The Dream/Nightmare/Unity/Cold Fusion Ticket

June 6th, 2008 in Featured Posts by Hillel Aron

It was suggested by Wolf Blitzer way back in January, and ever since has been argued about by bloggers, pundits, politicians, and even Communist ex-dictators. The question remains: should Barack Obama offer Hillary Clinton the job of Vice President? And would he?

WHY HE WON’T

• The Spotlight: The Clintons will hog the spotlight, distracting people from Obama’s message. A less famous vice presidential candidate wouldn’t get nearly the same amount of media attention.

• The Target: The Clintons will be an easy target for Republicans to hit. Every time Hillary makes an exaggeration, every time Bill says something a little bit nutty, and every time either one of them makes some sort of a gaffe, they’ll hand the right wing noise machine a new set of talking points. And even if the Clintons manage to avoid gaffes, their history is, um, a pretty big target, too. And who knows what scandals have yet to be uncovered?

• The War: Hillary voted to authorize the Iraq War. Could Obama pick her as veep and still make the case that authorization of the war was a calamitous error in judgment?

• Spare Change: Obama has run as a Washington outsider, a new face unafraid of trying new ideas. Hillary, on the other hand, has lived in Washington D.C. for the last 16 years.

• The Wussiness Factor: Obama, some say, is already in danger of looking like a “wuss” (especially compared to war hero McCain). Picking Hillary could be seen as kowtowing to pressure, especially after Hillary’s reluctance to drop out of the race.

• Control: Obama has shown a preference for control, both in his relations to the press and his recent consolidation of power within the Democratic Party. How could he possibly control such outsized personalities as Hillary and Bill Clinton?

• Feelings: It sure seems like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama don’t really like each other all that much. Would Obama rather run for president with someone he likes — or at least trusts?

• Experience: Hillary Clinton staked her campaign on her supposed experience. It didn’t exactly work against Obama, and it certainly wouldn’t work against McCain. Obama might want a running mate with actual experience — say, Joe Biden.

• Too Much Too Soon? Getting some voters to consider choosing an African American for president will already be difficult. Would adding a woman to the ticket be asking too much of people? Would there be a backlash from white males? After all, every single President and Vice-President has been a white male. Is there such a thing as too much diversity too soon?

WHY HE MIGHT

• Geography: Hillary would put Arkansas in play. It’s only six electoral votes — enough to have handed Al Gore the presidency in 2000 (and I better not get any comments about how he did win — give it up already).

• Demographics: Much has been made about Obama’s Appalachian Problem. Would Hillary help out in this area? Undoubtedly. Enough to win states like West Virginia and North Carolina? It’s possible. But she could give him a bit of a boost in Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Ohio — states that are likely to be close.

• Diplomacy: One of Obama’s main arguments is that he would find common ground with people. He would talk with leaders like Ahmadinejad and Castro. He would work with Republicans. What better way is there to prove this than by picking a fierce political rival as his running mate?

• History: Past unity tickets like Kennedy/Johnson and Reagan/Bush were quite successful.

• The Olive Branch: Kentucky exit polls reported that only a third of Clinton voters would cast their ballot for Obama in the general election. That percentage is likely to go down once Obama is the official nominee and he starts having to debate with McCain about Iraq, health care, and the Bush tax cuts (it may already be going down). But some Hillary supporters will remain resentful and picking Hillary for VP would obviously neutralize that. (Picking another woman, like Kathleen Sebelius, or picking a Hillary supporter, like Ed Rendell, might do to the trick as well).

• Fairness: There are many ways of tallying the popular vote in the democratic primary, but even when you count them in the way that’s most favorable way to Obama (by not including Florida or Michigan but using estimates from certain caucus states that don’t report the popular vote), he only wins by 1.6 percent. That’s hardly a resounding mandate. The Democratic Party is almost evenly split between the two. Isn’t it only fair that she be put on the ticket?

–Hillel Aron