Friday, July 27, 2007

Like It Or Not: Clinton-Obama 2008

Even though, I don't agree with his conclusion, Francis L. Holland's blog entry on a Clinton-Obama ticket raises a few salient points and I would like to include his blog entry as a counterpoint to the plezWorld blog entry on their recent spat concerning foreign policy.

The following blog entry by Francis L. Holland is cross-posted at the Francis L. Holland blog and Skeptical Brotha.

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama share the same essential challenge in the 2008 election: They have to defeat the white male supremacy paradigm - at least in terms of its hold over the 2008 presidential election - to end the 43 term white male monopoly of the presidency.

If Barack Obama weren't Black, then everyone would speculate - even more than they do now - about his potential as a vice presidential candidate. And he would look damned good as a vice presidential candidate on the Clinton ticket.

We certainly ought not refrain from this speculation simply because he is Black. Barack Obama obviously has a future and I believe his future can and should begin as vice president in the Clinton II Administration.

If he and Clinton are equally bought and sold to the Establishment, as Skeptical Brotha contends at his AfroSpear blog, then they have a lot in common that should recommend Barack Obama for participation in such a pairing.

Clinton IS going to win the nomination, and then half of all AfroSpear bloggers (and their constituents) are going to lose enthusiasm, unless Barack Obama is also on the ticket.

Field Negro says:
Sorry Francis, I am still not feeling Hillary just yet. I just can't get past her flip flop on the Iraq war, and her slick attempt to weasel out of her fickle convictions. Still, it would be nice to see America join the 21st Century and elect someone besides a white male as President.

And plezWorld predicts:
Hillary Clinton will head the 2008 presidential ticket, and in an attempt to shore up the south, she will select a southern democratic senator or governor (think John Edwards of north carolina or Tim Kaine, governor of virginia)... i'm still pulling for Barack Obama, but i think the novelty will wear off when the primary season kicks in and the gloves come off.

Black folks will still come out to vote in droves, because for some reason you people still love the Clintons.
As Skeptical Brotha observed, Barack Obama is NOT Jesse Jackson; he lives in a different historical moment and a radically different social context, and the proof of this is the reception he is receiving. His success is heavily influenced and supported by his times, and the success of Jesse Jackson was a prerequisite to creating the times in which we now live, such as they are.

Read the entire blog post here.

plez sez: in an earlier blog post, Francis L. Holland left a comment stating that he agreed that Hillary will probably get the Democratic nomination and that a large number of Blacks will want Obama on the ticket as her vice-president. i tend to agree with Francis L. Holland to a certain extent: Hillary will probably win the nomination and Black people will generally prefer that Obama be the VP on the ticket... BUT i feel the reality is that Hillary will win the nomination, Black people will prefer that she pick Obama as her running mate, but she'll go with Edwards or Richardson as the VP!

neither Hillary nor Obama brings the other one any NEW VOTES come general election time... they are both Northern Liberals, both are rich Ivy League elitists (not saying that this is a bad thing), both are minorities (duh!), and both can lay claim to the bedwetting tax-and-spend liberal wing of the Democratic party (Blacks, women, anti-war doves, etc.). but Clinton is going to need a white southern man (or definitely a non-northerner) to get those much needed votes (in Tennessee, Florida, etc.) that Al Gore and John Kerry couldn't secure against W.


Francis L. Holland Blog said...

You're a true brother to me, plez, to repost this at your blog and give it real consideration.

I could not disagree with Clinton if she opted for Richardson over Obama, because Richardson might help would solidify the Latino vote and New Mexico behind the Democrats.

But, polls show that most Latinos nationally don't know that Richardson is a Latino. This could be an advantage and a disadvantage, since it means that Richardson has not got an "immigrant" image nationally, which helps him with with whites, but he is half-Latino, and Latinos would eventually discover and respond to that, one would hope.

Edwards isn't a bad man, but he's not nearly the intellect or the politician that Obama is. Just look at the fact that, in spite of being a white man, Edwards has only one third the support and one third of the money of Edwards. Putting Edwards on the ticket would be "affirmative action of under-achieving white men." I can't see the need for such affirmative action, since white men have been elected to the presidency and vice presidency 43 consecutive times.

Plus, Obama and Clinton really do appeal to separate demographics. Less educated people favor Clinton, generally, while more educated people favor Obama. Independents, so far, like Obama. And the Democrats who don't like Clinton like Obama.

Democrats had all-white tickets in seven of the last seven elections and we only able to win two of those elections, in spite of going with an all-white ticket. So, that's clearly not the ticket to success, although the white male supremacy paradigm tells us that it is.

The ticket to success may be selecting the two most intelligent, dynamic, vote-getting and money-raising candidates, and that's going to be Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

There are going to be white men lining up, insisting that having a white man on the ticket is essential, but I suggest that we simple ignore those proponents of the white male supremacy paradigm, because Mondale and Dukakis and Kerry and Gore and Edwards are all living proof that putting white men one the ticket DOES NOT GUARANTEE electoral success.

It is often said that the vice presidential candidate doesn't matter that much, which is another reason to pick the best VP candidate (Obama or Richardson) instead of the white male candidate (Edwards).

Let's keep this conversation going and insist on progress for women, Blacks and Latinos in the 2008 presidential and vice presidential election!

CapCity said...

Obama is not only what the US needs, but he's what the world needs. In my humble opinion, he is the Muhammad Ali of politics:
*He's pretty;-).
*He's extremely diplomatic.
*He fights for & stands by his beliefs withOUT waffling - regardless of the backlash.
*He is respected world-wide (or will be) because he really listens AND is seeking ways to BRIDGE relationships through communication (as opposed to simply Bombing everyone who doesn't agree with his policy).
*He KNOWs the danger he walks EVERYday as a Black Man!
*He acknowledges that he is Blessed more than others and is attempting to use his 'celebrity' to help those less fortunate.

Dave J said...

Francis, you are too kind when you refer to Edwards. After listening to this man speak on many occasions, it would be a huge mistake for Clinton to include him in her campaign.

As you point out:
The ticket to success may be selecting the two most intelligent, dynamic, vote-getting and money-raising candidates, and that's going to be Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

The words intelligence and Edwards should not be uttered in the same room. Now this may sound harsh, and it may be unfair, but Edwards is not the sharpest pencil in the box.

Allow me to put forward a similar, but different notion. It is my belief that whether we preface it with "white" or "black" the male power paradigm will sooner settle on a minority male as president than a minority in the form of a female. I think on many levels and behind closed doors the schisms of the -isms are more afraid of gender than color. What if Obama wins the ticket, and has Clinton along as his running mate?

But then again, we could also merge all of our assertions and we'd come out with Obama winning the ticket and taking a "male" as running mate.

The possible combinations are so varied it is enough to spark a head ache trying to second guess it.

Lori said...

I share capacity's view of Obama (smile). Also, I really don't see an Obama and Clinton alliance of any kind. I like them both, but I think their egos are way too big to make something of that nature work.

If I'm not mistaken, Obama has already stated, in so many words, that he's running to Win as in the Presidency, not come in Second, as in Vice President (smile).

In any case, I'd personally hate to see Obama serve under Clinton. I doing so would harm his image, over the long run, more than it would help it.

Christopher Chambers said...

I still think Hillary is a death sentence for the Dems. Too much baggage, but she will get the nomination for the same reason losers like Mondale and Kerry got it--the machinery. Having Obama on the ticket (if this happens) won't save it.

plez... said...

i'm not as concerned about a white man going back to the white house (HELL, it's been going on for over 225 yeas now)... i'm concerned about which person is in the white house (i would not have wanted Al Sharpton to be the person to finally break through! HA HA HA).

i like Barack Obama and he's my favorite candidate BY FAR...

i'll be honest, even though she's leading the pack... i wouldn't be thrilled with either Clinton going to the White House... i'd rather have Edwards than her. she does not seem genuine AT ALL and her convictions appear to be tied directly to poll numbers and focus group reactions!

plez... said...

lori & chris,
after watching the YouTube debates and her surly attitude toward Obama (calling him naive in her patronizing manner), i like The Hillary even less. if she wins the nomination, i hope that she doesn't pick Obama as her running mate (i doubt that she will since he has nothing to offer her campaign).

if she gets the nomination, Obama will be best served to return to the Senate, wait her out for 1 or 2 terms and then return. by then, the country will be CLAMORING for his fresh perspective and he will have A LOT more experience on a national and international scale.

CapCity said...

Plez, when u get a minute check out my li'l political "Fantasy" post;-)

And of course, I agree with those who say (in their own ways) "HALE to the Naw" should Obama be second-in-command to Lady MacBeth/The Hilary. Forgive my return to "the vernacular" - but that would be suicide for My Precious Obama;-)...

CapCity said...

One more point to make before I step off my soap box;-)...
When Obama (& Political leaders of Color) is accused of being "naive"...has it been taken into consideration that his experience should be counted in "dog years" in a sense because in order to GET to the level where a Politician of Color needs to be his/her road traveled has had a great deal more challenges for them to overcome. Hilary may be more "worldly" because doors were already opened for her (not saying it was easy for her to attain her present status, but she has sat at many a table that Obama did not have access to...).
Just something else to think about if u haven't already...or am I being naive?;-)...

Jim Hardwick said...

I am a white male southerner. Obama looks like a Godsend to me.I hope the democrats have sense enough to nominate him and I hope the electorate have the sense to elect this man for the sake of our great country.

Homeland Colors said...

A lot of people overlook Clinton's ability to motivate the Republican Base to come out and vote...against her. Clinton as the dem canidate gets southern white evangelicals, many of whom have decided to sit this election out, to vote. Even if she wins, she'll have hurt dems who are lower on the ticket. Obama has a real chance of winning the nomination if Blacks, not whites, don't let his race stop them from voting for him. To many African Americans think that a Black man can't win the presidency, at least in the older generation. In addition to that, Obama won't negotiate away programs that help African American's because its politically viable, i don't think we can say the same about clinton.

dc_speaks said...

oh, this was a fantastic post and great points of view where raised to bring fortha a whole new ticket.

great great post.

thanks for sharing, plez.

Keith said...

I was on the fence before but Obama has my vote in large part because his foreign policy strategy will not maintain the status quo.

I too am confused as hell about why black folk blindly love the Clintons, especially Bill. Has anyone read The Debt?

I think I'm going to ride with your prediction, Plez. I think that Clinton will win the nom, and she will choose a career second banana like Edwards to roll with. Obama would not take the VP role even if it was offered. Plus I think that regardless of how popular Obama is, democrats will push for a white man to balance out the ticket. A white woman and a black man running the so-called free world? Yeah right!

plez... said...

if EVERYONE closes their eyes and just listens to each candidate, actually listens to what they say and what conviction drives their purpose, it would be hard for them to consider anyone else from either party to be our President, other than Barack Obama.

i think you are correct; those right-wing whacko's will be coming out of the woodwork to vote against Hillary next november. i don't think the democrats can win with her at the top of the ticket.

DC & keith,
glad you guys continue to come through plezWorld. as i've said since i first heard him speak, Obama speaks from the heart and brings a fresh perspective to the campaign! his stance on foreign policy is "not the way that things are done," but it is definitely something that the US (and other countries) need to look at... it may fail, but it will definitely fail if we do not try!