There have been several diaries about the "Dream Team" and (mostly) expressing why it may not be a reality even though most Democrats would wish they were lucky to have a chance to vote the team. This wish may yet come true if some of the signs below the surface play out over the next month or so. While there is never a 20/20 foresight and we will have an opportunity to analyze and dissect this Dream Team meme again in hindsight at some point in the future, for now, let's just play the game FWIW.
Follow me below the fold:
Bill Clinton has been out in the field campaigning and advocating on behalf of his wife in a more subdued fashion. In a couple of interviews over the last few days, he stressed he did not mean to disparage Obama personally but was only trying to defend and support Hillary like any spouse would. If anything, his only fault was vigorously advocating her cause. Saner minds know better than that, but what caused Bill Clinton to suddenl reverse gear? Was it really SC? Was it Ted Kennedy's rebuke? I don't think so. He pretty much dismissed SC with his Jesse Jackson remark and Hillary kicked butt in Teddy's own front yard. If anything, knowing Bill, this would have been cause for more "vigorously advancing" Hillary's cause.
Unless, of course, the 5 million dollar loan gave pause to his vigorous pursuit and the need to make nice. There was always going to be a limit to how much they could fund themselves, and with major donors maxed out, not playing nice would have been a financial disaster for the campaign. The victories allowed for an immediate fundraising lifeline, but was the damage already too high with a $100 - $150 million wipeout and no steady flow of dollars visible? After all, the Hail Mary passes of the Hallmark telethon and the website plugging immediately followed the debates. And how strange is it that Hillary never brought up Rezko again in any of the debates after hinting to Edwards that she had lot more on Rezko and Obama in the green room after the debate where she first brought up Rezko? Why the reconciliatory tone from her on this? Why the reconciliatiry interview from Bill on his role, stating on camers that his role would be limited in any new administration and would be only advisory, plus tertiary to the powerful roles he envisaged for the Prez, VP, and Secretary of State?
Today, again, Bill was out stating the following (WaPo link):
"I thought the best thing that has happened in recent weeks was the debate that Hillary and Senator Obama had in Los Angeles. They were able to respectively explore their differences and questions about each other's record," Clinton said in an interview after campaigning for his wife at a church in Southeast Washington. "They had disagreements, but they were respectful and honorable of each other, and they even left open the door that they might run together."
Hmmmm...really? Did they? I thought that they were both non-committal.
The sudden flurry of activity between Edwards and the contenders hints at a possible secret deal between the top 2 contenders on a joint ticket, thus avoiding a brokered convention, with Edwards negotiating his own role in a potential future administration in an effort to get behind the joint ticket. This is pure tea leaf reading of course, but is this why Edwards met secretly first with Hillary and will meet later with Obama to complete the formalities for a signed, sealed and delivered agreement on his role? Is this why Hillary spoke about an Edwards role in a future administration in her Maine stump speeches?
Is the outcome of the March primaries simply a last check on who headlines the ticket as Prez candidate and who supports as VP candidate based on the outcome of the results, with the ongoing drama around the superdelegates simply a sideshow?