Reich: Get ready for an Obama–Clinton ticket in 2012

If Robert Reich’s prediction is true, this would make every GOP operative and candidate in the 2012 race go mad…

America Blog

There was a point (see here) when I thought a primary challenge to Obama could easily come from within the Dem power structure. Obama seemed that vulnerable.

And I assumed that Hillary was positioning herself to be that person. In 1968, RFK didn’t declare his candidacy until Gene McCarthy had fatally wounded Johnson, making a safe entry possible. I saw the same strategy back then for a Clinton challenge for the crown in 2012.

But the moment passed, and hopes for a primary challenge seemed to have dimmed. (“Seemed”? Yes.)

Not only that, but the Clinton and Obama machines seem to have merged; certainly the CEOs of those machines are more and more aligned.

So I find this the next logical step — Hillary Clinton as the 2012 VP nominee. This makes her a shoe-in for the nomination in 2016 (assuming no horrid misstep betwixt), and possibly pres as well, given the current state of the opposition. So everyone’s happy:

    ▪ Obama can’t run again and the Dems need an heir.
    ▪ His daughters are too young for their dynastic turn.
    ▪ The Clintons still want it.
    ▪ Hillary as heir-apparent gives both her and the Dems another 4–8 years on the throne.

Sweet deal for them. Let Chelsea and Sasha duke it out, come their turn to seek power.  That will be later; this will be now.

Here’s Robert Reich, who might know a thing or two about the Clintons, on this subject (my emphasis):

My political prediction for 2012 (based on absolutely no inside information): Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden swap places. Biden becomes Secretary of State — a position he’s apparently coveted for years. And Hillary Clinton, Vice President.

So the Democratic ticket for 2012 is Obama-Clinton. … Obama needs to stir the passions and enthusiasms of a Democratic base that’s been disillusioned with his cave-ins to regressive Republicans. Hillary Clinton on the ticket can do that. … Clinton would help deflect attention from the bad economy and put it on foreign policy, where she and Obama have shined.

Sign me up — I think Reich makes the good call.

Am I liking this? Do you think I think we need 8 more years of progressive dreams deferred? That would be No.

But my dreams are beside the point, aren’t they. You and me, we’re just God’s spies, inspecting the mystery of things. Birds in a cage, as it were.

POLL: ‘Progressive’ Is The Most Positively Viewed Political Label in America

It’s always good to be on the  correct side of any issue…

Think Progress

new poll from the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press out yesterday shows that “progressive” is the most positively viewed political label in America, with 67 percent holding a positive view compared to just 22 percent who view the term negatively:



The poll found that the term progressive is viewed positively by a majority of all partisan groups — including 55 percent of Republicans, 68 percent of Independents, and 76 percent of Democrats.

The Week: Why Michele Bachmann’s Iowa chief endorsed Ron Paul: 3 Theories

Kent Sorenson's dramatic defection from Michele Bachmann's team to the Ron Paul campaign dealt an embarrassing blow to the struggling Minnesotan. Photo: Scott Olson/Getty

Undoubtedly there are some  backroom dealings happening in Iowa when it comes to the faltering Michele Bachmann campaign.

The leaders of the Evangelical movement there think that Bachmann should drop out of the race.  Thus far she has ignored all the signals and requests for her to drop out.  Her absence would leave Rick Santorum and Rick Perry to reel in the Religious Right in Iowa.  Most Evangelical groups in Iowa have already endorsed Rick Santorum…

The Week

Mere days before the Minnesotan tries to make a splash in the Iowa caucuses, prominent backer Kent Sorenson dramatically dumps her for Ron Paul

Rep. Michele Bachmann’s (R-Minn.) slim chance to win the Iowa Republican caucuses on Jan. 3 receded even further Wednesday night, as her Iowa campaign co-chairman, state Sen. Kent Sorenson (R),jumped ship to endorse Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas). A short three hours after appearing at a rally with Bachmann, the evangelical Christian, socially conservative Sorenson showed up on stage with Paul, saying he was going all-in for the libertarian icon. “When the Republican establishment is going to be coming after Ron Paul, I thought it is my duty to come to his aid,” Sorenson explained. What’s really behind this 11th-hour defection? Here, three theories:

1. Sorenson knows Bachmann is going to get crushed
Bachmann was already tied for last place in the polls, and now Sorenson’s “new land-speed record for a political defection… pretty much kills the Bachmann campaign,” says Joe Klein at TIME. Indeed, Bachmann really “hasn’t shown much to offer as a serious contender” since a standout performance at an early debate, says Bryan Preston at Pajamas Media. A late surge never materialized, and Sorenson probably “panicked once he realized that he was on a sinking ship.” But he chose a tenuous life raft, bailing “from one candidate who won’t win Iowa to another who might but probably won’t, and won’t win the nomination. Interesting choice.”

2. The Paul campaign bribed him
After Sorenson’s defection, Bachmann shot back: “Kent Sorenson personally told me he was offered a large sum of money to go to work for the Paul campaign.” (Team Paul denies any financial motivation in Sorenson’s decision.) I initially chalked up Bachmann’s bribery allegation to “the momentary and understandable hyperbole in the immediate aftermath of betrayal,” says Ed Morrissey at Hot Air. But then Sorenson’s former campaign manager said Sorenson had told her a similar story, so maybe Bachmann’s right after all. A direct payoff, or promise of some sort of steady “salary,” would at least “explain why he would leap from Bachmann to Paul, two campaigns that have diametrically opposed viewpoints on foreign policy and immigration.”

3. Paul was always a better fit for Sorenson
Sorenson may be a home-schooling, anti-gay, evangelical darling, but “it’s not entirely surprising” that he decided to back the libertarian Paul, says Patrick Caldwell at The American Prospect. Sorenson is a fiscal conservative as well as a social conservative — “he once sponsored a bill to return Iowa’s government to the gold standard,” for example — and he’s worked with Paul’s Campaign for Liberty group in the past. And there’s a personal element as well: Paul helped raise money for Sorenson in his 2009 state Senate campaign. If, as Sorenson says, he believes the GOP has “a clear, top-tier race between [Mitt] Romney and Ron Paul,” it makes a lot of sense that he backed Paul.