Which leads to another thought I've had recently. What about all those soccer moms (or was it security moms) from 2004? Rove got them to vote for Bush on security issues, will they vote for McCain this time around? Or do they, too, feel that the Iraq war has gone on long enough and that the (potentially failing) economy really is more important?

A Clinton-Obama ticket? On the theory of record vote totals, perhaps. That could even be true even without Bush's history in recent years.

Be aware that this is certainly possible. Of the two parties, the Dems by far would be the party that would have stage-managed a fake “battle” up to the nomination at the convention to boost turnout, with Clinton-Obama being planned months ago. (My own view is that this conflict is real, not fake and stage-managed.)

“As far as Obama supporters voting for McCain, if Obama were not on the ticket- I'm sure many of his supporters would vote for McCain. “

I believe many would. McCain has often been a Democrat Lite. (The other times when he has defined his fellow Republicans it has been for self-serving reasons.)

As far as Obama supporters voting for McCain, if Obama were not on the ticket- I'm sure many of his supporters would vote for McCain. I've already said I won't for Hillary (but a power-sharing or similar arrangement with Obama opens up that question for me), but I won't for for McCain. Period.

There are 6 separate qualities here, and she is very hit and miss:

1) communication: one need only watch C-Span to see how little she has in commun. skills vis-a-vos Bill or Obama. People look bored when she speaks, even in her Bush-like selected coteries. Obama excites and Bil can even rapt an audience with minutia. Hillary lacks charisma.

2) persuasion- see above. Not a strong suit at all. Also, see Healthcare '93.

3) understanding policy- yes.

4) raising money- not sure, since much of this is Bill's effort, and the Clinton. She lags behind Obama, and if she ran as Rodham, there'd be little, I think.

5) raising support- see raising money.

6) collaboration- mixed record in the Senate, and mixed as a policy wonk beforehand.

One of the probs with supporters is they often lay out their candidates as ideal in all categories. Of the 6 mentioned, I'd give 1 yes, 3 so-sos, and 2 nadas.

And with so many issues pulling the president in today's complicated world it makes sense to divide the “portfolio.” I guess essentially they'd be co-Presidents, even though I suppose the President would have the ultimate say over all issues. Of course the irony would be that if this becomes a reality we have Cheney and Bush to thank for expanding the powers of the Vice Presidency. I guess that could be their legacy.

But where does Bill fit in? Whatever arrangement there may be, Bill will get in the way.

(Many would vote for McCain, that's what many Obama voters would do.)