Regardless of whether it will actually happen, in a contest between Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, where would you stand?
Where did you stand in 2008?
About The Author
BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
57 Comments
Recent Posts
- Day 14: Louisiana Senator Approvingly Compares Trump to Stalin
- Day 13: Elon Musk Flexes His Muscles
- Day 12: While Elon Musk Takes Over, We Podcast With Driftglass and Blue Gal
- Day 11: Harm of Fascist Regime’s Foreign Aid Freeze Comes Into View
- Day 10: The Fascist Regime Blames a Plane Crash on Nonwhite People
Hillary changes the map. Recruit enough good women candidates at the House and Senate level and you could have a real groundswell.
I’d love her to offer the Veep spot to Diamond Joe, because he’s endlessly amusing.
But I don’t think Biden wins two terms, and Clinton does. And I don’t want the GOP back in the White House until my grandkids graduate from college.
My eldest kid is 12.
Does Biden want to be VP again?
Regardless of whether it will actually happen, in a contest between Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, where would you stand?
Neither. I’d vote in the general, but I wouldn’t vote for either of them in the primary.
Oppose both. Supported Gravel in 2008. Didn’t vote in primary bc I wasn’t registered at my college residence yet. I did attend a Hillary event bc Bill Clinton was speaking, and to enter you had to “promise” to vote Hillary, but I mostly went to meet Clinton.
I am not a fan of either one. I would be putting all time and resources on US House, Senate and local races.
BTW, I considered both Obama and Clinton in 2008 but went with Obama. Clinton said too many really dumb things (that I still cannot forget).
I’m for whoever is most likely to keep the Republicans out of the White House. Right now, that’s Hillary.
I was for Obama over Hillary last time, largely because I hated the idea of an alternation between political dynasties (bush/clinton/bush/clinton). I still don’t especially like the idea, but the consideration pales in comparison to my desire to keep the WH out of the hands of the crazies.
I’ve never been especially impressed by Hillary’s political talents, so I’m not 100% confident that she won’t blow it. If someone new comes along in the primary who seems to be a stronger candidate, I will not hesitate to jump ship. I don’t think that person is likely to be Biden, though. He’s tried several times and has never caught fire.
You gave an “either/or” choice.
If she were on the primary ballot, I would vote for Elizabeth Warren.
Why you ask? Because, IMO, she can express herself far more clearly in everyday (read: not fancy) words.
I’d rather keep Sen. Warren where she is, especially if Biden/Clinton/whoever had the guts to strongly support Warren’s efforts.
That said, if Warren chose to run for President, I’d back her.
Based on the above, enthusiasm for either one is low. Me too.
Neither of them wants to end the endless wars, nor do they take global warming or energy seriously.
Hoping we will have a better choice.
Will either of them throw the banksters in jail? How will either help rebuild the middle class and help the lower class reach the middle class? That’s another area where both stink.
If the president could rule by fiat then that would be easier, but with two other co-equal branches of government the president – any president – has limitations. That is a feature of our system of government, not a defect, even (especially!) when we would prefer decisive and quick action.
Yet there are certain bills that Obama(or any Democratic President really) can get the whole caucus to vote for no matter what. Of course those bills almost always benefit the .01% at the expense of the rest of the country.
Didn’t actually refute his point. Not that I was expecting you to.
Also, I don’t think you could get the entire Democratic caucus to vote to recognize Mothers Day.
Hillary. If we are doomed to a corporatist, at least run one that might get us the House and be able to govern. And she is a one who realizes regulations can be actually good for the fools.
Never been a big fan of Mr. Delaware.
That’s a really excellent point. One that Boo has made in the past. Hillary might have serious coattails.
Joe Biden is a fanatical drug warrior, and we are entering a period in which progress on that front might actually be possible. Clinton hasn’t exactly been a profile in courage on the issue, but she doesn’t seem to be a True Believer.
Continuing my family’s noted ability to pick winners, my support in 2008 went first to Dodd*, then Richardson, before settling on Obama.
*Yep, honest to God: Chris Dodd. The guy didn’t get 1% in Iowa; he didn’t something that rounded to 1%. Heck, he didn’t even get something that rounded to 0.1%. I consider myself part of an elite.
I supported Dodd early on, because he seemed to be Mr Progressive, mostly because he was good on the wiretap/civil liberties/NSA stuff. At that point (pre-financial crisis), his close relationship with Wall Street wasn’t an issue.
I’d have to pick Hillary Clinton over Biden. She isn’t perfect, but I can’t really think of a weakness she has that he doesn’t, and she’d be much stronger in the general election.
Wow, I found the other one!
I’d be OK with either Clinton or Biden. Biden, however, has run for president twice already and not gotten very far either time. Clinton has run once and almost made it, plus Bill won, too. I would imagine that Clinton could clean Biden’s clock.
I’ve long admired Biden but his chance was in “88. If he ran now, he’d make a poor showing and be out in the early rounds. His gaffs would be ridiculed in the media. Though it’s not surprising to hear his supporters talk tough, I don’t think he runs unless Hillary takes a pass, and maybe not even then.
Joe Biden, in large part because I believe loyalty should be rewarded (pro-Biden) and entirely because I oppose the Clintons (anti-Clinton).
I’ve got to agree with you Oscar. What I think of Biden now is nothing like what I thought of him 10 years ago. To me he looked very good in the debate with Ryan and in the convention. Biden has great people smarts and from what I understand he had about the smallest personal fortune of any senator, though he was senator for a long time. That tells you something.
I don’t like Hillary because her candidacy would represent the re-empowerment of the DLC. They nearly destroyed the Democratic Party before and they would do it again. Yes we would win and win big, but you might just find that your Democratic Party had morphed into the old Republican Party, much more so than it ever could do under Bill Clinton. (And that was bad enough.)
Ride or Die Joe, Baby.
Ride or Die Joe.
Anyone who thinks that the vice-president can take a position independent of the president of his administration simply has no knowledge of politics or government. You are his choice in a political marriage, and he expects your absolute loyalty.–Hubert Humphrey
Joe Biden was Barack Obama’s choice in a political marriage and he gave this president his absolute loyalty. I will reward that loyalty with my vote if he runs. Period.
Joe Biden’s loyalty is admirable.
But won’t that loyalty end, and Joe Biden go back to being who he was in the Senate (Mr. Mandatory Minimums) once he is no longer Obama’s Vice President?
Neither but I’ll go with Hillary (if I have to choose) because she’ll keep the White House in Democratic hands.
Like no other Democratic candidate could possibly do that, especially given the state of the national GOP today?
It’s really too early to prognosticate about 2016, but the question was simply about Clinton vs Biden.
Umm,perhaps you need to actually read the question this time around because I answered it directly.
The question:
Once again, my answer:
Neither but I’ll go with Hillary (if I have to choose) because she’ll keep the White House in Democratic hands.
See how that works?
As to the remainder of your comment, as you say, the question was simply about Clinton vs Biden. And my comment did not go beyond those parameters. Note, you are suggesting that others could do the same, I confined my answer to the two individuals named.
Doesn’t that imply that Biden would not keep the White House in Democratic hands? Or at least you have serious doubts about it.
Pass. Pathetic that the so-called reality party can’t do better than pin their hope on retaining the WH with one of two senior citizens that have been around forever and played a role in creating all messes we’re in today.
It’s sort of hilarious looking at a thread full of people sticking up their noses to potential democratic nominees, when, quite frankly, the consequence of electing a republican president at this moment in history would be so utterly disastrous.
Maybe you all think you’d be “lucky” and escape the worst of it; maybe some of you just don’t fully understand how tea party policies, enacted on a national scale, will screw you and yours; maybe some of you are wealthy enough that you think you can afford to be picky. But a republican in the white house, with a gerrymandered GOP House, could easily dismantle every remaining social safety net this country has and create misery the likes of which I doubt most of you can imagine.
It’s all fun and games, now, but wise up before it matters or a lot of very nice people will pay a very, very steep price.
You know how long I’ve been hearing this “scary, crazy GOP” crap? Since 1968. And all that scary crap that the GOP was gonna do back then and in every election since then just keeps happening regardless of which party gets elected. At a relatively slow pace from 1969-1992. But it’s been fast since then.
Maybe partisan Democrats should acknowledge how much their neo-liberal economic policies have already screwed people and call for immediate changes. Stop supporting the neo-liberals like Arne Duncan that would destroy public education. The economists that are cool with globalization and a minimum wage less than 75% of what it was in 1968. Roll back the income and wealth inequality and get real about climate change and the commons.
“Tea party policies,” and what the current policies of the DEM and GOP parties are all variations of disaster capitalism. So, pardon me if I can’t too exercised about all the people that will be hurt when for the past forty-five years a solid majority exercised their democracy by voting for unleashing the power and might of capitalism and militarism.
Well, I too have been hearing it since 1968 (well, not directly then – but in retrospect) but you have to admit that each time a Republican did get into office he did in fact make things worse (Gerald Ford excepted, which is why the emerging extremist faction tried to – and nearly did -replace him with Reagan during the 1976 primaries). In fact I think it can be argued that all those GOP presidents did cumulatively do what we feared.
Nixon did sign a lot of good legislation, true – with big emphasis on the clean air and water acts – but he also extended the military in ways even LBJ didn’t. I can’t imagine that Humphrey wouldn’t have been much better. Reagan pushed everything backwards and started the wave of Federalist Society judges, but it was the 1986 killing of the Fairness Doctrine and reduction in media ownership restrictions that sparked the avalanche of bad media we have today. Even Carter wouldn’t have gone into that territory.
Bush-the-first, though relatively sane compared to the others on this list, is effectively responsible for the large number of really bad SCOTUS decisions of the last 20 years, including Bush v Gore, with his appointments. No way that happens if Dukakis doesn’t get Gored by the media.
And we don’t need to speak about Bush the 2nd’s disastrous reign in detail.
Yeah, the Democrats have been poor at resisting the rightward move of our corporatist politics – sometimes they seem like a placebo party standing in for a real party of the left – but there is no question that keeping those GOP presidents from getting into office would have put us in a much better place right now.
The question is, given how far along we are with environmental destruction and climate change, whether just keeping the GOP out of the white house is a sufficient solution. The reality is that it almost certainly is not. Yes, President Cruz or whomever would be horrible, but President Biden, like Obama before him, won’t be able to provide solutions of the scope needed to combat the problem. (Queue Joe to rush in and tell us how Obama is the most environmental president EVAH … sigh).
I don’t know the solution – I wish I did. Voting Democratic doesn’t solve the problem, but it buys more time.
Bill Clinton championed and signed away more of the New Deal than the combined efforts of Reagan and BushI. Obama’s war on whistleblowers and jounalists along with his kill list, ramped up drone strikes, and Insider Threat Program makes Nixon, Reagan, and Bush look like authoritarian pikers.
Ah yes, the old “Obama is worse than Nixon, Reagan, and Bush squared”.
Marie, does the CIA ever come into your equation?
Really dislike those that presume to speak for me. Have never claimed (and it couldn’t be “the old” as Obama hasn’t been around that long) that overall Obama is worse than recent GOP Presidents — but one would have to be blind not to see that on so-called National Security stuff that a new level has been reached under Obama.
“Under Obama”. Yes, but what exactly does “under” mean in this case? How much does the NSA listen to Obama? Did Obama tell esign the program? Did he tell them to do this? Can he stop them from doing it? Don’t they have access to his e-mail too?
As for “old”, you’re right that Obama hasn’t been president all that long, but I’ve heard enough of such statements over these four and a half years that they are getting pretty old by now.
Those contradictions don’t heighten themselves, bub.
Hillary easily over Joe, unless she scares me off with some hawkish rhetoric about the WoT in the mideast.
Strong backer of Hill in 2008 over Obama, who I thought b/c of his youth and inexperience at the national level and tendency to want to play too nice with Republicans would be an obvious natural fit for VP under Hillary, with the chance to get some badly needed seasoning and up close experience having to deal with rabid Republicans on a range of issues.
Too bad it didn’t work out that way, as O disappointed and took most of his first term learning what Hillary already knew about dealing with rabid, untrustworthy Repubs. Still, far better he than McCain or Romney.
Hilary Clinton 🙂 https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mokoolapps.safaripuzzles
I like Joe a lot, but Hillary has the potential to change the map and I am all for that. I want to see Kentucky and WV go blue. I went for Obama in 08 and have never regretted that vote. I doubt Hillary could have done as well as he has, and am firmly convinced we would have gone into Iran and/or Syria under her leadership.
I shifted from Hillary to him back then based on the sheer competence of the Obama campaign in comparison to Hillary’s, and based on the people they surrounded themselves with.
Policy-wise there’s not much difference between them. Administration-wise they’ll probably rely on essentially the same folks.
As others have said, I’d prefer other people who are less pro-corporate, (yes, Elizabeth Warren comes to mind) but realistically that will never happen.
Therefore given that there isn’t a better realistic option I’d vote Hillary. It’s long, long, long past time for a woman to be in that position.
Oh, one factor I didn’t consider above is ability to win the general election. It’s way to early to know … we have no clue who the GOP candidate will be and don’t know yet what sort of gaffes or baggage Biden and Clinton will accumulate in the next few years. But if a strong case could be made that Biden (or another Democratic candidate) had a much better chance of winning the general than Clinton I would be persuaded to vote against her.
This doesn’t seem a realistic option at this point, to be honest. Hillary’s negatives relative to other Democratic candidates are minor but in most cases her relative positives are significant. Maybe there are a few people who wouldn’t vote Hillary because of her association with Bill or because of her gender, but almost all of those people aren’t voting Democratic anyway. But just being a woman she would bring in a lot of the fence-straddlers.
Going forward, EVERY election has to be about one thing and one thing only. And that is to do whatever is required at the ballot box to expedite the killing of the Republican vampire that is currently sucking the life out of this country and the middle class. Whoever can create a wave of momentum that will carry Democrats into Congress and help purge some of the state legislatures of the absolute nuts that have taken over will be the one who gets my support.
If we can’t do that, then in many ways nothing else fucking matters. We will continue to swirl down the crapper.
And that is to do whatever is required at the ballot box to expedite the killing of the Republican vampire that is currently sucking the life out of this country and the middle class.
LOL!! They’ve had a lot of help the past 30 years from plenty of Democrats, including Biden and Bill Clinton. Maybe even Hillary as well(I don’t remember where she voted on the Bankruptcy Bill .. so she could be just as bad).
Yeah….Joe Biden next to Ted Cruz. I can hardly tell them apart.
You do remember how Biden voted in the Senate, right? You can complain all you want, but he has a record. Just like people thought Edwards was a fraud, considering his voting record. I too would consider Biden a fraud if he ran in ’16 and campaigned as the second-coming of Huey Long.
Drones, and the national security state.
Probably consider a third party.
I don’t think gender enters into it. Instead, I intend to vote for whichever of the pair first calls on us to expropriate the expropriators, or first promises to seize the commanding heights of the economy in the name of the people.
Or announces their candidacy before a tableau of bankers’ heads on pikes.
Yeah, a big part of why I preferred Obama in 2008 was that he took very tough stands on issues like unwarranted domestic spying, indefinite detentions, etc. He’s a Constitutional lawyer and knew these issues in depth and appeared to care deeply about them. I know that these weren’t key issues for most Democrats but they were for me.
Call me cynical but after that lesson I don’t believe corporate-endorsed candidates when they promise to address corporate abuses.
Where would I stand? Like every real Democrat, right next to Dennis Kucinich, only scrunched down, so as to not make him look short.
I’d support Biden. Hillary has a core character problem. She is incapable of taking responsibility for her own actions. Her loss in 2008 was her team’s fault or her husband’s for going off-message or the media’s because Obama was “favored”. She voted for the Iraq War because W misled her. She repeatedly lied about being under sniper fire in Bosnia because she was over-tired and was misunderstood. We don’t need a compulsive liar and someone who shirks responsibility as president. Nor do we need the incompetent, dishonest, sleazebags she surrounds herself with in in the WH either.
I would support Joe Biden.
He is more experienced than Hillary Clinton and his last name is not Clinton. That is not a slam directed the Clinton family. It is a slam directed at all the hereditary politicval families that are far far too common in American politics: Kennedys, Bushes, Byahs, Babbits, Udalls, Tafts, Blounts … just keep paying attention and the list grows longer and longer. We supposedly revolted against hditary families holding power. Or at least so I thought.
As for 2008, I supported Joe Biden until he withdrew. I was hoping for a Biden / Obama ticket but got the inverse.
I wonder if the GOPP would have thought they could pull the gov’t shoutdown ploy against a President Biden? ? ?
As stated before, I don’t think Hillary is going to run. But if she does, I’m in. Lock, Stock and Barrel.