Hmmm?
Published by Lisa Kansas June 4th, 2008 in A Clinton Post that implies no hatred of Obama, An Obama Post that implies no hatred of Clinton, Remember NovemberFrom the beginning of the race for the Dem nominee for prez up to as recently as a few weeks ago, I would have said No, Obama would never really consider nor would he even particularly want H. Clinton as his veep candidate. However, given both the (a) extreme angst and (b) substantial numbers of the Clinton supporters, for the first time, I am considering otherwise.
How do I feel about that? Mostly indifferent. It would incline me more towards voting for the Dem candidates, rather than simply against McCain, if the Hill was Obama’s running mate. However, since the only change we’re talking about here in my voting behavior is how I feel about it internally, not any external action I would have taken, clearly it wouldn’t really impact anything.
My best-guess pick for the Obaminator’s veep candidate prior to this was Bill Richardson.
It’ll be interesting to watch how that selection process unfolds.
I can understand why someone would choose Hillary over Obama, but what I can’t understand is why so many people — including you, apparently — are so convinced that sans Clinton all you’re really doing is voting against McCain. I mean, both candidates have been super clear that they share nearly identical policy positions. A vote for Obama is a vote for universal health care, for more responsible environmental behavior, for better worker protection. Is he your favorite candidate? No, but he’s still for almost everything you’re for, right?
WTF?
Probably one of the reasons we’re fairly unclear on what Obama’s policy positions are is that Obama himself is fairly unclear on communicating what his policy positions are, except in the most general terms. TBH, he reminds me a lot more of Hillary’s husband than he does of Hillary. Which again, is basically fine; I’d rather have Bill back a lot more than I want any Republican in general and John McCain in particular, who I am convinced yearns to do nothing more than launch World War III in the Middle East.
My first reaction to this post was “WTF? She’s already breaking her vow not to blog about the primaries any more?” But I guess I’ll have to let you off on a technicality, this one time.
Bill Richardson’s an interesting choice. I’m intrigued and I want to know more.
I doubt that Obama will pick Clinton, but those kooky politicians sure do keep us guessing sometimes, don’t they.
I doubt it would be Richardson simply because a ticket devoid of teh divine whiteness would be seen as far too daring. *le sigh* He’d be a good pick, and would be a boon when it comes to reaching out to the Hispanic community, but I doubt it’ll happen.
Right now I’m just hoping for anyone but Webb, really.
There is this perception in the Obama grassroots that Obama’s background in community organising is some sort of ultimate virtue that he cannot afford to taint with Clinton’s Washingtony McWashington political machinery. I’m pretty sure that if you’re planning to become president - the ultimate machine cog - that distinction is pretty silly. But the changeniks insist that having the Clintons back in the Whitehouse would be a Bad Old Days thing.
re your anti-McCain vote: I think it’s worth asking how much of the recent Clinton fervour has been anti-Obama rather than pro-Clinton. If it’s the former, it probably doesn’t matter whether Clinton’s on the ticket or not.
Has he been unclear? Are you sure about that?
Check out the issues section of his site and download the PDF of his policy positions. I think you’ll find a mountain of specific goals and ideas, and I will be completely stunned if you don’t agree with the vast majority of them. Why? because they’re very similar to the things Clinton believes in:
“The differences between Barack and I pale in comparison to the differences that we have with Republicans,” Clinton said at a debate earlier this year.
Even on one of their most frequently debated policies, Obama once said: “Ninety-five percent of our health care plan is similar.”
He’s not just not-McCain, and the sooner Clinton supporters acknowledge that, the better our chances of making positive change in this country.
Marc, why the obsession with trying to force Clinton supporters to say that Obama is an awesome candidate? I would totally understand it if you were targeting Clinton supporters who say that they’d rather vote for McCain than Obama–but you’re clearly not, referencing as you do Clinton supporters who consider Obama to be not-McCain. The latter group is obviously going to vote for not-McCain, and since their vote is what’s going to make the positive change in this country, why are you worried about their failure to be overwhelmed by Obama as a candidate in of himself?
I care because it’s true. It’s true that he’s more than not-mcCain, just as it’s true that Clinton is more than not-McCain. And the more people who openly acknowledge he is more than the absence of a Republican, the more people will actually want to turn out for him when they’re very busy on voting day. The more people will talk about him in social company as who he really is — a GOOD candidate. And maybe those peole will remember to get out and vote for him and not just against McCain.
It matters.
Mmm…I’m afraid that the “truth” is not something that any one person can dictate on what is essentially a “preference” or a “matter of personal judgement.” You can certainly say that it is true that you believe he is a GOOD candidate. However, what is an undeniable fact is that he is NOT MCCAIN, and of course as you say neither is Clinton. As I said, I totally understand marketing him aggressively towards those who might either not vote at all, or might vote for McCain out of spite. However, I don’t really get it towards those of us who are already committed to voting for Obama.
Some friends and I a while ago decided that a Obama/Richardson ticket might be effective with middle America—Richardson is half-Mexican, after all, so between them, they’d have one whole white man.
Trying to decide whether or not to laugh or cry…
(My voting ended with the county caucus, anyway. I’d think about voting in Novemeber, but then I would feel compelled to vote against the insultingly inane fertilized eggs is people! legislation, which doesn’t even deserve my counter vote.
(My counter-lobbying, though? Yes. Tabling for NARAL soon.))