1) that Obama won because "Florida will not be fairly adjusted,"
2) that Obama is not the strongest candidate and
3) in a joke reinforced one of the more ludicrous arguments of the race.
This is also the guy that started talking about white people reluctant to vote for a black man.
You call that a running mate? Why not Geraldine Ferraro?
I think you're misreading her -- I see her as suggesting that offering the vp slot to one of Clinton's backers might obviate the need for him to offer it to her. What's she going to do, bitch that one of her loyalists got it instead of her? She'd have little choice but to back the ticket then, and it might both increase the sincerity of her support and earn a few more of her supporters. And it's infinitely preferable to having her on the ticket herself, which would be a disaster.
Welcome aboard the unBus, Lauren!
I think you are way off base. These people are still campaigning for Clinton, and that equates to attacking the presumed nominee. Obama needs a vice presidential candidate whom he can trust and who will be the most benefit to Obama demographically. This party unity thing is a big joke. The DLCers and diehard Clinton supporters are in a life and death struggle with the DNC and us grass- and netroots. It's time to get rid of them. Let them form their own party but don't use the word Democratic, please. We, the true Democrats not Republican Lites, have the copyright on that. We don't need them. All these years I have read the progressive blogs I have seen nothing but criticism of the DLC and now we are supposed to cave into the hostage takers?
I agree, this makes absolutely no sense. I think VPs are really highly overrated for campaigns anyway. A bad one choice can certainly hurt the ticket, but who really comes out to vote based on the VP? When was the last time the winner picked the runner up as a running mate in either party? Did Gerald Ford, Dan Qualye, Al Gore, or Dick Cheney really bring in votes, or "unify" either party? Especially in this case, you're correct, picking people who are leading the charge for your opponent makes no sense at all - who would they really want to be loyal to?
Go outside - Kathleen Sebeilius - Kansas Gov??
I say Lanny Davis or Donna Brazil
Lanny Davis acts like he really dislikes Obama...
I am leery of the DLC and hope that none of their members are on Obama's ticket. I trust Obama to choose the right VP because he has chosen people for his campaign very wisely.
I like Rendell and I think he picked who he was going to support and stuck with her. He has said that he would try to convince Obama not to go with him, and I agree. Obama appears to be leading in the Pa polls against McCain, and I think Rendell would be a much more effective campaigner than VP. The others mentioned, I can't say that I think VP. Biden is interesting.. he was neutral. Webb is another interesting guy (there is a lot of contrast of ideology, but I think both have a lot of integrity). In the end, Obama has to be true to his ideals and pick the VP, he thinks is the best fit for him. I like Biden, because Webb at VP, may make people nervous as to Supreme Court appointments as 2nd in command.
I see that Clinton supporters have reached the bargaining stage.
Next stop... Depression!
LOL
Dear American Voters,
Hon. Senator McCain and Obama, besides each having many attributes and characteristics. The critical differences in my professional, political, and personal opinion are as under:
1. Presidential "Temperament and Integrity".
2. Little Washington "insider Versus outsider" connectedness.
3. Vision and mission for our nation future rather than past.
4. American policies first USA centric than other countries centric.
In my professional opinion one senator has it and the other does not. We need one for our Greatgrand Nation to address our all these challenges with a fresh, clean and new slate.
God Bless America. its diverse people, and our Greatgrand Nation.
Yours truly,
COL. [retd] A.M.Khajawall
Forensic psychiatrist, Las Vegas NV
"Greatgrand Nation"
That has an Orwellian ring to it. Is this one of our newest entries in the newspeak lexicon?
You're just one of those Hate SmallTiny Nation First liberals!
I agree with the idea, but not with the people named. Ted Strickland for one I can't get the vision of him bobbing his head up and down when Hillary did the "shame on you barack obama" thing.
John McCain wants us to stay in the Iraq war, possibly start another in Iran. He wants the economy and health care to stay right where it is. And he's against the woman's right to choose. If that's not enough for Clinton supporters to rally around Barack Obama, well it's a damn shame.
Loading comments…
Posted May 28, 2008 | 03:25 PM (EST)