David Zephyr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:26 PM
Original message |
Friends, Our 2008 Ticket Must Be Either Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama. |
|
Edited on Tue Feb-05-08 01:28 PM by David Zephyr
I know that there is a lot of passionate competition between these two camps, but this Obama supporter is hoping that Hillary and Barack will both be on our ticket BECAUSE it would blow away any possible Republican ticket.
I know this isn't a popular thought this morning of Super Tuesday, but it is the ticket I want.
If my candidate, Barack Obama wins the nomination, I will not settle for anyone other than Hillary as his VP. I hope the reverse is also true.
And regardless of their differences, we have two amazing candidates and we should be very proud of both of them.
Peace!
|
jakem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:27 PM
Response to Original message |
|
what are you, McCain?!
:sorrycouldnthelpit:
|
David Zephyr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
That was funny, jakem! McCain has poisoned the word "friends". LOL! :hi:
|
ronnykmarshall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
18. That's the first thing I thought too! |
maddiejoan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:27 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Edited on Tue Feb-05-08 01:27 PM by maddiejoan
we agree.
Either/Or --but certainly BOTH
|
UALRBSofL
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
16. We need a ticket that will win |
|
Edited on Tue Feb-05-08 01:36 PM by UALRBSofL
Because the repugs are ruthless. And everyone on DU as you can see we are having record breaking turnouts just because it's a woman and a AA. I live in Florida and we had record turnouts and none of the candidates campaigned. We had a larger increase of turnout then the republicans who actually campaigned in florida.
|
BOSSHOG
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:28 PM
Response to Original message |
|
and I think whomever gets the nod should start getting their cabinet together and publicized. Edwards as AG, Clark as SECSTATE. unbeatable.
|
David Zephyr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
9. I like your cabinet suggestions. |
AtomicKitten
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:29 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Vehemently disagree: Hillary is the past, Obama is the future. |
demokatgurrl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:29 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Good Luck with that one. |
|
I don't think they can stand each other. And just think all those narrow-minded supporters of Clinton won't vote for the ticket if Obama is on it, and all those narrow-minded supporters of Obama won't vote for the ticket if Clinton is on it.... so I bring you our next president....
John McCain.:puke:
|
Yossariant
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:30 PM
Response to Original message |
7. No. It's a recipe for a loss to the GOP |
scheming daemons
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:30 PM
Response to Original message |
|
The appeal for Obama is that he is the Un-Hillary. He gains nothing, and loses plenty, by adding Hillary to the ticket.
Conversely... If Hillary gets the nomination, Obama doesn't want to spend the next 4-8 years with Bill being the EFFECTIVE VP, while Obama is relegated to attending funerals and fundraisers.
It is not going to happen. Hillary might ask Obama, but he'd say no. Obama won't ask Hillary.
Give it up... the "Dream Ticket" is a creation of the MSM. Read the latest Maureen Dowd column... the two don't like each other.
It would be a bad move for either of them.
|
redqueen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
13. "Read the latest Maureen Dowd column" |
|
:rofl:
The idiot who happily participated in the clown media's War on Gore? :rofl:
|
demokatgurrl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
26. Dowd is a nasty bitch who hates everyone. |
tyne
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
it would only help her. She wouldn't help him.
|
jaysunb
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
GoldieAZ49
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
Obama will not play second to the Clintons and it will alienate the indies and repubs and McCain will win
I also agree a Governor is needed as a VP
I will not pretend to know the best cabinet appointments for Obama, he knows who will best serve his administration, and I trust his judgement or I wouldn't be voting for him in the first place.
|
blm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:31 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Obama doesn't want the drag on his ticket and Dems in close contests around the country don't want the drag downticket.
|
busymom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:32 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I'm starting to realy sour on Obama. If he gets nominated (which seems more and more likely), I'll vote for him. But...if Clinton get the nod, I think I'd prefer Wes Clark (which seems to be the rumored favorite).
|
goodgd_yall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:32 PM
Response to Original message |
12. I don't think it is necessary |
|
Edited on Tue Feb-05-08 01:33 PM by goodgd_yall
It's a nice idea, but a Hillary/Clark ticket would also be a good one. This gives Hillary a military man on her side to level the playing field, assuming McCain is the Republican nominee.
|
in_cog_ni_to
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:33 PM
Response to Original message |
15. Michelle Obama hates Hillary. I don't see that happening. n/t |
ronnykmarshall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:33 PM
Response to Original message |
17. And John Edwards for Atty General. |
David Zephyr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
IDemo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:35 PM
Response to Original message |
19. Prediction: Clinton/Richardson or Obama/Edwards |
demokatgurrl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
27. I don't think Edwards wants to run for VP again. n/t |
saltpoint
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:36 PM
Response to Original message |
21. Either option is a possibility but not an inevitability and we can win with |
|
several veep nom choices other than whichever of these two isn't leading our ticket.
I was personally more drawn to the debate on issues when all 8 of our announced candidates held the stage. We're down to 2 or 3 now and all of those are good folks to be sure, but the debate was livelier and more wide-ranging at the onset.
It remains to be seen if the veep nom will be selected from one of the 7 original announced candidates or from the broader field.
|
newmajority
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:36 PM
Response to Original message |
|
And I'm sure some will dismiss this as "Hillary Hate" but there's simple political logic in my reasoning.
By even running ONE senator as the nominee, we're gambling on overturning the last 40 years of history. If the 'Pukes run McCain, then at least that much is an even match. If they run Romney or even the Huckster, they have that historical advantage. Huck's probably not going to win their nomination, but he's a possibility for their running mate, since McCain is considered dubious by the fundagelicals, as is Mittens (because he believes in the "wrong" religion)
Bottom line, the Pukes are likely to have a governor in at least one slot on their ticket. We can't run two senators against that, or we're asking for another disaster.
|
Skwmom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:40 PM
Response to Original message |
24. That's like mixing oil and water. Obama wants to UNITE the citizens of this |
|
country and with their support and involvement tackle the tough problems facing this country. Only by rallying the country will real change occur/any of the tough problems get tackled. A President must be viewed as trustworthy in order to unite the country. Clinton would invoke too much partisanship and distrust if she was on the ticket.
|
sandnsea
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:41 PM
Response to Original message |
|
No more Clintons. None, zero, good bye. And I don't really want Obama on her ticket either. It's going to be another scandal ridden 4 years, no doubt about it. The names are already out there.
|
jbnow
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Feb-05-08 01:48 PM
Response to Original message |
28. No, I would hate to see it. |
|
I hear the pressure would be on for Obama to be Clinton's VP to keep the enthusiasm and new voters and independents, blah, blah
This would be the weakest VP ever whatever agreements were made on roles. Gore had to deal with dual Clintons and now that the spouse is an ex-president it would only be worse. I don't know who they'll get but I would hate to see Obama give in to the pressure.
No one thinks Obama need to ask Hillary or that she'd be his best choice at all.
It's not a dream ticket, it's vaguely nauseating.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 12:09 AM
Response to Original message |