A year ago, Washington rumors had Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton switching jobs for 2012, and that was before the Tea Party wrecking crew came in, brought government to a standstill and created an anti-Obama climate that threatens a hostile takeover of the White House next year. (President Perry? Cain? A compliant Romney?)

The idea was dismissed out of hand back then, even though Bob Woodward, after months researching an Obama book, said, “It’s on the table. And some of Hillary Clinton’s advisers see it as a real possibility in 2012. President Obama needs some of the women, Latinos, retirees that she did so well with during the 2008 primaries…The other interesting question is, Hillary Clinton could run in her own right in 2016 and be younger than Ronald Reagan when he was elected president.”

For an election that will define America for decades ahead, it’s no comfort that the President is still ahead of Congress in the approval race to the bottom and raising tons of money from Wall Street (even Romney’s old firm). Disillusioned Democrats and Independents will need every bit of reassurance they can get that the crazies won’t take over the country.

Such a switch in running mates would be seen by cynics as a “Dump Biden” movement, but the potential positives far outweigh such carping. For a start, Hillary Clinton’s presence on the ticket would point up Obama’s foreign policy successes—-taking out bin Laden and drawing down troops, however slowly, from Iraq and Afghanistan—-and point up GOP empty rhetoric on the subject. And Biden’s long Senate experience would serve him well at the State Department.


Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2011 The Moderate Voice
  • ShannonLeee

    I think it is a no brainer. He brought in all of the old guard Dems anyway. He might as well have Hillary as VP. Politics and voter blocks aside…I think she would make a great VP.

  • JSpencer

    I think it’s a good idea. I also think it could re-energize some disillusioned democrats – meaning the ones who would have been happier if she’d won that primary.

  • I’m not with you on this one, Bob.

    First of all, Biden was the leading Democratic foreign policy light during the Bush interregnum.

    Secondly, why swap horses to shore up something that most voters don’t care squat about.

    Thirdly, having spent some quality time with Joe Biden early this month and knowing a couple of his staffers well, he’s not going to buy it.

  • The VP is a position; Sec. State is a job. She’s doing more good where she is.

  • Allen

    You are right Prof and you know what? She is doing a really good job too.

  • IIRC, Biden was happier as VP because he’s not big on world travel. He’s close to his family, grandkids, etc.

    I also get an unfounded suspicion that Clinton really likes SecState and will stay just because she likes the work and has been successful. VP, regardless of the Cheney effect, is still a do-nothing job, and I doubt she’ll volunteer with that (so I guess I ditto Prof. on his point).

    I’m also with Shaun on his second point: the voters aren’t interested. Biden hasn’t been a drag on the ticket or the Presidency, and there’s no reason to replace him.

  • raju

    Hillary as VP ?
    We are kidding, she is doing much better than Mr Obama, it is time for the president to realize his weaknesses in goverening and for 2012 run with Hillary as president and he as the VP. Then we the democrats can win the election and more importantly do the things we need to do to get the country on right track. Hillary with her international exposure knows what needs to be done with Chineese, Obama has no clue, he needs to understand his strength / weaknesses and not let those not come in the way for bigger needs of the country. Let us do it Barrack !!

  • sentry

    Imagining for the moment that she might become VP after 2012, I would like it if she made the position a vigorous, powerful one, more than what liberal critics thought of Cheney’s antics in that position.

    The VP position should be second most powerful, after the Presidency. One way to do this would be to make the VP among other things the primary domestic policy executive official. It should be the VP, not President Obama, traveling throughout the nation, be it for disaster visits or for visiting currently ailing (economically) places in the nation of note. (It’s a special case right now with Obama; his travels are part of his 2012 campaign. I refer instead to more normal or more legitimate travels by the President for domestic affairs. Why isn’t the VP doing this stuff?)