Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Clinton-Obama Talks Over the VP Spot?

1

Is it a bad thing if Hillary's $20 million in debts are not "integrated and involved in the Obama campaign"? It's like she's trying to get somebody to take over the payments on a bad home mortgage.

Posted by elenchos | May 23, 2008 9:40 AM
2

Here's where we find out if Obama is strong enough to negotiate with insane terrorists holding hostages, without giving in to their demands.

Posted by hmmm | May 23, 2008 9:47 AM
3

John Edwards lost to John Kerry and he was the running mate. If Hilary doesn't at least get the VP her supporters will really be fuming.

Posted by doremon | May 23, 2008 9:52 AM
4

@2 made my day.

Posted by Mike of Renton | May 23, 2008 9:55 AM
5

2nd place in the nomination process does not guarantee a VP slot!

No to Hillary as VP. It is totally against what Obama's campaign represents.

Posted by Lloyd Cooney | May 23, 2008 9:56 AM
6

@2 That is soooo true!

Seriously folks. If Obama is stupid enough to actually do this...

There is no way I can vote Democrat come this election day. I won't vote for Barack with Hillary on the ticket. She has been a complete and total bitch in this campaign season, doing things to her own party that are unprecedented in Presidential politics.

She just needs to go away. Now.

And take her $20 Million dollar debt and go find a minimum wage job to pay it off to see how many Americans truly live. Maybe after she has peeled out her last $10 bill for gas will she truly have a clue.

Posted by Reality Check | May 23, 2008 9:58 AM
7
along with a veiled (and somewhat contradictory) threat from one wing of the Clinton camp.

There was nothing veiled about that threat.

Posted by lostboy | May 23, 2008 10:09 AM
8

I know some skilled kindergarten teachers who could give Obama some pointers on how to deal with Clinton's conduct.

Posted by Mary F. | May 23, 2008 10:10 AM
9

@1: as i understand it, once she's conceded, she can use $ set aside for her general race to pay off the debts of the nomination race. plus they're rich.

Posted by maxsolomon@home | May 23, 2008 10:10 AM
10

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Willis | May 23, 2008 10:15 AM
11

Seriously, what does it say about Clinton and her team that their first tactic for gaining the VP slot is threats and strong-arming? I'm sure Obama is going to listen and say "Yeah, I want to deal with this for the next four years."

Posted by tsm | May 23, 2008 10:16 AM
12

You shouldn't have both candidates on the ticket. America will find it challenging enough voting for a woman or a half-black man; they wont' vote for a woman and a half-black man, whatever the order of the ticket.

We are not a progressive country. We're fairly conservative. We just have pockets of progressiveness.

I can't understand these Hillary supporters that say they won't vote for Obama and Obama supporters that say they won't vote for Hillary. Some of them even say they hate Bush and yet would rather vote for McCain! I can't understand why they'd want to make the country more of a garbage dump than it already is.

Listen children, you never get a perfect candidate. Ever. If that's what you want, stop voting. Now.

I'm a democrat first. I'll vote for whoever the nominee is. It looks like it will be Obama. I'll vote for him, but he's going to lose. I think this time it will be fairly significant too, not a close race. You read it here first!

Posted by Blabba | May 23, 2008 10:20 AM
13

GRACEFUL EXIT!!??!! What the FUCK!! She passed "graceful exit" three months ago.

Posted by Cato the Younger Younger | May 23, 2008 10:22 AM
14

when is somebody going to pipe up and put a stop to all this? it's an election and she lost. there are no consolation prizes. nobody owes her anything.

and now she's making herself out to be a fucking champion of civil rights because she wants to change the rules she agreed to from the beginning. bad leadership, bad judgment, bad campaign, bad everything. she's proven herself completely unsuitable for the job.

Posted by brandon | May 23, 2008 10:23 AM
15

@12. I actually mentioned a few weeks ago on this Slog that McCain will be our next president. The Democratic Party is unequivocally split. The combination of Obama being too inexperienced, the party rules (punishing MI & FL) and outraged Clinton supporters will put McCain in the presidency. Obama should never have run.

Posted by lark | May 23, 2008 10:36 AM
16

lark, it'd be pretty stupid to say that the winner of a race shouldnt have even tried to compete.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | May 23, 2008 10:43 AM
17

Speaking as a former Clinton supporter, the vitriol that numbnuts like Reality Check spew on the candidate that 48% of Democrats supported in this race is simply breathtaking. Yes, she lost, and she should concede, but she brings a lot of passionate supporters to the table, and comparing her to a terrorist makes us all look like morons.

Posted by Big Sven | May 23, 2008 10:44 AM
18

Don't worry Clinton's die hard supporters if they stay home they'll be canceled out by the conservatives who hate McCain.

Posted by doremon | May 23, 2008 10:48 AM
19

You retards predicting a McCain win are forgetting that Hillary's supporters are the only ones outside the beltway media who have even expressed a desire to vote for that loser.

Has anyone seen any McCain stickers around on cars, lawn signs, heard anyone proudly talking up the old man? I still see W stickers on the road and there's plenty of Ron Paul signs and stickers around; I've yet to see or hear an actual person (like, not a pundit on TV) say anything positive about McCain. My Republican friends and family universally hate the guy and either plan to sit the election out or vote Dem.

It's worth mentioning that he managed to piss off his base here in WA by fucking Boeing over.

Posted by hmmm | May 23, 2008 10:48 AM
20

#15, are you fucking insane? How is this Obama's fault?

Posted by w7ngman | May 23, 2008 10:52 AM
21

That's pretty impressive, @15, the way you try to shoulder the blame for the Democratic Party's internal troubles on Obama for daring to actually run - and win fair and square, no less. What gall he showed!

Posted by tsm | May 23, 2008 10:52 AM
22

I've been reading some of the pro-Clinton blogs and the arguments seem to boil down to: (1) Clinton can win in the general election while Obama can't and (2) Obama and the media are sexist. The overwhelming sense (repeated in @15 comment's that "Obama should never have run") is that Clinton is self-evidently entitled to the nomination. All pretense of Clinton being a better president, having more experience, running a better campaign, being able to raise more money, being able to turn out more new voters, improving the Democrats' chances in the House and Senate, etc., is gone--there now just seems to be a raging (there is no better word) bitterness among her remaining supporters. I am sure that it is disappointing to have the first woman be so close to the nomination of a major party and then lose. But stirring up rage and bitterness is not a very good way to get a spot on the ticket.

Posted by kk | May 23, 2008 10:54 AM
23

Two points:

1) Alpha-males, even when they are females, don't make good VP candidates.

2) If someone wants the VP slot, you act conciliatory and friendly to the candidate likely to have the top slot. Read Wonkette's latest entry on Hillary's stalwart resistance to conciliations about Michigan and Florida ("Our Greatest American Draws The Line") and then explain to how her behavior in any way indicates someone who WANTS to work with Obama, much less run with him.

Posted by Andy Niable | May 23, 2008 10:58 AM
24

Clinton tearing the party apart with her divisive comments (hardworking "white" Americans, caucus states like Washington don't count, DNC rules her staff approved = elections in Zimbabwe) and then demanding the VP slot as the only way to unify the party is like the man who killed his parents and then begged the judge for mercy because he was an orphan.

Posted by chutzpah | May 23, 2008 10:58 AM
25

Seriously, if he gives in, it's over. She can't get elected President and her as VP guarantees he can't, either. She's poison. If Obama chooses her, what's the point in voting for him?

Posted by whatevernevermind | May 23, 2008 11:17 AM
26

why won't unPC just show up and throw a fit so we can stop trolling her?

Posted by hmmm | May 23, 2008 11:23 AM
27

@10 wins.

Posted by Will in Seattle | May 23, 2008 11:24 AM
28

#17, speaking of vitrol, ever read the comments at reclusiveleftist.com?

Posted by w7ngman | May 23, 2008 11:57 AM
29

I take that back, it's not really vitrol. Just utter stupidity blinded by feminism.

Current headline is "Why does the guy with the second-most votes keep acting like hes going to be the nominee?"

Because um... he can? By some interpretations, Clinton's been acting like she was going to be the nominee for months.

Convenient that she doesn't count a state where Obama wasn't even on the ballot, and doesn't count certain caucus votes.

Sigh. Cognitive dissonance is fun.

Posted by w7ngman | May 23, 2008 12:05 PM
30

Yeah... the entire premise of popular vote is flawed in the presence of caucuses. Everyone knows that caucuses are going to have lower turnout. There's a system. If the system was pick the person with the most popular votes NO STATES WOULD HAVE CAUCUSES. Anyway, Erica's friends at reclusiveleftist are clearly just angry at the sexism in the system.

Posted by daniel | May 23, 2008 1:03 PM
31

how can the woman with the least delegates keep acting like the nomination is her birthright? how can people watch a democrat say the republican candidate is more qualified than her democratic rival, or listen to her former-president/disbarred attorney/sexual predator husband use his pulpit to trash a candidate in his own party, and then whine about her unfair treatment? mind boggling.

Posted by brandon | May 23, 2008 1:06 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).