Obama sidesteps question on Clinton as VP

May 14, 2008


CAPE GIRARDEAU, Mo. – Illinois Sen. Barack Obama sidestepped the Dream Team question on Tuesday when asked whether he would make rival Hillary Clinton his running mate if he beats her for the Democratic White House nomination. 

“Sen. Clinton is still competing. We haven’t resolved this nomination. I haven’t won the nomination yet,” Obama said, after jokinginly asking the audience member who asked the question whether he was a reporter.

“It would be presumptuous of me to pretend like I’ve already won and start talking about who my vice president’s going to be. I still have some more work to do.”

Presumptuous? Maybe. But he’s not exactly pretending. Obama, who has a nearly insurmountable lead over the New York senator in their race for the nomination, went to Missouri on Tuesday and campaigns in Michigan on Wednesday.

Both states have already voted in the primaries and will be crucial to him in a general election against Republican John McCain.

Photo Credit: Reuters/John Gress


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

I think Hilary would make a devisive and undermining VP unless Obama reigned her in rigorously.

After the dirty campaign she has waged would YOU make her your VP if you were Obama?

N0 – are are not brain dead, she would be a poor choice!

Who wants two powerbases in the Whitehouse?

Only a fool, I’ll wager!

Posted by Keith M Warwick | Report as abusive

Hillary is just too behind in this point of time. She needs big wins in the remaining states, and superdelegates. I just do not see that happening.

Posted by Mike | Report as abusive

Barack Obama is going to choose the absolute best running mate and it is not going to be the sore loser feminist Madame Clinton.

Posted by Carole H. | Report as abusive

I picture Mr. Obama as a very intelligent man who realizes that the only way to win in November and finally put a stop to the Bush policies and tax cuts as well as the War in Iraq, that has put America in a deep whole is to select Ms. Clinton as his running mate if she agrees. Ms. Clinton can carry the working class vote. That is something that John Kerry and John Edwards together could not do in 2004. Mr. Obama has proven he can carry the college graduates and higher income voters as well as the African American voters, however history tells us that alone is not enough to win the highest office in America. He needs the working class vote and Ms. Clinton has fared well with them. Hillary Clinton is not some monster who wants to dominate the White House. She is a woman with deep concerns about her country and has the political background and experience to make things happen in America. She is definitely not in it for money or power. She has both of those. I honestly feel the best chance we have to end the Bush and Republican nightmare is to support a Democratic ticket with Obama and Clinton in 2008.

Posted by D From Dallas | Report as abusive

Hillary Clinton would be a poor choice for Obama. I was a loyal Clintin supporter until she failed the political leadership test and voted against the Levin amendment on 10/12/02, and voted for Bush’s Iraq war and gave Bush cover to attack Iran. Also, her negatives are poison to any general campaign. Barack Obama is a born leader, not merely ambitious, and he’s shown leadership skills throughout the campaign. I look to him to run an administration adeptly, not ineptly as has Clinton cronies. Moreover, Obama is a genuine change agetn, while Clinton’s corporate supporters would exercise undue influence. No, no, no — to the crazy Clinton as VP notion. Obama has many good choices; I’d rather see Chuck Hagel rather than a “regional, balancing” choice like Rendel or Bayh. I’d like to see Jim Webb as a like change agent; best bet, however, is Sam Nunn. He’d give the ticket the kind of broad appeal that Clinton brags about but doesn’t have.

Posted by Dana Mooring | Report as abusive

It is so obvious that the Americans’ message is that nearly half likes changes and the other half like solutions.

If Obama is truly a leader and care about the party then he would beg Clinton to be on the ticket. But again, Obama is showing that he is just a puppet; first, sitting in Wright’s church for 20 years, and now by his wife who is ‘not proud’ of America and calls it ‘mean’!

Posted by vote4thebest | Report as abusive

primarily to ‘vote4thebest’

If we were “proud” of America in its current condition, we wouldn’t be voting to try to fix it. Blind patriotism in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary is what got us supporting war with Iraq in the first place and the second place. I am proud of our constitution, I am proud of our people and our culture, I am proud of our commitment to change and to hope in the face of adversity. But I’m not a moron; we have some huge problems in our government that need to be addressed. And to call somebody un-american when they’re simply excercising a constitutionally guaranteed right to speak up about the problems in our government and our disasterous foriegn policy is not only fundamentally against what the U.S. stands for, it’s also a fallacy.

“Dissent is the highest form of patriotism” -Howard Zinn

Posted by Mike | Report as abusive