David Broder has an authoritative take on the possibility of a Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton ticket. In short, it's very unlikely. Both of them have better options:
Knowledgeable Democrats see at least two more-attractive options for (Clinton). One is to return to the Senate, where she is popular, well established and potentially in line to be majority leader, a position with real power. The other is to go back to New York, where Eliot Spitzer's resignation from the governorship yesterday leaves a potential opening for a new candidate in 2010.
As for Obama, many of the same arguments apply -- with even greater force. He is less enamored of the Senate than is Clinton, but it could provide a comfortable resting place for four or eight years. Or he could go back to Illinois and run for governor in 2010, when incumbent Democrat Rod Blagojevich would be up for a possible third term.
Obama would be a heavy favorite over Blagojevich or anyone else in a primary and over the nominee of the beleaguered Illinois GOP. And winning the governorship would provide the executive experience that may be the biggest gap in his resume.
But there is an even better reason for Obama to shun an offer from Clinton. With Bill Clinton poised to move back to the White House if his wife becomes president, the West Wing will be a miserably crowded place. There are almost always jealousies and tensions between the president's staff and the vice president's. But add in Bill Clinton's ego and entourage, and serving there would truly be cruel and unusual punishment for Obama.
I buy all this, but I still think the winner will have to offer the loser a place on the ticket, to placate the loser's disgruntled supporters. It's just unlikely - though not impossible - that the offer would be accepted.
(Thanks SL)
Comments