One reason to look forward to the end of the Democratic primaries was that it would put an end to the endless whine of Obamites that Hillary Clinton isn’t dropping out. If continuing a nomination battle into June hurts Democrats, they should consider holding their primaries earlier, instead of arm twisting lagging candidates midway through. Hillary is as responsible for the Democrat’s bad scheduling as Obama is for the Michigan fuck-up.

Now that it’s over and Hillary has clearly lost, holding out with even a semi-public demand for the VP slot would amount to blackmail. To the victor goes the spoils, otherwise a nomination race loses nearly all meaning. The spoils, in a primary, is the leeway to fashion a team according to the winner’s vision and instincts. Of course there is a long history of primary losers jostling their way into the ticket by throwing around the weight of their supporters. If Hillary goes down that road, she should at least frame her arguments in realpolitik terms, not in terms of morality or common good. However, there is also a long political tradition for blatant inconsistency, so tradition can justify anything.

It has become a cliché to state that there is little difference between Obama and Hillary in terms of philosophy and policy priorities, that the choice really was a matter of who has the political dexterity and governance skills to win the general election and implement a shared agenda. I think this is quite false. The two candidates have some significant differences not only in style but also in substance, especially in the area of foreign policy. Since this is an area where the new President will have to concentrate much of his clean-up efforts, it’s all the more important that Obama not compromise his strength and maneuvering room at the very outset.

The biggest irony is that VP’s office used to be largely a ceremonial one in the days of Mr. Potatoehead. Its emergence as a major power center within the administration is a legacy of Dick Cheney, alongside his many other charming contributions. In her stubborn quest for power, Hillary Clinton seems eager to capitalize on one of the dubious legacies of the Bush presidency! Any Democrat should advocate retracting the enormous accumulated power of the VP’s office, not elevate its importance further.

If Clinton wants to have influence over policy, she should seek a prominent Cabinet position, not the Vice Presidency. From a purely strategic viewpoint, the problem with that is obvious. Cabinet appointments will be made after the election, when Hillary will have no bargaining chip left and will have to rely on Obama’s trust rather than the implicit threat of electoral sabotage. By going for the relatively safer option, she hasn’t displayed much trust herself.

Doesn't she have the right to extort? Those vote totals were extremely close (across all 57 states), and she has been beating him ever since Ohio. Two months of often thunderous ass-kicking. By some counts, she leads in the popular vote.

Also, as veep, she could play the attack-dog role very well.

I'd agree that the very public campaign for veep is not the best. Leading me to wildly speculate that back-channel discussions have gotten nowhere, and she's taken off the gloves.

Numbers too big to ignore . . .

It doesn't have much place in politics, as far as I can tell. Obama should just take that tricky feeling out of play by publicly offering her either a cabinet position (Defense?) or an explicit leadership role on health-care reform (I say this part to my most certain professional detriment). That would acknowledge the strength of her campaign, avoid the hamstringing influence of having her negatives tied intimately to his campaign, and make those of her supporters who are threatening to sit out or vote for McCain put up or shut up.

The point about her capitalizing on Cheney's extra-constitutional transformation of the office of Vice-President was a good one - it would be delicious irony if it didn't taste so bad.

Dave made a similar argument on FB's thread, and it draws on a parallel with the usual norm in generals - that presidents need a mandate to push their own agenda too agressively. Close elections imply an obligation to seek middle ground.

True, but nobody insisted Bush make Kerry or Gore his Sec State. The expectation is policy compromise, not mixed appointments. Hillary would be right to haggle e.g. that Obama extend coverage in his health care plan and incorporate some of her ideas, or that he rethink his position on negotiations. A nearly categorical public demand for a seat on the bus has no precedent I know of.

Hillary has the very real power to burn down the house. She could provoke a very spirited floor fight, in wall-to-wall prime-time coverage.

I'm thinking she's willing to follow through on that threat. Making it credible. Credible threats are a bitch.

What's that Stephen King miniseries, where the guy keeps saying "give me what I want, and I'll go away." Difference here, give her what she wants, and there she still is.

Health care? Iran policy? Pfft. Platform committee is the gift you dole out to naive suckers. The woman's not stupid.

Chelsea for veep.

once had visions of being a major power center but never imagined to use the vehicle of Vice Presidency to live out his dream.

A purely ceremonial position is stupid - unless you're British and want the tourism revenue.

I agree with your sentiments - and of course, did put that same thesis and reasoning forward long ago (in my youth). The "Clinton should quit" group were an abomination.

But I don't know if Obama sees Clinton now as an ally or an enemy - and putting her in a ceremonial role with little teeth is a fine way to treat an enemy, you might agree. Keeping her quiet would be the issue. But not offering her something acceptable (to her) will make it more difficult to keep her quiet. The last think Obama should want is for Senator Clinton to go back to being Senator Clinton.

Lastly, I think Clinton sees it as possible that Obama will lose. Being on the ticket keeps the door open to "set things right" (in her mind) in 2012.

You want to torture her? Put her in Cabinet as Secretary of Defense. She'd be a bad choice - but it would make for great art.

I understand Madame Clinton better than most. I too waged battle and had played a winning hand, only to lose my unborn in an accident, of all things. And they wondered why I seemed paranoid. There is never enough grieving.

Adieu, Hillary.

Excellent post as always...best prose here on the fray..however you do apparently still have that sense of boyish innocence that I find remarkable.

The entire process of running for POTUS requires at the very least an over sized ego. The fact that this office is the possession of millionaires exclusively rules it out as any sort of real democratic position...the word Democracy was never intended to describe the plutocracy that we now have..my humble opinion. I will admit that this particular form of government is very good at certain things, those who do the real policy making in this country have profited handsomely from the last eight years of elitist Washington DC politics.

I agree that VP is more a statutory office than an effective position of governance...Obama needs to invite Clinton for the sheer image of the thing...and Clinton knows damn well that in offering herself as an option it creates a negative electricity for Obama as he hesitates to accept, each day that he waits causes him the loss of more Clinton supporters.. I will still be surprised to see her take it though. Image!! Image my man...this entire campaign has hinged on it...Just ask Uncle Jeremiah.

I also agree that there is a lot of difference between the two candidates...apparently however they both hired the same polling service before constructing their platforms because one would never know about such differences from their campaign Rhetoric. One thing they both do have in common though..the ability to use an ax with no regret to chop down their opponents. Obama's entire political history is replete with back stabbings and vicious legal maneuvers and not all of them confined to political opponents. Hillary is also a scrapper with vicious counter punch when she is cornered.

Both Candidates have demonstrated a disrespect for Truth and have used various shades of it to wiggle off of the foot in mouth hook throughout the campaign process. To me there is nothing more despicable than a person who becomes whatever his/her constituents will vote for, it only ensures that we will have the impulse candidate each and every time the shallow minded electorate allows itself to be bowled over by smooth speech and glamorous ambiance.

To be fair it would appear that both also have long records of public service at the grass roots level...I don't know anything about McCain's past except for his former Presidential Primary failure and his war record.

It would have been one more way that I'd have failed you.

I lead the popular vote.

Wolf Blitzer may be a useless douchebag most of the time, but I thought standing in front of the various vote counting "scenarios" last night proved a great point about cooking numbers. She's ahead...if you ignore some votes.

Two months of thunderous ass-kicking? Not so much. How many primaries have been held in that 2 months? I think 10 counting PR.

She may be a great attack dog, I'm just worried about who she'll bite.

Doesn't she have the right to extort? Those vote totals were extremely close (across all 57 states).

No.

You don't call the person who finishes second in a political race "powerful."

You call him or her "the loser." You send them, not to Washington, but home.

Stunning to me how few grasp this basic concept.

The vice president should go back to being largely a background prop for State Of The Union Addresses.

Being vice president needs to be like having majored in art therapy in undergrad: knowing a lot about stuff most people couldn't care less about.

Other stuff, something something, and whatnot. I'm still reeling from last night's Hell's Kitchen episode. Dude ruined the entree and proceeded to sweat in the gravy. (Gordon was not bemused.)

Fly from Desdemona! For 'tis a foregone conclusion--that she, being wed to thy solemn estate, shall first presume its protection, then plume herself in its pomp, and finally, yea, pretend even unto its power! And not only she, milord, but that horrid, dark, indistinct familiar who looms ever about her, whispering mementoes of the power of its name! O, listen to thy faithful Iago, sire--wear fate's guerdon alone! Share it not with this seeming angel, if thou wouldst not, at length, discover a vengeful devil in thy very sheets!