Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KyrosL who wrote (67926)	5/23/2008 9:42:12 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542937

I think it would be difficult to have a number two person who thought they should really be number one. I want Obama to pick someone he thinks he can work with. It would also be nice to be free of the Clinton (family) baggage. I mean if it IS time for a change, then why pick from the same old family we had around for 8 years in the 90's? They were good years, don't get me wrong, but I think it's time to move on. I don't like dynastic politics- didn't like it in the Kennedys, don't like it in the Bushes, and I wouldn't be any happier to see it in the Clintons.

To: KyrosL who wrote (67926)	5/23/2008 9:50:39 AM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 542937

JMHO but if Obama is serious about new politics and breaking with the past, he needs more new names at the top. Hillary on the ticket also keeps the whole anti-Clinton industry out there alive and well and intruding on the election. The plus side is that the ticket might - only might - get more competitive in some states where Obama was weak with poor voters. If I were at the small table with Obama debating this, I would be pushing hard for a Webb, Richardson, Nunn, Clark, etc. in lieu of Hillary. But we won't really know what will happen until we know.

To: KyrosL who wrote (67926)	5/23/2008 10:00:48 AM
From: biotech_bull	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542937

I see it as Obama's call, pure and simple. As the chosen nominee he gets to weigh the pros and the cons. Will be the first of his many Presidential decisions, I hope.

To: KyrosL who wrote (67926)	5/23/2008 10:27:19 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542937

Why is a Hillary vice presidency a bad thing? She blew a 25% lead over Obama she had in the polls in October 2007. Even the Billarys believed they were a runaway winner and consequently they had no plans beyond Super Tuesday. When Billary hit the campaign trail, the Democrats quickly changed their opinion about her. You think the radioactive nature of the Billarys would not have a significant negative impact during the GE particularly after the negative impact it had with the Dems.?