Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hillary Clinton for vice president
Washington Post ^ | 01/03/2012 | Suzi Parker

Posted on 01/03/2012 2:50:27 PM PST by presidio9

“We need Hillary in the White House in 2016 or on the ticket in 2012,” an elderly man told Bill Clinton at a recent book signing here. The former president smiled, signed a copy of “Back to Work: Why We Need Smart Government for a Strong Economy,’’ and assured the man he’d let his wife know: “I’ll pass that along to Hillary.”

Arkansas Democrats have been whispering for months that President Barack Obama would be smart to put Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on the ticket as vice-president.

After all, it’s no secret Hillary is tired of logging miles as the 67th Secretary of State. She racked up 237,597 miles – as of Dec. 8, the latest date for totals – while visiting 45 countries and logging 506 hours of travel time in 2011. She has already said she doesn’t want a second term as Secretary of State.

When asked about her plans, the former president said, “She’s tired and she wants to come home” and “do the kind of work that I’m doing now.” But, he added, “It’s up to her to come and know what she intends to do.”

So, does that mean anything in particular about the former senator’s future plans? Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor in the Clinton Administration, predicted in “Business Insider” last week that Obama will pick Hillary as vice president in a switcheroo that makes Biden secretary of state – “a position he’s apparently coveted for years,” Reich said. He said his prediction was not, however, based on any insider information.

This was manna for those Hillary supporters who have never abandoned hope that the former first lady

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: biden; potus; wickedwitch

1 posted on 01/03/2012 2:50:29 PM PST by presidio9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I bet the Lockerbie bomber would endorse the ticket.


2 posted on 01/03/2012 2:52:29 PM PST by mewzilla (Santelli 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I don’t care what people here say. If she is VP in 2012, we will lose. This cannot happen. She is very popular in the general public. We hate her here but we are 10 percent of the population. No the way to rid ourselves of Obama is for it to be an Obama/Biden ticket.


3 posted on 01/03/2012 2:53:57 PM PST by napscoordinator (A miracle is happening before our eyes! The ONLY MORAL CONSERVATIVE!!! Rick Santorum 2012!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Putting Hillary on the ticket will make him look like a total failure. Like he couldn’t win on his own. Although it would be fun to bring out the ‘08 primary clips of the two of them.


4 posted on 01/03/2012 2:54:24 PM PST by jersey117 (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

this is a great clip. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vmuc4Z5Oqk&feature=player_embedded


5 posted on 01/03/2012 2:55:33 PM PST by ncfool (The new USSA - United Socialist States of AmeriKa. Welcome to Obummers world or Obamaville USSA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
This would probably be a brilliant move by obama. It would totally change the conversation, revitalize the base, and draw in any left over clintonites with attitude because of 2008. Nobody cares about Biden one way or the other, so it has essentially no down side and much potential upside.

Only question is if Hillary is up for it. Who knows, they all say they're not interested in VP, right up until they say 'yes.'

6 posted on 01/03/2012 2:57:21 PM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
If she is VP in 2012, we will lose.

I agree. I hope it does not happen. I think lots of dems are talking this up now.

7 posted on 01/03/2012 2:57:41 PM PST by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

That settles it then. Romney will pick Hillary as his VP.

The perfect ticket.

All 50 States in a landslide;)


8 posted on 01/03/2012 2:58:21 PM PST by sodpoodle ( Newt - God has tested him for a reason..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

“We need Hillary in the White House in 2016 or on the ticket in 2012,” an elderly man told Bill Clinton at a recent book signing here.”

Obviously the elderly man is suffering from senility.


9 posted on 01/03/2012 2:59:37 PM PST by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Never happen...but I can’t figure why she isn’t challenging him in the Primary. She’d whip him by a huge margin, and it could only help the RAT party.


10 posted on 01/03/2012 3:00:01 PM PST by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jersey117
Putting Hillary on the ticket will make him look like a total failure. Like he couldn’t win on his own.

Correct. If The One has been doing such an excellent job, saving us from a Bush Depression and planning the bin Laden raid, why should any such change be necessary?

11 posted on 01/03/2012 3:00:26 PM PST by presidio9 (www.catholicscomehome.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sodpoodle

That would be funny if it wasn’t so true...


12 posted on 01/03/2012 3:00:54 PM PST by goseminoles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Ya ever get the thought that maybe just maybe Hillary moonlights somewhere as a dominatrix


13 posted on 01/03/2012 3:01:18 PM PST by Joe Boucher ((FUBO) You'd be mad as hell to if you were married to that wookie bitch little fag that he is)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
She wouldn't do it. It would be a step down for her, but she would still have to travel to state funerals and such.

If she wants to run in 2016 she's better off not being so close to the failed Obama administration.

14 posted on 01/03/2012 3:02:30 PM PST by Dick Holmes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard

Yup. Obama’s gonna’ have hillary standing behind him.

Think Vince Foster.


15 posted on 01/03/2012 3:03:50 PM PST by maine yankee (I got my Governor at 'Marden's')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla

I don’t think the worst Secstate in the last 30 years is qualified to be Veep anymore than Stand up Chuck Biden!


16 posted on 01/03/2012 3:04:00 PM PST by omega4179 (We can't wait!............. for the end of an error.....1-20-13)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
They might win with her on the ticket but he will never pick her as his VP.

His ego couldn't take the notion of needing Hillary as his savior, and it would only emphasize the notion that the Democrats picked the wrong nominee.

17 posted on 01/03/2012 3:04:12 PM PST by CaptainK (...please make it stop. Shake a can of pennies at it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

A history making first!!

HOMOSEXUAL RUNNING MATES!!


18 posted on 01/03/2012 3:04:59 PM PST by Mortrey (Impeach President Soros)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9; a fool in paradise

Hilda on the ticket = State funeral March 2013.


19 posted on 01/03/2012 3:06:21 PM PST by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mortrey

A history making first!!

HOMOSEXUAL RUNNING MATES!!
______________________________

LMAO and WMSO at the same time!
(wiping my screen off)


20 posted on 01/03/2012 3:09:40 PM PST by leapfrog0202 ("the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of personal discovery" Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jersey117

ya, put another know nothing person on the ticket , but if they won ,you would have Bill hanging around LOL !!


21 posted on 01/03/2012 3:10:05 PM PST by molson209
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

He’s too much of a narcissist to put her on the ticket. It would be more like Hillary winning her first term than obama winning his second. The late night jokes would be brutal. LOL.


22 posted on 01/03/2012 3:12:40 PM PST by jersey117 (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
I don’t care what people here say. If she is VP in 2012, we will lose.

That depends. If our side screams LEWINSKI-"IS" in the same way we screamed HUSSIEN-WRIGHT-AYERS in 2008, we will lose.

One way or another, the Dems will try to invoke memories of "Clinton's economy" and "the peace and prosperity" of the Clinton years. They just might beat us with that if we don't have answers ready.

23 posted on 01/03/2012 3:25:24 PM PST by TwelveOfTwenty (Compassionate Conservatism? Promoting self reliance is compassionate. Promoting dependency is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

All the Democrats need is a graceful way for Biden to exit and Hillary will be the Democratic VP Nominee.

Biden may get sick, want to spend more time with the family or take the Sec. of State job.


24 posted on 01/03/2012 3:32:00 PM PST by trumandogz (If Rick Perry cannot secure his name on the Va. ballot, how could he be trusted to secure America?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

This would effectively turn Obama into a lame duck placeholder for 2016.

His ego and arrogance couldn’t stand it.


25 posted on 01/03/2012 3:35:12 PM PST by headstamp 2 (Time to move forward not to the center.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TwelveOfTwenty

If the GOP nominates Newt the Dems will have no choice but to place Hillary in the VP slot.


26 posted on 01/03/2012 3:37:14 PM PST by trumandogz (If Rick Perry cannot secure his name on the Va. ballot, how could he be trusted to secure America?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
“She’s tired and she wants to come home” and “do the kind of work that I’m doing now.”

Some jokes just write themselves.......

27 posted on 01/03/2012 3:37:22 PM PST by edpc (Wilby 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

We need to be ready to defend ourselves against “Clinton’s economy” regardless of how things turn out.


28 posted on 01/03/2012 3:40:06 PM PST by TwelveOfTwenty (Compassionate Conservatism? Promoting self reliance is compassionate. Promoting dependency is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

It will depend on the polling data. If the Dem’s internal polling shows it’s a close race, he’ll stick with Biden and rely on his smear machine to sink the Republican. If the internal polling shows him trailing badly, he may make the change out of desperation.


29 posted on 01/03/2012 3:46:26 PM PST by GreenHornet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Yes, From the person who brought us “Arab Spring” and Democracy to Egypt. NOT!


30 posted on 01/03/2012 3:48:10 PM PST by wetgundog (" Extremism in the Defense of Liberty is no Vice")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Parley Baer

“Obviously the elderly man is suffering from senility.”

I would agree with that. Hillary? ... Please!
Mr. Bill would sure love to be back in power again.


31 posted on 01/03/2012 3:49:56 PM PST by Jennikins (We are being ruled, not governed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
She is very popular in the general public.

It must be from her "wartime" record of dodging sniper fire.... Hillary "sniper" Gaffe

That wench is a liar, just like her husband.

32 posted on 01/03/2012 4:25:19 PM PST by Sarajevo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator; StarFan; NautiNurse
I don’t care what people here say. If she is VP in 2012, we will lose. This cannot happen. She is very popular in the general public. We hate her here but we are 10 percent of the population

I agree. Several women I've spoken to over the past three years - even many supposed Republicans - still long for a President Hillary. {{shudder}}

I've seen Hillary over the past couple of years swearing "I'm never running for office again!" I don't believe her. I think if Obama offered her the VP slot, she'd jump at it. :-(

33 posted on 01/03/2012 4:26:47 PM PST by nutmeg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

34 posted on 01/03/2012 4:58:40 PM PST by Thunder90 (Fighting for truth and the American way... http://citizensfortruthandtheamericanway.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla
I bet the Lockerbie bomber would endorse the ticket.

Mantoinette barely flys with Barky as it is. Out of 44 US Presidents there have been 20 assassination attempts, 4 kills and few near kills such as Reagan. A Detroit drug dealer has better odds. Hitlary a heartbeat away? Barky wants to live.

35 posted on 01/03/2012 6:19:08 PM PST by Reeses (TV gives men a window into what women want, and it isn't pretty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!

Hillary’s gunning to be the next dictator of North Korea. That gig lasts longer.


36 posted on 01/04/2012 10:11:30 AM PST by a fool in paradise (Since Obama's only challengers in 2012 are in the GOP debates, include him the next 15.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TwelveOfTwenty
If our side screams LEWINSKI-"IS" in the same way we screamed HUSSIEN-WRIGHT-AYERS in 2008, we will lose.

A lot of people here think a major reason why our side lost is specifically that John McCain refused to go negative and never brought up Wright or Ayers on the campaign. I looking forward to Gingrich or Santorum doing just that.

37 posted on 01/04/2012 4:38:40 PM PST by presidio9 (www.catholicscomehome.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

A Kenyan jew hater paired with a socialist black/jew hater?


38 posted on 01/04/2012 4:47:52 PM PST by jetson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
A lot of people here think a major reason why our side lost is specifically that John McCain refused to go negative and never brought up Wright or Ayers on the campaign.

Yeah, I remember the HUSSIEN-WRIGHT-AYERS crowd when I first came here. On one hand, I was accused of being a DU/Daily KOS/Obama supporting troll for saying that the voters were concerned about the economy, not HUSSIEN-WRIGHT-AYERS. Yet on the same threads, they would say that Obama's supporters didn't know about Wright and Ayers because the MSM wasn't reporting it. And they couldn't see the contradiction in this. Funny thing is, many of THEM have since been banned.

I looking forward to Gingrich or Santorum doing just that.

Not me. Everyone who cares about those issues is already voting against Obama. They need to stick with the issues that the Independents and undecideds care about, which is how Obama has performed as President.

39 posted on 01/04/2012 4:52:13 PM PST by TwelveOfTwenty (Compassionate Conservatism? Promoting self reliance is compassionate. Promoting dependency is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: TwelveOfTwenty
Not me. Everyone who cares about those issues is already voting against Obama. They need to stick with the issues that the Independents and undecideds care about, which is how Obama has performed as President.

Wrong. A majority of the people who will be voting have never heard of either Bill Ayers or Jeremiah Wright, because Obama got exactly one question from the MSM during the entire campaign. It came from George Stephanopolus, who himself had never heard of Rev. Wright until the day before, when Sean Hannity asked him why he and his colleagues were letting Senator Obama slide on that one.

The majority of voters only pay close attention to politics for six weeks or so every four years. They do no listen to political talk radio, and they do not watch cable news. This is particularly true of independents. Of course voters are concerned with the economy, but character also matters. The MSM built up a false character profile of Obama, and they will do so again if our candidate lets them. He can't run on his record, so he will make character a major issue, regardless of who is opponent is.

You don't sound like a troll to me, you sound naive.

40 posted on 01/04/2012 5:01:05 PM PST by presidio9 (www.catholicscomehome.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Wrong. A majority of the people who will be voting have never heard of either Bill Ayers or Jeremiah Wright, because Obama got exactly one question from the MSM during the entire campaign.

Here are what the polls said about Wright.

FOX News Poll: More Than Half Believe Obama Doesn't Share Views of Pastor Wright
FOX News Poll: Wright Ties Hurt Obama Campaign
Poll: Flap over pastor hurts Obama
Poll: Wright and Obama
Poll shows Rev. Jeremiah Wright hurting Barack Obama
Obama resigns from controversial church (not a poll, but shows the MSM reported it)

On Ayers, it's possible most didn't know, but it's naive to think that the DU and Daily KOS "trolls" who lurk here didn't know. They just didn't care.

41 posted on 01/04/2012 5:21:58 PM PST by TwelveOfTwenty (Compassionate Conservatism? Promoting self reliance is compassionate. Promoting dependency is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: TwelveOfTwenty
I disagree with you (and the media's) interpretation of these polls. For example:

Fifty-seven percent of Americans do not believe Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama shares the controversial views of his former spiritual mentor the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, while about one in four (24 percent) believes he does share Wright’s views. And a sizable minority has doubts about Obama because of his pastor’s comments, according to a new FOX News poll.

Republicans (36 percent) are more likely than independents (20 percent) and Democrats (17 percent) to think Obama shares Wright’s controversial and unpatriotic views. Whites (25 percent) are more likely than blacks (15 percent) to think so.

This does not work out mathematically. FOX is leaving something out here. You can't have 57% of the entire sample disagreeing with something, and then having subsets of 64%, 80% and 83%. Believe it or not, there are journalists with liberal agendas even at FOX News. This one left something out to fit his or her own narrative.

Over a third of voters (35 percent) and a quarter of Democrats (26 percent) and independents (27 percent) say Obama’s relationship with Rev. Wright has caused them to have doubts about him. Here the racial breakdown is stark: 40 percent of whites and 2 percent of blacks have doubts.

This is the more relevant point. Not that ALL voters will change their opinion of Obama, but that a significant portion will when they hear the whole story. Most of them never did. As a matter of fact, the extent of most of the respondents' knowledge here was very likely what they heard from the pollster.

I don't have time go through each of the stories you supplied. I picked the first one, and it smelled pretty bad. The second and third and fourth ones specifically say that the info Obama. He resigned from the church for damage control, and to get the story out of the media.

And, again, the vast majority of voters don't spend any time on websites like FR or DU. It would be a huge mistake to let Obama skate on these issues again. Gingrich and Santorum have already assured us that he won't if they are the nominee.

42 posted on 01/04/2012 5:35:34 PM PST by presidio9 (www.catholicscomehome.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
This does not work out mathematically. FOX is leaving something out here. You can't have 57% of the entire sample disagreeing with something, and then having subsets of 64%, 80% and 83%.

Sure it does, if you take into account what the responders are saying. 57% of Americans did not believe Obama shared the controversial views of Wright, while 24% believed he does share Wright’s views. That means that at least 81% KNEW about Wright. It then went on to explain the breakdown of those who did, but the bottom line, according to this poll, is the the majority knew.

This is the more relevant point. Not that ALL voters will change their opinion of Obama, but that a significant portion will when they hear the whole story. Most of them never did.

According to the previous poll you commented on, 81% did know. Most didn't care, or maybe just accepted that Obama didn't share Wright's views.

As a matter of fact, the extent of most of the respondents' knowledge here was very likely what they heard from the pollster.

What do you base that on?

And, again, the vast majority of voters don't spend any time on websites like FR or DU. It would be a huge mistake to let Obama skate on these issues again.

Obama may have been able to skate on Ayers, but Wright nearly derailed his campaign. Remember that "wonderful" speech he gave on race relations in response? Do you honestly believe the majority didn't know about it?

Gingrich and Santorum have already assured us that he won't if they are the nominee.

Santorum may be squeaky clean, but Newt has too much baggage to try digging up other people's skeletons, especially with an MSM that is sympathetic to Obama. Besides, I doubt either thinks that the majority isn't aware of Wright.

43 posted on 01/04/2012 5:59:33 PM PST by TwelveOfTwenty (Compassionate Conservatism? Promoting self reliance is compassionate. Promoting dependency is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: TwelveOfTwenty
According to the previous poll you commented on, 81% did know. Most didn't care, or maybe just accepted that Obama didn't share Wright's views

Wrong. Three of the four polls the YOU provided specifically said that the Wright story hurt voters' opinions of Obama.

What do you base that on?

Um, the fact that the MSM pretty much ignored the story.

Remember that "wonderful" speech he gave on race relations in response? Do you honestly believe the majority didn't know about it?

Again, people knew that he gave a speech on race relations. Most people did not know or care why. About 10% of the electorate pays attention to politics. Most find it boring. More people get their political news from John Stewart or SNL than Bill O'Reilley.

As an example, people from Alaska do not actually say "you betcha," but its one of the first things that comes to most voters minds when they think of Sarah Palin. That and "I can see Russia from my house."

Santorum may be squeaky clean, but Newt has too much baggage to try digging up other people's skeletons, especially with an MSM that is sympathetic to Obama.

That is EXACTLY the point my friend. Obama HAS to come after Newt's character, and Newt HAS to fire back. And if the candidate himself names names, and makes specific points, the media can't ignore him. McCain refused to do so.

44 posted on 01/04/2012 6:13:40 PM PST by presidio9 (www.catholicscomehome.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Wrong. Three of the four polls the YOU provided specifically said that the Wright story hurt voters' opinions of Obama.

Granted, only the first poll indicated that most Americans didn't believe Obama shared Wright's views, but I was answering in the context of "According to the previous poll you commented on". What they all show is that most Americans knew of Wright.

Um, the fact that the MSM pretty much ignored the story.

You and I have a different recollection of that situation.

Again, people knew that he gave a speech on race relations. Most people did not know or care why.

According to the polls I posted, most Americans knew about Wright.

That is EXACTLY the point my friend. Obama HAS to come after Newt's character, and Newt HAS to fire back.

There's only one problem with that. If we start screaming HUSSEIN-WRIGHT-AYERS-MUSLIM-TRAITOR as we did in 2008, Obama can easily respond by pointing out that he gave the order to kill Bin Laden and other terrorists. Yes, I know that he did it using intelligence gathered from policies that Bush implemented, and which he campaigned against. But he continued those policies, taking much criticism from his own side in the process, until OBL was dead. Do you honestly believe that screaming HUSSEIN-WRIGHT-AYERS-MUSLIM-TRAITOR will counter that, because I don't?

Americans are concerned about the economy. Many of us knew that in 2008, and we should all know it now. All we have to decide is, do we want a replay of 1980, or 2008?

45 posted on 01/05/2012 3:59:55 PM PST by TwelveOfTwenty (Compassionate Conservatism? Promoting self reliance is compassionate. Promoting dependency is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: TwelveOfTwenty

I don’t know anybody but the kooks who are saying that our candidate needs to make an issue of Obama’s (irrelevant) Muslim background. So unless you point is that our guy should ignore Bill Ayres and Jeremiah Wirght (that seemed to be what you were saying originally), I’m not sure that we are in disagreement here.

What I think you are missing is the fact that of course 1/3 of voters aren’t going to care if Obama gets photographed in a hot tub with Ahmedinijad. So if half of all voters say they care about Jeremiah Wright (and were’re going to have to agree to disagree about how well the average voter knows that story), that means that at least half of all independants DO care to some extent. More importantly, MOST don’t know much or anything about Bill Ayres. And, no, the point of that information is not that Obama supports terrorism. The point is “How well do you really know this guy?” Even after four years, do you really want to put him in a position where he can do whatever he wants because he doesn’t have to worry about re-election. All of this would have been more effective the first time around, but it still has value.


46 posted on 01/05/2012 5:12:34 PM PST by presidio9 (www.catholicscomehome.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: bigbob
Never happen...but I can’t figure why she isn’t challenging him in the Primary. She’d whip him by a huge margin, and it could only help the RAT party.

Presidents usually defeat challengers because they have patronage and all the powers of incumbency. With the challenger party chiefs have to wait and hope to get their goodies. Sitting presidents can make the promises and carry them out now.

When a sitting president is challenged it's usually a bad sign for his party. Even if he beats back the challenge it's an indication the party is weak -- Bush 1992, Carter 1980, Ford 1976. If a challenger from the president's own party beats him, they'll be bad blood in the party and the coup could be taken as a sign that party's days in power are numbered.

The Hillary for VP thing sounds far-fetched, like the sort of thing people who don't know politics dream up, but that never actually happens. But pollsters have said that Hillary on the ticket could make the difference for Obama. It's just possible Oama might be tempted.

47 posted on 01/05/2012 5:32:27 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: maine yankee
Yup. Obama’s gonna’ have hillary standing behind him.

:)
48 posted on 01/05/2012 5:36:36 PM PST by novemberslady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
I don’t know anybody but the kooks who are saying that our candidate needs to make an issue of Obama’s (irrelevant) Muslim background. So unless you point is that our guy should ignore Bill Ayres and Jeremiah Wirght (that seemed to be what you were saying originally), I’m not sure that we are in disagreement here.

I think our candidate SHOULD ignore Ayers and Wright, because any attempts to question Obama's patriotism with that will be answered with the killing of OBL and other terrorists. The MSM will repeat soundbites of the AYERS/Wright mention and the OBL answer, and our candidate will be made to look bad.

What I think you are missing is the fact that of course 1/3 of voters aren’t going to care if Obama gets photographed in a hot tub with Ahmedinijad. So if half of all voters say they care about Jeremiah Wright (and were’re going to have to agree to disagree about how well the average voter knows that story), that means that at least half of all independants DO care to some extent.

Obama won in 2008 with convincing margins anyway.

More importantly, MOST don’t know much or anything about Bill Ayres.

Even if that is true, those on the left that did know didn't care. Take DU for an example. Do you honestly believe they weren't lurking at FR and seeing our posts about Ayers. Google "Ayers Democratic Underground" to find out how wrong that is. Here is an example. They knew. They didn't care.

And, no, the point of that information is not that Obama supports terrorism. The point is “How well do you really know this guy?” Even after four years, do you really want to put him in a position where he can do whatever he wants because he doesn’t have to worry about re-election.

They put him in position of President with a veto proof Dem majority in Congress, even knowing his ties to Wright.

All of this would have been more effective the first time around, but it still has value.

The only value it will have is to Obama if our candidate decides to join us in screaming HUSSEIN-WRIGHT-AYERS, especially if the economy actually improves. If FR wants to repeat this tactic hoping for a different result, do it. But our candidate needs to stick with the issues that most Americans care about.Ayers Democratic Underground

49 posted on 01/06/2012 3:06:01 PM PST by TwelveOfTwenty (Compassionate Conservatism? Promoting self reliance is compassionate. Promoting dependency is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

That “Ayers Democratic Underground” at the end was a copy paste goof. Sorry.


50 posted on 01/06/2012 3:09:59 PM PST by TwelveOfTwenty (Compassionate Conservatism? Promoting self reliance is compassionate. Promoting dependency is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson