digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Clinton to force herself as VP - over Obama's objection

metaobama.com — Why is Clinton still in now that the math makes victory impossible? Because this is how she accrues enough delegates to force herself onto the ballot in the Vice President slot. She only needs to convince about 100 Obama delegates or superdelegates to overrule Obama's VP choice in order to force herself onto the ballot as VP.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • noprtyaff, on 05/07/2008, -14/+1"Even as far gone as America is, it's still hard to imagine a majority of voters will vote for a half-black, half-foreign Democrat with the hardest Left voting record in the Senate who has openly consorted with racist black nationalists and unrepentant terrorists for so many years, and who will push as aggressively as possible for even more discrimination against the white majority and even more immigration. In addition to that baggage, Obama has nothing like the requisite experience to be president. Our two quite young presidents, T. Roosevelt and Kennedy, both had much more relevant experience when they came on the presidential stage. It is patently obvious to all but the most addled liberals that Obama is where he is only because he is a presentable black." -Howard Sutherland
    • maikai, on 05/07/2008, -1/+5a presentable black???? presentable???
    • bullcutter, on 05/07/2008, -2/+6***** that stuffy racist prick, whoever he is.

      Isn't it funny how conservatives are ALWAYS the ONLY people to bring up Obama's race?

      They are hoping to play on fears of the ignorant and weak-minded by dropping the race card at every opportunity they get. But what they fail to realize is that the majority of the racist ***** who are gullible enough to believe them are voting Republican anyway, so there's no votes lost here.

      Sorry you dirty ***** but your trick isn't working this time. Its been more than 40 years now since the civil rights movement, and Americans are too advanced to fall back the centuries in thinking you would like them to.

      People from all walks of life will come out in droves to vote (many for the first time) in the presidential election FOR OBAMA, which will far outweigh the racist Democrat factor. Millions of Republicans will vote for Obama as well as they are coming to realize their own nominee is a mediocre used car salesman.
    • schroeder, on 05/08/2008, -1/+2Why are you quoting a retard?
  • NoDrama, on 05/07/2008, -0/+14Ludicrous notion. The nominee doesn't have to accept an adversarial VP candidate.
    • littlequeenie, on 05/07/2008, -1/+5Hope you're right!!! I don't know why people call this a dream ticket - it would be more like a nightmare. Can you imagine trying to govern wondering which of the Clintons was about to backstab you?
    • gary210, on 05/08/2008, -1/+1I looked at the Dem party rules to find support for this idea while writing the blog piece, but I couldn't find any. As I read it, the delegates elect both candidates separately. If you can find the place in the rules where the nominee can reject a VP candidate elected by the delegates, I would be (a) thrilled, and (b) happy to update my article to reflect that the scenario is impossible. I think, unfortunately, that it is in fact quite possible under the rules. In any event, the delegates could amend the rules to expressly permit it if they wanted to.
    • tcbishop12, on 05/08/2008, -0/+3The convention delegates will always defer to the nominee's own choice. Show me one example where they haven't - in other words, where the nominee's choice of running mate has not been ratified by the delegates, and the nominee forced to accept another choice. Hasn't happened.
  • rrouse, on 05/07/2008, -2/+9Mr Sutherland, considering that George Bush is our current President, Obama is more then qualified for the job. I don't consider GW a presentable white.
    • noprtyaff, on 05/07/2008, -5/+1And McCain would be GW II. All three of the remaining candidates are utterly terrible. Have a nice day.
  • MindyB, on 05/07/2008, -1/+6HELL NO!! I can just see that, Hillary sabotaging Obama's Presidential campaign with dirty underhanded crap. NO WAY! That would definitely assure a Democratic loss in the general election. She is too full of herself to not try to sabotage him. He needs to keep her very far away from the general election contest.
  • BishkekBuddy, on 05/08/2008, -1/+6The sad thing about the Clintons is they continue to feel they "own" the Democratic Party, that the Dems will do what they wants just because they want it. I don't want to see Hellary anywhere NEAR the ticket!
    Obama has:
    a) the largest fundraising machine any candidate has ever put together
    b) won the most States
    c) won the most popular vote
    d) won the most pledged delegates
    e) the message and the agenda Dems most want to see

    HE has the power in the Democratic Party and, as our Presumptive Nominee, can pick and choose his own VP running mate.
    • tcbishop12, on 05/08/2008, -1/+2Thanks, Anja. Not to mention that Sen. Obama needs someone that he can actually trust as a running mate. Nor would I put it past Hillary to intentionally sabotage the ticket in favor of a run in 2012. Plus - Hillary's most recent comments about race just take her out of any consideration.

      I haven't considered geo-political pairings, but in terms of experience and leadership, I'd say that Richardson would make an excellent VP choice.
  • unpolloloco, on 05/08/2008, -3/+3might vote for McCain after all.......
  • bitfreak, on 05/08/2008, -1/+6Putting Hillary on the Obama ticket is like putting a tire filled with concrete around his neck and dropping him off in shark infested waters; she will get him killed. And that IS a double entenrde.
  • holdencaulfield, on 05/08/2008, -1/+3having a clinton as your vp is like signing your own death wish... seriously...
  • whataboutdave, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1I would vote for McCain if Obama chose Hillary as his running mate. No joke.
  • DangerCollie, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1Sheez, you guys. This is politics, not warfare. He would be foolish not to consider her as a running mate. That doesn't mean he'll do it, but he'll consider it. And it's not out of the question. Her appeal to older voters, women and swing voters is something he'll consider carefully. Plus it's the Clintons. That's a political and fund raising powerhouse. A popular ex-president on the campaign trail. She'd be on anyone's short list.
    Now the flip side of the coin. There are good reasons not to pick her. He could select someone with more appeal to conservative voters that bolsters his defense credentials like Wesley Clark. Put Clark out there talking about Obama's plan for getting us out of Iraq.
    What he's not going to do is be forced by anyone to pick a running mate he doesn't want. Have you learned nothing about this man in the last year? He went up against one of the most entrenched and well-financed political machines in the world, one that was all but ordained for the nomination, and came out on top. Do not underestimate him. I'm glad he's a nice guy because I wouldn't want to be on his bad side.
  • mikesbaker, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1I guess if that happens you guys are gonna vote McCain?
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.