How could this ever be possible with the negative PERSONAL attacks going on. Both sides, and most especially Clinton, are creating sound-bites that play right into the hands of the GOP. They are wearing down the voters, diminishing the stature of them both in the eyes of the populous.

After the things that have been sent back and forth, not just on policy, but statements about how one or the other is entirely unqualified, etc...how would this ever be viable, much less possible?

There are many who have passed the threshold for being VP. As for Hillary, she should be asked.

Oh, the guy unqualified to be CiC is qualified to be a heartbeat away? That's rich.

WHEN Obama is nominated, he will choose somebody like Jim Webb or Wesley Clark. Hillary would be an actual detriment to the ticket.

Oh, and Rendall is a moron, but everybody knew that already.

It might make sense if Hillary had any other way to win except by theft, and if she had chosen to go another route than declaring war on Obama and going scorched earth. It's hard to imagine a united party after this. She has been endorsing McCain over Obama so how would she possible turn around as VP and support an Obama presidency.

Why do I care what Ed Rendell thinks?

Ed Rendell is supposed to be a politically savvy guy. I just wonder how he is supposed to be an honest broker here when he is busy trashing Obama in his state, and casting doubts that Obama can win because people in Penn. are so racist and just wouldn't vote for a black man. Sheesh.. we have a bunch of jerks in the Dem. party.

This has nothing to do with a dream ticket.

Clinton wants to appear as the one who has the best interests of the party in mind, while Obama will be made to look selfish if he does not want her on the ticket.

If Clinton somehow steals the nomination, she will have some excuse ready for why Obama can't be on the ticket after all.

Dream ticket? For the Republicans. Even without the nastiness, think about it: A ticket to energize both racists and those who hate Hillary. The idea that people who are supposed to be our leaders and serious commentators on public affairs could consider this for more than a moment is truly frightening.

Big mistake. Give Hillary some important role, not VP.

My honest guess here. She's angling for some kind of "prize" as a way of conceding.

But a joint ticket for these two. No, I see it as a big mistake. Big mistake. Dishonors either one of them. I just don't see the "chemistry" working here.

Give Hillary the Majority Leadership Role. She's a fighter. That's a great place for her!!!

Barack is the diplomat. Really, we need a prez who's a diplomat, not a Warlord.

You may be right on this one. Like Karl Rove, Hillary's team does nothing without a political reason

In retrospect, Ed Rendell was right, if uncouth, in his comments about racial sentiments among blue-collar white voters posing an obstacle to Obama's post-racial, green, black, and creative class coalition. Obama has won white, blue-collar voters only in states with little to no racial diversity or tensions like IA and WI. In states like MA and OH (and probably PA) the Archie Bunker Reagan Democrats have been tough for him to crack.

On the VP question, although it has seemed Clinton would need him more than he Clinton, after TX and OH I'm afraid its becoming more true for both of them.

i'm of the opinion that two senators on the ticket is not wise.

In the unlikely event that Clinton gains the nomination, if I stood in Sen. Obama's place, and got a VP offer from the Clinton campaign, I would refuse. And I would do it publicly.

I'd be very sure to say something about how curious it is that someone who has just run a campaign based on personal vilification, misrepresentation, outright lies, and an overt endorsement of the Republican opposition would even think to ask about sharing a ticket.

And I would not do it in writing, I'd go on Olbermann, and possibly CNN, and any other broadcast outlet I could find. And then I'd settle back in to a long Senate career.

It would be like a four-year migraine, being her VP.

The probable loser of the nomination had best STFU, if this is to have any chance.

Biden is angling for Sec of State, and he'd be a good one. He's too old to follow on as Pres.

Dodd would also be a good Cabinet member, but we can't lose all Senate seats. As VP he's more of a domestic choice. Obama needs a strong foreign policy VP

Richardson would be solid. No complaints. Good political choice.

Webb is the best, bcs he has the right profile to advise on Iraq and Afghanistan, good foreign policy credentials (and votes). Plus he brings a certain toughness to the ticket that the others wouldn't. He's smart, on the right side of issues (except guns, ) and has a similar temperament as Obama: cool, measured, clearthinking.

This is very likely true. Obama should start floating some possible roles for her in his administration to see if there is any interest. I think she would be a good Majority Leader. Can't be any worse than Reid. (Who could be?)

Honestly, what I think is going on here is Hillary is trying to get voters to believe they'll get a two-fer, i.e., "Vote for me in the primaries and caucuses, and you'll still get Obama." It's clever but disingenuous (what else is new?). I do think having Obama as a running mate would help Clinton's prospects if she were to become the nominee, but the reverse would not be true. She would drag him down and give more fuel to the GOP attack machine.

Personally, I would like to see an Obama/Richardson ticket (although, as a Virginian, I am also a huge Jim Webb fan). Richardson would add the veneer of "experience," plus he would presumably offer access to Hispanic voters, currently a sticking point for Obama.

I can think of one really good reason for them to run together... just imagine the psycho-acrobatics of the GOP trying not to appear bigoted.

Rove has already said to lay off using "Hussein."

How are they going to be able to practice their "politics as usual?"

jwszoid writes:

How does Hillary say she wants Obama as his running mate, when she has said less than a week ago that he is not up to the all-important 'threshold' to be commander in chief that she is, should something happen to her?

Conversely, how could Barack put Hillary on the ticket after this remark? McCain could put together a very nice ad with her quote: VP candidate says Pres candidate isn't qualified to commander in chief. Not good.

All this speculation in the press and the back and forth bickering of between the likely democratic nominee is hurting the Democratic party.

What we are witnessing is a failure of leadership within the Democratic Party.

There needs to be leadership that steps forward and backs one of the candidates. Allowing this to go on with this tone and tenor is nothing but a death knell for our party.

Democrats cannot take back the WH with all these public displays of tantrums and dissension. The world is laughing at these folks with an obscene amount of money bashing one another and their party.

Those superdelegates who did not come out and back one candidate are the real problem here. This race should be shut down at this point.

Hillary Clinton has done the unforgiveable and that is flout the other parties nominee as better to lead this country. That is unacceptable and most assuredly will contribute to the GOP winning the WH.

Hillary needs to be denounce and rejected by the Democratic party period. Her actions are deplorable and untenable in terms of being able to accept the nomination as she has clearly defined McCain as not just superior to her party opponent but who is unrefutably significantly superior to what she brings to the table in terms of experience as her democratic rival, as far superior experience to her as well when it comes to foreign policy.

After all, experience is supposedly what one needs to acquire wisdom and judgment garned by life lessons. Neither, Hillary nor McCain had the judgment to opposed the biggest foreign policy strategic disaster in the history of the United States. So much for the value of their 'lifetime experience'

Experience for the Presidency does not begin in Washington, and nor should it, as that was not the intent of the founding fathers. Life experience to be President is garnered from being of the people, among the people and for the people for which this republic stands. One nation not an 'inside the beltway' district.

Hillary is unacceptable to be the party nominee.

If this was corporate America she would have been fired for those remarks as it was the equivalent of saying that she thought the other biggest competitor company was better than the staff at her company. So, buy the competitors product or if she was in the NFL she is the backup quarterback on the bench for the Colts and saying that the Pats starting QB is better than the starting QB for the Colts.

Hillary has to go.

The party leadership is seriously remiss for not rebuking her.

We should see a steady stream of party elder statemans in the press every day renouching her for dissing her own party.

Anything short of this is a party train wreck and meltdown waiting to happen.

Somebody has got to have the political courage and guts to kick these phucking Clintons off the stage.

Who will it be?

This is the second or third indication from the Hillary camp that they would accept a joint ticket.

HILLARY IS ANGLING FOR THE VICE-PRESIDENT SPOT

The problem is that her campaigning over the last 10 days has been so dumb that she has hurt her own political value. How can you take a running who has endorsed your opponent.

I think Obama is too proud to forget the tenor of this primary campaign. I think he'll have a hard time being in the same room with the woman after this.

I think that Clinton would think the VP position beneath her historic call to ascend to the holiest of holies.

the Clinton camp also doesn't seem to pick up on their own air of condescension when the talk about the candidate who is leading in voters and delegates (that would be Obama) accepting the position of VP.

"Oh, this little young guy will be happy with this bone we throw him." He's BEATING you, you moron.

Despite the fact that Hillary mentioned the same thing, methinks Ed's mouth is already getting ahead of his authority with the Clinton camp.

On the other hand, "Fast Eddie" and the Clintons are intertwined in numerous ways -- not only did Bill appoint Ed's wife to the Third Circuit, but they also named him head of the DNC. More troublingly, they both were/are deeply intertwined with Norman Hsu and Bill's business partner, Burkle, who co-hosted a Hillary fundraiser with Hsu at Burkle's California estate.

Hsu, aside from bundling nearly a million for Hillary, also gave heavily to the Clinton Global Initiative. If they ever get around to divulging who financed Bill's taxpayer supported library, you'll likely find Hsu/Hong Kong/Chinese mainland money, there, too.

Ed isn't much for conflict, so aside from not wanting all the dirty Hsu-Burkle-Kazhakstan-Red Chinese business to become public, he probably wants everyone to make nice before somebody gets indicted.

Like the man said, follow the money. When are those tax returns coming out, again?

Starting in 2003, Hsu began contributing to, and collecting contributions for, the Democratic Party,[17][19][23][24] although he did not join the party and was not registered to vote.[25][26] He also donated to causes such as the Innocence Project and Clinton Global Initiative.[2] He also became a trustee of The New School in New York, to whom he donated $100,000 and provided the money for a scholarship.[27] Democratic Party figures did not know much about him or his businesses, but appreciated his support;[2] he became known to them as someone who could quickly raise large amounts of money,[23] and as someone who networked tirelessly and always found ways to be included in high-profile events.[28] By 2007, Hsu's status within Hillary Rodham Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign had risen to the level where he was a "HillRaiser",[23][29] someone who had "bundled" more than $100,000 for her campaign, and to where he co-hosted a $1 million fundraiser at wealthy Democratic Party supporter Ron Burkle's Beverly Hills estate,[3] and in September, he was scheduled to co-host a major gala fundraising event featuring music legend Quincy Jones.[17]

Great website management. You trashed my entire comment after I signed in. Oh well.

Hillary's campaign is schizophrenic

1) he's not vetted. he's not past CIC threshold. ad nauseum

2) he'd make a swell VP (or Pres)

I think part of the two-fer ticket talk here, though, is her trying to tie herself to his popularity in Miss.

Obama will be recorded as on of the greatest hypocrites in history if he sells out to run with Hillary Bush-Clinton-Bush-Bush-Clinton-Clinton in any way shape or form. The CHANGE Obama promises to lead cannot happen with the Bushes or the Clintons anywhere near the White Hosue.

An Obama-Clinton or Clinton-Obama ticket is a victory for the dishonest, warmongering, corporate driven, Washington-establishment, Bush-Clinton STATUS QUO, and for Bush-Rove-Clinton politics.

Obama can win the presidency on his own with integrity, vision, leadership committted to REAL CHANGE. Or, he can embrace the Clintons and their brand of power and seling influence to the highest bidder.

I for one hope and pray Obama is the man he claims to be and will never compromise his standadrds and values to run with the Clintons.