Was the deal made long ago and this "drama" all just for show?

[Skwmom]

Obama picks a VP that is close to the Clintons. Biden even thinks Hillary is better qualified to be VP (or Pres) and Bill Clinton has said the Biden VP pick was a home run. Bayh and Biden, the two it seemed to come down to were both Clinton allies or friends.

Rahm Emanuel is close to the Clintons. Why would a known experienced hand like him opine upon accepting the job in public and risk embarrassing Obama? Of course, if his position was decided long ago as part of a bigger deal, his public comments would make people think that he was just offered the job.

Bill Clinton said they were never promised anything, there is no quid pro quo, while the Clintonites use it to slam Richardson and Kerry for wanting the job. Oh doth Bill protest to much?

They are now talking about how the rest of the potential national security/defense picks will work well with Clinton.

So was the deal made long ago and this all just for show? I remember after the Clinton and Obama meeting. Someone posted a picture of Obama and posted a cryptic comment. It makes me wonder if the Clintons played hardball and got some MAJOR concessions. At least, that would make this whole thing make sense.

On edit: The Whitehouse Prize could make the strongest of men strike a deal. Though who all such a deal would actually include is a question in and of itself.....

[onehandle]

1. Do you think that Obama is this weak?

A puppet of the Clinton machine?

Really?

[Captain Hilts]

3. Exactly. Think higher of Obama. nt

[No Elephants]

39. Nothing in believing a deal may exist puts down Obama or Clinton. They

are pols. Pols make deals with everyone, including other pols.

[Skwmom]

5. Well, if he did strike a deal, he would want to go out of his way to hide it

b/c it would make him appear weak.

Maybe the Clintons played real hardball and the deal was made before McCain made his lousy VP pick.

It's not necessarily that he's weak but that the Whitehouse prize was too great to risk. That prize could make the strongest of men succumb.

[sufrommich]

22. So he's not weak, just a devious phony?

:crazy:

[Skwmom]

29. He's a politician who wanted to sit in the Whitehouse.

[sufrommich]

34. Why would he need to strike any deal with Hillary Clinton to

"sit in the Whitehouse"? He won the primary,he won the election,which usually puts you in a pretty damned good position deal-making wise.

[No Elephants]

30. What does "phony" have to do with it? All politicians make deals all the time. Has he ever said

that he would never make a deal? No. Quite the opposite. So, phony does not come into it, IMO.

[Two Americas]

25. not weak

The OP is just saying that Obama is a politician. What is it that people think he is?

[No Elephants]

27. Who said anything about weakness? Striking a deal means that each side got something he or she

wanted. Nothing weak about that, unless one side settled for too little. If there was a deal, I don't think Obama settled for too little.

[Captain Hilts]

2. Bill Clinton ran a good government. It's that simple.

That's why he left office with a %70 approval rating.

[Skwmom]

6. Because the damage caused by NAFTA and deregulation didn't

occur until after he left office.

Bill Clinton running a good government is a myth (unless you consider a financial and economic collapse a good thing).

[No Elephants]

35. Bingo. He rationalizes signing Glass Steagall, but that is one of about 3 keys to the mess

in which the economy is today. Another is almost total removal of any meaningful review of large mergers and acquisitions, which began under Reagan and cleared the way for things that are "just too big to fail," virtually all of our news being controlled by only 5 corporations, uncompetitive monopolies, and a host of other ills.

[blm]

7. No - if it was ACTUALLY good there'd be no way Bushes would be back in WH by 2001.

and every 'good' thing done was overturned within a year of Bush taking office, so NONE of the 'good' alleged had any lasting or transformational power did it?

However, the WRONG he did in protecting the secrecy and privilege of GHWBush and his powerful cronies throughout the 90s HAS had a long lasting effect on our party, the nation and the world, hasn't it?

[Double T]

4. Who cares? There is a strong BO Administration being put together.........

(with a couple of exceptions) and I expect the American People will be amazed at what THEY do. NO MORE bushes/cheneys means we can only go up from here!

[Skwmom]

8. You mean a strong Obama/Clinton admin being put together?

Because it's getting kind of hard to tell where the true power lies.

[Double T]

11. It will no longer be with bush/cheney; that's really all that matters.

I expect the BO Administration will work well together on behalf of the American people.

[shanti]

18. THANK YOU!

that's the bottom line - we no longer will have to put up with snarl and the chimperor!

[Skwmom]

24. Isn't that sentiment how Bush got into the Whitehouse?

I remember the first Republican debate. A poll showed republican voters thought Bush did a lousy job, did not demonstrate ability. However, they thought he was the only one who could beat the dreaded Clintons so they elected and supported Bush w/out question b/c he was viewed as their savior.

So is that how we are to view Obama, as our savior from Bush that we do not question? Many thought Obama would be the person who would save us from the Clintons but it seems like he's done quite the opposite. The way things are going, it's looking like it's going to be the Obamton Administration.

[shanti]

57. good grief

chill out! he's not even in office yet.

[No Elephants]

40. Make no mistake. It lies with Obama, both by law and by his nature.

[ginnyinWI]

9. if there was a deal, what did Obama get out of it?

She certainly didn't concede early, did she. Didn't pull any punches that I can see. So what would he have gotten in exchange for a deal like this? It's not like the Obama we see in public and I don't think he did any such deal.

[Skwmom]

14. She could have threatened a floor fight at the convention or other things.

She could have threatened a scorched earth strategy (as in I might not get the ultimate prize but neither will you).

[cali]

20. no actually she couldn't have. She didn't have the SD support for

a floor fight. Try again.

[Skwmom]

32. I think in Newsweek it was reported she was threatening some kind of fight .

I read it in their special edition.

But of course Cali, I'm sure you know exactly what went down.

Plus, I never said a floor fight would have be successful. But it would have been viewed as SEVERELY damaging Obama's chances.

[No Elephants]

42. I heard the same thing. However, that, too, could have been rumors floated by the Clinton camp, to

give her greater leverage to bargain with Obama. (IF there was a deal, of course.)

[No Elephants]

38. IF there was a deal, it was made AFTER the primaries, not before. And I would guess not long before

the Convention. And the deal, IF there was one, would have had to do with the Clintons, especially Hillary, campaigning for Obama.

[Skwmom]

49. Per the NY Times, John Bolton said Clinton would be SOS back in July.

Isn't that interesting.

John Bolton, the former United States ambassador to the United Nations, who forecasted as early as this past July that Mrs. Clinton could wind up at the State Department, laughed as he offered the incoming president this piece of advice: “Obama should remember the rule that you never hire anybody you can’t fire, especially as secretary of state.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/15/us/politics/15obama.html

[liberal N proud]

10. Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton are good politicians and know how

to play the game of going along to get along.
The comments they all made were to appease one group or another at any point to get what they need.

Stop trying to read conspiracy into everything that happens. Give Obama some breathing room and see what his administration is like.

[Skwmom]

15. Backroom deals are common practice in politics and it would make this whole thing make sense.

Because it doesn't make ANY sense. The downside potential is so HUGE, (without any HUGE upside potential you couldn't get in another way) that logically it makes no sense to do it.

Americans accepting everything at face value is what got us into this mess.

[WI_DEM]

12. No, it's a major decision and a week isn't that long to reflect on a important decision

[high density]

13. If you want people who have had experience in a Democratic White House...

...then your choices become limited to Clinton people. That's just a fact of how the last three decades have played out.

[Skwmom]

16. Did the Clinton people all have prior Whitehouse experience?

[cali]

21. duh. yes. unless you want to use bushy people.

or superannuated Carter folk- many of whom are dead.

[Skwmom]

23. Did you understand my question.?

Obama has to pick people with Whitehouse experience so he has to pick Clinton people.

My question: Did the Clinton admin only pick people with prior Whitehouse experience?

When is the new blood, the new talent going to come into play when all you do is use retreads? Especially retreads that played an important role in destroying our economic and financial system.

[high density]

28. No, Clinton didn't pick experienced people and he had a very difficult time getting started

"At first glance it looks like the ‘Clinton restoration’ that Barack Obama’s victory had seemingly forestalled. In fact however, Mr Obama’s selection of many aides associated with the last Democratic president obeys a deeper logic – of ensuring his administration hits the ground running, something Bill Clinton signally failed to achieve when he took power in January 1993."

"The lesson of both Carter and Clinton administrations is that prior government experience is essential if a new White House team is to be effective. In 1977, Jimmy Carter brought with him a so-called ‘Georgia Mafia,’ superloyal to the new President, but which quickly antagonised the Democratic barons who then ran Capitol Hill.

Something similar happened 16 years later when Bill Clinton arrived. Unlike Mr Obama, he waited almost two months before making key White House staff appointments. When he finally did, many were old associates from Arkansas – like Thomas ‘Mack’ McLarty, a childhood friend of Mr Clinton but who was out of his depth as chief of staff, and replaced after barely 18 months in the job. "

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/rupert-cornwell/rupert-cornwell-returning-to-the-past-is-way-forward-for-obama-1023027.html

[No Elephants]

46. All the people being put in now will have new people working with them and learning from them. The

minute any of the Clinton people are seen to be undermining Obama--who IS the change we can believe in--they will be gone and those training under them will step in. At least, that is what I assume would happen. And I assume that because it happens in business, in education, etc.

[No Elephants]

45. Before Clinton? No. But the Clinton transition was not an especially good one. Now, they do have

prior experience.

[Occam Bandage]

17. No. In fact, Obama is moving much more quickly than most President-elects do.

[Skwmom]

26. We heard before that he was working on his transition for some time.

The point of my post is that he already made a deal with the Clintons to make her SOS but they are dragging the role out to keep people from thinking a deal was made. A lot of people are shaking their heads over this move b/c it doesn't seem to make any sense. But if her selection is the result of a prior, it does make sense.

[Occam Bandage]

31. Bill Clinton's process was so entangled that he didn't announce most of his picks until January.

Claiming conspiracy because of a one-week deliberation process over the most important cabinet post is kind of silly.

[Skwmom]

37. Hmm.... silly? Sounds like a logical guess as to why he went down this path.

Silly is accepting as fact:

1. The Clintons, the ultimate politicians, never asked for any quid pro quo.
2. That Hillary Clinton is SOOOOOOOOOOOO qualified that Obama just had to ask her and no one else would do.
3. That Obama will be able to control the Clintons.
4. That the Clintons can pass the vetting checklist that was leaked.

Silly....now, that is silly. :rofl: :rofl:

[No Elephants]

47. I don't know if there was a deal or not. But, since when is a deal a "conspiracy?"

[Skwmom]

54. When you want to sell the idea that Obama needs Hillary for her brilliance and qualifications

and no quid pro quo was involved :rofl:

[cali]

19. I don't know why I bother with your posts

they're invariably filled with misinformation and speculation rooted in it.

Here goes anyway:

Biden is not especially close to the Clintons. And virtually every high profile dem in public life was an ally of the Clintons. He was prez for 8 years and she sits in the Senate.

Rahm Emanuel is closer to Obama than to Clinton. He endorsed neither Clinton or Obama in the primaries. His family and Obamas are quite friendly.

When have the Clintons slammed Kerry or Richardson for wanting to be SoS?

Your post is typically mindless. Your conspiracy driven bullshit is as weak as it gets.

[FrenchieCat]

33. I'm trying to think of what the Clintons could have done during the convention

that would not have made their political lives miserable from that point on.

Do you really think that the Clintons had a card to play that they held back on?
I think if they would have had the leverage that you claimed, and made things difficult
for Barack Obama during the convention, they would be the most hated couple in the world.
All eyes were on them to perform as Democrats.
Had they done anything else other than what they did, all hell would have broken loose.

My point is that the Clintons had no leverage with which to bargain with.
Obama won the nomination and was going to be the nominee regardless.
For the Clintons to have been seen as sabotaging the First Black Democratic Presidential Nominee,
would have been the end of the Clinton legacy, and effectively their careers. period.

[Skwmom]

41. It's threatening the scorched earth option or other things.

It could have been something like .... it is going to be really, really, really hard for me to keep Bill and some of our supporters in line if I don't get SOS. Plus, having other people remind him of what a thorn in his side she could be in the Senate.....

I think they had cards to play. Not cards enough to give her the VP slot but cards enough to give her SOS.

The downside potential for Hillary Clinton as SOS is huge so I can't just see going down this path w/out it being part of a brokered deal. But can you imagine the negative reaction to the Clintons if it became public that it was part of a deal - which is why I could see coming up with a strategy to keep people from suspecting the most reasonable answer to - Why Hillary?

[No Elephants]

48. When the primaries were over, they met. There was clearly a deal that he help her with

fundraising to pay off the debt she had run up and they would appear together at Unity and several fundraising events. Between those events and the Convention, she did very little campaigning for Obama. This was in sharp contrast to Dean, who no sooner dropped out than he began two months of campaigning for Kerry. At and after the Convention, though, Obama got a lot of support from Hillary and some from Bill as well. Now, it is possible that Obama did not ask for help from them until that point. He does believe in a strong finish. However, it is also possible that they struck a deal a short time before the Convention. Insisting that there was a deal is speculative. But so is insisting that there was no deal.

[Skwmom]

51. Did you read my post about Bolton above?

He predicted back in Jul that she would wind up in the state department.

A deal is the ONLY thing that makes sense.

[Jennicut]

36. So the Clintons picked Biden as VP, Emmanuel as COS and put Hillary in as SoS

That is too funny for words! Hello. Anyone got a brain? Obama picked Biden for his foreign policy experience, Rahm because being from Illinois he has known him for years and Hillary as possible SoS because he wants to and thinks she might actually be the right person for the job . Obama has not been forced into anything, its just your paranoia has gotten out of control.

[Skwmom]

44. Rahm is the perfect person that both sides would have agreed upon.

He is someone both sides would trust. Maybe one of his jobs is to enforce the brokered agreement.

And with Clinton as SOS, they would need a VP that she got along with.

The Clintons would have been idiots to broker a SOS slot w/out making sure there were "safeguards" in place that things wouldn't turn sour.

[No Elephants]

50. It doesn't have to be either that they agreed on everyone or that there was no deal at all. And

speculating about a deal is not paranoia. Why are some people assuming that making a deal has to be a bad thing?

[Skwmom]

53. Because it doesn't fit in with the storyline that Clinton was only picked b/c

Obama wasn't satisfied with Richardson and Kerry, that he needed the more qualified Clinton - which is downright laughable.

The Clintons are trying to sell themselves as the selfless duo, who didn't expect anything in return, but will make any sacrifice (even stopping all of Bill's Mother Theresa work) so Hillary can serve her country.

The more I think about it the more I think this had to be the result of a prior deal, especially the way the Clintons are trying to package it.

Paranoia? The Clintons eat, live, breathe, and sleep political manipulation.

[HughMoran]

43. Who cares

Putting her as SOS is good for him strategically, so I don't care if/when he decided to do this - it's a done deal and I'm happy about it.

[Skwmom]

52. Big difference between being asked to serve and forcing your way

into an administration (and trying to get back at Richardson and Kerry in the process). Obama wasn't satisfied with them so he sought out Clinton, Richardson was only talked to b/c he was a backup, Richardson wasn't smart enough to be VP, they wanted their quid pro quo, and all of the other low digs.

Pretty sad if the only way you can become SOS is to use strong arm tactics and political hacks. But hey, what's a girl supposed to do when she doesn't have the qualifications.

Bill Clinton saying they didn't expect this reward was the biggest red flag that something wasn't as it seemed. The Clintons not expecting a quid pro quo. No, that doesn't pass the smell test.

[HughMoran]

55. You can enjoy all the speculation you want about the "girl"

I find your post presumptuous and insulting to Obama and Democrats everywhere.

[Cleita]

56. You could override the White House by replacing the DINOs in Congress

and entrenched Republicans in the next election with more progressive candidates, and making sure you have a veto proof majority in Congress. Then the lawmakers can make the laws we want and any Clintonites and the President really can't do anything about it. I think though that once the make up of Congress changes, the White House will go along with it.