Why the Obama administration would want to create a sense of doubt, disarray, and even panic by swapping out Vice-President Biden for Hillary Clinton is beyond me, but that doesn’t keep idiots like Bill Keller from revisiting the issue over and over. The reasoning is terrible. No allegation is made that Joe Biden is a liability or that he is doing a bad job. The purpose of the change wouldn’t be that it was necessary, only that it would help Obama run-up-the-score and get a better Congress. Well, that, and it would create a better heir-apparent to Obama for the 2016 campaign. The former rationale is plausible, but also highly doubtful. Clinton could help Obama win more comfortably and have more coattails. I can’t rule that possibility out. But she could also make him look wobbly and indecisive. She would excite one element of the Democratic Party while deflating Obama’s core supporters, who presumably supported him because they saw something less than ideal in Clinton. If the president were desperate, the potential reward might outweigh the risk, but that is not currently the case. As for the latter rationale, both Clinton and Biden will be on the old side by 2016. But neither of them will be too old to run. Biden is seven years younger than Ron Paul, just to make one comparison.
If Clinton wants to run in 2016, there is no reason in the world why she would need to be the sitting vice-president to do it. She could resign from the State Department after the election, take some time off to rest and recuperate from her vigorous schedule, and then start ramping up a campaign in 2014. A little distance from the sitting administration would probably be an asset. It would give her the ability to create some separation and enjoy some maneuverability. If Obama loses his reelection, she’ll probably be the undisputed front-runner in 2016. There’s so little upside for her, that I very much doubt she wants the job. She’d probably take it if asked, but unwillingly.
It’s just a dumb idea.
I think if they could do it without terrible, terrible optics it might not be a bad idea, but I think that’s essentially impossible. Biden’s done a fine job as VP, and I think Hilary’s the odds-on favorite for 2016 nominee regardless of whether Obama is re-elected, and regardless of what her job title in the Obama Administration is. The President has got a challenging campaign ahead of him because the economy is awful; making it look like his Administration is in chaos sure as hell won’t help with that.
I agree that the economy is the key issue in determining November’s election. And nobody knows what will happen in the economy over the next 10 months.
Having said that, as Brien Beutler reports at TPM http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/01/morning-in-america-the-rapid-economic-recovery-conservati
ves-are-praying-against.php?ref=fpblg , there’s data to suggest that the US economy will perform better in 2012 than most forecasters predict.
And if that happens, then it’s hard for me to see how Romney (or any Republican nominee) keeps the race close…let alone wins.
It’s such a stupid idea I couldn’t even bring myself to read it. So thank you, Boo, for doing that for me. I seem to remember Reich had something much the same a few weeks ago.
If Obama loses his reelection, she’ll probably be the undisputed front-runner in 2016.
Democrats don’t take very well to 2nd place finishers. Democrats preferred Obama in ’08, why would they want Hillary Clinton in ’16?
Joe is the punching bag for a lot of comedians, like Jay Leno, who is very unfair about Joe. While Joe is sometimes guilty of speaking too fast, I have a lot of respect for him, and believe that he is a real asset.
He does need to become the heavy a bit more, and go out and bring the thunder. That would be a much better role. Especially if the Willard becomes the nominee. Let Biden go on a “Bain Destruction” tour, where he goes to every state to highlight the destruction that Bain Capital brought.
This is just a lead trial balloon that’ll only go so far as a real lead balloon will go.
But, from my POV, I don’t see this as such a bad idea, such as it is. Of course this would have been a terrible idea in 2009 and 2010, but now I think many of Obama’s 2008 voters are giving this a resounding “What’s the difference?”.
The idealism and “hope” of 2008 has long since evaporated. Obama right now looks wobbly and indecisive anyhow (save for his right-wing foreign policy decisions which make him look like Margaret Thatcher–insert random misogyny accusations here).
Obama was undoubtedly the STAR of the 2008 show. Biden was a a nonentity. Obama would have won even if Jessica Rabbit was the VP nom. (No, that wasn’t a Palin swipe but it would be funny if I were even so clever.)
Now that all of the idealism has collapsed, something needs to stoke those oh-so-cold embers back to some semblance of flame. We all know that policy won’t be that something. So what else have they got to give? More optical illusions.
What’s the difference? Indeed.
“… Obama right now looks wobbly and indecisive …” Yes, to the same people he always looked wobbly and indecisive to. To everybody else, and that’s the vast majority of Democrats and a lot of independents, he’s looking more steady and decisive than ever.
I think this comes from Hillary saying she was not going to be SoS in the 2nd term (should there be one).
Also, Biden has a foreign policy background and is said have wanted that job at one point.
I would like to see Obama groom an heir-apparent as I don’t think Hillary will want to run in 2016 and Biden will be long in the tooth by then.
Perhaps the best thing is to stay with Biden through the election, Hillary resigns after the first term, move Biden to state and then there will be a former Governor of Montana that might make an excellent VP as I think he will be term-limited by that time.
A major problem with getting Hillary is Bill. They are still 2 for 1.
This all comes from the Clinton camp. It’s been going on for well over a year. It was she might run in 2012 and then VP.
Hillary had the best shot at being elected prez in 2008.
It seems that Keller forgets that Obama makes the decision on VP and it is a real insult to Biden. Biden handled the SOFA with Iraq. He was quiet about it.
Fish got to swim, birds got to fly, Villagers got to push dumb ideas.
Bonus points: among the
realolder white Americans whom the Villagers claim to know so well, Biden is way more popular that Hillary.Obama has basically frozen out most of the Clinton-hangersoners.
they want a way back in.
this idiocy is their way of trying to feel important again.
Bingo.
Possible advantage: lots of press to Obama’s foreign policy successes. Such as:
Biden was a player in all foreign policy decisions, but Hillary was arguably more visible. She’s certainly not known for her gaffes, nor did she have any involvement in all the Congressional negotiations.
While one might question whether Biden’s family wants to spend more time with him, any successful 69 year-old politician can plausibly claim wanting to spend more time with family.
Not sure why Obama would want to take the risk, just saying the media is likely to respond with a slew of stories relating to Obama’s overseas successes.
Which would make him…drumroll…74 years old in five years time. I’m struggling to think of what could be a funnier juxtaposition than Democrats lining up behind Joe Biden after everything that was said about McCain’s age in 2008.
Also, too, you lot would be a lot happier in life if you would just stop reading the Washington Post and NYT op-ed pages, I should think.
This is just poop-stirring by a Villager. I would read absolutely nothing about Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, the Clintonites, the PUMAs, or anyone else connected with the principals here. This is almost certainly not coming from Kamp Klinton. It’s just a columnist who needs to fill some inches and wants to see if he can start a fight.
Barack Obama is the best president of my lifetime, and Hillary, one of the great Secretaries of State in this nation’s history.
Silliness that won’t happen for the above reasons.
For archival purposes.
http://www.salon.com/2012/01/09/bill_keller_writes_newest_dumbest_biden_clinton_2012_swap_piece/