The Democratic Dream Team
It should be painfully clear, even to the most die-hard partisans, that Democrats stand a better than average chance of winning the White House and expanding their majorities in Congress. All of the major indicators from polling to fund raising show that Democrats stand to benefit from severe voter discontent. My money is on Senator Clinton. Of all the candidates, she is the most articulate, well educated and passionate candidate in the Democratic field. She also happens to be on point with many of the major issues that American’s care about.
I’m interested in seeing what other’s think about what a Clinton administration might look like (or another candidates dream administration). My prediction is as follows:
Vice President: Toss Up - Tom Vilasak or Evan Bayh
Secretary of State: Joe Biden
Secretary of Treasury: Gary Cohn
Attorney General: Janet Napolitano
SEC Chairman: Chris Dodd
Secretary of Defense: (Jim Webb would be an ideal candidate however Democrats can’t afford to risk his seat). Jack Reed would be the next best alternative.
What are your thoughts on the ideal Democratic Dream Team?
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically each day to your feed reader. If you don't have a feed reader, you can always have these articles delivered to your email inbox every day. Click here to sign up.
Trackbacks & Pingbacks
Comments
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
I still think (and hope) Obama can win the nomination. But if you're talking about a Clinton administration, I think you have to include Wes Clark. He's been a strong supporter and she may have him in mind for a VP spot to boost her national security credentials.
Just wondering - does anyone think it's a possibility that Edwards or even Obama could be VP?
Biden/Webb is the Democrat Party dream team. Aside from these guys, the party is a total collection of socialist clowns who will rob Peter to pay Paul… with your money! Government health care, more money for federally run schools, more UN control… this Democrat field is a disgrace. A once proud party that brought us Andy Jackson, Grover Cleveland, and Jack Kennedy should hang its head in shame.
I wouldn't be so hasty to throw in the towel especially if Clinton is the candidate. If Rudy runs against her I think he may win. And I am certainly not a Republican voter by any stretch of the imagination. But the more I watch Clinton's arrogance grow, especially with her obvious distain for Obama, the more inclined I may be to vote for the Republican which will be a first in many years for me.
I agree with Raoul. Don't throw in the towel. As a Dem, I will not support a Clinton candidacy and very much believe the Party will step in and make some sort of back door deal–too much too lose on this race. She has way too much baggage. My personal take–for a female raised on the feminista b.s. Clinton and her White Gloved Rebels professed back in her day, she was quick to "refresh" the philosophy of feminism–suddenly all about the personal choice of women–when hubby got outed from his own closet. Meanwhile, the rest of us females raised in the '60s and '70s are living examples of true (albeit very tired) independent women who Hillary now expects us to support her to the White House as the first female Prez? I think not. This race is about change for the better, not about a bunch of sixty-something women's last chance to put a woman of their own age group into the history books. Do NOT let the media pick our candidates–take a look at Time, which just hit the racks 11/19. Joe Klein's article on H.C. says everything no Dem dares to say. Feel free to stop by the Frog to read more about my unpopular insights. As for Obama as a VP on her ticket, that would push me right off the edge. That man–as well as many Dem contenders–are ten times the proven leader as those who have manufactured a tired shadow of old school politics.
I think Hillary is a weak candidate because when the general election starts, and the nastiness starts (they say it could be the ugliest campaign ever), it hurts her the most. Americans at some point are going to realize that they are voting for another 4 - 8 years of grudges and political hatred between Repubs and Dems. Bush/Clinton fatigue is going to settle in and we are all going to want to see new faces. I'm a Republican so I want the weakest candidate for the Dems to win the primaries, but I'll admit - even the prospect of another term or two of this crazed partisanship is dispiriting…
I don't think many can take too much more…
Tony, ‘she is the most articulate’ Most articulate… what are you smoking? She’s a stiff who’s been labeled the first presidential robot. She is excessively mono tone when she speaks, her marketing team has to rig all her questions and she triangulates virtually every major issue that exists in the political discourse. Hillary is allot of things, but articulate is not one of them.
Any place to read her foreign policy articles or speeches? Specifically - EU3 and Iran, Security Council Reformation (like Japan). Who are her FP experts (besides Sandy Berger)?