<p>Oh, IM, I agree with you. But if it did happen, it wouldn’t cost Hillary my vote.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’ve got to be kidding! Politics at this level is about virtually nothing else other than the candidates’ egos.</p>
<p>So do all you BO supporters actually think that HRC diehards are going to throw their vote at him come November? Just look at the hatred here toward HRC. I believe there is similar hatred going the other way. And I also believe the majority of those that support HRC do so because of her experience and more moderate views which more closely parallel McCain’s vs BO’s. Why would the moderate Democrats suddenly feel the need to support a radical socialist?</p>
<p>I’m open to singing La Boheme at the Met.</p>
<p>I’m open to playing shortstop for the Yankees.</p>
<p>I’m open to being the next Queen of England.</p>
<p>Rated PG:</p>
<p>Radical Socialist? Have you actually taken the time to look at BO’s positions vs. HRC? Not very different at all. Look at the facts at [OnTheIssues.org</a> - Candidates on the Issues](<a href=“http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm]OnTheIssues.org”>OnTheIssues.org - Candidates on the Issues) instead of believing sound bites.</p>
<p>Real Democrats will vote Obama, not McCain.</p>
<p>You are perpetuating a stereotype. I have to wonder why.</p>
<p>There does seem to be a sort of cognitive dissonance at work when people insist that Clinton’s stand on the issues is a lot more moderate than Obama’s. That’s why this race has come down to things that have little to do with the issues, namely race and gender.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree with this. There is a large number of Hillary supporters who say they will never vote for Obama – and it’s not just women. You can call it what you want, but it’s going to be a major problem for Obama in the general, especially when McCain has already been turning his attention to those disgruntled supporters.</p>
<p>Three words: Circular Firing Squad:rolleyes:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Too easy? Or easy as the walk in the park the primaries against a bunch of Washington empty suits, a poorly funded Hispanic, and an unknown from Illinois was supposed to be? Didn’t that backfire quite splendidly? This race should have been over in New Hampshire. </p>
<p>You are seriously overestimating Clinton’s draw and underestimating how much a large part of the country despises her. Inasmuch as she’ll add the *expected gender based * votes, this will be balanced by a greater number of voters who will feel compelled to cast an anti-Clinton vote. </p>
<p>A double minority ticket could be dream ticket, but could also be a nightmare ticket. Something that a very smart politician such as Obama knows very well. </p>
<p>His chances of winning will be slim … and slim to none with Clinton. </p>
<p>An easy victory? Pffffft!</p>
<p>I predict Obama will pick Bill Richardson [ latino, lots of government experience] Gov. New Mexico for his VP, and will win in Nov. Anyone want to place bets on other VP candidates’?</p>
<p>Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia [military experience, former Navy Sec. in Reagan Administration].</p>
<p>All it will take is 10% of Hillary’s voters to cross over for McCain to become our next Prez!</p>
<p>Kathleen Sibelius</p>
<p>“All it will take is 10% of Hillary’s voters to cross over for McCain to become our next Prez!”</p>
<p>Nope. Because the number of Republicans and independents who will vote for Obama (as proven in the primaries) far outstrips the number of Hillary Dems who might vote for McCain.</p>
<p>“So do all you BO supporters actually think that HRC diehards are going to throw their vote at him come November?”</p>
<p>Some of them, yes. Right now people have very fresh feelings of anger and disappointment. It’s a law of nature that hot things gradually cool down. Not everybody is going to come back on board with the party, but some will. Five months is a long time.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Other nope, here. The new youth vote for Obama will exceed all numbers of unsatisfied Clinton supporters. And I don’t think there will be that many. It’s unlikely they will carry some kind of grudge that lasts for five months. Of course, they are disappointed now and will respond negatively to a survey, but emotions will cool and their better judgement will prevail because Obama’s policy positions are the same basically as Clinton’s and far different from the Republican nominee’s.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why wouldn’t they? His positions on most issues are very close to hers (and both are far from McCain.)</p>
<p>By refusing to publicly admit defeat to Obama and to congratulate him for essentially locking up the nomination, Hillary has made it impossible for her to become the next VP. By not admitting defeat, she appears to be implying that she can ruin Obama’s chances if he doesn’t choose her to be his running mate. Therefore, if he does select her, everyone will see him as a complete wimp who could not even handle an individual whom he had already defeated fair and square. Obama already has problems with his reputation with regard to the appeasement issue. If he cannot even stand up to Hillary (after he legitimately beat her), then he obviously could not stand up to terrorists, heads of other countries, etc. Obama will not select Clinton unless he is a total moron (which I have not yet ruled out). If Obama selects anyone other than Hillary, he would likely be the favorite to win in November. If he shortsightedly selects Hillary, he cannot win. As far as Hillary being willing to consider the VP nomination, I can only say (using a crude but somewhat appropriate phrase that was popular 30 years ago, when I was in high school), “That is mighty white of her!”</p>
<p>While I find the continuing shenanigans and demonstrations of entitlement from Clinton entertaining, I would hope Obama picks a VP soon to shut up Clinton and her army of rabid supporters once for all.</p>
<p>“Why wouldn’t they? His positions on most issues are very close to hers (and both are far from McCain.)”</p>
<p>This is probably true, but I enjoy the irony. A common complaint from the Dems against GWB for the last 7 years was that he was too far right, too much of an idealogue (he wasn’t, really, but that’s beside the point); we want a more centrist president that can bring the country together. </p>
<p>Now, when given the choice between someone who has a proven track record of crossing the aisle and compromising, the Dems say, why would we want someone like that when we can get someone who is far left who has no track record of crossing the aisle on anything of substance.</p>
<p>Irony indeed.</p>