The Queen of All Evil - Clinton-Obama '08?

follow QueenofAllEvil at http://twitter.com

The Queen's Court

Archives

Clinton-Obama '08?

I like Clinton but Obama hasn't got enough experience for a VP slot. I know that he doesn't have to have any but I'd feel better knowing he was a tested leader like Hillary Clinton is.

Would you vote for a Clinton Obama ticket? Why/why not?

Posted by Rosemary on 01.25.2007

(link)

shep (mail):

Yes. Why not, indeed.

Inexperienced?! You've voted for and vocally supported the most ignorant, uncurious, unaccomplished man ever to run for national office - for president!

1.25.2007 2:09pm

(link)

Rosemary, Queen of All Evil (mail):

You've voted for and vocally supported the most ignorant, uncurious, unaccomplished man ever to run for national office - for president!

I was only 20 when I voted for Dukakis, you can't still blame me for that. ;-)

1.25.2007 2:20pm

(link)

robert west (mail):

I don't know if I'd vote for such a ticket; it would depend on who else was running, and it would depend on what I learned about the two in the meantime.

I'd consider it. I can't say beyond that yet.

1.25.2007 3:03pm

(link)

double-plus-ungood (mail) (www):

Seriously though, when Bush was running for President, he didn't know the name of the leader of Pakistan. How was he any more qualified to run the country than Obama?

1.25.2007 3:29pm

(link)

shep (mail):

"I was only 20 when I voted for Dukakis, you can't still blame me for that. ;-)"

Michael Dukakis makes George W. Bush look like Alfred E. Newman. Come to think of it, Dukakis is still irrelevant.

1.25.2007 3:35pm

(link)

Ara Rubyan (www):

Obama hasn't got enough experience for a VP slot

Not like Cheney. Cheney had lots of experience.

1.25.2007 3:45pm

(link)

Alex (mail):

That will be the ticket to beat.

I've said it for almost 6 years now that Hillary will be our first female President. I have no doubt in my mind. The only question is, will she ask Obama to be her VP and will he accept.

I think it's a great ticket, and pretty much fool proof. Hillary has the answers (well....okay, not ALL the answers....but a LOT anyway) and Obama's got the vision.

I say Yippee.

That's what I say.

1.25.2007 4:50pm

(link)

Rhianna (mail) (www):

No. I won't vote for Clinton - she just rubs me the wrong damn way and some of her policies and those of her husband while in office (whom I voted for TWICE) were bad for the military and have adversely affected it. No need to revisit Clinton light, thank you very much.

Obama is flavor of the freakin' week and I'm not a lemming. I doubt he can stand national politics for long, especially at the "golden boy" pace he's been keeping. Something's gotta give. Either his "beloved family" or some of his political crap. If he picks family he'll piss off dimicrits. If he picks politics he'll piss off voter blocks of family minded people. He's in an untenable position.

I'd like to see Rudi on the GOP ticket but NOT McPain - at all costs not McPain in the ass.

As for ungood - Bush has a better record then you. He was in charge of one of the largest economies in the US. You've accomplished what outside of slobbering over how much you hate him? Oh, you're the head of the DNC aren't you? That's pretty much all they're good for as of late.

Rose! How DARE you vote for Dukaka! For SHAME woman! 20 or not! ;)

1.25.2007 7:12pm

(link)

triticale (mail) (www):

The only Democratic contender I would be willing to vote for happens to be the one with the most relevent experience; Bill Richardson. I will not vote for any candidate for any office who supports victim disarmament.

1.25.2007 10:25pm

(link)

Adam (mail):

Rhianna can always be counted on to inject class and thoughtfulness into any discussion around here. :-)

I'm not a big Hillary Clinton fan. The one I'd most like to vote for isn't running: Feingold. I guess at this point my second choice is Richardson.

1.25.2007 10:30pm

(link)

jrogge (mail):

Wow Dukakis. There was an election for you. It's bad when people begin summing up the election as "The Wimp" vs. "The Shrimp". Hell they were already laughed at and no one had even set foot into office yet. Sure people make fun of presidential candidates, but usually not both at once, in the same article, in the same publication. We're talking newspapers and magazines here not college student magazines printed in someone's basement.

1.26.2007 1:29am

(link)

Tim_the_Soldier (aka thread killer and nun thriller) (mail):

Well, Clinton's military certainly kicked ass in Iraq and Afghanistan too bad the Bush team didn't send them in with the plan that had been the scenario war-gamed back in 1998-99. You know, the one that called for an initial troop force of around 400,000. You know, the one that predicted factional fighting and a high likelyhood of insurgent reaction against U.S. forces. You know, the one that was dismissed as "stale" since it came from the Clinton administration.

My preference is a Edwards/Obama ticket, but I think a Clinton/Obama ticket would be good as well. No matter what happens, Obama IS going to be on the ticket. Richardson/Obama would also be a good ticket. Hell, any democrat AND Carrot Top will probably be better than this administration.

What specific policies of Hillary Clinton upset you Rhianna?

1.26.2007 2:21am

(link)

Tim_the_Soldier (aka thread killer and nun thriller) (mail):

And while we're at it, all those conservatives who claimed that the economy under the Clinton administration was good because of Reagan's policies...since economic "realities" dictate that you need time to see the effects of national policy...a theory not well supported I might add - all those same conservatives who claim that the current economy is strong, growing, and healthy...which, it looks like, have to bow down to Bill Clinton, since, you know, it takes time to grow an economy.

1.26.2007 2:24am

(link)

Maggie (www):

I'm definitely not a Hill fan. I doubt she would pick another charismatic man to stand at her side ... taking the back seat to another media darling is not something I see her doing.

She would pick a milquetoast whose name we don't know from some state in the southwest who sits on the fence but has his feet hanging over the right side.

Triangulate is her credo.

1.26.2007 11:17am

(link)

Mark Adams, who's always correct, get used to it. (mail) (www):

Richardson is BY FAR the most qualified candidate out there, red or blue, which means he doesn't have a hope in hell of even coming close to being on the ticket when the dust clears. He's also stated specifically that he has absolutely no interest in being VP because he has a much better gig as Governor (and he still has 4 yrs in his term.)

It's no secret that I've been an Edwards supporter, since I run the Ohio For Edwards blog and a related Yahoo Group. But I really don't see a Hillary/Obama, Hillary/Edwards, or even an Edwards/Obama ticket. The last time I remember a sucessfull marriage of the top two rivals in a primary coming together was Reagan/Bush. It's a hard sell and there are some nasty staff animosity issues that get in the way by the time the conventions roll around.

If Hillary and her mountain of cash prevail, I see her tapping Evan Bayh as VP. In fact, since they're so close and since he bowed out well before things heated up, I'm convinced that the deal was made back last summer.

If I thought there were more righties like Rose who said they'd go for Hillary, I'd rethink my Edwards stance, but everybody knows her, have made up their mind about her, and half of those people hate her. give me Carrot Top before another POTUS who is in the least beholden to the Dobsons and PNAC crowds.

1.26.2007 2:59pm

(link)

shep (mail):

Very insightful, Mark.

1.26.2007 4:04pm

(link)

Mark Adams, who's always correct, get used to it. (mail) (www):

Tell you what, if the GOP wants to even have a dog in the hunt whatsoever, they'd better start rallying behind someone like Hagel -- and beg him to save their party.

1.26.2007 7:30pm

(link)

double-plus-ungood (mail) (www):

As for ungood - Bush has a better record then you. He was in charge of one of the largest economies in the US. You've accomplished what outside of slobbering over how much you hate him? Oh, you're the head of the DNC aren't you? That's pretty much all they're good for as of late.

What the hell are you raving about now, Rhianna? I'd be insulted, but I can't make head or tail of your gibberish these days. Are you drinking heavily or something?

1.26.2007 10:47pm

(link)

Ara Rubyan (www):

Tell you what, if the GOP wants to even have a dog in the hunt whatsoever, they'd better start rallying behind someone like Hagel -- and beg him to save their party.

Hagel's a good guy, but if he's the nominee (and the election were held today), Republican turnout will flatline and the Dem nominee will win 40+ states.

1.27.2007 9:15am

(link)

Ara Rubyan (www):

Oh, and before I forget: Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-Arkansas) is set to announce on Monday.

He's the guy many Dems are afraid of.

1.27.2007 9:18am

(link)

Ara Rubyan (www):

So...watch the Huckabee video and and ask yourself: can this guy raise $70 million by the end of 2007? Same goes for Hagel and any other nominee, Republican or Democrat.

1.27.2007 9:28am

(link)

Ara Rubyan (www):

Then when you're done thinking about THAT, ask yourself: shouldn't we have public financing of campaigns by now?

1.27.2007 9:29am

(link)

shep (mail):

"...shouldn't we have public financing of campaigns by now?"

Silly wabbit. Giving everyone an equal platform to make their pitch to the public would be depriving them of their freedom of speech.

1.28.2007 4:19pm