Posted on 10/01/2005 6:22:32 PM PDT by FairOpinion
FOR countless Democrats around America, the announcement last week of a new initiative linking Senator Hillary Clinton to one of her party’s most appealing new stars amounted to a match made in political heaven.
Not since President George W Bush crushed the Democratic party’s hopes in last November’s election have two senators with perhaps the strongest chances of beating Republican rivals to the White House formed such an intriguing alliance.
Clinton has been linked with Senator Barack Obama, the charismatic black Democrat from Illinois, in a healthcare initiative that unites two formidable and ambitious politicians who have their eyes on making US presidential history.
The details of the senators’ health proposals were in danger of being swamped last week by renewed speculation about how long America might have to wait for either its first woman or first black president.
“This is a powerful partnership,” noted Norman Ornstein, a political specialist at the American Enterprise Institute, one of Washington’s most influential think tanks.
Obama’s emergence as a popular national figure has helped fuel optimism in Democratic ranks that the Republicans will not recover from a recent series of crushing setbacks — including widespread criticisms of the government’s hurricane-relief actions, the criminal indictment of one of the party’s leaders on Capitol Hill and Bush’s continuing problems over Iraq.
Ever since he burst onto the political scene with a spellbinding speech to the Democratic convention last year, Obama, the 44-year-old son of a black Kenyan father and white American mother, has been tipped for the highest office. His autobiography, Dreams from My Father, was on bestseller lists for more than a year.
He comfortably won his 2004 Illinois Senate race but, taking a leaf from Clinton’s book, adopted a low profile as a novice senator during his early months in Washington. He spent most of his time cultivating Illinois contacts and working quietly in a junior role on several Senate committees.
All that changed when Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. Appalled by what he described as America’s “historical indifference” to the plight of poor black people, Obama accused government planners of being “detached from the realities of inner-city life in New Orleans”, saying the Bush administration “simply doesn’t recognise what’s happening in large parts of the country”.
On one visit to affected areas he appeared at a press conference given by former presidents George Bush Sr and Bill Clinton, and was spotted chatting to Hillary.
Although the two had often crossed paths in Senate corridors, Obama had previously made clear to reporters that he was not seeking the kind of leadership role Clinton now fills in her party.
“What Senator Clinton did when she first came in was what any person would do when they come into a new environment, that is listen and learn before you speak and you act,” Obama recently told Time magazine. “I have tried to follow that same wisdom.”
Yet Katrina inspired a change of heart and within days Obama was giving his first nationally televised interviews. A tall, glamorous figure with a mesmerising speaking style, he has since popped up in public frequently and joined Clinton in voting against John Roberts as Bush’s choice for the new chief justice of the US Supreme Court.
For Clinton, Obama’s emergence represents both an opportunity and a potential longer-term threat. For much of the past five years she has been building bridges to the communities she needs for a successful White House run in 2008.
She has devoted herself to security issues and forged a strong relationship with the military. She has softened her stance on abortion, emphasising the human agonies involved, and worked hard to shed her reputation as a bruising ideologue by co-operating with Republican senators on a range of issues. She has backed Bush on keeping US troops in Iraq.
Yet Obama’s support — and his presumed influence with blacks and other poor immigrant communities — could be critical to Clinton’s success. Not the least of Senator John Kerry’s problems against Bush last year was his failure to mobilise black voters who traditionally support the Democrats.
So it was not just doctors’ eyebrows that were raised when Clinton and Obama announced last week they were working together to find a solution to America’s medical malpractice crisis.
So many lawsuits are filed against doctors that the cost of malpractice insurance is driving many of them out of business.
Ornstein noted that the announcement was likely to fan speculation about Obama’s vice-presidential prospects. “He’s got national candidacy written all over him,” he said.
Few Democrats believe America is ready for a presidential ticket comprising a woman with a black running mate — at least not in 2008. “That’s too much history all at once,” one party strategist said.
Yet there are signs that Obama is positioning himself to inherit Clinton’s mantle as the next great Democratic presidential hope should the New York senator slip in her Senate re-election campaign next year — or otherwise fall from the reckoning.
When Katrina struck, Obama was out of the country on his first foreign trip as a senator to inspect disarmament projects in Russia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan. On his way home he passed through London and paid a brief visit to No 10 and a meeting with Tony Blair.
“They let me sit in Winston Churchill’s reading chair,” he proudly told reporters later. One day visitors may be told it was also the chair used by President Obama.
All the more reason for the media to protect him, and for Hillary to fall in love!
I think Hillary will run again for reelection, she needs that position to maintain visibility. And it looks like she will win.
Poll: Sen. Clinton would win re-election
http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/?feed=TopNews&article=UPI-1-20051001-16370200-bc-us-clintonpoll.xml
POUGHKEEPSIE, N.Y., Oct. 1 (UPI) -- If the election were held today, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., would win with 52 percent of the vote, found a Marist College poll.
Thirty-two percent said they would definitely vote against Clinton having a second term, reported the New York Daily News Saturday.
About 50 percent assume Clinton will run for president in 2008, although 53 percent say they would rather she didn't.
Forty percent of New Yorkers say they want the junior senator to run for president, 8 percent would like to wait and see who runs against her, and 8 percent are unsure.
The survey of 707 registered voters was conducted by telephone Sept. 26 and 27 in proportion to the voter registration in each county in New York state, and adjusted for turnout in statewide elections.
Obama has been swooned over by the media ever since he made his appearance, and there hasn't been a single negative note. Whether he can preserve that dubious purity after the spotlight of national attention is turned on him is another question, but the media have gotten extremely good at brushing any unwanted facts under the rug.
Does anyone know whether Obama is an American citizen by birth? The Constitution requires a presidential candidate to be American born, and therefore also the VP, since the VP stands to inherit the presidency if something happens to the president. He appears to have been born in Hawaii, which I suppose makes him a native American.
Should I puke now or later?
That was the point FWF was making: she would get two states and no other.
Obama is an electrifying speaker. Too bad he has his head screwed on backwards.
You've got that right! Lucky for us, I don't think they'd have a snowball's chance in hell.
Hillary should be used to Blacks, after all she was married to the first black president, and Obama is after all half white..I can hardly wait for Teddy to campaign for Obama....
If its Clinton/Obama, no chance to win.
The Dems need a ticket that will appeal to moderates and
Clinton/Obama have no hope of doing that. Their only ace up the sleeve would be to polarize the country. Haven't the rats learned after two unsuccessful presidential election cycles, that just does NOT work ?
I hope it is Clinton /Obama. The pubs will put 'em down again. Of course the rat logic is that elections are entertainment and the ticket of max entertainment would be Clinton/Obama. A titillating ticket with nae hope of winning, but think of the wonderful press ops! And the imagry, a frigid Hillary warming to the coal of Obama's fires. Whew , heady stuff!
If this ticket illustrates the best election strategy the rats can think of, they are far, far , behind the learning curve! Its a goood sign for the pubs.
What a great bumper sticker that would make...
Clinton/Osama Obama '08
A Jeb Bush ticket would be suicide for the Republicans. G.H.W. Bush was a good man, but was politically a moderate wimp who alienated conservatives. G.W. Bush is also a good man, but is no conservative (he ran as a "uniter, not a divider" and has consistently backed off from conservative positions and kissed up to liberals). Have you ever heard the old saying "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me"? A third Bush would be "Fool me three times, you must think I'm a complete idiot and I probably am!"
Cheney's heart condition rules him out, and Rice would need some SERIOUS conservative credentials to get past the nominating process.
The best hope for the Republicans is to look at conservative governors (few and far between) as well as senators and representatives. Find someone who energizes the base (Tancredo or Allen, as examples), but also has the killer instinct needed to defeat the Hildebeast. You know that with two Communists on their ticket (Clinton and Obama) the Democraps would pull out all the stops to destroy any GOP candidate. Such a candidate MUST AT ALL COSTS be a TRUE and UNABSHED conservative....and one with enough blood lust to send Hitlery and Osama Obama to a political grave. Another moderate just WILL NOT DO.
My fear is that the blue bloods in the Republican Party will have control and will nominate someone "respectable," and not the blue collar street fighter needed to destroy the Traitor Party once and for all. Bush, Cheney and Rice are all "respectable." "Respectable" gets you beaten when you take on the True Believers....and for all her many faults, Hitlery is a true believer in Marxism, as is Obama. You can't defeat them with "respectability." Be ready to look for someone who is a conservative true believer with the fire in the belly to b*tch slap the Dems back into submission....where they belong!
What southern state could Clinton/Obama win?
Someone needs to remember the heart and soul of the democratic party is filled with the likes of Senator Robert Byrd, Gov. George Wallace and Gov. Lester Maddox. I remember Kerry sailboarding off Nantucket and skiing in Vail, yet I don't remember seeing any blacks enjoying these endeavors with him.
Hillary and Obama will set a record with 60% or better polling in their favor, yet only 30% actually pulling a lever in their favor.
It really doesn't matter who the dems pick in 08 it will be close because the country is split.
The title implies that she's hooking up with Reno.
I can't think of a single things Obama adds to the Hillary ticket that benefits her. Therefore, as much as the media would like to see this, it won't happen.
Why would Hillary pick Obama as VP in 2008? She already has 85% of the black vote. I think she will pick Clark to give her a military man as a running mate. Someone to make her look like a strong leader. (Barf)
That's my point. These are two solid "blue" states. A Republican will never win them anyway. So. Since she was going to get Illinois anyway, what sense does it make to pick the guy with the terrorist sounding name.
Obama is their great hope for 2012 or 2016.
He will have only been a senator for 4 years come 2008.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.