Hillary Clinton supporters- Do you say YEA or NAY to Gov. Sebelius as VP?

[Colobo]

Only Hillary Clinton supporters. I wanna know how they feel about the possibility.

[Colobo]

1. Vote and share your views.

[Colobo]

2. Kick.

[jobycom]

3. I'm mixed. I don't dislike the idea, but it would insult a lot of people.

She'd be good, but Clinton would bring more to the ticket, so it would be a clear anybody-but-Clinton message from Obama. That would piss me off, but I'd still vote for him. I already don't like him, so he's not really going to sink any further for me, and he's not going to push me to McCain. It would be a missed chance to make me think favorably of him, though, but he's missed so many of those chances that I assume he will continue to do so.

[Colobo]

4. Thanks for your input. I appreciate it.

[jobycom]

5. It was a good question. One I and another Clinton supporter talked about last week

So I had been thinking about it. :)

[malik flavors]

6. Were the feelings you just expressed the consensus among the others as well?

[jobycom]

8. Yeah. I was actually the more accepting one.

My friend worked for the campaign at a somewhat high local level, so he had more direct exposure to, well, stuff that happened, so he was more bitter than me. We even talked about the possibility he wouldn't vote at all, but he will, I'm sure. He's been a fierce Dem activist for too long to stay home. Like me, though he's much younger (20s).

But yeah, the attitude toward Sebelius was his, too, and he seemed to be reflecting the attitudes of others in his circle.

[CTyankee]

92. My husband was fiercely for Hillary and he's a big Dem activist.

I also voted for Hillary in our primary. But both of us are committed to Obama's candidacy now.

A Sebelius pick would be a stick in the eye to some Hillary supporters, but I don't think any of my fellow Hillary supporters here in librul New Haven would have a problem with it, other than to mutter that we should've had Hillary as the woman candidate. I really don't think it would be a deal breaker, but obviously I can't speak for everyone.

[Labors of Hercules]

7. reason vs. emotion

People feel a certain way and don't stop to think. That's been the problem with human decision-making for centuries, and it's no different now.

[jobycom]

9. Naturally all sides in every battle, including this one, accuse the other of having

too little reason, too much emotion. If Obama choses Sebelius, his supporters will say it was a reasonable choice, his opponents will say it was an emotional one. My side will be right, of course, because whatever I believe is always right. :)


Obama doesn't need to worry about either of us now, though. He needs to worry about the swing voters, and what will make them happy. He's already got all of our votes, he doesn't really need to care whether our votes are happily or grudgingly cast.

[highplainsdem]

12. It's reason. And the most important reason is that Clinton can help the ticket much more than any

other choice. If it has to be someone other than Clinton, there are alternatives better-qualified than Sebelius. But the main reason is that the party needs to be united, and Obama needs the Clintons and their supporters, and the best way to ensure that is to have Hillary Clinton on the ticket.

I've also said here before -- and still feel -- that if Obama does not ask her to be his running mate, he'll look weak, afraid of being overshadowed by the Clintons. And that would be particularly true if he chose someone relatively unknown like Sebelius.

[Labors of Hercules]

32. Are you saying Sebelius is not more qualified for the Executive than Hillary?

Would you then say that Hillary is more qualified to be President than Bill was? Because Kathleen Sebelius' resume is more impressive than Bill's was when he was elected.

[Evergreen Emerald]

10. she is not a good candidate.

Why would he choose her? I have seen her record and have not been impressed with her when she spoke. I am not certain why she is even an issue.

It would be insulting if he is considering choosing her only becasue she is a woman--and insulting for Clinton who has 10 times the qualifications as Sebelius.

[Colobo]

13. So you think she has no qualifications?

[Evergreen Emerald]

14. I did not say that.

[Colobo]

16. You said you are not impressed with her and that you don't know why she was an issue...

So, I assume you think she's not qualified for the job.

[Evergreen Emerald]

24. that is not what you said.

[Labors of Hercules]

34. "Clinton who has 10 times the qualifications as Sebelius."

How about substantiating that statement, because I contend that it is patently false.

The truth is, Sebelius has executive experience Clinton does not have, and contrary to popular belief, Clinton and Obama do NOT see eye to eye when it comes to foreign policy, nor is she any more credentialed than he is in foreign policy, so that argument is ridiculous as well.

[Evergreen Emerald]

56. Do tell

You have decided that Clinton and Obama do not see eye to eye on foreign policy (I disagree, I have yet to see anything different in the two, except that Clinton is more nuanced and in-depth in her analysis because of her expansive knowledge compared to Obama).

What, do tell, since you have nixed Clinton in part because she does not see eye to eye with Obama, is Sebelius's view on foreign policy? How is it different than Clinton's?

Regarding experience: I have reviewed the record of Sebelius and she comes up short in comparison to Clinton. I have reviewed the experience of Sebelius, and she comes up short.

She is a weak choice.

[Labors of Hercules]

71. "I have reviewed the experience of Sebelius, and she comes up short."

prove it. Show me the experience Clinton has that qualifies her as a Vice President.

Sebelius has experience that is far more similar to Bill's. Does that mean Bill was less qualified when he won the Presidency than Hillary?

[Colobo]

74. She hasn't proven that Clinton > Sebelius for the job yet.

[Evergreen Emerald]

82. Yeah

I noticed you did not answer my question. Prove it your damn self. I have no desire to argue with you. I don't really care what you think.

[Colobo]

84. Why are you so aggressive?

[Evergreen Emerald]

85. I respond in kind.

[Colobo]

86. You know what?

:hug:

I mean it.

[Evergreen Emerald]

87. right back atcha!

;)

[Labors of Hercules]

89. Sebelius voiced agreement with Obama's statements on Iraq since 2003...

You can start there.

[juajen]

96. I'm a tad late to this thread, but if anyone is still reading,

how about 18 million votes, and beloved all over the world. No one, but no one, compares to Hillary.

[Colobo]

72. So, according to you, Sebelius is not qualified and Hillary is.

[salonghorn70]

11. No

As a former Clinton supporter, I would say no on this. It is not that I would say it is some kind of an insult to Hillary. I just don't think Sebelius brings as much to the ticket as others. My choices would be Biden, Bayh or Kaine , in no certain order. Biden and Bayh bring experience in foreign policy and national security issues. Biden is very good with blue collar voters. Bayh would help in Iowa and Indiana and maybe Missouri and would also appeal to independents and Republicans. Kaine would make Virginia very competitive.Kaine would also appeal to faith voters. All three are Catholics, I believe. So it is not so much that I am anti-Sebelius as I am pro-others.

[Maureen1322]

15. Absolutely not.

If he wants a woman why wouldn't he pick Hillary?
For me, picking Sebelius over Clinton would be a bad, bad move.

[Colobo]

18. He wants a VP that is in tune with his agenda. Gov. Sebelius might be that person.

[Maureen1322]

20. More in tune than Hillary?

[mystieus]

65. Yes.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

21. hillary is incompatible with his message. i love her to pieces but that is just the truth

this is not about qualifications. elections arent. if it were we would be talking about president gore not frat boy bush

[CreekDog]

22. Because Sebelius won the governorship of a very red state

[CreekDog]

23. gosh, i didn't know Hillary was the only acceptable woman candidate

:sarcasm:

[Maureen1322]

27. For me, she is.

[CreekDog]

30. i think you have something against women candidates then

if nobody but Hillary among them is qualified. that's riduculous.

[MrsT]

39. Do you treat male candidates as poorly as you treat female candidates?

ONLY ONE acceptable female candidate? No Boxer? No Napolitano?
Do you think there is ONLY ONE acceptable male candidate?

[Colobo]

73. But for Obama she might not be.

[jenmito]

28. Why wouldn't he pick Hillary? 2 words-BILL Clinton. n/t

[totodeinhere]

40. If he determines that Sebelius is more qualified than Clinton, then why not Sebelius?

There is nothing written in stone that says that Hillary must be the first woman to be VP or President. I think that Governor Sebelius would be a great choice.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

17. you want the truth? unless its sam nunn on the ticket, i will vote for obama

and this point, unless something dramatic happens very little will make me enthusiastic about obama. by dramatic, i dont mean HRC on the ticket. i happen to think HRC on the ticket is a very stupid idea.

[MrsT]

19. She isn't my 1st choice but she absolutely brings some things to the ticket

She isn't a good speaker and she would undoubtedly bring cries of "if Obama wants a woman VP, how dare he snub Clinton!" as if the only reason Kerry considered her is because she is a woman. :eyes:

However, she manages to be very popular in a red state, and certainly would certainly appeal to moderates and anyone who likes the idea of bi-partisanship. She seems pretty progressive from what I have read. She has strong ties to Ohio. Despite what the polls say 4 months out, McCain would have to play some defense in Kansas is she was on the ticket.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

25. The VP must be perceived as someone who could straighten Obama out if he went of the rails

The top quality for an Obama VP is as a reassurance for folks who aren't quite sure about Obama.

"At least if he proposes something really loony, X will be there to straighten him out."

So he needs someone with wider experience and a national reputation.

Sibelius is a bad, bad choice.

"Well, at least if the Russians invade he'll have some woman I've never heard of there to steady his hand" just doesn't work as practical politics.

Dodd would be okay. Biden would be excellent. Sam Nunn is too RW. Clark is a TERRIBLE politician (I love him, but it's true)

Hillary would be a good choice because of the economic brand-name, but I doubt she's even on the list.

[sufrommich]

26. I fear the perception would be that

he felt some pressure to run with a woman because of the primaries and that he chose Sebelius so he wouldn't have to choose Hillary. I don't think it would do him any good and may cause some bad feelings.

[Maureen1322]

29. Couldn't agree more. I just don't see him doing that.

[Beacool]

31. No way!!!!!!!!!!

Women are not interchangeable and to choose Sibelius over Hillary is a slap in the face to those who supported Hillary.

Hillary and Obama were neck to neck and neither one closed the deal without the super delegates. Therefore, it would be very disrespectful to her to choose another woman and not the person who won the votes of the other half of the Democratic party.

Would it have been OK for you if Hillary were the nominee and she picked another AA politician over Obama?

[Labors of Hercules]

33. Sebelius is a better fit for Obama's VP than Hillary is.

Her executive and economic credentials are more impressive than Hillary's, and she has the added plus of having no ex-president in tow.

What is it that makes you think being the Freshman Senator from New York makes Hillary so much more qualified than Sebelius? Cuz no matter how you slice it, that's all the elected experience Hillary's got. :shrug:

[Beacool]

35. Did you miss the primary?

Who got as many votes as Obama? Even today more than 4 out of 10 Democrats still wish that she was the nominee. She won most of the Democratic states, etc., etc.

Hillary is more than qualified to be VP. Heck, she's more than qualified to be president!!!

Want true unity in the party? Then Obama should put his money where his mouth is and offer her the job. I don't know whether she wants it or not, but it should at least be offered.

[Labors of Hercules]

37. Are we comparing Clinton to Sebelius or to Obama?

Because I don't recall that Sebelius ran in the Democratic primary for president, so to use Clinton's votes as a reason to choose her over Kathleen is completely unfair.

[Beacool]

43. Maybe so, but to choose Sibelius over Clinton is just as unfair. n/t

[Labors of Hercules]

69. Why? Clinton wasn't running for Vice President...

The playing field is equal. If Sebelius proves to be the better choice for OBAMA, why is that unfair to Clinton?

[Colobo]

75. They are answering with their hearts.

[Labors of Hercules]

80. just what we need to fix the problems in this country...

Better yet, why don't we just pray about it. :eyes:

[datopbanana]

68. get. over. it.

[Beacool]

90. We'll "get over it" when and if we choose to do so.

So, back off!!!

The condescending nerve of some people!!!!!!

:mad:

[jenmito]

91. Is that a threat that you may not vote for Obama?

[Beacool]

93. It's an answer to the poster's rudeness. n/t

[jenmito]

95. So you'll be voting for Obama whether Hillary's his choice for VP or not?

[beac]

94. Hillary was able to stay in the race as long as she did because of

her VAST personal fortune. If she wasn't a millionairess many times over, the race would have been finished in February. Being a poor financial manager and surrounding yourself with inept advisers is not a good way to demonstrate one's "qualifications" for the Oval Office.

If she'd wanted to keep the possibility of VP open, she shouldn't have poisoned the well with her made-for-GOP-ads attacks on Obama.

She is now getting assistance from Obama in paying off her debt. I think that is ALL she is owed.

[polmaven]

57. May I make a slight correction?

Senator Clinton may be the "junior" senator, but she is no longer a "Freshman" Senator. This is her second term.

[MrsT]

36. Did you vote for Hillary just because she was a woman?

I didn't. If Obama chooses a female running mate there is no reason to think that he is choosing her just because she is a woman.

It sounds like you want to treat male candidates and female candidates differently.

[Beacool]

45. It would be seen as Obama trying to appease the female Hillary supporters.

Besides, listening to Sibelius speak is as entertaining as watching paint dry.

[MrsT]

53. And it is Obama's fault that some people would ASSume he is trying to "appease?"

Who was Kerry trying to appease when he considered Sebelius? SO basically, because Hillary was in the primary, no other females should be considered as VP? Does that rule get applied to men as well?

[Colobo]

76. Good points, MrsT.

[totodeinhere]

42. There are many historical precedents for choosing someone other than the runner up for VP.

Many times the presidential nominee picks someone who didn't even run for president because that person is a good fit for the ticket. Just because Hillary was the runner up doesn't mean that she should necessarily be picked for VP. IMO Governor Sebelius would be a better choice than Hillary because Sebelius fits in better with Obama's message of change. Hillary represents the past and we need to move on from that.

[Beacool]

44. Change, what change?

Or do you mean his vote on FISA and all the other "adjustments" he has done in the last 2 weeks?

Hillary is NOT the past, she's the present and she will be the future too. Hillary's power has been enhanced, not diminished by having ran for president. To ignore her would be a bad mistake for Obama and the party.

[jenmito]

46. Are you one of those PUMAs? What besides the FISA compromise are you talking about?

His message of change is to have transparency in govt., to talk to our enemies without preconditions, etc. Hillary is the past due to her HUSBAND almost more than herself. He won't disclose the names of his donors to his library among other things, so they won't pass the vetting stage.

[Beacool]

49. Oh, please.........

Every candidate deserves criticism when it's merited and FISA was a doozy.

The Clintons are not the past, they are even more powerful now than before the primary. Hillary is now seen as a political powerhouse in her own right and she ain't going anywhere.

[jenmito]

51. You didn't answer my questions nor refute what I said. n/t

[Beacool]

54. What, the PUMA question?

If I were a PUMA I wouldn't even bother coming to this board. What for?

Which adjustments? Rejecting public financing, late term abortion for women under mental distress, "fine tuning" the Iraq war troop removal, but everything else pales compared to the FISA vote. Nominee or no nominee, that was a very disappointing vote. Ditto for the other Democrats who voted Yeah.

[jenmito]

55. Not just that one...

All the things you mentioned besides FISA are false "adjustments." You're just repeating the anti-Obama talking points. He never promised he'd take public financing. He never said he was for LTAs for MENTAL health distress, and he didn't change his position on Iraq, either. You haven't been listening. And you completely avoided the fact that Bill Clinton would have to be vetted and he said he will not release the names of his donors to his library among other baggage he has.

[totodeinhere]

47. No, IMO obama can easily win without Clinton on the ticket.

Therefore, he should only pick her if he wants to. If he does then I will respect his decision since the decision is his and nobody else's. Even Clinton has acknowledged that fact.

If Obama picks someone else then that's his prerogative and all good Democrats should work hard for the ticket whether Hillary is on it or not.

[Beacool]

50. We weren't talking about all other options,

were were talking specifically about Sibelius.

[CakeGrrl]

48. Again with the "ignore Hillary at your own peril" threat

Does that basically mean "put her on the ticket or Obama doesn't get the vote"? I just want someone to own up, because there aren't many ways to interpret that.

Why does the VP have to be a bargaining chip? What if Obama wants someone who works well with him for his entire term, not just to get more votes in the GE, who happens not to be Hillary?

And if that isn't a real issue because being VP turns out to be really and truly nothing much more than a glorified state funeral attendee, then why do her supporters want that secondary role SOOOO badly for her?

[Beacool]

52. Why?

Because it's a step closer to the WH and she can run again in future years. I repeat that I don't know if she even wants the job, I just think that it should be offered, that's all.

[krispos42]

83. Excep that in the original Constitution

before it was amended, the runner-up in the election for the Presidency was made the Vice-President. This was dropped fairly early on because of the development of the political party, but in general it's a really bad idea for the second-place finisher to automatically be the VP. The people running for president that can actually win the nomination are people with with large egos, enormous personal and political power, and huge ambitions. All of which has the potential to make them bad choices for the second spot on the ticket.

This means that each much be individually screened to see if they can play second-fiddle to the person they lost to. I don't think Hillary can. I think she carried the mantle of inevitability for too long, I think she came too close to winning, and I think her supporters would demand she have more of co-presidency than a vice-presidency, for Obama to be able to work with her as VP.

Any of the other former presidential candidates I think can, even Edwards. But not Clinton.




This is in conjunction with the fact that for every "I'm only voting for Obama if Clinton is on the ticket" die-hard PUMA that would vote for Obama in November, two or three "McCain sucks so I'm going to stay home, vote 3rd party, or vote Obama" conservatives would be motivated to vote for McMaverick® just to keep the dreaded Defeater of Bush and Dole out of the White House.

[JohnnyLib2]

38. No, I think foreign policy experience would be a bigger addition to the ticket.

Biden or Bayh, maybe. The murmuring I hear most frequently from older voters has to do with experience and somewhat with familiarity. Why leave that angle open to exploitation with a lesser known choice?

[jefferson_dem]

41. Not a Hillary supporter but I would vote against Sebelius.

Under normal circumstances I would say "hell yeah" as she would add much to the ticket. Not this time, however. If any woman is selected for the VP slot, it darn well better be Hillary.

[styersc]

58. Hillary recieved just a small number of popular votes less then

Obama.

I don't know why this seems to be so hard to understand. It was never about getting a woman on the ticket. About 19 million Democrats feel that she is a strong leader with good ideas.

As it turns out she may be a little to the left of Obama, but she would still be a good choice.

[jenmito]

60. Now it's "about 19 million"? No-it's about 18 million. And she also received nearly 200 fewer

delegates than Obama. She lost. The winner has the luxury of choosing his VP. He ran against special interest/lobbyists' influence. He ran against the partisanship of the 90s. He ran against the Clintons.

[Beacool]

61. No she didn't, the pledged delegate difference was 127.

Furthermore, there's still a debate as to who really won the popular vote if one counts actual heads, regardless of party rules. Counting MI, and even giving Obama every uncommitted vote, Hillary won the popular vote by over 48,000.

As it stands, without MI, Obama won the popular vote by only 41,622 more votes than Hillary. Therefore, neither one had an overwhelming support over the other. It was pretty much a 50/50 proposition.

Pledged delegates:

Obama: 1,766.5

Hillary: 1,639.5

Difference: 127

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_delegate_count.html

Popular vote:

MI

Obama (giving him all uncommitted votes): 238,168

Hillary: 328,309

Total vote with MI:

Obama: 17,773,626

Hillary: 17,822,145

Clinton: + 48,519

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

[jenmito]

64. I didn't say "pledged delegates." I said "delegates." He got 2229.5 to her 1896.5, a

difference of OVER 200. Over 300 even: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_delegate_count.html He won. No need to rehash the technicalities. He won. He's OUR nominee. I assume you'll be voting for him whether he chooses her as his VP or not.

[karynnj]

77. There should be no debate over who won the popular

vote in the primary as it is a metric that makes no sense. Each state chooses their delegate selection process - in some caucus states, that had perfectly legal, never before contested processes, there is NO official "vote" tally - so they were eliminated! The process downweights all caucus states. If the "popular vote" was important - no state would hold a caucus. The Clintons and their media allies did a disservice to the Democrats by bringing up all these competing and invalid metrics - and they didn't do it until after superTuesday when they could see that Obama had a good chance of beating HRC.

There IS a valid argument that Clinton was far closer than most people who lost the nomination in the past, but she still did lose. It is still the decision of the candidate to choose his VP - he may choose HRC. If he does it will be because he things that of the qualified candidates she will make it significantly more likely he will win. If he doesn't think that, he will pick someone else.

[krispos42]

88. Except you can't legitimately count Florida and Michigan

in the totals for either candidate. By no definition were they fair elections and must be totally disregarded.

[quakerboy]

59. it is interesting

While people were still in full swing, fighting the primary, I heard any number of times that if Hillary were to lose, it would set women back, no woman would have a chance for at least 20 years.

Reading through this thread, it sure seems like part of the population is determined to make that a self fulfilling prophesy. It is disheartening.

[MasonJar]

62. I wouldn't care but others would. It would not be wise IMHO. If he

wants a woman, he should ask Hill. She probably would turn him down by now.

[Phillycat]

63. Because they both have vaginas?

:eyes:

[IDemo]

66. I didn't vote since I wasn't a Hillary supporter, but

Sebelius doesn't bring the foreign policy background that will be a strong requirement for his VP. Between the two, Hillary beats her here. But there are better choices than either.

[emilyg]

67. Nay.

[Awsi Dooger]

70. I'd support it under one condition

That we don't get flooded with nonsense threads about Obama carrying Kansas.

[Catherine Vincent]

78. Obama and company will not choose her.

He would not pass over Hillary and go for her. In fact, Obama will choose a white male for his running mate.

[romana]

81. Yep

I've been saying this all along. Obama isn't going to want to share the limelight. He'll choose a white male to be his VP.

[barack the house]

79. So Sebelius it is then. Just kidding.