Guardian – June 4, 2008:

Barack Obama should not pick Hillary Clinton as his vice-presidential nominee, former president Jimmy Carter has told the Guardian.

“I think it would be the worst mistake that could be made,” said Carter. “That would just accumulate the negative aspects of both candidates.”

Carter, who formally endorsed the Illinois senator last night, cited opinion polls showing 50% of US voters with a negative view of Clinton.

In terms that might discomfort the Obama camp, he said: “If you take that 50% who just don’t want to vote for Clinton and add it to whatever element there might be who don’t think Obama is white enough or old enough or experienced enough or because he’s got a middle name that sounds Arab, you could have the worst of both worlds.”

Yesterday, James Hill commented on the idea of an Obama/Clinton dream team:

All of the people who hate the Clintons and all of those who see through Obama being motivated to vote for McCain?

That works.




  1. Pan Am Pool says:

    Isn’t Jimmy Carter the fellow who first shown weakness and allowed Iran to intimidate and badger the great Satan – the USA?
    Was he not the one who negotiated the successful treaty with N. Korea to end its nuclear program?
    North Korea is now the exporter of nuclear weapon and ballistic technology
    As my friend Moe Brown the chicken man instructs “Those that cannot do teach. Those that cannot teach criticize or offer dinner commitments that they do not honor”

  2. Hmeyers says:

    At the end of the day, winning is winning.

    Obama should pick Hillary to get the old bitter crone vote that is mad at him.

    He’ll easily win the election, but yes it would be a little annoying having the baggage of the Clintons for 8 years.

    But winning beats losing. Those angry old ladies would turn out to vote Hillary as VP since it would be historic.

    Hillary’s negatives wouldn’t matter too much as the VP candidate.

  3. Mister Ketchup says:

    No way Hillary! I’m shooting for Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Wow, I guess that was a poor choice of word. 🙂

  4. bobbo says:

    I don’t like making political predictions. They are too uncertain and just become vehicles for wish fulfillment or spin.

    Thinking I’m free of that, I don’t think Hillary would take the VP post. She shouldn’t want to wait until 2016 to be president and she and Bill would give up too much money for a position that would be subject to the whims of Obama. How many Billy scandals before Hillary got an office in the third stall of the basement bathroom?

    She ran, she made key mistakes, she can make more money, have more influence, be positioned for 2012 if she stays a Senator. If I were her, thats what I would do. No prediction, no spin==just advice.

  5. Esteban says:

    I agree with President Carter. Obama should not choose Hillary as VP. I think it would do little to placate the Clinton supporters, but a lot to alienate Obama’s core constituency. From the beginning, Obama has preached a platform of change in Washington, and appointing Hillary to be his running mate would be a major compromise of his outsider values.

    As for the morans (sic) who say they’ll vote for McCain in the fall if Hillary doesn’t get the nomination, I say that time heals all wounds. By November, they’ll realize that McCain is as far from Hillary Clinton as a candidate can get. Obama will still be the better choice for most reasonable Democrats.

  6. Who says:

    Hillary’s thinking if she became the VP and if anything happened to Obama she’d get the presidency by default. I’m thinking the Clinton’s left something in the White House that someone may find eventually and they are doing anything they can do to get back in there. Who knows, it could be some Vince Foster evidence.

  7. Shawnx86 says:

    Jimmy Carter “The biggest looser”

  8. Mister Ketchup says:

    #7 – Moran, I think you meant loser.

  9. Mister Ketchup says:

    Hey everybody! I played golf today and hit two great balls, I stepped on a rake.

  10. ArianeB says:

    Jimmy Carter “The best EX-President ever”

    He’s absolutely right. Obama needs someone with national name recognition who could be president themselves. Ideally John Edwards or Al Gore, but I doubt either would accept.

    Governor Richardson would be next on my list

  11. gquaglia says:

    If Hillary becomes VP, I give Obama about a week before the Clinton’s have him assassinated.

  12. Mrroon says:

    We Love Carter but if Obama doesn’t pair with Hillary his administration will be as lame and ineffectual as Carter’s was.

  13. Mister Ketchup says:

    Obama picked Caroline Kennedy to head the VP search.

    #14 – BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

  14. Raster says:

    They should listen to Carter!

    After all, he proved during his term as president what a masterful politician his is.

  15. Mister Mustard says:

    >.Jimmy Carter “The biggest looser”

    I guess you weren’t a spelling bee winner, hm?

  16. MikeN says:

    Carter is one of the worst ex-presidents.

  17. Jägermeister says:

    #18 – Mister Mustard

    And he’s a “winner“…

  18. Jägermeister says:

    #19 – MikeN – Carter is one of the worst ex-presidents.

    But he was competent while being in office?

    And as for all the whining about Carter… he’s not the worst President… no-one beats George W. Bush.

  19. The Warden says:

    Obama should offer Maxine “Socialized” Waters the VP spot. She’s what America needs.

  20. Libertican says:

    Jimmy Carter is such a milquetoast. He has used his privileged position as a former President to criticize and undermine every US President since he left office. His weak-kneed foreign relation debacles in the late ’70’s (Olympic boycott, Iran hostages) were unforgivable and damaged the US reputation so much that in contrast, Reagan’s subsequent abilities looked downright imperial. I don’t listen to anything Jimmy Carter says, but in this case he is right.

    It will be Obama/Richardson vs. McCain/Romney.

  21. gregallen says:

    One of the main jobs of the VP candidate is to be the attack dog so that the presidential candidate can remain “presidential.”

    Hillary would be fantastic at that.

    However, candidates almost never pick the person you think they will … or even that the pundits predict.

  22. jlm says:

    Dead within 6 months if Clinton is VP, then she wins.

  23. DAAV0 says:

    You mean James Earl Carter, Nobel Laureate, best selling author of 20 books, former nuclear sub commander, successful farmer, founder of habitat for humanity, known and respected all over the world??? THAT Jimmy Carter?

    President Carter was a grown up. He did the responsible, and tough thing to do. He never pandered. He was a straight shooter.

    Idiots hate that.

  24. Mister Mustard says:

    >>founder of habitat for humanity…

    As much as I like Jimmy Carter, and as much as I like Habitat for Humanity (I’m an active participant), Jimmy was not the founder of HfH. He pounds nails, but that’s about it.

    HfH was founded in 1976, and Jimmy didn’t get involved until 1984. The founders were Millard and Linda Fuller.

  25. bobbo says:

    #26–DAA==you are wrong on other points of admiration as well. You might touch base here:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter

    I don’t know why Carter ratholed himself in the Whitehouse for 444 days instead of treating the hostages as a minor issue — compared to the rest of his stewardship?

    Makes me think maybe military expereince, even 6 years as a prisoner of war, may not prepare one to be a CIC?

  26. bh28630 says:

    DAAV0 said…

    About the only knowledgeable comment regarding former President Carter. History will prove that Jimmy was one of the few ethical men to hold the job in the last 50 years. For real insight, search out Hunter Thompson’s pre election evaluation of candidate Carter. And for anyone able to go beyond sound bite snap judgment, Jimmy’s dedication to peace and abhorrence of politics as usual is more than merely commendable. I would go so far as to posit that many of his choices during his presidential term were actually astute for America but failed because they didn’t pander. Example: He told people to lower their thermostats. Compare Carter’s candor re energy policy with the smirking chimp encouraging purchasing SUVs.

    In 200 years, historian’s evaluation will offer better perspective regarding who actually served the nation most effectively. That peanut farmer from Plains, GA will surpass Clinton and Kennedy as well as every Republican president since Eisenhower. Stay tuned.

  27. bobbo says:

    #29–bh, etc==I’d agree with you except for the hostage fiasco that showed the weakness of his consuming focus on “human rights.” How do you perceive that crippling affair?

    Also, to be fair, while urging conservation, he did squat to get us energy independent. Maybe he dropped out of nuke school just too early?

    All my hero’s have feet of clay!

  28. BigCarbonFoot says:

    #29 – One can be ethical and still be incompetent.

    Example: “Example: He told people to lower their thermostats.” Proper American energy policy is to produce more energy. Cutting back is wrong thinking.

    What else? Double digit inflation, double digit interest rates, nearly 10% unemployment… Hmmm…. Yup, Carter was a genius…

  29. BigCarbonFoot says:

    Oh yeah, McCain Vs. Obama: the contest to see who can destroy America faster and more thoroughly. Someone please make it stop….


1

Bad Behavior has blocked 5328 access attempts in the last 7 days.