Interesting. Did Bill choose Gore or was he pressured into picking him?

I think that is very sound logic.  Another scenario is that if she has a delegate lead but Obama is close enough to maybe not win, but to keep her from winning outright and the GOP settles on their nominee, that she makes a deal with Obama and gives him the VP, so that they can wrap the race up.  

I think Feb 5 will give us a picture of where this race is headed.

What states does Obama help her with? Assuming the reason for Obama as VP is to hold the Clinton-insulted African American vote, the Southern states, with high African American voters, have had overwhelming numbers voting Dem to no effect (Gore, Kerry still lost the south with 90% of the AA vote).

So if you're going to lose the South anyway, why not try to go after the West. Pick Richardson and see if you can put NM, CO, NV, AZ (unless McCain) and if dreaming TX in play. Richardson might also help in Florida, if you assume that people vote general ethnicity (not suggesting that they do or should and with Richardson, Cuban versus Mexican who knows how that plays).

would be a great choice.

Jim Webb also.

Hillary has run on her experience and her ability to hit the ground running.  That means she has sold herself on being an experienced administrator with stong domestic and foreign policy experience.  

I agree Clark may be the most likely but there will be LOTS of pressure to pick Obama; and she may be toying with the idea now... Think of the AA turnout alone with Hillary, whom is well respected in the community and Obama, who would be the first AA VP.  So I guess we will see what happens.

I don't see Obama plugging any holes.

Clark, Jim Webb, Bob Graham (former FL senator), any of these would fill national security/southern credentials.

Which is not what is being said.  Go away troll.  You bring NOTHING to MyDD.

Webb opens up a senate seat in a red or purple state and we don't have a strong dem on the bench who is a shoo-in to take Webbs seat.   Clark would be better duet o this reason... However, I think she would be better served picking OUTSIDE of the Clinton inner circle.  Otherwise, the business as usual GOP attack will rear its ugly head.  

I could see the Governor run... I also think he'd take VP in a heart beat if offered.  

I don't think Obama's own respective approaches (i.e., his rhetorical approach to politics vs what he actually does) go together very well.  Which leaves me a little luke-warm to this proposal.

Lori,

That's a good argument for Obama as VP, but those independents and republicans inclined to vote for a ticket with Obama as VP might be vehemently anti-Clinton too, in which case they may go with the GOP ticket, particularly if it's McCain (the extreme wingnut rump of the GOP hates McCain). So, if it's McCain v. Clinton, who do you think McCain would select as his running mate?

As for Clinton's VP, it won't be Webb. They need him in the Senate. It might be Clark, who endorsed Clinton early on in the primary campaign. But, it could be Evan Bayh (a big mistake, in my view, he's as boring as it gets!). I think the pressure would be on Hillary Clinton, as the nominee to pick Obama because it will excite the base. But, that all depends on how Obama does in the primary with delegates, not to mention how the Rezko trial looks down the road. If that looks like it will mushroom into trouble, there's no way a Clinton ticket would pick him.

The irony here is that Obama supporters are fond of saying that Obama isn't part of the hated DLC wing of the Democratic Party. But that is the very Democratic Party influence that comes into play in picking running mates. But, it's also true that nominees generally choose a running mate based on what support that running mate brings to the ticket.

If Barack Obama can prove his future in the party is bright, he would be good as a running mate for building the party toward future elections. If he's VP he's in the catbird seat for a run at the White House in 2012 or 2016. And, he's young, so he'd be perfectly capable of carrying on the party banner at that time.

Just some thoughts thrown in. Note: We do not know that the nominee won't be Obama. It could be. That's still to be decided as we go along. But, I think--IF Clinton is the nominee, there will be some pressure from the Congressional Black Caucus and some other wings of the Dem Party to reconcile the party and choose Obama...

that's a good argument, and I really hope it happens. the flip side of your argument is that being VP is just what Obama needs. 8 years in the center of the storm and he'll be primed to run for president -- in fact he'd be the presumptive nominee, rather than just another ambitious Senator.

but Hillary's the key, and you lay out good reasons why she'd choose Obama. I'd add that, most simply, they're clearly quite compatible ideologically.

but the down sides to Obama as VP include:

-there are reports they don't like each other. that could just be rumor, but I do think it's important that there be a comfort level between a POTUS and VP, and with an ambitious competitor like Obama I don't know that anyone would want him as their partner. Add to that his rock star quality, and I think a justifiable fear is that she'd be overshadowed and/or he'd be a loose cannon.

-what does he bring to the table in terms of new votes? Wes Clark clearly appeals to a demographic in which she's weak, and Vilsack might give her a regional appeal, but Obama's support is among Dem youth and Af Amers. Perhaps he'd increase the % of their turnout, but let's face it those voters will be Hillary's, anyway.

So...I don't think so...but I do fervently hope so. That'd be a transfomational, historical ticket and we'd both get the first woman president ever AND it'd put us in line to have the first African American president.

Lori,

I've been meaning to post on this topic, but you pretty much said everything I intended to say.  If the campaign proceeds as it looks like it will, then I expect Obama to be named VP.

And, you know what else?  There political stances are pretty similar too (look, for example, at their voting records).  Probably at least as similar as Clinton's and Gore's were in 1992.

There'a a lot of nastiness from both candidates' surrogates, so your naivete is showing by saying that Obama should force Hillary and Bill to beg on their knees.

No, I think, if Hillary Clinton were the nominee, and she offered Barack Obama a VP slot on the ticket, he'd be a fool not to take it. Frankly, it would give him a perfectly positioned step toward running for President and winning down the road. No one could claim he didn't have the experience; and certainly, he's got the rhetorical talent to do it.

Politics is a nasty game, and Barack Obama learned from the nastiest--Chicago Pols. He's no shrinking violet himself when it comes to dirty tricks--he shoved long-time African Americans aside in his earlier Illinois elections, by challenging names on ballot petitions--and he angered a lot of Illinois' black voters when he did so.

Give it a rest. I'm proud of both front runners in the Dem party, and I'm sad that John Edwards had the bad luck to be caught in the middle between two candidates who are such powerhouses that he couldn't get a foothold. But we're blessed with an embarrassment of RICHES in this primary, and we should try to keep that in mind here.

The GOP is fractured, lost, divided, and their house of cards is imploding on them--it's their own fault, of course, for letting W. so distort their party values that they no longer know what or who they are. They're the party of BIG DEBT, HUGE SPENDING and TWO FAILED WARS. They deserve every bit of the angst their experiencing.