by Mark Silva
While Hillary Clinton angles for a still uncertain position in this post Obama-clinches-nomination period, there is one place where most Obama supporters don't want her.
On the ticket.
"On the morning after Barack Obama's historic nomination victory, attention has quickly turned to the question of possible running mates - specifically whether Obama and Hillary Clinton will join forces in a so-called "Dream Ticket,'' the Pew Research Center reports.
"In a survey conducted in late May (May 21-25), a majority of Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters (53 percent) said they would like to see Obama choose Clinton as his running mate. However, Obama supporters viewed a possible Obama-Clinton pairing as anything but a dream. Fully 54 percent said they did not want to see Obama choose Clinton as his running mate while 37 percent said they did.
"Clinton supporters, not surprisingly, were much more open to the idea - 76 percent said they would like to see Obama to choose Clinton as his running mate.
"An analysis of the data finds that, despite the sharp differences between Obama and Clinton supporters on this issue, key Democratic voter groups - including some that have consistently supported Obama for the nomination - have a positive view of a possible Obama-Clinton ticket.
"For instance, black voters supported Obama over Clinton for the nomination by 80 percent to 15 percent in Pew's May survey. Most black Democrats (59 percent) say they would like to see Obama choose Clinton as his running mate. About the same proportion of liberal Democratic voters (58 percent) - who also supported Obama for the nomination by wide margins (61 percent to 36 percent in May) - express a positive opinion of a possible Obama-Clinton pairing.
"The prospect of Clinton taking the number two slot on the ticket attracts broad support from groups that have long favored her candidacy - less educated Democrats and women. Nearly two-thirds of Democratic voters (64 percent) with no more than a high school education say that Obama should choose Clinton, as do 59 percent of women.''

Comments
Clinton has too much baggage (read BILL) and is too controversial. She also would not be happy sitting in the back seat.
Posted by: StCMan | June 4, 2008 3:13 PM
Obama should arrange to book Hillary on the next space shuttle mission for an extended tour (say, maybe 4 years?) on the space station.
Posted by: Independent | June 4, 2008 3:14 PM
Hillary Clinton on the ticket with Obama would be a mistake. This is Obama's time. Bill and Hillary Clinton would be upstaging Obama behind his back all the time. There are some many qualified Democrats, many with more experience than Obama, that would make great running mates. Hillary and Bill Clinton are too polarizing of figures and would draw attention away from Obama.
Posted by: Depot Jimj | June 4, 2008 3:15 PM
I think, I hope he chooses her. He is not simply the candidate of change, but the candidate of healing a nation divided as well and it would nice if he could start with healing the dem party.
She has momentum and it would be a waste to waste it. If he does it, it would really be nice if he does it soon..
Posted by: B K Ray | June 4, 2008 3:18 PM
The role of Vice President of the United States is for the Vice President to play a low-key role and remain hidden behind the scenes. We all know that Mrs. Clinton will not "be" the Vice President but will push her way into the limelight and somehow assume the role of President "Lite", and I think Barack Obama is gentleman enough to allow her to do that, which would be wrong.
It would be a huge mistake for Barack Obama to allow Hillary to be his Vice Presidential running mate. If elected, he will have an overwhelming life change and he doesn't need her ruining it for him and our country.
Hillary can go back to being the Good Senator from New York.
Posted by: annie | June 4, 2008 3:20 PM
What many Americans do not know is that a judge ruled (in April 2008) that the deposition of hillary clinton in the pending campaign fraud case against her and bill (MUR 5225) would be postponed until after November 2008 (elections). Also named in the case were Harold Ickes, Governor Ed Rendell, and Howard Wolfson. After this date, all this hillary baggage, among other skeletons, will start to come forward.
Posted by: tony | June 4, 2008 3:24 PM
Speaking as someone who voted for George Bush twice (and I don't regret it considering the alternatives at the time) and Bill Clinton before that, I will consider strongly casting my vote for Sen. Obama ... UNLESS Sen. Clinton is his running mate.
If the 08 Dem ticket is Obama and Clinton then I will vote for McCain.
Posted by: Paul | June 4, 2008 3:26 PM
these statistics do not comport with any other that I have seen or heard via the mainstream media....It is much more negative than as depicted here
Posted by: lori | June 4, 2008 3:28 PM
If Clinton is on the ticket, it undermines the whole concept of vote for change. And undermines what I believe in in Obama. Given a lack of change, I'll take my chances with "no change" McCain.
Posted by: Walking Tool Shed | June 4, 2008 3:33 PM
Glad to see that you Obama supporters that do not want HRC on the ticket are in a minority! Lets face it losers, without HRC your man has no chance to win! get over your zealous attitudes and start thinking about bringing the party together. you know as one! You Pbama supporters are the ones who divided this party now put it back together if you want to win HRC got almost half the votes people wake up!!!
And also one more point.. the percentage of HRC supporters that are for this Dream Ticket are much higher than you Obama supporters. So what does that say? it says you are the sliters of the party not the HRC supporters!
Obama Clinton is a sure win!
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | June 4, 2008 3:34 PM
I support Clinton. I voted for her. I feel so cheated that she did not win. I voted for Clinton, Gore, and Kerry. In 2008 I do not even care if Clinton is the VP .....I will give my vote to John McCain. If my vote does not count and the superdelegates have more power, then I will make it my business to vote for McCain and make sure Obama does not get a chance to win.
Posted by: Kathleen | June 4, 2008 3:35 PM
You have a gift of presenting an idea in a very provocative way !! I wonder why that is ?!!
I would have stated, and have stated, the voters of New York State really need the good services of a very capable politician, Senator Clinton !! Allow Senator Obama the same prerogatives as his many predecessors have enjoyed !! He has earned it, thanks to Senator Clinton and all the other contenders for the nomination !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, Chicago | June 4, 2008 3:39 PM
If Obama chooses Hillary as his VP, I will vote for McCain, as will many others. She is an egotistical, divisive hack from the old era of destroying those with a different view, and the country must get past this. At least McCain is civil, even is also from the same era.
Obama needs a fresh, new uniter and there are many to choose from. If "the women's vote" must have a woman as VP, then look to the governor of Kansas.
Hillary made her mess and must live with it. I would not trust her with a 2 mile pole.
Posted by: Diane | June 4, 2008 3:39 PM
Who cares what Clinton wants? She lost. That's it. So what. Do we call the cops now, to drag her off the field? I think the media and perhaps Obama are giving her more credence than she should have, than what's really there. He should not be pressured to take Clinton, or anyone. He should be left to make that choice. She is no different than any other candidate that has run a race, and lost, so we need to stop treating her as if she has the golden baton or something as she holds what she says 'her 18 million voters' hostage for her bargaining tool when there is only emptiness behind the glitter. Just like in the campaigning, she made the American people believe she had all this power when in reality she really had none. All she had was the 'brand', the Clinton name. And if it weren't for that name I truly believe had she been running the same she would have only received about 25% of all that she did receive. So if she received 18 million votes, her real votes with her own stead would've only garnered about 5 million votes, or less. I believe Obama would've still been ahead of her, while still running against 3, well 4 including her mother. And so now she puts 'the fear of Clinton' out there and Obama and the rest are eating the bait when there really is nothing Clinton to fear about and there really is no 'Clinton power' to unleash. I truly think that Obama can match her so-called 18 million votes with her being totally out of his picture and gain even more, so he should not allow her to manuever him with 'her' so-called 'supporters bait'. He can get his own, without her, and without all the headache game-playing and disrespect. And where is she moving the goal post to now? Bermuda? She stated when either had reached 'that magic number' that person would then be the nominee. So...?
Go Obama!!!
Posted by: RuthieM | June 4, 2008 3:40 PM
Get a clue Kathleen, Obama won fair and square. He won more delegates and played by the rules (unlike Hillary, who tried to change them).
Do you really want a Supreme Court packed with more extremists chosen by McCain?
Posted by: Reality | June 4, 2008 3:45 PM
WHAT's THE POINT OF THIS USELESS TICKET? WE WILL VOTE FOR McCAIN, A TRUE HERO RATHER THAN A TRUE ZERO BACKED BY THE DEMOCROOKS. Max
Posted by: Max | June 4, 2008 3:47 PM
"You Pbama (sic) supporters are the ones who divided this party now put it back together"
What was it that those HRC supporters were yelling at the rules thing when they were determining the fate of FLA. & MI.?
Posted by: A Cynic | June 4, 2008 3:48 PM
No, I think Barack should save her for his first nomination for U.S. Supreme Court justice. She could put that Yale law degree to good use.
Posted by: Nookie Farley | June 4, 2008 3:48 PM
Absolutely NOT !
1) How can he have spent the entire campaign talking about change and how we need to do things differently, and then choose someone with 30 years of experience / inside the beltway manuevers as his running mate? Contradiction in terms isn't it?
2) That's too close to what she really wanted....read temptation...read always butting in and being co-President.
3)Baggage, misstatements, false memories, gaffes...need I say more? Oh, and "Bill"
I agree that a woman would be the best choice..........bring on the Governor from Kansas
(and no, I'm not from Kansas !)
Posted by: J.M. Sheehan | June 4, 2008 3:48 PM
....."glad to see that you Obama supporters that do not want HRC on the ticket are in a minority! Lets face it losers, without HRC your man has no chance to win, ... if you want to win HRC....
*********************
NO! WE AN WIN WITHOUT
NO-CLASS BILLARY!
Posted by: K. Smith | June 4, 2008 3:50 PM
The worse mistake Obama would make is to put Hillary on his ticket.
Not Good! Hillary Pollerizing.
Posted by: Beverly Sublett | June 4, 2008 3:54 PM
With educated voters supporting Obama and the uneducated supporting Clinton, does this mean people of average intelligence are voting for McCain?
Now I understand why Clinton had so many people voting for her; does not say much for the education system in the US.
Posted by: Toni | June 4, 2008 3:54 PM
And Clinton voters don't want Obama. McCain is starting to look better to me now for some reason.
Posted by: tired of O | June 4, 2008 3:54 PM
That's ok Obama we Hillary supporters don't want you either..
ABC News got a real story about your Obami -
Obama Takes a More Hawkish Stand, One More LIke the Bush Administration's
Will the real Obama please stand up.
Posted by: SD | June 4, 2008 3:56 PM
Anyone who has suffered a great loss knows how the Hillary camp feels. I have friends on the North Side of Chicago who still believe the Cubs should have won in 1969.
But that's why there's a process. You don't always win, even when you should have.
Here's one other point: so long as Hillary drags this out, Obama has more reason to doubt her. He won the race, albeit by a nose. She should let him enjoy his place in the spotlight. Denying him his day by continuing to carry-on as she does will do her no good.
Even if Obama loses in Nov. without her; she won't be able to win in 2012. If she doubts that, she should ask Ted Kennedy how much support he had for a run after 1980.
Posted by: Bud McFarlin | June 4, 2008 4:00 PM
I believe the most logical choice is Gov. Kathleen Sibelius. She's a woman, which at heart is really what the die hard feminist Clinton supporters want. She also appeals to the republicans (see, governor of Kansas) and by extension the conservative voter base.
Posted by: Poul | June 4, 2008 4:00 PM
Kathleen, yours is an amazingly revealing statement, and it doesn't say much good about its author.
You supported Clinton, so you "feel cheated" she did not win?
Isn't that the ultimate statement of egotism and entitlement?
Every political contest has a loser. What if everyone took your narrow view? Democracy could not function.
So you will vote for McCain?
This statement is so ridiculous, I wouldn't bother commenting, but it represents something heard from a number of Clinton's followers.
I guess a leader without character draws the same followers of the same nature.
Posted by: John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada | June 4, 2008 4:02 PM
Hiallry dont join this loser !! It will only hurt you when we propel you into office in 2012. Let him struggle to try to win some of your constituents, then he'll realize what anasset you would have been when he loses. He will not win Florida, Pa , Ohio etc unless you are on the ticket. He wont win the electoral college for sure. Run from him Hillary - he is poison and the next drama is around the corner !!
Posted by: jimbo | June 4, 2008 4:02 PM
Hillary probably should have a place in an Obama presidency, perhaps in the cabinet, but I don't think a VP spot would be good. She would become a stronger VP than the last VP was, and Bill and Hillary would be upstaging Obama every chance they got. Whatever the choice, people need to realize that we need to elect a Democratic President this year at any cost. America needs change, and Republicans offer no change, just the same old, same old staus quo. Ordinary people, workers and especially veterans deserve much better than that!
Posted by: scott | June 4, 2008 4:05 PM
If Hillary really wants the VP slot, she should stop trying to force her way in. Acting graciously speaks so much better to party unity over taking a posture that basically says, "I'm not throwing you my support unless you make me your VP." Talk about divisive.
Anyone who says they'll go McCain if Clinton is/isn't on the ticket- you are not letting your head temper your heart. Use reason. We don't want a continuation of the past 8 years. You will be the sole reason the democratic party fails this fall(in a gimme election)- if you don't get over your zeal.
Seriously... did you see/hear McCain speak last night? This election is in the bag unless we(democrats) screw it up.
Posted by: Doug W. | June 4, 2008 4:07 PM
I wonder if alot of people are like me?
I want Obama to win the GE.
If that means putting HIllary on the ticket, then fine.
But if he can win it without Hillary, that would be even better. (which I think he can)
My bet is that in the end he will NOT name Hillary as his VP.
Posted by: greg | June 4, 2008 4:08 PM
Apparently the previous 8 years of a heartless, soul-less moster as VP is not enough for these people.
Posted by: Paul | June 4, 2008 4:11 PM
Too bad, Obama's supporters have NOTHING to say about it!
Are you sure Michelle isn't behind this??
Posted by: Jenn | June 4, 2008 4:13 PM
The fervor with which so many Clinton-backers would like to see Hillary as the Veep betrays the comfort they have in seeing her play a secondary role. Is this really the best thing for her now? In terms of Hillary's best interest, I don't think so. She would wield more power in the Senate.
Posted by: Scarzo | June 4, 2008 4:20 PM
Republican ads this fall will feature Hillary saying McCain is more qualified to be president than Obama, She said it. They WILL use that.
Bad enough as it is. As Obama's running mate it will be unanswerable.
Scandals, baggage, liar, cheater, backstabber, disingenuous....
PLEASE Barack--as we have said all throughout this campaign: anybody but Hillary.
Posted by: Roger Deem | June 4, 2008 4:21 PM
You know how the media is! If it were an Obama/Clinton Presidency/Vice President situation, you know Hillary Clinton would be the Media Darling. She is in this for "show." And you know the media would get Vice President Clinton to say some really nasty things about President Obama. The media has great ways of turning anything into a three-ring circus and if she is Vice President, that will be a four-year Circus! Mark my words.
Posted by: Trish | June 4, 2008 4:24 PM
Glad to see that you Obama supporters that do not want HRC on the ticket are in a minority! Lets face it losers, without HRC your man has no chance to win! get over your zealous attitudes and start thinking about bringing the party together. you know as one! You Pbama supporters are the ones who divided this party now put it back together if you want to win HRC got almost half the votes people wake up!!!
And also one more point.. the percentage of HRC supporters that are for this Dream Ticket are much higher than you Obama supporters. So what does that say? it says you are the sliters of the party not the HRC supporters!
Obama Clinton is a sure win!
Once again, the Clinton people showing their true colors. And they keep wondering why their candidate lost what was as ure thing 4 months ago. People are sick of your divisiveness. Go play golf with Karl Rove and talk about the good old days of attacking those who aren't lock step with you.
Posted by: Walking Tree Foot | June 4, 2008 4:25 PM
The anti-Clinton rant continues even after the nomination has been won by Obama. Not only in the media but by Obama supporters who believe he can win without the moderate Democratic vote.
Keep it up folks, continue to bash Hillary and it will make it that much easier for myself and other Democrats to vote for John McCain.
Posted by: Fred C Dobbs | June 4, 2008 4:28 PM
greg,
I'm with you, but I don't think Obama can win without the solid support of former HC backers. That doesn't mean that I think she should be his VP, either.
Obama certainly understands this.
HC's camp understands this.
Nattering keyboard brigadiers don't.
Posted by: johnf | June 4, 2008 4:32 PM
If Hillary wanted a vp spot she should've conceded last night and offered her support like a grownup.
Instead....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAu39I5QOUc&eurl=http://www.jedreport.com/
Posted by: Reality | June 4, 2008 4:33 PM
I say this having supported Sen. Clinton since Gov. Richardson dropped out - Sen. Obama can not choose Clinton. She represents too much of the "old politics" that he is trying reform. It will look like yet another great hypocracy/pandering moment by Obama. She represents the tangible (sp?) past, while he represents the undefined and unguided "change" of the future.
Posted by: Geoff | June 4, 2008 4:34 PM
To RuthieM
If obama could get the 18 million voters on his own without Clinton, then why did she get them in the primary and not obama.
John McCain Rules!!!!!
And to the obamaites, don't expect much "change", this dude isn't going to do anything either!
Posted by: Pat | June 4, 2008 4:35 PM
I support Clinton. I voted for her. I feel so cheated that she did not win. I voted for Clinton, Gore, and Kerry. In 2008 I do not even care if Clinton is the VP .....I will give my vote to John McCain. I will make it my business to vote for McCain and make sure Obama does not get a chance to win.
Posted by: Kathleen | June 4, 2008 3:35 PM
Gee Kathleen, I never realized you wield so much power. Good riddance to you and all like you. You are traitors, sore losers, and crybabies. McCain is an antiquated, liar. A fossil with no new ideas. I will never share your myopic vision of America. This man is literally four more years of failed policy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GPzIrxZ0QA&feature=related
Posted by: Dr Heathen Scum | June 4, 2008 4:36 PM
yes greg lets hope th amajority of democrats think the way you do. The rest of these hate mongers in here should calm down and stop letting their personal feelings get in the way of how to win the WHite House back! Obama CLinton is the only sure way to do this!
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | June 4, 2008 4:45 PM
I can't imagine her taking the VP job and being behind the scenes. She seems like too much of a grandstander to sit back and pretend that she doesn't think she deserved to be President. Plus there other BETTER options. Like Biden for example.
And haven't we all had enough pant suits and scarves??? I know I have... Please someone put her on "what not to wear" or one of those makeover shows.
Posted by: Bones | June 4, 2008 4:46 PM
Not picking HRC for VP is a show of strength. It's that simple..
Posted by: herb sweetow | June 4, 2008 4:47 PM
NO to Hillary as VP.
There are other Democrats that are experienced, and LOYAL that would make a unity ticket. Try:
Tim Kaine
Chris Dodd
Joseph Biden
Sam Nunn
Why would Hillary want to be VP on an Obama led ticket when she has already said that he has no experience? She was complimentary to McCain and said he had experience, why doesn't she join his ticket?
Posted by: AJB | June 4, 2008 4:50 PM
Do you realize what just happened last night? The party elite pushed his delegate count higher and the media declared him the winner...
...but Hillary still has a higher popular vote than Obama.
Now, remember when the media insinuated everyone was mad because they thought it was be just the opposite??
Obama is popular, but still not as popular and as reliable a candidate as Hillary. Now we have a nominee who can't even stand up for his religious beliefs?!? Now that's history.
OBAMA for 08 --but lets keep it in perspective :)
Posted by: Craig | June 4, 2008 4:56 PM
Forget Hillary. She was VP already behind Bill (is that where she got her experience?)and then she moved to NY so she could be in politics. How about John Edwards for VP?
Posted by: Paul Lieter | June 4, 2008 4:58 PM
I think we should keep both candidates and get rid of their supporters. Kathleen will take her ball and go home and support the war if Hillary is on the ticket or not. Diane is not gonna vote for Obama if Hillary is on the ticket. She too will support the war. Jimbo seems like a bimbo with whatever he's sellin. SD....what????
Are you people even old enough to vote?
Posted by: bill r. | June 4, 2008 4:59 PM
Clinton will never be on the ticket. Just as Bill said in 1992 that Hillary will be the co-president, Obama would have to put up with Bill and Hillary. What would we call this? A troika?? A menage a trois???
Posted by: Perch Rapala | June 4, 2008 5:06 PM
I don't know where that survey came from just mentioned in this blog, but I would say African Americans - at least 75 percent DO NOT WANT HILLARY CLINTON ON THE TICKET.
We are not playing games here, she's too toxic! Bill, too!
Posted by: change | June 4, 2008 5:07 PM
HILLARY IS SMART WHY TAG ON WITH A LOSER IN NOVEMBER--
Posted by: GEO | June 4, 2008 5:11 PM
Healing??? You say? If she's on the ticket...I don't
vote!!! PERIOD!
Posted by: Bob Hamilton | June 4, 2008 5:13 PM
They need to create an American Idol type show for selecting White House Interns. Bill Clinton can be one of the judges!
Posted by: Mike | June 4, 2008 5:15 PM
All of you hate mongers and angry people.. just wonder if HRC were a man if you would be saying the same harsh things? I doubt it. So this woman is shrewd. Name one politician that is not. ONE, anyone? Didnt think so. Oh and dont even try naming Obama because you will soon find out he is one in the same as they all are.. Shrewdness goes with the territory my firends.
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | June 4, 2008 5:16 PM
I wouldn't think about giving Hillary the VP slot for one second after her antics. She hasn't even conceded the race is over yet. That singular act has destroyed whatever respect I had that remained for her and cost her any chance of earning my vote in the future. Win with honor. Lose with honor.
Posted by: Kevin | June 4, 2008 5:18 PM
Kathleen,Thank you for being so dis-ingenuous and trying to prolong four more years of misery on the American people.You do sound like a Repugnant!!!!
I support Clinton. I voted for her. I feel so cheated that she did not win. I voted for Clinton, Gore, and Kerry. In 2008 I do not even care if Clinton is the VP .....I will give my vote to John McCain. If my vote does not count and the superdelegates have more power, then I will make it my business to vote for McCain and make sure Obama does not get a chance to win.
Posted by: Kathleen | June 4, 2008 3:35 PM
Posted by: Raving Loon | June 4, 2008 5:18 PM
Picking Clinton would undercut the entire message of the Obama campaign. How can you talk about change with the former First Lady as your running mate? And she really doesn't help him much in terms of picking up valuable states or his lack of military and executive experience. If you pick somebody like Webb, you at least get some military traction and put Virginia in play. If you pick Evan Bayh, you get executive experience (and some traction with Clinton supporters?). If you pick Wes Clark, you get military background and possible Clinton supporters. I also think there are Republicans who would rather stay at home than vote for McCain, but they'll go out to vote against Hillary. There are simply much better candidates than Hillary. She deserves an important role, just not VP.
Posted by: PJA | June 4, 2008 5:21 PM
I'd rather see her in a real job like Secretary of HHS.
Posted by: Cheryl | June 4, 2008 5:22 PM
All I can do is laugh at the democrats for trying to make all of life fair, then skew the rules to favour the "anointed" one. Thank GOD I lean Libertarian/Republican. John McCain may get my vote if he chooses Bobby Jindal, the first (East) Indian-American to serve as governor. From Louisiana! Who said Republicans were racist? Democrats, that's who. And the chickens have come home to roost!
Posted by: Tom | June 4, 2008 5:27 PM
I'm with you Greg - use her if he decides that he has to, but it would be preferred if he didn't take her or need her. HRC really showed a lack of class last night that was borderline sickening. I can understand rallying your troops, but be an adult Hillary. If he takes her and wins two terms as prez, he'd better watch out in Year 6...she'll be pushing him out of the way on her way to the 2016 election!
Posted by: Drewman | June 4, 2008 5:27 PM
From the way I see it, Hillary is in a Win-Win situation. Either Obama puts her on the ticket as VP and they win - OR - She wins in 2012. Just my humble opinion. I have nothing against Obama, I just really wonder if he can get the states / votes needed to win the presidency.
Posted by: John | June 4, 2008 5:29 PM
John Edwards will be the VP. Hillary had a chance for VP but she let her power hunger get in the way. She should have stayed home last night...I wish she handled it better she could have been a good VP with Obama.
Posted by: Peter Skinner | June 4, 2008 5:35 PM
The Obama trolls think they're doing their candidate any favors with this hatred and divisiveness? Obama can't pick another woman as his VP or it will be rightfully viewed as an insult and pandering. Obama can pick another typical white guy to be his pick. McCain then just has to do his checkmate move and name a woman as his VP choice. Watch the stampede of alienated women vote for a Republican ticket, and say good-bye to Obama. But at least the trolls will have the satisfaction of having denied Hillary Clinton her rightful place in history.
Posted by: Bemused | June 4, 2008 5:36 PM
I am happy to have a place to voice my disgust. Hillary holding Senator Obama hostage is dispicable and she would be an exact replica of Cheney as a VP. There are great people to choose from and I trust the DNC not to force her upon him.
Posted by: Eileen Vivoda | June 4, 2008 5:37 PM
John Edwards is a good choice. No baggage and brings some additional credibility. Plus, he'll get the female vote for his nice hair.
Posted by: steven mark tobin | June 4, 2008 5:37 PM
NO NO NO NO NO. I am as through with the Clintons as I am with the Bushes. 20 years of these two families' divisive, confrontational politics is enough. If she's on the ballot with Obama, I'm just staying home. She's just politically repugnant.
Posted by: Steven | June 4, 2008 5:44 PM
Even if Hillary were to be on the ticket with Obama, I would not vote for him. I have been supporting her from the beginning, and I don't want to see Obama become president in any way shape or form. He is not trustworthy or honest in dealing with the American public. I am afraid some of Hillary's supporters will vote for him if she is on the ticket, but that would be going against everything her supporters have supported because she would be his lacky and have no say in the running of this country. She is too good to be his gofer. No, No Obama even if he could raise JFK from the dead to be his VP. Oh is it ok to mention the assination or will I get bad press.
Posted by: A Look Into The Future | June 4, 2008 5:46 PM
tony, quit making up rediculous stories.
Posted by: A Look Into The Future | June 4, 2008 5:48 PM
Obama should appoint Hillary to the Supreme Court (after he is elected). They need a "fighter" like her!
Posted by: alice | June 4, 2008 5:57 PM
Why not, they deserve each other!
Posted by: Allen | June 4, 2008 6:04 PM
This should be a "HAPPY DAY" for us, but a lot of you would rather cry, bicker, and vote Republican, than to unify the Democratic Party. Right now, we should be rolling up our sleeves and putting on our thinking caps to find solutions that would protect our jobs, stop unnecessary Home Foreclosures, unfair Health programs, bringing our troops home, and another 4 years of Bush Blunders.
A house divided will never stand. This is exactly how the Republicans expect us to act out. If we continue to create a diversion, the Republicans will again be laughing as they input ALL of their people in the Supreme Court and place you deeper in your rut. Soon we'll be all be standing in line applying for jobs like "Gun Bearer for Dick Cheney" ANYONE INTERESTED????
I believe the most logical choice is Gov. Kathleen Sibelius. She's a woman, which at heart is really what the die hard feminist Clinton supporters want. She also appeals to the Republicans (see, Governor of Kansas) and by extension the conservative voter base. Now That would be a DREAM TICKET!!!!
Posted by: Herman C. | June 4, 2008 6:17 PM
Hillary, this was your 3 AM phone call. Guess what. You blew it.
Posted by: don | June 4, 2008 6:17 PM
posted: "Obama can't pick another woman as his VP or it will be rightfully viewed as an insult and pandering. Obama can pick another typical white guy to be his pick. McCain then just has to do his checkmate move and name a woman as his VP choice. Watch the stampede of alienated women vote for a Republican ticket, and say good-bye to Obama."
Are you saying women would feel insulted if Obama "pandered" to them by picking a woman VP, but would be delighted to vote for McCain if he did the same? For anti-choice, warmongering, adulterer John McCain?
I don't think so.
Posted by: GKM | June 4, 2008 6:18 PM
I'm so disappointed in Obama backers. I've never come across such a divisive and petulant group!!! I was always torn between Obama & Clinton and am happy that one of them won. I think a ticket with both should satisfy both Obama backers and Clinton backers.
However, it's apparent there's a lot of Obama fans who 'will take their toys and go home' if they don't get their way. Grow up! Politics are dirty and the people involved are dirty. The democratic primary certainly shows that to be true.
I think what disappoints me the most is the petulant attitude that if Obama backers don't get their way, they'll vote for the other party. Way to cut off your nose to spite you face!
Posted by: johelia | June 4, 2008 6:23 PM
[quote=tony]What many Americans do not know is that a judge ruled (in April 2008) that the deposition of hillary clinton in the pending campaign fraud case against her and bill (MUR 5225) would be postponed until after November 2008 (elections). Also named in the case were Harold Ickes, Governor Ed Rendell, and Howard Wolfson. After this date, all this hillary baggage, among other skeletons, will start to come forward.[/quote]
[quote=a look into the future]tony, quit making up rediculous stories.[/quote]
Actually, it's true. Google MUR5225.
Posted by: pony | June 4, 2008 6:28 PM
The basis for Obama's campaign is CHANGE. After the last 7+ years, it's clear that nothing good comes from allowing the Vice President to run the country, so I hope that a 180 degree turn in this area is among the ch-ch-ch-ch-changes President Obama initiates.
So as long as President Obama promises that his VP will be strictly limited to Constitutionally-defined duties (becoming President in the event of the death or resignation of the President and acting as the presiding officer of the U.S. Senate), then we should be O.K. with having Hillary Clinton as Vice President. (And let's pray that President Obama doesn't die or resign during the full term of his presidency!)
Posted by: Dante A. Bacani | June 4, 2008 6:45 PM
Even as a Clinton supporter, i was deeply moved by Obama's speech last night. He even tossed out an olive branch to Hillary(which she will accept when she is ready). I've read countless posts throughout the day which bashes Hillary for being a sore loser because she didn't concede right away. Unfortunately, Obama supporters have been equally sore winners and i just pray it doesn't cost the Democrats the White House this fall. These personal attacks against each other HAS to stop. At this point, it doesn't matter who won the popular vote because it was a virtual tie. It also does no good to say if Clinton is on the ticket I ain't voting or i'm voting for McCain because we all know that's not true or you wouldn't have even bothered voting in the primary/caucus. The "Dream Ticket" has been talked about and a distinct possibility since last November. Democrats will not win the GE if this bickering doesn't, guaranteed!!
Posted by: darrin | June 4, 2008 6:49 PM
I could have tolerated Hillary as the nominee a few months ago. She's not without her strengths, but throughout this long campaign, she's done a remarkable job of producing nausea among numerous Democrats (including me).
She and Bill have shown that the only thing that matters to them is the Clintons.
She's proven anything but gracious – for goodness sake, she hasn't even had the good grace to concede the nomination, and is arrogant and self-centered enough to offer herself "available" as VP. Guess what, Hillary (and Bill)? It's the winner's prerogative to choose a Veep.
Choosing Hillary as VP would be a mistake; I have no doubt that during the campaign and during an Obama presidency, Hillary would be pursuing her own agenda, not Obama's, and would be doing her best to undermine him and maneuver to suit herself.
Hillary, if you can't have the good taste to support the Democratic nominee without strings attached, please do your party and country a favor and get lost.
Posted by: JRR | June 4, 2008 7:03 PM
Initially I was happy with Obama, Clinton and Edwards and couldn't decide among the three before Edwards pulled out of the race. It made no difference to me if Clinton or Obama won the Dem nomination. We had good Dem candidates this time around. Anyone who says or has said I will vote for McCain if...should rethink what they are saying. NO MORE REPUBS. I hope Obama does choose Clinton for his VP running mate. Clinton is an intelligent and responsible person and knows what the VP responsibilities are and the limitations; also capable of stepping up to fill in for Obama should that need ever arise. Please NO McCain. Vote for the Democrat. Support your party - there will be many Repubs crossing over too. Obama and Clinton each have useable brains - we haven't seen that in the White House for nearly 8 years.
Posted by: Rebecca Bricker | June 4, 2008 7:14 PM
I'm disappointed in the number of children they allow in this forum. Waaah, waaaah you didn't vote for my candidate, Hillary! So I'm going to take my ball and go home and vote for McCain! Either you people are GOP and coming here to spout your conservative fertilizer, or you neeed to grow up.
Posted by: Jim | June 4, 2008 7:26 PM
I've been back and forth with this in my mind and the last few weeks convinced me that Hillary would be toxic and a drag on the ticket. She's a loose cannon and has proven, especially in the last few weeks, to be border line delusional. Perhaps she's just fatigued by the campaign but IMHO, she can't be trusted and put in any prominent position to screw up this election. I don't think her die hard followers will vote for Obama anyway (see http://www.hillaryis44.org). I think the vast majority of her supporters will come around and vote for Obama -- probably after the convention and after the speech he'll give there which may be turn out to be one of the greatest he'll ever give (and he's launched some doozers throughout this campaign so far).
That said, Obama should privately promise her a cabinet spot (anything but Sec. of State or Defense) if she wants it.
Posted by: Mark | June 4, 2008 7:39 PM
Congressman Rangle handled all that nonsense! Got all of those Superdelegates together and got her on the phone!!! Checked her behind! Maxine Waters and all of her support FINALLY stood tall and refused to back her on her blatant disrespect of Barack last night. NOW LETS SEE WHAT ALL THESE BLOGGERS say NOW? She was wrong and has been for a loooong time.
Posted by: Keith Lifetime Chicagoan and Southsider | June 4, 2008 7:44 PM
The votes are in and the party has chosen Senator Barack Obama as the Democratic Presidential Nominee! Voters should respect that! I applaud Senator Obama for running an outstanding race! Congratulations on a job well-done!
Senator Obama should enjoy the excitement of the moment that is due him as the Democratic Presidential Nominee. Clearly, he has reached historical milestones!
Indeed, Senator Obama should exercise his privilege of selecting his own vice president--just as so many of his predecessors have done--without the opposing voters' degrading comments; name-calling; coercion; ultimatums or threats of changing parties if Obama does not put Clinton on the ticket as vice president; or any other tactic used to try to force Obama's hand. (Not that he would go for that!) This kind of tit for tat demeanor is uncalled for, immature, and divisive. Besides, since both Obama and Clinton have shared many similar views throughout the primary, as a Democrat, to change parties simply because one's favorite candidate is not chosen makes me feel that the opposing voters' priorities are irresponsible or unwise, and maybe even vindictive. If so, that is just wrong!
In closing, not that the poles are "the voice of God," but since most poles state that both Senators Obama and Clinton would fare better against McCain, it really shouldn't matter who Mr. Obama selects as his vice president.
Posted by: PPG | June 4, 2008 7:45 PM
Developer linked to Obama guilty in fraud case(CNN). Rezko convicted of corruption. WHY IS THE INFO COMING OUT NOW RIGHT AFTER THE LAST PRIMARY? WHY DID THEY DRAG TONY REZKO'S VERDICT. WHY IS CARDINAL GEORGE THROWING PFLEGER UNDER THE BUS RIGHT AFTER OBAMA'S NOMINATION?
DEMOCROOK, DEMOCORRUPTED,CORRUPTED MEDIA FAILED THIS COUNTRY. MANY PEOPLE GO TO JAIL FOR LESS THAN OBAMA - REZKO CONNECTION. WHICH MEANS INTEGRITY AND MORALITY DO NOT MATTER FOR DEMOCRATS. HOW CAN ANYBODY IGNORE WHAT OBAMA IS INVOLVED IN? HOW CAN ANY DECENT PERSON CHALLENGE THOSE WHO SAY THAT THE WHOLE SYSTEM IS CORRUPTED! HOW DID OBAMA GET WHERE HE IS WITHOUT ANY SCRUTINY AND DESPITE ALL OF HIS DESPICABLE ASSOCIATIONS. WHY ARE SO MANY PRETENDED EDUCATED PEOPLE SUPPORTING A SHAMELESS MAN RUNNING FREE WHILE HIS FRIEND TONY REZKO IS GOING TO JAIL. HOW CAN OBAMA PREACH HONNESTY KNOWING THAT HE GOT HIS MANSION THROUGH A CORRUPTED FRIEND. EVERYBODY IN CHICAGO EXCEPT OBAMA KNEW AT THAT TIME THAT REZKO WAS UNDER FEDERAL INVESTIGATION. SPENDING ALL THIS TIME TALKING ABOUT A RIDICULOUS TICKET IS A SHAME. CORRUPTION IS A CRIME. OBAMA IS A SHAMELESS MAN RUNNING FREE. Max
Posted by: Max | June 4, 2008 9:12 PM
Not a fan of BHO, however, Joe Biden makes sense for a BHO VP or Sec. of State.
Posted by: Vivian | June 4, 2008 11:11 PM
Three "D's" to decribe an Obama/Clinton ticket:
DEPRESSING, DISAPPOINTING & DISHEARTENING!
Posted by: President Obama! | June 4, 2008 11:15 PM
Wait, did a Clinton supporter just call Obama supporters "losers"? Is that supposed to be ironic?
Posted by: CarbonDate | June 5, 2008 2:19 AM
I think what disappoints me the most is the petulant attitude that if Obama backers don't get their way, they'll vote for the other party. Way to cut off your nose to spite you face!
Posted by: johelia | June 4, 2008 6:23 PM
Yes Johelia your opinion hits it on the spot! These Obama supporters are what has divided the party!
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | June 5, 2008 7:42 AM
I think what disappoints me the most is the petulant attitude that if Obama backers don't get their way, they'll vote for the other party. Way to cut off your nose to spite you face!
Posted by: johelia | June 4, 2008 6:23 PM
don't you mean Clinton backers? That's all I see are Clintonites saying they'll be voting for McCain...
doesn't anyone see past the end of their own nose anymore?
Posted by: cj | June 5, 2008 12:15 PM
OBAMA IS A SHAMELESS MAN RUNNING FREE. Max
Posted by: Max | June 4, 2008 9:12 PM
says the Raving man running free....
Posted by: cj | June 5, 2008 12:22 PM