Meet the Nominee
So I woke up this morning, checked my email, saw the letter from Hillary, felt sad for about 2 1/2 seconds, and then Laurie Anderson's phase-shifted cartoon voice came into my head, going:
"O-kay. I can cope. I can adapt."
Now that I've had my 2 1/2 seconds of grieving, we can get on with our work. Of course I have a few words of advice for our nominee, as I'm sure doesn't surprise you. Only advice, mind you - I know some of you are sensitive about being told what to do. So....
May I respectfully suggest choosing Hillary now. Like by Saturday. Two months before the convention. Everyone's been talking about how important it is to have everything settled, to have the party healed, to be unified. I've had my 2 1/2 seconds and feel refreshed and ready to go. I don't know how you all are doing. Need more time? Will Sunday do? I'm a patient chimp, no problem.
I'll address a few points that may be bothering you. I've said them before, but in a consolation post maybe they'll take on a new light.
First, the Big Dog? Bill? Don't worry about him, he's a big lovable goof when he's floating around Davos trying to save the world. His political days are over, everyone knows that - whether it was his heart surgery or age, whatever. Forget the UN, but he'll be too busy running around the world to interfere in the White House, since Second Ladies aren't exactly the most sought after news stories. Plus, he likes campaigning, not sitting around the house (he gets in trouble when he has too little to do, you'll be reminding yourselves, so yes, back on the speech circuit he goes). And you'll see Bill in a whole different light when he's picking on McCain. And the press will too.
Second, Hillary sabotaging Barack? Come on, that's one for the tabloids. What does it gain her? She's going for the nomination in 2012, back on the trail in 2010? Just as soon as she finishes hammering nails into her toes. She's already old enough for this line of work, and there's more promise in this position, provided it's not just decorative, to keep her busy and happy.
Third, she'll want to be co-President? What exactly does that mean? There's only one person who signs bills, one person who gives the State of the Union address. Much of what a president does is delegated (how did W rack up all those frequent flier miles to Crawford?). And in the shape government's in, there's enough work for 10 co-presidents. But as people have been saying for months, it's not like Hillary was in the White House for 8 years directing every detail, or even that Bill followed every piece of political advice she gave in that time. So she already knows the limitations - First Lady or VP, damn close to the top, but not #1 yourself.
Fourth, those negative campaign comments? They go away in a heartbeat. That inexperience thing? Barack and Hillary will be there in the White House, working it out - she'll know who to call if he doesn't, together they have the judgment and the experience. The ideas guy and the details gal. Isn't that what she implied with the whole MLK/LBJ flare-up? You don't have to believe it yourself, but in terms of smacking down McCain, it works. We'll be double- and triple-checking CIA reports and being appropriately skeptical about foreign military adventures, while McCain will be repeating Mission Accomplished, Surge and 100 More Years. Hillary can spearhead diplomatic initiatives before they rise to the presidential level, laying the proper groundwork to ensure "negotiate without pre-conditions" is a good idea.
And I've flacked this site a number of times, but it's worth looking at thehillaryiknow.com in this context. Because I few years ago I heard Hillary mention, "women make lists" and it stuck with me. They're organized in the way that they remember birthdays and weddings, who wears what size, when the dental appointment is, which spices are almost out in the cupboard, even while juggling a full work load. People ask Hillary for stuff and she gets back to them. She remembers. This kind of attention to detail can be really valuable in a White House juggling priorities and often moving from crisis to crisis. And she's much more personable than she's been given credit for.
Anyway, that's probably enough to mull over in your jubilation. For some I'm sure this would be a bitter pill to swallow, but I used to think the same about coffee and now I'm hooked. Congratulations, Barack Obama, and enjoy your party. The Claret's on me.
"O-kay. I can cope. I can adapt."
Now that I've had my 2 1/2 seconds of grieving, we can get on with our work. Of course I have a few words of advice for our nominee, as I'm sure doesn't surprise you. Only advice, mind you - I know some of you are sensitive about being told what to do. So....
May I respectfully suggest choosing Hillary now. Like by Saturday. Two months before the convention. Everyone's been talking about how important it is to have everything settled, to have the party healed, to be unified. I've had my 2 1/2 seconds and feel refreshed and ready to go. I don't know how you all are doing. Need more time? Will Sunday do? I'm a patient chimp, no problem.
I'll address a few points that may be bothering you. I've said them before, but in a consolation post maybe they'll take on a new light.
First, the Big Dog? Bill? Don't worry about him, he's a big lovable goof when he's floating around Davos trying to save the world. His political days are over, everyone knows that - whether it was his heart surgery or age, whatever. Forget the UN, but he'll be too busy running around the world to interfere in the White House, since Second Ladies aren't exactly the most sought after news stories. Plus, he likes campaigning, not sitting around the house (he gets in trouble when he has too little to do, you'll be reminding yourselves, so yes, back on the speech circuit he goes). And you'll see Bill in a whole different light when he's picking on McCain. And the press will too.
Second, Hillary sabotaging Barack? Come on, that's one for the tabloids. What does it gain her? She's going for the nomination in 2012, back on the trail in 2010? Just as soon as she finishes hammering nails into her toes. She's already old enough for this line of work, and there's more promise in this position, provided it's not just decorative, to keep her busy and happy.
Third, she'll want to be co-President? What exactly does that mean? There's only one person who signs bills, one person who gives the State of the Union address. Much of what a president does is delegated (how did W rack up all those frequent flier miles to Crawford?). And in the shape government's in, there's enough work for 10 co-presidents. But as people have been saying for months, it's not like Hillary was in the White House for 8 years directing every detail, or even that Bill followed every piece of political advice she gave in that time. So she already knows the limitations - First Lady or VP, damn close to the top, but not #1 yourself.
Fourth, those negative campaign comments? They go away in a heartbeat. That inexperience thing? Barack and Hillary will be there in the White House, working it out - she'll know who to call if he doesn't, together they have the judgment and the experience. The ideas guy and the details gal. Isn't that what she implied with the whole MLK/LBJ flare-up? You don't have to believe it yourself, but in terms of smacking down McCain, it works. We'll be double- and triple-checking CIA reports and being appropriately skeptical about foreign military adventures, while McCain will be repeating Mission Accomplished, Surge and 100 More Years. Hillary can spearhead diplomatic initiatives before they rise to the presidential level, laying the proper groundwork to ensure "negotiate without pre-conditions" is a good idea.
And I've flacked this site a number of times, but it's worth looking at thehillaryiknow.com in this context. Because I few years ago I heard Hillary mention, "women make lists" and it stuck with me. They're organized in the way that they remember birthdays and weddings, who wears what size, when the dental appointment is, which spices are almost out in the cupboard, even while juggling a full work load. People ask Hillary for stuff and she gets back to them. She remembers. This kind of attention to detail can be really valuable in a White House juggling priorities and often moving from crisis to crisis. And she's much more personable than she's been given credit for.
Anyway, that's probably enough to mull over in your jubilation. For some I'm sure this would be a bitter pill to swallow, but I used to think the same about coffee and now I'm hooked. Congratulations, Barack Obama, and enjoy your party. The Claret's on me.
Advertisement
A few comments, pretty much all over the board:
1. I think Hillary's personality would actually be very well-suited to VP, but only if she and Barack can work well together.
2. I'm glad you addressed the Bill question, but I'm still not convinced.
3. There's a lot more support for putting Hillary on the ticket in the great wide world out there than there is in this self-selected, argumentative community.
June 5, 2008 4:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm self-flagellating for missing the opportunity to note:
How Hillary views being First Lady or VP:
Close, but No Cigar
June 5, 2008 4:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ouch!
June 5, 2008 5:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, not the least bit arcane. Rec'd for the perspicuity.
June 5, 2008 4:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Laughing so hard I'm crying.
Which means Obamanauts will hate it.
June 5, 2008 4:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not at all. Rec'ed for a lot of reasonable points.
But the one about the campaign comments? "They go away in a heartbeat."? Only if McCain cooperates, but of course he won't. Why do you think McCain wouldn't use clips of Obama's running mate saying Obama isn't ready to be commander in chief, and use them over and over and over and over?
The second part of your answer there doesn't work either:
In essence this has Hillary saying that Obama really isn't ready (and how can she say otherwise with wall-to-wall clips in McCain ads having Hillary saying this in several different ways). But not to worry, because his Vice President can tell him how to handle a crisis. I don't see that working out very well for Obama.
A number of other good points though.
June 5, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Unfortunately, RS, you have already been proven correct. I can't find the link anymore, but the RNC has officially gone on record saying they plan to use the quote (my paraphrasing here:) "a lot".
June 5, 2008 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama and his team have to make this decision, and it has to "feel" like the right one for him. But however this turns out, unity is a key here. McCain must not win. This is from King's last speech.
"Now, what does all of this mean in this great period of history? It means that we've got to stay together. We've got to stay together and maintain unity. You know, whenever Pharaoh wanted to prolong the period of slavery in Egypt, he had a favorite, favorite formula for doing it. What was that? He kept the slaves fighting among themselves. But whenever the slaves get together, something happens in Pharaoh's court, and he cannot hold the slaves in slavery. When the slaves get together, that's the beginning of getting out of slavery. Now let us maintain unity." Martin Luther King, "I've Been to the Mountaintop," April 3rd, 1968.
The above quotation is used in:
"1968-2008 Forty Years" (A brief photo essay)
http://msa4.wordpress.com/
June 5, 2008 10:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it might be a little unrealistic to expect him to pick any VP by Saturday, although I understand your argument. I'm not sure I agree about Bill, though. I know normally, vice presidential spouses aren't sought out by the news media, but this one's a former president, and the truth is that the public likes to read stories about him, so it's still very likely (IMHO) that he could be a drag on the ticket.
June 5, 2008 4:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think that my concern with Bill and, to a lesser extent, Hillary, is that I'm not confident that they can stay out of the limelight when necessary. Bill in particular seems unable or unwilling to control his mouth, but more importantly, the press loves to write about him. He could inspire hours of news coverage by blowing his nose. Hillary's strengths nothwithstanding, I don't think obsessive press about the Clintons is good for Obama as a candidate or as President.
June 5, 2008 4:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Do you recall a story about Bill Clinton from 2005? (Okay, that's the year he toured with Bush Sr. for Katrina. Remember anything scandalous he said that year?)
Do you remember Bill being in the news a lot in 2006 when Hillary was running for re-election?
Do you remember all those times people complained about some news story breaking and Hillary didn't post her comments until later, being accused of taking a poll to decide which side of the argument to come out on?
In short, it's a non-issue.
June 5, 2008 4:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree.
With HRC out of the race, Bill will be less personally and emotionally involved. He should be able to think more clearly about his actions, and that should benefit everyone.
Come to think of it, that's another argument not to have HRC as the veep choice.
June 5, 2008 9:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Speaking of limelight...can you imagine how creepy his State of the Union addresses would be, with her sitting right there over his shoulder, nodding along and smiling? When Darth Cheney does it to Bush, it looks vaguely like the ol' Jedi mind trick.
June 6, 2008 12:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, don't any of you people have day jobs?
Not going to happen, Desidero.
The non-concession speech clinched it.
Just piss-poor political judgment.
June 5, 2008 4:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
See? What did I tell you, Des? They even hate it in Canada.
June 5, 2008 9:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
I understand where you are coming from, but I don't really think she brings anything to the table that any other senior pol wouldn't bring.
However, what she does bring is a a huge amount of negative energy for many people. Adding her to the ticket causes way more problems than solutions. Hell, just keeping the republicans demoralized moving into November is enough of a reason to give her some other plum job.
What you are really advocating is she be Barack's Chief of Staff, because that is where a ball-busting super pol would come in handy next January.
(PS: The last wasn't meant to be snarky or sexist. I actually think Hillary has many fine qualities and could be very useful in establishing a progressive majority (ball-busting is just one of many.) I just don't think the best place help is on this year's democratic presidential ticket. Many indicators show that would be a disaster, if only by bring out the republicans.)
June 5, 2008 5:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
And for another edition of What Digby Said...
June 5, 2008 6:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Another good one. Thanks for sharing. I'll do my best to reserve any negative opinions I may have of the Clintons based on their actions moving forward in to the future vice my interpretation of what they did in the past.
June 5, 2008 9:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Personally, I think Hillary is WAY over-qualified for the job of VP. Would she really be happy attending funerals and suchlike? I doubt she's seriously interested in the job, and I doubt she'd take it if she were offered a cabinet position doing something more useful.
June 5, 2008 6:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
PS: I'd be worried that Bill would be the perpetual mother-in-law, constantly offering unsolicited advice on how to raise the baby. As Hillary once put it, "Bill is a tough dog to keep on the porch." He's said many times that he misses being president and he'd love to do it again. He'd try to keep his place, but I don't think he could resist the temptation to meddle.
June 5, 2008 7:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
My primary concern with Hillary as VP is for how she would unify the Republican party. I think a lot of Dems underestimate just how much she is irrationally hated by rank-and-file Republicans. She will help get out the vote for certain demographics in the Democratic party, but I would fear that she would help get out the vote for a much broader swath of the Republican party.
Perhaps I am overestimating this effect as Bill Clinton was elected to a 2nd term. Still, my gut tells me that from a purely political point of view she brings in more Republican votes for McCain than she does Democratic votes for Obama.
June 5, 2008 7:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
"My primary concern with Hillary as VP is for how she would unify the Republican party."
Same here. As Jimmy Carter pointed out, they'd be consolidating their weaknesses as well as their strengths. I think the Republicans would welcome an Obama-Clinton ticket--it makes the target that much bigger.
June 5, 2008 8:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
I voted against Carter once and I'd do it again. He was an embarrassment to the south. He redeemed himself somewhat with his charity work as ex-President, but let's not push it. Half of these party elders people trot out are losers.
June 5, 2008 10:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Carter doesn't know anything about how to win elections.
June 5, 2008 10:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
OK, I like Carter, but the funniest thing I ever heard anyone say about him is that he's made such a great ex-President that he should've jumped straight to that role. :D
June 5, 2008 10:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Carter. Desidero. Peanuts.
June 5, 2008 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Peanut gallery.
June 5, 2008 6:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Carter, sinking Obamanaut Boat......(and)
June 5, 2008 8:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
submarine
June 5, 2008 10:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
glug glug.
June 5, 2008 11:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah, see there's where we disagree. Jimmy Carter was my favorite president of recent times. His biggest mistake was granting asylum to the Shah. That single well-intentioned but politically stupid move was his undoing.
June 5, 2008 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then there was that little thing of the helicopters crashing in the sand, and instead of going back and taking care of business he hid out in the White House for a couple of years.
June 5, 2008 8:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
That was my concern with Clinton from the start of the campaign last year and I although I didn't think she really deserved the rights' hatred; I do think that it is real. I grew up in a military town with a lot of right wingers around me who would forward around Anti-Hillary emails to everyone they know that are filled with the most hateful, disgusting and baseless lies that I have ever seen.
They have been keeping their dogs hungry for her for this very chance to mobilize the party against her. I just don't think she is as helpful to the ticket as people might think.
June 5, 2008 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Plenty of right-wingers will rally to defeat a black man as much as a Clinton.
June 5, 2008 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
No doubt, but believe it or not, the Clinton hatred is even stronger and wider, or at least it seems that way to me.
June 5, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't believe it. I just think the Clintons get more press.
June 5, 2008 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I'm basing it largely off people I know, but I'll give you that it's anecdotal evidence.
June 5, 2008 7:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
This just doesn't seem like a good fit to me, for many reasons.
Although it is not an official campaign slogan, clearly the theme Obama is trying to project is "a new generation of leadership". A second storyline - "Bill and Hillary return to the White House" - conflicts with that message. The Clintons are too big, and cast too large a shadow. Obama needs to be well out from under that shadow, and his administration needs to be the start of a new day. And we simply can't afford all the tabloid speculation about what the Clintons are doing or might be doing.
In the end, I doubt that Hillary Clinton really wants to be a vice president. Obama just has to say that the process of vetting and choosing a vice presidential candidate will be long and thorough, and won't be completed for a couple of months. By that time, the passions of the moment will have dissipated.
June 5, 2008 8:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you for your concern about my passions, but I'll keep my passions running as long as I care to.
June 5, 2008 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
I can't help but think there is only one reason she wants the VP --> Anything Can Happen. I know, it is TERRIBLE, but I have a terrible opinion of Hillary, and I never did before this primary started. She got it the old-fashioned way; she earned it.
Also, if she did get the nod, and they lost, she would be better situated for a Presidential run in 2012. As things stand now, she is definitely NOT well situated for that.
June 5, 2008 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do agree that Sen. Obama should announce his preference for vice president as soon as possible, but not until AFTER Sen. McCain chooses his running mate. Moreover, I think it would be best that Obama not choose Sen. Clinton for ANY role in his administration until she publicly uses the words "concede" and "endorse."
I haven't seen either of those words come out of her campaign. Sen. Clinton has expressed her "support" and even promised to "strongly support" Sen. Obama in a letter to her supporters. This is not nearly as emphatic as endorsing him, which I suppose she cannot do without withdrawing from the race.
And the closest her campaign has come to indicating an end to the contest is (and this didn't even come from her lips) to to indicate a "suspension" of the campaign, which seems to be a not-so-veiled threat to make more trouble for the Democrats.
June 5, 2008 8:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama may not have that option since the Republican convention comes after the Democratic convention.
June 5, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep. Desidero is getting a little ahead of his Hillary here. Granted, "I know [he is] sensitive about being told what to do," but maybe he should hold off on the smug lecturing to the winning team and wait for the second place finisher to concede.
June 6, 2008 1:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your "walkabout" took about an hour or so. TPM is a hard habit to break I'm guessing.
June 5, 2008 8:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
We have until Saturday, Sweetie. Or do you prefer my little taste of pineapple? You Obamanauts are always in such a hurry.
June 5, 2008 8:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wham bam thank you ma'am.
June 5, 2008 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Easy, buddy - it's concessions day, we're on our best behavior.
June 5, 2008 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Missed that qualifier. But don't call every Obama supporter an Obamanaut. If you read my posts, you'd realize that I'm not. It's oh so hard to escape the madness of the crowd you hang with.....
or the readiness of the other mob to kill you.
June 5, 2008 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Was Jason offended by the label "Argonaut?" John Glen by "Astronaut?" No. I mean it as a sign of respect. I'm only sorry I'm too old to go on the voyage. I have to go by land with the women and old people. I'm hoping you will have built a shining city by the time we arrive.
June 5, 2008 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
June 5, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I decided to try the river route and help with the leaking boat. Lots of leaks to plug at this point, but the only boat I can find. I'd like the 'nauts to try the land trail. It's plenty rocky but it's firm, having been trodden so many times and by so many experienced mule-skinners.
June 5, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, Billy, you're thinking Reagan's metaphor. The more apt metaphor here is the Promised Land. We don't build it for you. You have to come and build it yourself.
June 5, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought I told you to stay away from me.
June 5, 2008 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Desi, I can fully understand why you and a number of folks believe Hillary should be the VP. Hell, this primary ended so close as to be almost a tie. So to many she's earned it. And I do think she as certainly earned the right to be on the short list. However, whoever the VP is it has to be the nominee's decision. (Yes I know Johnson's was not necessarily JFK's decision.)
What I am saying is that it has to appear that it was done for pragmatic reasons and not because a gun was put to his head and he was threatened. This to me would not be a good way to start a partnership. So announcing on Saturday would look like he was forced.
Also There's not enough time for vetting Bill between now and Saturday. And agree with it or not they are going to want to vet him. They are going to want to look very deeply into his financials.
All that said, July is soon enough, if it is to be. Enough time will have passed for things to cool a bit. They both will have had enough time to talk and work out the details of her role and Bill's role.
Personally I don't see it happening. I think she has more to offer in the Senate, SCOTUS or a cabinet position. However from a pragmatic point of view there is the 16 year line of thinking.
June 5, 2008 8:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
You know, JS, I thought that about JFK/LBJ too, but a commentor who appeared to be well-informed told me LBJ was actually JFK's choice because of the South, in spite of protests from his closest advisors. I mention it because it strengthens your point. And I want that plane ride.
June 5, 2008 9:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the update. And anytime.
June 5, 2008 9:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
It has always been my admittedly nothing more than intuition-based understanding that Johnson was, in fact, not Kennedy's true first choice.
It is my belief that Kennedy offered the VP spot as a gesture, a good-will attempt to get some of Johnson's Southern support, but he actually expected Johnson to refuse the offer. Frankly, I am not sure why Johnson accepted, but I do believe that Kennedy did not really expect him to do so. Some people believe the animosity between RFK and Johnson developed as a direct result of this incident.
BG, do you possibly still have a link to the blog you refer to? This topic has always been of more than a passing interest to me.
Thanks!
June 5, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think he may have just been on wiki looking at the 1960 campaigns, or maybe he got it from one of the Kennedy histories. I actually remember that convention, and had believed Johnson traded delegates for the nomination, which turns out to be wrong. Kennedy had the delegates, but was trying to assure a victory in the Fall. Judging from how close the election was, he seems to have made the right choice.