Hillary Clinton for VP? Not So Fast, Strategists Say
EmailThere has already been talk about whether Sec. Hillary Clinton would replace Vice President Joe Biden on the 2012 ticket – talk that both political strategists James Carville and Matthew Dowd dismissed this morning on "GMA."
"I doubt the Secretary of State wants to be Vice anything," Carville told me.
"Anytime you bring up the Secretary of State’s name it is provocative and people are interested in it and it causes all kinds of a stir. And that’s about all it is, I don’t see any evidence other than speculation that this would happen," Carville said.
That speculation began when former Virginia Governor L. Douglas Wilder penned an opinion column in Politico entitled "Obama-Clinton ticket for 2012." In it he wrote "With this state of political fragility, Obama needs to reevaluate the policy advisers who brought him here. That leads to the threshold question of whether Joe Biden should remain on the ticket. I say no."
This type of chatter is usually associated with discussions about who is the so-called "heir" to the Democratic nomination, according to Dowd. Dowd said that what is so "silly" about this talk is that it doesn’t have to do with Joe Biden, it has to do with President Obama’s low approval rating.
"The funny thing about it is if you really took this to its logical end Joe Biden’s numbers are better than Barack Obama’s," Dowd said. "So if you wanted to replace somebody you wouldn’t start with Joe Biden."
Watch my interview with Dowd and Carville here then weigh in below and tell me who you think should be on the 2012 ticket.
Santorum: Money Will Not Defeat Obama, Ideas Will 
Rick Santorum's Full Speech at CPAC 2012
You know, it is amusing to hear accolades for Hillary’s performance as Secretary of State, when she has been largely ineffective in that position.
Realize that she is ignored by the middle east, because she is a woman! She is shown courtesy when there, and immediately forgotten as soon as she leaves.
Just where are the REAL accomplishments? They don’t exist.
The entire issue is a joke.
Posted by: Rick McDaniel | August 13, 2010, 1:44 pm 1:44 pm
The reason why the SoS might be perceived as ineffective is because no other country really gives a damn what the US thinks or wants any longer. Ever since the unilateral invasion of Iraq, other countries saw that and are deal making without the USA in mind i.e Brazil and China. The SoS can only do so much now because of it. If we pull military aide from Israel then that will get them moving to negotiations with the Palestinians. Money talks.
Posted by: matt | August 13, 2010, 2:42 pm 2:42 pm
true to fact the sec of state is also ignored in Washington –It’s just a way to keep her out of OBAMATICS
Posted by: BillSaidIt | August 13, 2010, 5:36 pm 5:36 pm
what need to happen is the discovery that Obam bam fast as you can is an illegal president and court martialed and deported
Posted by: BillSaidIt | August 13, 2010, 5:37 pm 5:37 pm
This will be to the attention of all Political Pundits out there in the Media. You are touching a Strategy written by Pierre C. Deshommes since 2007. This Strategy was developped to show how to hold on the White House to 2012 and beyond up to 2020 by the Democratic Party with the “two Giants (Hillary Rh. Clinton and Barack H. Obama) with the presence of their Powerful Grassroots out there.
He is prepared to challenge anyone trying to take credits for.
Posted by: Pierre C.Deshommes | August 13, 2010, 8:47 pm 8:47 pm
I’m still wondering who’s going to be on the Democrat’s ticket for PRESIDENT in 2012.
He can’t even consistently campaign for a candidate that wins these days, much less successfully campaign for himself.
Despite the fact that it has never happened in the history of the US (at least not voluntarily), where a sitting president DIDN’T get his party’s nomination to continue on for a second term if he was still eligible (i.e., the 10-year limit), it surely won’t be Barry H. Obama this time around, lest the Democrats simply want to hand the reins over to the GOP in 2012.
Barry’s going to make history in 2012… just not the kind he’s going to relish.
Posted by: Namako | August 13, 2010, 10:02 pm 10:02 pm
Think about it. Hillary Clinton has 18 million votes in the bag and probably a few more to boot. She could easily win the electoral college numbers this time around because Florida, Michigan will be in play and not stolen from her. Obama will not be able to win at the caucus level this time so his dominance in the smaller states would not be there either. Would Hillary want to sit this one out and just waste away in a doomed VP seat under a politically doomed president? Or would this really be her best shot at the presidency. I think with the GOP in disaray, a possible third party run of a tea party type in the mix, no strong democrats and again that 18million that would LOVE to put her in the WH and rid the party of Obama. Why should she wait another six years and risk being a has been under Obama. Hillary will need to run in 2012 and win the nom. If she does not, watch her become an media star instead.
Posted by: swoosie | August 14, 2010, 2:56 am 2:56 am
Hillary Clinton won more popular votes than Obama. She should be on the 2012 ticket, alright, but only on the top of the ticket. Hillary is the most respected, most intelligent and most foresighted person this Country has, and should rightfully be in the White House. This will depend upon the ability of the American public to get past its gender prejudice.
Posted by: sophie | August 14, 2010, 9:03 am 9:03 am
She’s so foresighted, she was able to predict that one day there’d be snipers waiting to shoot down her plane as she flew into Bosnia…
She didn’t lie, it just hasn’t happened yet.
LOL!!
That’s why she’s called Hilarious Clinton.
Posted by: Namako | August 14, 2010, 9:13 am 9:13 am
Namako: Hilarious Clinton? Never heard her called that. But I do know she has been voted The Most Admired Woman in the Gallup poll for 12 of the last 15 years.
And unlike Sarah Palin – she has brains and class and a daughter who isn’t trash!
Posted by: scarr | August 14, 2010, 9:53 am 9:53 am
At this time I wouldn’t vote for a Democrat of any kind.
Posted by: Jan Saunders | August 14, 2010, 10:14 am 10:14 am
Biden for Vice President, Hillary for President.
Posted by: Mary | August 14, 2010, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm
Indeed, Hillary for president! Fix the economy, restore the middle class. You won’t find her on vacation and the golf links while there’s work to be done. (Wow, never realized just how much Obama has in common with W!)
Posted by: Sophie | August 14, 2010, 3:35 pm 3:35 pm
America is also the protestant country.America have no u.s female president. because of religion.But religion is not reason,why did European protestant countries to get elected female leaders
AMERICA SHOULD HAVE FEMALE PRESIDENT.
WE NEED HRC 2012!
Posted by: ATHAN OF PHILIPPINES | August 14, 2010, 9:19 pm 9:19 pm
12am STOP 1
Posted by: ABC Moderator | August 16, 2010, 12:01 am 12:01 am
why don’t they have all government employee take a drug test like they do the truck drivers and the new reporter and ask them if they are on drug?
are the baseball,football,baskball,socker player wifes that have babys in the US will they be called illegals
Posted by: roy anderson | August 20, 2010, 4:03 pm 4:03 pm
will i vote for someone that will give all this gov.has taken away
Posted by: roy anderson | August 20, 2010, 4:13 pm 4:13 pm
This is the most TWISTED idea I have ever heard. Both these people(Obama and Hillary) are followers os Alinsky and that is like saying they are both extreme socialists or state controlled everything believers( commonly know as Marxists). Bill Clinton for Pres. would have been palatable but not these two people who are with the RUIN America first crowd, then pick up the pieces and totally control our freedom-No way to Hillary for anything else or Nobama period in 2012!
Posted by: rockychance | September 16, 2010, 8:19 am 8:19 am
Namako said it best – it is entirely possible that Obama will not get the nomination. Perhaps the best thing that can happen is that Obama steps aside to do what is best for the country, giving the Democrats a fighting chance with Hillary running for president. This is the scenario that should have happened in the first place, but who the heck knew? At least she has the experience and the knowhow for the job, plus she’s married to a former president who, despite his indiscretions didn’t do too badly. He did leave us with a surplus – anyone remember THAT?
Posted by: josephblough | September 16, 2010, 10:14 am 10:14 am
Whenever these politicians coerce Israel, by negating the word of God, negative shock waves ripple across America that cannot be undone! If only they were biblically astute, they would make fewer mistakes in the affairs of nations and at home. America used to be a light to the world, but has now adopted faults religions while taking shameful attitudes against the One True God, which will not go unnoticed, but suffer the consequences of idolatry. America has removed the Lord and Savior of the world from His rightful place in our government, courts and school system and now, His judgments are finally upon America! They that have the eyes to see, let them see and ears to hear, let them hear.
Posted by: LonePuma | September 16, 2010, 10:57 am 10:57 am