Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Vice Presidential Speculation of the Day

1

That list of maybes notwithstanding, isn't it just a given it's going to be a white southern male who's not a senator?

Posted by Levislade | September 26, 2007 10:46 AM
2

I could see a mildly Hispanic guy in the vee pee position, though he would have to be very mildly nonthreateningly Hispanic I would imagine.

Posted by Katelyn | September 26, 2007 10:50 AM
3

Hillary's first choice:
Joe Lieberman

Posted by Mahtli69 | September 26, 2007 11:00 AM
4

If Hillary gets the nomination why should she choose a VP, she will loose the general election. Then we may as well move to Canada or kill ourselves.

Posted by Suck it Jesus, Mohammed and Moses | September 26, 2007 11:02 AM
5

Hilary most certainly may get the nomination, although, she certainly might not. Have these bloggers never heard of the 19th Amendment?

Posted by elenchos | September 26, 2007 11:04 AM
6

Antonio Villaraigosa would be a hot VP.

Posted by Gurldoggie | September 26, 2007 11:34 AM
7

i want russ feingold.

Posted by and | September 26, 2007 11:41 AM
8

When the fuck are the democrats going to grow some balls? Why can't they accept the fact that those of us who want change don't want it in tiny increments? I think that a obama/hillary (or vice-versa)ticket would be awesome, but the dems will keep playing the same political games, and the electorate will treat them with the same attitude that they have for the last 30 years. Playing this game has lead to a huge shift to the right over the last 30 years, and politics as usual will lead to another 30 of the same old shit.

Could one major candidate please grow a pair and lead? I don't want to see Jeb in office in 4 years.

Posted by wisepunk | September 26, 2007 11:44 AM
9

This is a bag of Poo.

The question is, who will Gore or Obama choose for their running mate, and will Clinton have a shot at that ...

Posted by Will in Seattle | September 26, 2007 11:50 AM
10

Will, drop the Gore thing. Really, it's getting old and kind of sad.

Posted by Levislade | September 26, 2007 11:53 AM
11

wouldn't it be funny if she chose bill? of course it'll never happen, but in a parallel universe... i'm just sayin'.

Posted by Kim | September 26, 2007 12:07 PM
12

@11, that will through the election into the hands of the Supreme Court as a challenge to the 22nd amendment. (ie, another GOP victory as the republicans would not file that complaint until after Hillary wins (if she does win that is) The court would rule the election invalid as Hillary chose someone to be VP who if he became President again would violate the two term rule)

But let's bitch about the 22nd amendment that was forced on to us by .....(drum roll) the Republican Party!! That is right, after FDR (a Democrat who lead us through the Great Depression, won WWII and spoke in complete sentances) the GOP thought "Fuck anyone like this happening again, let's take a choice away from the voters". Truman was exempt from it but said that the 22nd ammendment would be something we may regret later on.

Sorry about the tirade, that is why we have elections: voter imposed term limits!

Posted by Cato the Younger Younger | September 26, 2007 12:14 PM
13

unfortunately, i agree with this analysis. so, Dems will have a history-maker at the top of the ticket (either clinton or obama) and boring, old white dude in the veep position. at least the boring, old white dudes in the Dem party are pretty benign (save Leiberman).

Posted by chris | September 26, 2007 12:30 PM
14

On the bright side, the 22nd Amendment probably saved us a third Reagan term.

Posted by NapoleonXIV | September 26, 2007 12:53 PM
15
And then he could tell Hillary why it might be too risky to have a woman on the ticket.

How about he explains to her why it's too risky to have Hillary Clinton on the ticket?

Can we all please get over the reductivist gender/race thing? I swear, no one outside Democratic circles is even talking about it.

Posted by lostboy | September 26, 2007 12:55 PM
16

@14 - A third Reagan term as he descended further into the throes of Alzheimer's would've made for interesting theater.

Posted by Mahtli69 | September 26, 2007 12:57 PM
17

A third Reagan term would have been HYSTERICAL!!! Damn, that would have been some GOOD TV!!!!

And yeah Hillary in the Oval Office is just too much Republican for me. I guess it is time to seriously get the Green Party working in the US.

Posted by Cato the Younger Younger | September 26, 2007 1:01 PM
18

When I saw that pic of Hill and the dude from Indian my heart sank. A pic of Hill and Obama together (in either position) is exciting as hell.
I agree with 8. Go Guts!

Posted by poster girl | September 26, 2007 1:50 PM
19

This reasoning may be depressing, but it's exactly how most seasoned political types think. Pragmatically speaking, it might even make sense.

If it's Hillary and an old Southern white guy, I hope to hell it's Wesley Clark. He at least isn't completely uninspiring, and brings something to the ticket.

Edwards/Obama is a better bet because though the person in the top slot is a white guy, he's running as a populist, and those two guys represent different parts of the party, different parts of the electorate, and different parts of the country--while still working as a team. Obama's got good judgment but is a little green. This would give him everything he needs to be the presumptive nominee in 2016. I just hope that a winning Democratic ticket selects Richardson for Secretary of State, because he's got the right position on Iraq and should be given a chance to negotiate our way out of that mess.

Posted by Cascadian | September 26, 2007 2:09 PM
20

@ 12 -
The relevant text of 22nd amendment reads

"No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice"

I think it's pretty clear on its face that Bill wouldn't be "elected" to the office of the President any more than Jerry Ford was elected president. And the "activist judiciary" decrying GOP would never ask the court to look past the plain meaning just because it served their political purposes, right? (hahahahahaha)

Posted by jon | September 26, 2007 2:23 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).