A majority of Democrats favor Clinton on ticket

I am a 62-year old woman, and they didn't ask me! I do not want Hillary on the ticket. She and Bill couldn't accept being #2.....they would undemine Barack's presidency.

just ask her and get it over with! make history even more!!!!!!!!!

Obama is a Rookie and he needs a clever person to look up to!

Who cares? Obama needs to focus on winning over independents now...and moderates don't like Hillary.

She will hurt him in swing states such as MO, VA and CO.

Would it not be of interest to cite your own poll that appeared two days ago in which a "majority" clearly stated that folks did NOT WANT Hillary as VP?

Obama does not need her to win the Presidency...he is of the future and she is smugly of the past!

Like Hell we do..? Get her out of here. Hillary would be the worst choice.

The nuance of the poll here is totally ignored. I was asked this (probably a different poll) and the question was "Do you think Barack Obama should have Hillary Clinton on his ticket in November?"

The answer I gave was yes. I don't *WANT* that. But I think it has to be done.

no surprise that 51 % males oppose the idea. CLEAR EVIDENCE OF MALE
CHAUVINISM IN SO CALLED PROGRESSIVE DEMCTARS.
the fact remains that OBAMA WAS NOT ELECTED BUT SELECTED BASED OG GENDER AND RAISD BIAS( IN REVERSE)
SUDDENLY THE MOST FAVOURITE OF BLACKS HILLARY COULD ONLY GET !) % BLACK VOTES.
it is SHAME on american society when developing coutries HAD FEMALE LEADERS decades ago WHERE WOMEN are treated as second class to men.
there is too much hollow sloganising in american society a generation away from reality.
AMERICANS SHOULD HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME THAT THEY ARE STILL GENDER BIASED IN 21!ST CENTURY.
bhagwan deol los angeles

What is the point of the delegates spending time and money going to the Democratic National Convention in Denver if their votes count for nothing?

baloney, no clinton bagage pleaseeeeeeeeeeze!

A majority of Democrats are idiots.

The arrogance and rudeness displayed by Obama towards Clinton as VP made me think that Hillary should stay away from Obama as a running mate. Obama did not win this nomination without intimidation on caucuses, negative media and brokered coronation by Dean, Pelosi, et.al. Obama did not win the nomination with a wide margin - many Obama voters have buyers remorse after getting to know him. I strongly advise Hillary to stay away from Obama and our support will be accepted and not ignored elsewhere.

obviously Obama can't win without Clinton. Only those blind to reality wouldn't see that. She won PA, FL, OH, NH, IN, and WV, all swing states that a democrat must win to beat a republican. Obama can't win these states without her because he has the most liberal voting record in congress, and those states aren't comfortable with that. Hillary has proven she can win those states, and therefore Obama needs her.

I'm not sure who they interviewed, but it wasn't me. I gave money to my first political campaign this year - Obama. If he helps her with her debt or puts her on the ticket, I want my money back! I don't want "the Democrats" to win the Whitehouse -- I want Barack Obama to win!

Emotions run high but the decision to chose a VP is not an emotional one. Barack Obama has never been one to "Do anything" to win.
Maybe by choosing Hillary Clinto as a running mate, lefe would be easier in the short run.
But, spending the nex four years managing Hillary and Bill Clinton would be a bit much.
Barack is calling for "Change" then why take the Clintons into office

I keep seeing these notes as to whom should be the VP pick. I ahve started to notice a trend of Clinton supporters that think having her on the ticket is the only way to getting their votes. I do not think that anyone running for president should be bribed into anything for any particular group of people. I keep seeiny things like " DEMS WANT AN OBAMA?CLINTON TICKET." Well I don't know who DEM is but Day aint us. I leave it to you!

the problem is Bill

Democrats have sidelined women for years by long ago reducing them to one single issue: abortion. This year is no different. After rigging the primary process for its chosen one, the DNC is now reminds women that we must "unite" because John McCain is not "pro-choice." True enough, he's not. However, here's the deal: I recognize the critical importance of Roe, BUT, as a woman and lifelong Democrat, I also refuse to be reduced to this single dimension. It means nothing to me if "Caroline" replaces Hillary Clinton with herself or the Stepford Hillary, Kathleen Sebelius. I am sick of the DNC telling me that they have me on the "supreme court/roe v. wade leash." I am cutting the leash this year. You get no money from me. No support for your pre-fab candidate who repeatedly played the race-baiting card (yes you can, Michelle) to your deafening silence. You do not get my vote. Don't ever threaten me again with your supreme court "coat hanger." Nancy P. -- I just burned my leash! LIberated from the DNC.

Kelly Hamilton you are an idiot. If you are truely blind enough to follow one politician without a party behind him to equalize and distribute the power then you diserve your money back so that you can pack up and move to where ever George W. Bush will be come Jan 2009.

There are three kinds of lies; lies, damn lies, and statistics! - Benjamin Disraeli

Substitute polls for statistics and it still rings true!

Hillary, the Queen of Spin and a Legend in Her Own Mind!

The Klintons

I definitely think Obama should NOT choose Hillary as VP and I am an older white woman. Anybody who cares about our economy and getting out of Iraq will vote for Obama, anyway, no matter what they are saying now. Obama will show strength and choose the person he wants and the one that will really help him win and who shares his ideals and ethics. Perhaps he might ask her to serve in his administration.

It appears that CNN has conducted another poll in a select environment. I know of no Democrat who wants Clinton on the ticket. No bigger mistake could be made by Obama. Let him bring the change that he proposes without baggage from another era.

The more Obama supportors show disrespect and ugliness to
Senator Clinton and her supportors, the harder it is to find the heart for
UNITY. Desist. Namecalling and insults are toxic at this time.
It does not help our country.

The argument that Hillary won the swing states is bogus. She won the Democratic primary in some swing states. That's no guarantee that she would carry those same states in a general election. Furthermore, it has been shown time and again that the VP does not help the presidential candidate bring in more votes. People vote for or against the presidential candidate. On the other hand, a VP with lots of negatives can push people away. It's important that Hillary be part of the coming election campaign, but not necessarily as the VP candidate.

I'm not sure how many Democrats constitute a majority, but with millions of them, I seriously doubt if a majority was contacted. I think we are talking about a majority of Clinton supports that were polled. I am a 68 year old female Democrat and I DO NOT WANT ANOTHER CLINTON IN THE ADMINISTRATION. Their time has passed. We do not need HRC as veep with Bill running the show. And I thought he was a great president and voted for him twice. But enough is enough.

I agree with MB. I feel Hillary is too self serving. The only one dreaming about that ticket is Hillary. The best combo for me is Obama and Jim Webb. Mr Webb gave a post State Of the Union commentary that had me wishing he would run for number one.

ABSOLUTELY - that is a dream ticket. Hillary would provide much needed expertise in backing Obama. She has experience with foreign affairs and she is familiar with the nastiness of the politcs in Washington. I think it would increase his chances of winning signficantly. The bottom line is that Barack will never take the states where white working class is the majority of the population. In those states, racism runs rampant.

If Obama chooses Hillary as VP then it will never really be his presidency. The last thing we need is Hillary and hubby prowling around sticking their noses in where the president should be. Neither of them will be capable of gracefully remaining in the background.

Imagine Clinton as VP, and she and Obama enter the White House.
Then Bill Clinton follows saying, "Yay, that's my old office! Can I have this chair?" And Clinton shows Obama where they keep the drinks. It probably won't work.
Obama needs a clean, fresh start. Besides, would Clinton be happy deferring as Number 2? Would she be able to adapt to Obama's management style? The mild-mannered personalities on the Obama staff are so different from the strong personalities on the Clinton staff.

I think we need Clinton as a key ally in the Senate, where she can really lead, offer important critiques to policies by the White House, and help push critical legislation through. This would not be at all a bad position, and she will have a shining career there, whereas the V.P. traditionally doesn't really do anything (and we don't need to repeat Cheney-style underhanded power-playing).

Hillary's insane following consists of aggressive soccer moms who rage when they don't get what they want....Barack does not need Clinton baggage - neither hers, her husband nor the sychophants that root for them!

OMG. Would people (LA post esp) please stop suggesting that you should vote for someone based on their gender or race. You vote for the best person. I decided who I was going to vote for in this election 4 YEARS AGO. The instant after I heard Obama's speech at the DNC. I am a white male. Was I suppossed to switch to John Edwards because he is white? That is ridiculous. I like Obama more. I am glad to see many women (Terri) post and share a similar view or state that he should not pick the Clintons as the VP. People have to get past gender politics as much as racial politics. Some have posted sound absolutely victimized that a woman won't be President. I think you are "projecting". Get over it and focus on what is important. The primary election is over and she lost.
On the VP...no way should it be HC. The smart choice is picking someone who adds something new and exciting ...she is well known. And her negatives are sky high. Pick someone from Virginia who can carry that state....and the election is over. Especially if McCain has a health scare.

This white woman is sick and tired of the MSM's repeated attempts to shove the so-called "Dream Ticket" down our throats.

Are Democrats nuts? A Obama/Hillary/Bill White house won't work. This is not in the best interest of the party and the nation. Hillary should just take herself out of the VP run for everyone else's sake. This is a contest for the Democrats to lose and the Hillary supporter will simply ruin Obama by keeping the bitter fight going. (And I think that is exactly what Hillary wants.) I am a conservative and I might vote for Obama. But no way I will vote for Obama/Hillary/Bill.

***EVERYONE WHO IS LETTING THEMSELVES BE CONSUMED BY HRC VS. BO IS FALLING FOR YET ANOTHER GOP DISTRACTION***
You're making us all look like fools. This is all pointless. The small differences between Barack and Hillary are not what's pulling the party apart. The election is not a popularity contest. It is about making decisions to do best for the country and our people. The FACT of the matter now is that Hillary CANNOT become president. It's sad, but it's true. So lets all move on, get together, stop the war, and try to at least carry out some of the things she believes in. If you truly respect her, you'll help her voice be heard. Her ideas and policies don't stand a chance if McCain is elected.

The last thing the democrat ticket needs is all the baggage that Clinton brings along. She's a compulsive liar:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/hillarys_list_of_lies.html
who, as one example, thinks it's OK for her brothers to accept 100s of thousands of dollars as bribes for Presidential pardons:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/02/28/pardons_reemerge_as_issue_in_clinton_run/
It isn't going to take a genius to run attack ads to bury any presidential ticket with Hillary on it. There are plenty of better candidates, and certainly better women candidates out there. Try checking out the qualifications of some of this country's women governors for starters.

Ditto with the other voters here whose opinions and preferences were not asked. There are thoughtful reasoned arguments against this. They are emerging from Jimmy Carter, Ted Kennedy, and not sure who else. It's kinda soon for everybody to weigh in. I say this. She was considered as a running mate for Kerry and her "negatives" were too high. She's going to use 18 million votes as political capital but the VP isn't really what she wants. She might want to dominate Obama or do an end around him or he might die or lose the election and if those are her hopes, they are more negatives than ever. Here we have a chance at a luminous, inspirational, inclusive, open hearted government and she wants to play trial lawyer. She should run as an independent or John McCain's VP if she wants to. See how many of her voters want to go there. But not VP with Obama. Who wants that? 54 percent of what sample population?

A Obama/Hillary/Bill White house will be work . This is in the best interested of the party and the nation.
Our country will be change when both of them to be VP .
We do not yealous with Hillary. We should be strong believed both off them will be help our country better then.We need to change and see

Maybe some of us who feel postive toward Hilary should post on here. Looks like all of the "agin-ers" have had their say. How did you feel about having money in the bank when Bill left office? How do you feel about it all going to another country (that despises us) to fight a civil war that we definitely should be out of? I hope, since BO is the presumtive nominee, that he can do all the magic tricks that most of you seem to think he has up his sleeve. "Fasten your seat belts. It's going to be a bumpy ride." as Bette Davis once said in a movie.

I don't care who is on the democartic ticket. The two top canididates were there because of race and sex, not because of their qualifications. They speak of change but nothing specific enough to support. For the first time in 44 yrs I will be voting Republican because the other option is not acceptable. Its too bad as there are some well qualified Democrats who would have been better to run and stood a good chance of winning. The rancor and devisiveness from Obama and Clinton embarassed me at times to admit I was a Democrat.

I'm an independent, and I was leaning to vote for the democrats after this catastrophic presidency. But the democrats are more interested in fighting among themselves than anything else. Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for a rational plan to face some of the problems this country is confronting. Definitively, I won't vote at all, or I'll do it for McCain, if he can articulate a meaningful plan to move this country forward. Keep on fighting fellows and good luck in November!

I have been a Republican all my life. I plan on voting for Obama.
However, if Hillary is on the ticket I will once again vote Republican.
It's not because she is a woman. It's that smug attitude, lack of ethics
and integrity she has demonstrated during the last 16 months that
makes it difficult to respect her

Hey, no one asked me! I say flat out NO to Clinton on the ticket! Too much baggage, too different of a 'management' style (Clinton unlikely to adapt to Obama's), Bill Clinton is part of the package, Bill's business dealings are contrary to US foreign policy, etc.

No way should Obama choose Clinton.

Both Obama and Clinton are good for the Democratic party. Obama can run that office even wih a powerfull Clinton as number 2.

I say Hillary should let Obama sink. He'll never win this once the Republicans have their way with him. I read the misogynist drivel in these comments and it pushes me further and further away from voting for Obama. Maybe Hillary can be head of HHS in a McCain administration. I for one will sit this one out, as will many of my friends. Roe v. Wade? Let you young folks, who seem to know it all, deal with fighting for it. I've done my share, as has Hillary, as have her supporters.

Obama is a One-man-Dream-Ticket. His presence up there gives hope to second class citizens, third world countries, people under colonial rule and underprivileged people the world over. Obama don't water down what you stand for and don't taint your image with colonial stereotyped aristocrats. After winning Gold, don't degrade your position with Silver.

She won 18million votes.

She's got leverage.

Obama is tainted with Rezko, Auchi,Ayers, Wright, Phleger (and I have heard there is another "spiritual advisor" out there for Obama that we have yet to meet. Does he have a tarot card reader too?

He is backed by ethanol - we subsidize it and ethanol production drives our food prices up.
McCain is against ethanol subsidies because ethanol contributes to greenhouse gases.
McCain's record on the environment is better than Baracks.

The poll must have been Washington DC Democrats or Republicans.
Hillary Clinton would deep six the campaign. In both parties the traditional Washington candidates were resoundingly defeated. Clinton was a machine and the public wants a clean sweep.

McCain won under his old maverick image. The smooth slick insiders did not last in either the DNC or the RNC. Obama did get some help from the never another Clinton contigency in the Western United States. He consistently from beginning to end won white states in the West. Hillary would have a bigger problem than I think the Beltway pundits realize. This is the election of REAL PEOPLE vs Party machines.

I THINK IT WPULD BE WRONG AND VERY SELFICH FOR OB NOT TO PICK HCR FOR VP AFTER ALL THE VOTES SHE WON THIS COUNTRY IS NOT ALL ABOUT OBAMA ARE HILLIRY ITS ABOUT WE THE PEOPLE

The same poll also found that "41 percent say she should keep going to the national convention in late August". Are they nuts?? No wonder that 54 percent of the same sample also favors Hillary on the ticket...

if obama were politically savvy, he would choose--no second thought about it—hillary rodham clinton as his running mate. in fact, even in the thick of the primaries, obama should have sounded out hillary about it, & perhaps that early, the race would have been his.

i demurred from suggesting it pointblank early on (though in february i half-suggested it, as my web postings clearly prove) but i had expected it would been a great chess move, so to say, for obama to have done so, had he thought of it.

hillary undermining obama’s “change” message? what a preposterous comment. firstly, even obama’s “change” agenda, as analyzed by political experts, isn’t exactly the new-mint “change” that it purports to be. the national online review calls it “the old newness,” as the NRO’s analyst debunks, point by point, obama’s change agenda claim.

change is a politically-charged shibboleth, useful for obama in this case. but in his jewish-american forum speech just a few days ago, obama sounded not the change agent he purports to be, in regard to israel & palestinian & the hamas & syria & iran & a whole caboodle of the things he used to claim about during the primaries campaign season. in fact, obama now sounds like hillary on these vital issues, taking a leaf from her “textbook.”. so where’s the claimed “divide” between the two? obama, as i always have noted, is a machiavellian politician who has mastered “the prince” quite well. yes, mccain will be ill-served to call obama “inexperienced.”

no chemistry, trust or compatibility between Hillary & obama? that she told unsavory things of him in the campaign? didn’t obama, of hillary? it takes two to tango. besides, don’t the hillary bashers know not a thing about physics, that unlike poles attract, likes repel? so hillary will bring the hispanics, white working class, women & other key sectors into obama’s win column.

hillary’s the indubitable best vp democrat candidate there is around, bar none. the rest are mere pretenders. we all know how a wonk she is, how brilliant she is—on almost all issues.

carter (jimmy) suggesting military-expert vp nominee like nunn is nothing. nunn definitely is an intellectual lightweight side by side with hillary. besides, obama can always get the advice of the military thoroughbred, so to say, if he wants a military advice.

hllary a “divisive” figure? how divisive can one be who gets 18 million popular votes, eh AP? pray tell me. as we filipinos put it, mamatay na kayo sa inggit ke hillary! (you can die of envy, for all you care, for you’re consumed by the green-eyed monster in your anger & hatred against hillary.)

finally, obama knows this. choosing hillary as his vp is a brilliant political move, as history is on his side. ample political precedents prove the genius of this move: jfk chose his arch-rival, johnson, & reagan picked his nemesis, bush sr.--& both (jfk & reagan) proceeded to romp off with the plum prize, the oval office in the white house.

go ahead, jacqueline (kennedy), recount that tale to obama over & over again.

obama as the first black american president & hillary as the first woman vice president—this is an unbeatable team, & this is history-setting, history-completing american presidential elections like no other. surely, obama will never deny to the american women this epochal opportunity for equality.

so many people see ghosts where there are none. so many americans see bad things when they should see the good ones.

if obama were politically savvy, he would choose--no second thought about it—hillary rodham clinton as his running mate. in fact, even in the thick of the primaries, obama should have sounded out hillary about it, & perhaps that early, the race would have been his.

i demurred from suggesting it pointblank early on (though in february i half-suggested it, as my web postings clearly prove) but i had expected it would been a great chess move, so to say, for obama to have done so, had he thought of it.

hillary undermining obama’s “change” message? what a preposterous comment. firstly, even obama’s “change” agenda, as analyzed by political experts, isn’t exactly the new-mint “change” that it purports to be. the national online review calls it “the old newness,” as the NRO’s analyst debunks, point by point, obama’s change agenda claim.

change is a politically-charged shibboleth, useful for obama in this case. but in his jewish-american forum speech just a few days ago, obama sounded not the change agent he purports to be, in regard to israel & palestinian & the hamas & syria & iran & a whole caboodle of the things he used to claim about during the primaries campaign season. in fact, obama now sounds like hillary on these vital issues, taking a leaf from her “textbook.”. so where’s the claimed “divide” between the two? obama, as i always have noted, is a machiavellian politician who has mastered “the prince” quite well. yes, mccain will be ill-served to call obama “inexperienced.”

no chemistry, trust or compatibility between Hillary & obama? that she told unsavory things of him in the campaign? didn’t obama, of hillary? it takes two to tango. besides, don’t the hillary bashers know not a thing about physics, that unlike poles attract, likes repel? so hillary will bring the hispanics, white working class, women & other key sectors into obama’s win column.

hillary’s the indubitable best vp democrat candidate there is around, bar none. the rest are mere pretenders. we all know how a wonk she is, how brilliant she is—on almost all issues.

carter (jimmy) suggesting military-expert vp nominee like nunn is nothing. nunn definitely is an intellectual lightweight side by side with hillary. besides, obama can always get the advice of the military thoroughbred, so to say, if he wants a military advice.

hllary a “divisive” figure? how divisive can one be who gets 18 million popular votes, eh AP? pray tell me. as we filipinos put it, mamatay na kayo sa inggit ke hillary! (you can die of envy, for all you care, for you’re consumed by the green-eyed monster in your anger & hatred against hillary.)

finally, obama knows this. choosing hillary as his vp is a brilliant political move, as history is on his side. ample political precedents prove the genius of this move: jfk chose his arch-rival, johnson, & reagan picked his nemesis, bush sr.--& both (jfk & reagan) proceeded to romp off with the plum prize, the oval office in the white house.

go ahead, caroline (kennedy), recount that tale to obama over & over again.

obama as the first black american president & hillary as the first woman vice president—this is an unbeatable team, & this is history-setting, history-completing american presidential elections like no other. surely, obama will never deny to the american women this epochal opportunity for equality.

I for one hope she's not on the ticket. I want her in the Senate where she can make sure OBAMA keeps his promises and where she is "free" to critique him. He's going to lose anyway, so she might as well not be part of the mess that is coming in November. Also, for those of you who don't want her on the ticket because she'll bring him down, please urge Obama not to have her campaign for him. If she's such a liability, then he can win with the supporters he has.

Please, let Obama decide himself who he would be comfortable with as a running mate. Hilary could be of greater help somewhere else in his administration or remain in the Senate and be a great force there to help pass greatly needed legislation. Anyone who says they would vote for McCain if she isn't on the ticket doesn't really have the country's best interests at heart.