The lead story tonight - my "lede," as we spell it here - should have been about the remarkable fact that a black man has been nominated by a major party to lead a developed Western nation for the first time in the history of the world. A man - in whose lifetime people with his shade of skin were denied the right to vote and to use public accommodations - who is now on the cusp of the presidency. It says something good about America, and I would like to have been able to dwell on it.
But no. Once again, it's all about Hillary Clinton, who delivered the most abrasive, self-absorbed, selfish, delusional, emasculating and extortionate political speech I've heard in a long time. And I've left out some adjectives, just to be polite.
Here's an interesting point for you. Barack Obama's speech, which featured a long and gracious nod to Clinton toward the beginning, was posted on various websites as early as 8:10pm East coast time. That means that Clinton - who didn't start speaking until 9:31pm, noticeably missing her introductory cue - and her staff had more than an hour to read Obama's speech and see that he was going to be more than kind to her.
But Clinton, who did not post her speech in advance, gave Obama a much briefer and more perfunctory nod. She congratulated him on his well-run campaign, but not on his victory, which is historic and assured. She told her crowd that, though she is now defeated, she "will be making no decisions tonight." She urged her voters - naturally nudged up to 18 million, which exaggerates the matter by about a half a million votes - to visit her website and send her messages, a piece of demagoguery that merely ensures that a week hence, if she wants to, she'll be able to say, "more than 10 million of my supporters have written to encourage me to go on to Denver". And speaking of the convention city, when her audience began chanting its name, she did not of course try to stop them and say that a convention fight was not in the interest of party unity.
What's her game? It's this, I think. It's not merely to be vice president. Although apparently it is that. I take it she and Bill have decided that being Obama's vice-president for eight years is the most plausible path to the presidency. But she did not on Tuesday night merely try to make a case for herself as a good vice-presidential candidate. She held a rhetorical knife to Obama's throat and said, in not so many words: I'm still calling some shots, buddy. You offer me the vice-presidency, or I walk away. But she has also forced Obama into a situation whereby if he chooses her now, he looks weak. So that's the choice she is hoping to impose on the nominee: don't choose me, and Bill and I will subtly work to see that you lose; choose me, and look like a weakling who can't lead the party without the Clintons after all. Now that's putting the interests of the party first, isn't it?
Democrats had better understand what this means, and they'd better not kid themselves. With any person other than a Clinton, this whole thing would have been over in late February - that is, any other candidate who lost 11 primaries in a row and ran out of money would have been shamed out of the race at that point. Or if not then, after May 6 (North Carolina and Indiana), when it became obvious that she could not come within 100 delegates of Obama, no matter what happened with Florida and Michigan.
But the Clintons know no shame, and more importantly, there has been no referee who could end this game, no one who could say to a Clinton, "Enough now." Well, Democrats have to say it. Now. Enough.
I really wanted to write a happy piece tonight. I wanted to write about Obama's amazing victory and about Clinton's tenacity being finally tempered by an acceptance of reality - reality that she'd lost and reality that, while there are indeed good arguments for her being on the ticket, the person who won the nominee has the right to choose the running mate.
Obama, after a slowish start, ended up giving a good, fiery speech aimed at John McCain. And McCain's speech, though flat in delivery, laid out his themes reasonably well. A race between these two men will be a race between two people who - whatever you think of their politics - are presenting substantive cases to the country and asking the people to choose. That's going to be a good show. But someone has to send that sore loser on the sidelines off to the showers once and for all.
Showing posts with label dream ticket. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dream ticket. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Questions To Ask About The Unity Ticket - Latest Barack Obama news
(1) Does Clinton want to be vice president?
It's clear that she is open to the possibility, as she says; it's probable that she hasn't had the time to contemplate the question with attention to all of the personal, professional and psychic ramifications -- what it would mean for her, her family, what she would do, what Bill would do? A person very close to Clinton, someone who talks to her regularly, someone who is reliable, said that Clinton ultimately does not want, in the sense of an affirmative desire, to be vice president, but would never turn down an offer.... in other words, she is an American and a patriot and a loyal Democrat and would not refuse a chance like that to serve her country.
(2) Would Clinton accept the vice presidency if it were offered?
At this point, yes, say her aides and advisers. She wants to do what's necessary to unite the Democratic Party, and the consequences of refusing an invitation would be pretty terrible.
(3) Would Obama consider her, seriously?
At this point, no. Judging by the attitude of those who are advising him, what turns Obama off the most about the Clintons generally is the sense that the party was hers and her sense of desert that she is owed something. Some Obama advisers were very much turned off by the presence of vice presidential talk yesterday although they attribute this more to Clinton's advisers than to Clinton. From my first interviews with Obama advisers and members of his family, I've gotten an overwhelming sense that President Clinton's Oval Office dalliance with Monica Lewinsky deeply offended them and that the incident, its effect on the country, and its aftermath, shape in many ways the Obama family's view of the Clintons today. (It is certainly true of some of his staff members.)
The thinking in the Obama campaign is that the party will, over the next few weeks, coalesce around Obama; that the fervor to put her on the ticket will diminish; that right now, the active phase of speculation is driving most of the unity talk, and if Obama, by mid-summer, has a comfortable lead in the polls, the demands will die down, especially if he treats her with respect.
(4) So how does he treat with respect?
He vets her, or he indicates that he will vet her, and he vets at least one of her supporters -- perhaps Gov. Strickland of Ohio; he promises her a prime-time speaking slot; he offers to let her shepherd his health care plan through Congress; he promises her regular input in his decisions.
(5) There will be lots of pressure on Obama to change his mind, though.
Unquestionably. And since we're in the moment, a lot of it is to be expected. You can be sure that Obama will do nothing rash, and that whatever he decides, he's going to take lots of time. If the pressure on him does not abate and if the support of a good chunk of the 17 million Democrats who voted for Hillary Clinton does not migrate to him by the middle of July, then Obama might find himself in a quandary.
(6) So basically, the answer to the original question is: if Obama can coalesce the Democratic Party before he needs to pick a vice president, there's almost no chance that he will pick Hillary Clinton.
That's pretty much it, yes.
(7) What's the next step?
Well, Clinton wants a one-on-one meeting with Barack Obama at his soonest convenience to discuss her exit from the race.
You can expect some of her supporters to very aggressively and almost ungraciously spout the opinion that she is owed the vice presidency. I do not know whether Clinton herself will sanction these endeavors.
There may be a movement by her supporters to place her name in contention for the vice presidential nomination even if Obama nominates someone else.
It's clear that she is open to the possibility, as she says; it's probable that she hasn't had the time to contemplate the question with attention to all of the personal, professional and psychic ramifications -- what it would mean for her, her family, what she would do, what Bill would do? A person very close to Clinton, someone who talks to her regularly, someone who is reliable, said that Clinton ultimately does not want, in the sense of an affirmative desire, to be vice president, but would never turn down an offer.... in other words, she is an American and a patriot and a loyal Democrat and would not refuse a chance like that to serve her country.
(2) Would Clinton accept the vice presidency if it were offered?
At this point, yes, say her aides and advisers. She wants to do what's necessary to unite the Democratic Party, and the consequences of refusing an invitation would be pretty terrible.
(3) Would Obama consider her, seriously?
At this point, no. Judging by the attitude of those who are advising him, what turns Obama off the most about the Clintons generally is the sense that the party was hers and her sense of desert that she is owed something. Some Obama advisers were very much turned off by the presence of vice presidential talk yesterday although they attribute this more to Clinton's advisers than to Clinton. From my first interviews with Obama advisers and members of his family, I've gotten an overwhelming sense that President Clinton's Oval Office dalliance with Monica Lewinsky deeply offended them and that the incident, its effect on the country, and its aftermath, shape in many ways the Obama family's view of the Clintons today. (It is certainly true of some of his staff members.)
The thinking in the Obama campaign is that the party will, over the next few weeks, coalesce around Obama; that the fervor to put her on the ticket will diminish; that right now, the active phase of speculation is driving most of the unity talk, and if Obama, by mid-summer, has a comfortable lead in the polls, the demands will die down, especially if he treats her with respect.
(4) So how does he treat with respect?
He vets her, or he indicates that he will vet her, and he vets at least one of her supporters -- perhaps Gov. Strickland of Ohio; he promises her a prime-time speaking slot; he offers to let her shepherd his health care plan through Congress; he promises her regular input in his decisions.
(5) There will be lots of pressure on Obama to change his mind, though.
Unquestionably. And since we're in the moment, a lot of it is to be expected. You can be sure that Obama will do nothing rash, and that whatever he decides, he's going to take lots of time. If the pressure on him does not abate and if the support of a good chunk of the 17 million Democrats who voted for Hillary Clinton does not migrate to him by the middle of July, then Obama might find himself in a quandary.
(6) So basically, the answer to the original question is: if Obama can coalesce the Democratic Party before he needs to pick a vice president, there's almost no chance that he will pick Hillary Clinton.
That's pretty much it, yes.
(7) What's the next step?
Well, Clinton wants a one-on-one meeting with Barack Obama at his soonest convenience to discuss her exit from the race.
You can expect some of her supporters to very aggressively and almost ungraciously spout the opinion that she is owed the vice presidency. I do not know whether Clinton herself will sanction these endeavors.
There may be a movement by her supporters to place her name in contention for the vice presidential nomination even if Obama nominates someone else.
The dream ticket - Latest obama news and views
Putting Hillary Clinton on the ticket for vice president creates a ménage-à-trois. Bill will be the unexpected roommate. Even if a President Obama can discipline Hillary and get her to play second fiddle, there is not the remotest chance that he can get the former president to accept such rules. Even if Bill Clinton wanted to rein in his newly prolific public expressions of rage and frustration, there is doubt that he is any longer capable of doing so.
Hillary, who likely desperately wants to be tapped for vice president, is going about it in exactly the wrong way. She seems to be demanding a kind of coalition government between herself and Obama, a definition of the vice presidency not likely to appeal to the president. It reminds me of 1980 when there were discussions of a ticket with Reagan as the presidential nominee and former President Gerald Ford as the vice president in a coalition government where the VP would have extraordinary powers.
Intended to reassure voters who were panicked by Reagan's "extreme" conservatism, the arrangement never came to fruition, a development which gave us the House of Bush.
Instead of conceding defeat and campaigning for Obama, auditioning for the spot of loyal teammate, Hillary insists on keeping her options open and vies for the spotlight with Obama, exactly what you do not want a vice president to do.
Last night, when Obama went over the top in delegates and could claim the nomination as his, Hillary organized a rally of all of her supporters, directly competing for airtime with the newly minted nominee.
Adding Hillary to the ticket would not bring Obama a single vote (except possibly for Bill's). Her supporters are divided into two distinct categories. The original Clintonistas were strong Democrats, party faithful, pro-choice, middle-aged and up, largely female and all white. But Hillary's recent backers have been downscale whites of both genders who were turned off by Obama's pastor, wife and other associates and were afraid he might be a Muslim in disguise. Unhappy about voting for a woman, they never really liked Hillary but turned to her when the alternative was Obama.
If Hillary had won the Democratic nomination, these latent backers of Hillary in the primaries might still have voted for McCain in the general. Their support of Hillary is purely linked to her opposition to Obama. Were she to join the ticket, they would vote for McCain anyway. After all, Obama will still be black and the Rev. Wright will still be nuts.
But adding Hillary to the ticket brings, along with her, Bill.
The public Bill Clinton has morphed over the past few months from a statesman and philanthropist to a petulant, angry, cursing, spoiled narcissist, accusing everyone of being sleazy and biased and in so doing fashioning himself as a foil for Obama. This unattractive image is not the right one for the bottom of a ticket in a presidential race. And make no mistake, Bill comes along with Hillary.
But the more serious problem is the public record that Todd Purdum, an excellent journalist, laid out in his Vanity Fair piece. Bill's relationships with billionaires, his pursuit of financial gain, his alliance with the emir of Dubai, and his acceptance of speaking fees and income from some of the least savory of types is not what you need to carry around with you in a presidential race. To put Hillary on the ticket is to confront nagging questions about donors to the Clinton Library and Bill's refusal to release them. It would be to inherit a load of baggage that Obama does not need as he tries to position himself as the candidate of change, antithetical to the corrupt and corrupting ways of Washington.
On her own, Hillary would be no bargain as vice president. She would never accept direction and never sublimate her ambition or agenda to Obama's. But with Bill in tow, her candidacy becomes even more fraught with peril should Obama be inclined to bow to pressure and put her on the ticket.
Hillary, who likely desperately wants to be tapped for vice president, is going about it in exactly the wrong way. She seems to be demanding a kind of coalition government between herself and Obama, a definition of the vice presidency not likely to appeal to the president. It reminds me of 1980 when there were discussions of a ticket with Reagan as the presidential nominee and former President Gerald Ford as the vice president in a coalition government where the VP would have extraordinary powers.
Intended to reassure voters who were panicked by Reagan's "extreme" conservatism, the arrangement never came to fruition, a development which gave us the House of Bush.
Instead of conceding defeat and campaigning for Obama, auditioning for the spot of loyal teammate, Hillary insists on keeping her options open and vies for the spotlight with Obama, exactly what you do not want a vice president to do.
Last night, when Obama went over the top in delegates and could claim the nomination as his, Hillary organized a rally of all of her supporters, directly competing for airtime with the newly minted nominee.
Adding Hillary to the ticket would not bring Obama a single vote (except possibly for Bill's). Her supporters are divided into two distinct categories. The original Clintonistas were strong Democrats, party faithful, pro-choice, middle-aged and up, largely female and all white. But Hillary's recent backers have been downscale whites of both genders who were turned off by Obama's pastor, wife and other associates and were afraid he might be a Muslim in disguise. Unhappy about voting for a woman, they never really liked Hillary but turned to her when the alternative was Obama.
If Hillary had won the Democratic nomination, these latent backers of Hillary in the primaries might still have voted for McCain in the general. Their support of Hillary is purely linked to her opposition to Obama. Were she to join the ticket, they would vote for McCain anyway. After all, Obama will still be black and the Rev. Wright will still be nuts.
But adding Hillary to the ticket brings, along with her, Bill.
The public Bill Clinton has morphed over the past few months from a statesman and philanthropist to a petulant, angry, cursing, spoiled narcissist, accusing everyone of being sleazy and biased and in so doing fashioning himself as a foil for Obama. This unattractive image is not the right one for the bottom of a ticket in a presidential race. And make no mistake, Bill comes along with Hillary.
But the more serious problem is the public record that Todd Purdum, an excellent journalist, laid out in his Vanity Fair piece. Bill's relationships with billionaires, his pursuit of financial gain, his alliance with the emir of Dubai, and his acceptance of speaking fees and income from some of the least savory of types is not what you need to carry around with you in a presidential race. To put Hillary on the ticket is to confront nagging questions about donors to the Clinton Library and Bill's refusal to release them. It would be to inherit a load of baggage that Obama does not need as he tries to position himself as the candidate of change, antithetical to the corrupt and corrupting ways of Washington.
On her own, Hillary would be no bargain as vice president. She would never accept direction and never sublimate her ambition or agenda to Obama's. But with Bill in tow, her candidacy becomes even more fraught with peril should Obama be inclined to bow to pressure and put her on the ticket.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)