Skip to main content

Bill Keller, op-ed columnist for the NY Times wrote a piece that just needs to get discussed:

But the idea that [Hillary] should replace Joe Biden as Obama’s running mate in 2012 is something else. It has been kicking around on the blogs for more than a year without getting any traction, mainly because it has been authoritatively, emphatically dismissed by Hillary, Biden and Team Obama.

It’s time to take it seriously.

I haven't made it a secret that I'm not real happy about voting for President Obama. I'm one of those independent progressives that will probably never be happy with what we call a Democrat now-a-days.

But I have to admit, I felt a little gleam of something when I read this.

Is there actually a chance that President Obama would chose a new running mate and, if so, would he run with Hillary Clinton?

According to Keller, there are three pluses:

One: it does more to guarantee Obama’s re-election than anything else the Democrats can do.

Two: it improves the chances that, come next January, he will not be a lame duck with a gridlocked Congress but a rejuvenated president with a mandate and a Congress that may be a little less forbidding.

Three: it makes Hillary the party’s heir apparent in 2016. If she sits out politics for the next four years, other Democrats (yes, Governor Cuomo, we see your hand up) will fill the void.

Then he alludes to a couple more:

Plus # 4 - Down Ticket Races

An Obama/Clinton ticket could do a lot to help some down ticket races, especially in places where Joe Biden doesn't have as much pull, like down south and possibly the desert southwest. Nothing like a Clinton on the campaign trail, right?

Plus # 5 - The Gender Gap

Keller also mentions the famous Gender Gap and what happened to those female votes in 2010, "One reason Republicans did so well in the 2010 Congressional elections is that they overcame the gender gap and carried women voters 51 to 49."

Put a woman on the ticket, and there is a good chance that women will take a closer look. They may even be inspired to vote. And, if Republicans chose to put a woman on the ticket, it gives the Democrats a chance to keep some of those votes.

But this is the one that I think would take the cake:

Plus #6 - Historic election

Electing the first African American president was part of the draw for many volunteers and many voters in 2008. Creating history all over again would just plain feel good. It would not only motivate voters, it would motivate volunteers which, in turn, means more voters.

I have to admit, I might be encouraged to volunteer if I could help get a woman in office.

Is Clinton the answer to a more progressive 4 years?  Not likely.  I won't be that naive ever again. But she could be the answer to a lackluster election where folks aren't very excited about getting out to vote. As one of those who feels pretty lackluster, I think this should actually be a serious consideration for those who make the big decisions.

How about you? What do you think?

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  my 2 cents...NO HRC (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tonedevil, LaurenMonica, murphy, Onomastic

    "I have confidence that the American people are more interested in doing what is right to protect this country than in political posturing."

    by fhamme on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 11:15:50 AM PST

  •  1) He won't do it; 2) he shouldn't (15+ / 0-)

    Complain all you want about President Obama, but his VP choice isn't part of the problem.  He may not rev up the base, but he's been a solid advisor to the President, especially on foreign policy issues.  And notwithstanding his occasional public turns of phrase, he's also well-spoken on policy issues (I say this having had lunch with him last year).  

    To change horses in mid-stream in a Presidential Election will create a meme that the President is "flailing" and "desperate", which will offset any potential benefits of a "historic election".

    •  Lots of Presidents have chosen different running (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hester, thetadelta

      mates the second time around. It's not like it's an unusual thing to do.

      And this isn't about Biden doing a bad job... this is about inspiring more people to vote. Keller does point out that if Obama could win with a mandate again... and with more down ticket races... his last four years could make an even bigger difference.

      I wouldn't have even mentioned it if it didn't spark a chord with me. But it did. And I've been pretty down about the election overall. I don't think I'm that unusual outside of Democratic circles.

      •  You sound educated and informed: (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cassandracarolina, journeyman
        Lots of Presidents have chosen different running mates the second time around. It's not like it's an unusual thing to do.

        Most swing voters are not, and will buy into the inevitable RW hype about it being an "unprecedented admission of failure."

        "A cynical, mercenary, demagogic press will produce in time a people as base as itself." - Joseph Pulitzer

        by CFAmick on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 11:35:15 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I disagree with you. I think most swing voters (0+ / 0-)

          don't fit any stereotypes. We shouldn't assume they are stupid anymore than we should assume their smart.

          The RW is losing lots of independents... my anecdotal evidence among military folks is convincing me of that. But they need a reason to vote... a lot of them will just chose to stay home. Just like they did in 2010.

          •  That wasn't my intent (0+ / 0-)

            A "low information voter" is someone who doesn't have time to follow news closely, or is paying attention to poor news sources. That's not "stupid," but uneducated and uninformed.

            "A cynical, mercenary, demagogic press will produce in time a people as base as itself." - Joseph Pulitzer

            by CFAmick on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 07:57:26 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Hasn't been one in over sixty years... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Bob Love

        ...excluding Ford, for whom Rockefeller was seen as a placeholder in a time of political turmoil.

    •  It must be the decision of all 3 (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Its not about changing VP.  Its about a critical management change:  Biden to SoS; Hilliary to VP.  And of course it would have to be handled very deftly in order to prevent the repugs and/or the pundits from describing it as an act of desparation or in some other negative light.  Has to be the decision of all three of them.  Doing this would be out of the question if it could be interpreted as Obama wanting to move Biden out of VP.  It would have to be based on Biden's expressed desire to go to over to State.

      I think it would be a good move for Obama.  However, it is not going to happen.  He would see it as too risky.  He is on a steady path now, that he believes will lead to victory.  This type of move could blow up - in unpredictable ways.  He won't do it.

      "It's a flawed policy wrapped in an illusion." Rep. John Murtha

      by Political Junkie on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 03:17:27 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Just get over (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    journeyman, Larsstephens

    "Rick Perry talks a lot and he's not very bright. And that's a combination I like in Republicans." --- James Carville

    by LaurenMonica on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 11:20:03 AM PST

  •  Don't see it happening (8+ / 0-)

    Keller's just stirring up shit.  He's good at that.

    HRC has been a tremendous asset as Secretary of State, and I just don't see Obama kneecapping Joe Biden.

    We're resigned to our collective fate because we've been conditioned to believe that this is as good as it gets.

    by Richard Cranium on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 11:22:00 AM PST

  •  bill keller (9+ / 0-)


    all indications are that hillary wants to retire after the election. she's been in the game a long time. there's also the ol' "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" thing. people aren't going to vote against biden, but some would vote against hillary.

    The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

    by Laurence Lewis on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 11:22:51 AM PST

    •  With all due respect, have you read this site? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I read more about "it" being broken than I do otherwise.  If that's the argument, then Hillary should be on the ticket.  But, by all indications, all parties agree that she won't be on the ticket.

      Koch Industries, Inc: Quilted Northern, Angel Soft, Brawny, Sparkle, Soft 'n Gentle, Mardi Gras, Vanity Fair, Dixie

      by ChiTownDenny on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 12:48:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  i'm talking politics, not policy (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        journeyman, Onomastic

        many of us have problems with various policies, but from a political standpoint, reelection looks good. and for those who want the administration to move left, hillary clinton isn't exactly the answer.

        the theory behind having her move to veep is that it would help with the campaign. it wouldn't.

        The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

        by Laurence Lewis on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 01:11:54 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  He asked Biden to run again (8+ / 0-)

    with him, and Biden accepted. Fini.

    "We have cast our lot with something bigger than ourselves" - President Obama, July 30, 2010

    by Overseas on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 11:24:00 AM PST

  •  I agree that it would help him win re-election. nt (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    angelajean, merrylib, Lost and Found

    "Say little; do much." (Pirkei Avot: 1:15)

    by hester on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 11:30:34 AM PST

  •  Clinton will never be elected to the WH (3+ / 0-)

    Her negatives are stupidly high, and rightly so, and have only gone down because she's not in an elected office.  She's also tied to the Clintonian third way, screw the middle class, rah rah business nonsense of the 90s.  Not to mention the Clinton's are non stop scandal factories.

    Furthermore people are starting to get fed up with political dynastic families, and creating an American royal class out of them.

    Hillary will never be elected into the White House.

    "Foolproof systems don't take into account the ingenuity of fools."

    by overclocking on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 11:30:52 AM PST

  •  I don't see it happening, don't cheer for it, but (7+ / 0-)

    whateva :/

    Hey instead of spending energy on these fruitless discussions, why don't we just GOTV for Obama second term, Dem House & Senate, Speaker Pelosi once more, and take back the states....

    It's a thought. And it would go a long way to restoring that which has been trashed by the G No P...

  •  I think it is an interesting conversation (6+ / 0-)

    something needs to be done to energize the base "for" us rather than just "anti" women-hating, rights-killing "them".  But I'm not sure this would do it.

    I work in fairly conservative circles.  And the only person I've ever heard them speak as viciously about as they do Obama is Clinton.  In fact, before I knew anything about Obama's positions in 2008 election I was not in favor of a HRC candidacy.  Not because I had anything against her, but because I knew people that would crawl from their death beds to vote against a Clinton.  I never understood the visceral hatred of the Clintons.  But I worked in the Pentagon during the Clinton Administrations and I saw it.  Mostly among contractors, because the military and civilians know they have to live and work under both parties and never let it show too clearly, but even so it was palpable.

    I'm not sure that giving those people the opportunity to vote against both the kenyan-muslim-whatever-it -is-this-month and a Clinton wouldn't motivate them more than it would us.  And then there's the "Hillary isn't any more progressive than Bill or Obama" point of view.

    I think ways of building enthusiasm are desperately required, but I'm afraid this would be counter-productive.  There is also the point that someone made recently, that Bush the elder was an aberration, that VPs of 2 term presidents have been seen as a third term and historically not done well.  It might be a good idea to have an open primary in 4 years.  Elizabeth Warren, anyone?

    P.S.  good to see you AngelaJean.  I just watched a movie that supposedly had some Argentine spanish in it and they were using 'voz' instead of 'tu'.  We did that in Paraguay, but I thought Argentina was a 'tu' country.  Can you clarify?

    •  It's an interesting minus... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      The would hate the two of them together more than they hate the two of them apart.

      As to Argentina - it's a vos country in the area around Rio de la Plata. So if you heard vos in a film, it was true to the spirit of Argentina. Which film did you watch? We just finished watching The Motorcyle Diaries a second time (first for my boys). It was better the second time because I didn't have to rely on the subtitles.

  •  There's logic to it, but . . . (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    angelajean, Onomastic

    I don't see it happening.  Unless Obama is trailing by more than the margin of error 6 months from now.

    And don't discount Biden's unique appeal in a state like Pennsylvania, his native state.  Or the impression dumping an old white man from the ticket for non-white man ticket will have on, well, old white men.

    “If you think I can be bought for five thousand dollars, I'm offended." Rick Perry.

    by Paleo on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 11:45:23 AM PST

  •  There's one significant reason not to do it. (7+ / 0-)

    It opens up all kinds of lines of attack for the Republicans that have not been used in a general election.

    Obama will be attacked on his record. Biden has already been through a general election as a VP. But Hillary has not been through a national general election in an elective capacity.

    Putting her on the ticket opens up a giant can of worms regarding the Clinton's past, and, yes, that includes things like who is funding Bill's foundation and Hillary Clinton's own issues with campaign fundraising in her primary race against Obama, not to mention issues going all the way back to the Rose Law Firm.

    All you have to know about this is to watch what is happening to Romney with his Bain Capital past right now to  understand why it makes no sense to put Clinton on the ticket.

    It would complicate the reelection effort in a way that is completely unnecessary.

  •  The HillaryIs44 crowd might come back! Oh noes! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Actually I think it would be rather cool.

    Definitely help our chances in '16, unless a Populist Keynesian with actual charisma shows up.

    Happy little moron, Lucky little man.
    I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!
    —Spike Milligan

    by polecat on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 11:52:47 AM PST

  •  I always thought that during the Clinton years (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sylv, Onomastic

    that many times Hilary was the smartest person in the room.
    But- no I don't think that replacing Joe Biden would be a good idea. For one thing- isn't loyalty supposed to run both up and down the chain? Biden has been an excellent advisor to the President. You can see his influence in the changes in foreign policy. And he really does connect with people.
    As for Hilary- she may very possibly be the best Sec. of State that we have had in 50 years. Why would she then agree to something that would undercut this administrations progress, for what would appear to be very partisan reasons?
    How could we trust a President that displays no loyalty to his VP? Political expediency doesn't cut it.

    Intolerance betrays want of faith in one's cause. Mohandas Gandhi

    by onceasgt on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 12:05:07 PM PST

    •  It can be done while still being loyal. (0+ / 0-)

      It's not like you have to knee cap the guy.

      Keller suggests they trade places - Biden for Secretary of State and Clinton for VP. Then it places her in a better position for the 2016 election.

      It's certainly not a perfect solution but I think it warrants some conversation, nevertheless.

      •  There are a lot of folks for whom Hillary was (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Onomastic, angelajean, Larsstephens

        an unacceptable choice in the 08 primaries (voted for Iraq war among other things) and would be an unacceptable choice in 2016.

        If Hillary were to run and win in 2016 I can see just as much disatisfaction among progressives with her as there has been with Obama.

        I believe we can and must find a better candidate in 2016. I see Elizabeth Warren as having the potential to be a cadidate we can all rally around.

        Ds see human suffering and wonder what they can do to relieve it. Rs see human suffering and wonder how they can profit from it.

        by JTinDC on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 01:26:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  No- I don't think that will work (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Onomastic, angelajean

        Now granted I was always an Obama supporter, but the Mr. was all in for Hilary. As was my sister.
        What that would do is give conservatives another opening to portray Obama as weak.
        And as much as I would like to see a woman as President- Hilary would be 69 years old. Doesn't she- if she wishes- deserve some time to enjoy her family and hopefully some grandchildren?

        Intolerance betrays want of faith in one's cause. Mohandas Gandhi

        by onceasgt on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 02:22:28 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  You day she is the best SOS (0+ / 0-)

      in years. Can you tell me why you think that and with whom are you comparing her?  To me she is mediocre but agree with you that replacing Biden would be seen as disloyal.

  •  I'm in full support of this ticket. Anything (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    angelajean, merrylib

    To shake things up.

    •  I just private messaged someone the same thing! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      EclecticCrafter, merrylib

      Maybe it's very American of us... maybe we just want to see something new, something different. I just know I can't campaign for more of the same. I can vote for it but why not hope for something different?

      •  That is true (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Onomastic, Larsstephens

        about Americans, I guess.

        Something new? Yes.
        Something different? No.
        Hillary and Joe Biden would be very similar as V-P's,

        I do not get how you cannot campaign for Obama/Biden,but you would consider it for Obama/Clinton.

        You are basically unsatisfied with the President,I get that, but you would consider him acceptable to campaign for if he had Hillary on the ticket?

        I like Hillary. I would not squawk if she was on the ticket. But, the top of the ticket is why I will be campaigning for this ticket,not the bottom.

        It is just me,but if I have decided to vote for a candidate or a ticket, I am going to campaign for them. Otherwise,why even vote?
        It is a binary choice and no matter who is put up by the GOP, they will be worth campaigning against.

        •  I have limited time & resources (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Onomastic, angelajean, merrylib

          I will vote for Obama.  No question.

          But, will I send my campaign $$ to him or to my congressman? or to Warren?  or to Act Blue?

          I don't go door to door, I will make some phone calls.  Will I make those calls for OFA? or for Move On? or Elizabeth Warren?

          Those of us who have been dismissed as safe votes and "un-needed" (see firespitter's comments) may indeed be safe votes.  But we are not safe resources.  I won't spend energy on a campaign that doesn't excite me.

          I don't want a pony.  I want to know that the Constitution is the paramount law of the land; I want equality under the law to mean something -- if I committed 1/10 of the crimes banks have, I'd be in jail, could we prosecute at least 1/100th of the Wall Street criminals?  I want civil rights for everyone.  I know you can't get there over night, but I'd like to know it is a shared destination.  And at this point, it isn't.  The Hyde amendment has to go, but this administration is for it.  No planB? sounds Republican to me.

          Something has to change for me to get excited.  To make me want to give more than my vote to this ticket.  This diary raised one potential way to reach disaffected voters.  For reasons I've posted elsewhere, I don't think this one would work.  But I do think these ideas are needed.

          I'm thinking about sending OFA a note every time I give money elsewhere.  "I just sent $x to X's campaign; it could have been yours, but DOJ prosecutors illegally withhold exculpatory evidence from defendants."  "This $y could have been yours, but my transgendered friends can't pee in peace and you don't think that's a problem."

          Don't get me wrong.  I like Obama, personally.  I think he is a great father, it seems to me that his wife thinks he's a good husband.  He voted against the war in Iraq, he signed the Lily Ledbetter Act, he brought the troops home, etc.  I think he has done some good things in the face of difficult opposition.  I'm just not sure that we have the same goals.

          Why vote?  Because it is my civic duty and right that others have died to preserve, so I will not hold it cheaply.  Why not campaign?  Well, there's so much else I could do more productively with my time.  I could volunteer at a food kitchen, I could tutor low-income teens in math, I could do any number of things that would give me more positive feedback than campaigning for someone who thinks anyone's rights should be put on hold while he evolves.

          I don't know what to do about the enthusiasm gap.  That's why I welcome diaries like this that invite conversation on the subject.

          •  This is a diary all it's own, EclecticCrafter. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            EclecticCrafter, merrylib

            Let's hope some more people start posting some controversial ideas. Maybe one of them will stick and work. DailyKos is not as recognizable as it once was... I saw this diary as an oppportunity for a conversation. Too many see it as a threat.

            Wow. To be threatened by the mention of Hillary Clinton on the ticket. It tells me that a lot of people are afraid about the next election and they are hiding their fear in the deepest, darkest corners they can find. Let's hope that changes sometime soon. Because unless we can start talking about the maybe's, the might be's, the possibilities, we are in a lot of trouble.

  •  All that needs to be said is: (6+ / 0-)

    "it has been authoritatively, emphatically dismissed by Hillary, Biden and Team Obama."

    And we're done here. Move along.

  •  I like it. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    EclecticCrafter, angelajean, merrylib

    Biden is going to be 70 this year and he may not want to sign on for four more.  There comes a time when you need to step aside because you are no longer up to the demands of the job. Biden seems fine, but he's not a young man.

    And being SoS in this environment has got to be exhausting.  I bet HRC is ready for a change and ready to come home.

    I was never a HRC fan.  She rubbed me the wrong way.  But she has earned my admiration and respect with her stint as SoS.  She's a beast and I'd love to see her as VP.  

    Newt Gingrich: Believes marriage is between one man and a series of ever younger women. Wife #1 born ~ 1936, divorced when in her mid-40s...Wife #2 born ~1947, divorced when in her mid-40s...Wife #3 born ~1966.

    by trillian on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 12:52:50 PM PST

  •  When hell freezes over (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    and the devil issues iceskates.

    Ain't happenin' and it's a bad idea.

    All those enemies the Clintons made during Bill's 2 terms are pretty much still there.

    Who needs a redo of that whole mess?

    I must be dreaming...

    by murphy on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 12:53:34 PM PST

  •  It's simply too late for it to happen. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
  •  GOP just loves that we keep talking about this. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Onomastic, Larsstephens

    Ds see human suffering and wonder what they can do to relieve it. Rs see human suffering and wonder how they can profit from it.

    by JTinDC on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 01:05:56 PM PST

  •  Yet another columnist (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Onomastic, Larsstephens

    couldn't think of anything to write about so they recycle this old chestnut.

  •  Sure--Keller WOULD want that. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Any of the 1% would LOVE to have a Clintonista on deck to reengage on domestic policy. Those people will throw anyone under the bus if it's politically expedient.

    No, thanks. Obama made a brilliant move by making the price of elevating HRC's profile above that of junior Senator that she had to be loyal to him and his administration as a Cabinet member and was carefully boxed into foreign policy only. It was a genius strategy and she needs to stay right there, under wing and unable to do political harm.

    I will say, btw, that I think she's doing a great job as Secretary of State.

  •  NO HILARY..Period.! not 2012!, MSNBC is hiring (0+ / 0-)

    She is loser.....with a lot of baggage...Secretary of State is a good job for she is out of the country, most of the time......

    If she pays off her 2008 campaign debt.....then she can be a candidate for VP or President in for 2012.....MSNBC is hiring....

  •  I'm afraid we're on opposite sides of the fence (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    angelajean, Larsstephens

    with this one.

    Sorry. :(

    If corporations are people, then I want to see some birth certificates and talk to their parents.

    by Onomastic on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 03:03:14 PM PST

    •  Don't be sorry! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Onomastic, merrylib

      It's a conversation!

      Honestly, I'm not even 100% convinced myself. But I thought it a topic worth discussing on a Democratic site. Seriously.

      Something needs to happen - some shake up somewhere. Or not. Obama can probably win without it.

      But I have to admit, I like the idea of a mandate again. I like the idea that we may convince the President that amazing things are yet to be accomplished.

      I hate the idea that we might have 4 more years of the same. Maybe we'll still be at war and maybe we won't. Maybe we will have better health care, maybe we won't. Maybe we'll address climate change... probably we won't.

      I just want that damn feeling back... I want to feel like the President can accomplish all those wonderful goals and that he has the backing of the American people behind him. I'm afraid of living 2010 all over again.

      •  Maybe it's an age thing. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        After seeing Reagan and Shrub elected to office twice, to me it was a miracle that Obama was elected at all.

        I never thought that his election to the Presidency was going to insure a quick or easy correction of all the systemic problems we have.  Nor did I ever think that's I'd agree with every decision he made. I don't do that with anyone, even my kids. :)

        Was I excited about his election? Of course. But I knew that was the first step, on what was probably going to be a long, hard, road.

        Did I expect it to be nearly as difficult as it has been? Not to the extent that it has. I don't think many of us expected the Republicans to go bat shit insane. But they did, and are.

        The levels of obstruction has surpassed by light years, anything I've ever seen before.

        It has truly been shocking, and frightening. And I think that has been difficult for many to come to terms with.

        In spite of all this President's efforts to heal this country, something I completely agree with, the Republicans are doing every thing they can to divide and fracture us.

        And they have lots of help.

        What frightens me the most is not working as hard as possible to keep them from doing anymore damage.

        I want more and better Dems in the House. I want more and better Dems in the Senate. Hell, I'd like to see more folks like Bernie Sanders, and Chellie Pingree!

        And that's means digging in for the long haul. That means continuous grass roots effort. That means calling out MSM. Etc, Etc.

        No matter who we elected in 2008, no matter how "progressive", we'd still be in it for the long haul. The forces arrayed against us were far too embedded, for far too long.

        I don't need to feel excited. I do need to know that we are committed to working long and hard over time. Because that is the only thing that will truly make a lasting difference.

        Sorry about rambling on so long.

        If corporations are people, then I want to see some birth certificates and talk to their parents.

        by Onomastic on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 05:55:59 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Never apologize for your rambling (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          because it isn't. It makes sense.

          You've given me a new name to look up, Chellie Pingree. Never heard of the person and if their name is side by side with Bernie Sanders, I have a feeling it's a person I need to know!

          In response to being excited - I don't need that to vote. I will vote. I need it to convince other people to vote. When I volunteered last time, I was a mean caller on the phones. I could get people to change their minds. And a lot of it was because I was willing to talk about military service and was excited about a candidate that would get us out of the wars. My secondary issue was the environment - basically that we need to get off oil to improve national defense and to help with global warming.

          I have very little to call and convince people about. We know where the President stands on those issues and those stances are pretty middle of the road. I can't be the one to do the convincing this time around. I want to be but I just don't have it in me.

          If Clinton was on the ticket, it truly wouldn't give me much more to work with but it would give me some. But I thought the conversation could spark something new. I thought maybe I would see some Democrats willing to talk about their own candidates team rather than the never ending dribble we get about the Republican candidates.

          I will be a much better volunteer for someone like Elizabeth Warren or for a better candidate for the House of Reps in my own state of Alaska (I still haven't heard of a Dem running against Don Young, however). And probably much better off staying away from political diaries on DailyKos. It's not much fun to be accused of being a troll or anything else just because you have a difference of opinion.

          Talk about rambling... mornings before coffee kicks in will do that to me :)

          •  I love rambling conversations, thoughtful ones, (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            where things are peeled back, and perspectives shared.

            Far too often around here it's just reaction, a digging in, instead of a consideration of how, and why, someone has reached their particular perspective.

            And the variety of perspectives can be fascinating. You, and jimstaro, for example, are both "military", and yet have, from what I can tell, different perspectives on what this Administration has done.

            And while yes, more certainly needs to be done to get us off oil, steps have and are being taken. The growth in renewable energy sources on public lands, something the Administration could do without Congressional approval, is one example.


            There's been a great deal of work in a very short time that a lot of folks haven't heard about. Given Republican hatred of all things environmental, and getting us off the oil nipple,  it's rather amazing.

            Chellie Pingree is my Congressional Rep in the House.

            Wish you hadn't been accused of being a troll. :( Not kind, and really lazy thinking.

            Hope you've had your coffee. Still working on my first cup of tea.

            If corporations are people, then I want to see some birth certificates and talk to their parents.

            by Onomastic on Tue Jan 10, 2012 at 05:49:49 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Im in favor of this (0+ / 0-)

    but these diaries on Dkos are getting annoying because all they do is spew up nasty things about Hillary and make her seem like shes some awful person. She have been a loser, but she did get over 16 million votes remember.

  •  Michelle/Hillary? n.t. (0+ / 0-)
  •  I don't think it's a good idea. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    angelajean, Onomastic

    Changing a VP is a major move and would indicate a total lack of confidence in Biden. IMHO, Joe is doing a fine job. He's certainly not doing a poor job.

    As someone said above, won't, shouldn't.

    "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them...well, I have others." --Groucho Marx

    by Dragon5616 on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 04:19:08 PM PST

  •  Obama/Corzine! (0+ / 0-)

    Let's go all out bankster boldness!

  •  Hillary Clinton could end up as the (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    best secretary of state since William P. Seward, and I can't imagine why she would consider being a vice president. To say nothing of Obama. For what? Keller's article is more New York Times turning gradually into People Mag, trying to arrange the Famous into the most concise possible piles. Why not Angelina for president, with Alec Baldwin as veep? Also, Biden is the best vice president possible, partly because nobody seems to have any idea how smart he actually is.

  •  In 2008, I said no to that idea (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    and stand by it. The VP would have to be someone whom I'd vote for, since they could potentially be President. Since I would not vote for Hillary (and should she ever be the frontrunner here, I would simply leave UNLESS she were opposing someone heinous although I'm in a good Blue district). And she's not that person. Wasn't then and is not now still. It was a bit of of a punch to the gut when she was SOS, although I think she's done an alright job so far.

    But the circumstances would need to be dire for me to vote for her. I don't care one way or another about Biden. I know little about him, I suppose. Ignorance is bliss. I know too much about Hillary to support this prospect, although I'd be tickled pink to see a woman as VP or POTUS.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site