Hillary on the ticket? Wow, if you want to get all the ship-jumping National Review types to forgive Bush in zero seconds flat, that'd be the way to do it.

exactly. Bush could propose trillions in new spending and the right would take it to make sure Hillary doesn't get back into the white house.
On a related note today at NRO Derbeyshire has an article ripping into Bush for proposing to raise the debt ceiling by $1TR. As noted here and elsewhere the purpose behind this is facilitate the move to privatize social security. Does this come up in Derbeyshire's article? no, only the usual Bush spends too much rant.

If Kerry had any spine he'd say no, as Hillary would dominate all conversation and leave Kerry forgotten. Then again if he had any spine, he wouldn't behave as he has.

It doesn't make sense for HILLARY! to accept second fiddle now when she would otherwise own the orchestra in 2008.

She won't win re-election in '06 if Rudi runs, so why shouldn't she?

Hillary has shown a certain discipline in recent months, which would probably mean she would stay on message with Kerry through the campaign. The problem is the media orgasm that would follow her nomination would make covering her to so many in the mainstream press be the "It" assignment.

Given that secnario, Kerry could easily become the equivlaent of Richie Cunningham on "Happy Days" once The Fonz showed up and began taking all the limelight away. I don't know if Kerry's ego could handle that, and if it looked as though he was headed for a loss in the final days of the campaign, the torture could get excruciating, as the press changed its story line from "Kerry 2004" to "Hillary 2008" before the votes wree even counted.

I don't see why picking Hilary doesn't fit in quite nicely with his "South can go to hell" strategy. So Bush will win his states by even bigger margins due to anger at Clinton. So what? Votes don't matter, states matter.

It does seem to me that this would make OJ's pet theory about Condi-for-VP more problematic for Bush. One can imagine the stories the media would write: "In a desperate bid to counter John Kerry's dramatic selection of Hilary Rodham (Clinton?) as running mate..."

brian:

He'd actually have to pick her at that point. Remember after his Dad drubbed Geraldine Ferraro in their debate the backlash that followed?

brian:

He'd actually have to pick her at that point. Remember after his Dad drubbed Geraldine Ferraro in their debate the backlash that followed?

My prognostication:

Kerry - Clinton at convention.

Post convention campaign: Kerry implodes, withdraws. Clinton for Prez by default.

You heard it first here.

Why would he "have to pick her"? We're still talking about a popular wartime president with a strong economy versus a Senator. All of which adds up to an easy victory. Let Kerry make the desperate moves. Granted, the move has its advantages, and Bush has never shown much of any interest in what the press thinks, so one never knows...

brian:

Because at the end of the day he's still a politician.

The only thing more surprising than Hill winning the veepstakes would be her actually taking it.

Sitting VP's have a notoriously tough time being elected president (see Gore, Al). All of the disadvantages of incumbency and none of the benefits.

Chris B
"Sitting VP's have a notoriously tough time being elected president (see Gore, Al). All of the disadvantages of incumbency and none of the benefits."

It has happened recently. George H.W.Bush is the most recent. Nixon almost made it and succeeded on the second try.

I am one of those who voted for Gore and am glad that Bush won.

There are a relativly low number of data points for the last 100 years to convincingly project trends.

re Nixon, close only counts in horseshoes and thermo-nuclear weapons. The number of losing candidates who've gotten a second bite at the Presidental apple is small as well, leaving out the 3rd party crowd.

Not saying that she couldn't pull it off, just that being VP isn't necessarily the springboard that people like to assume it is. If it was, one would expect that the path would be followed more than it has been.

She'd be better off running for a Govenorship.

I hope you are right. I'm just expressing my worst case scenario.

Hillary is not the irresistable force people think she is - she won the one seat she could in 2000. Would she have won in IL or MA or CA against a Democrat in the primary? No. Would she have ever won a Senate seat from AK? No.

Would Rudy have beaten her in 2000? Maybe, and certainly would have done better than Lazio.

What is her threshold in a national election? Even if it is as high as 48%, it isn't enough.

And now she has Wesley Clark around her neck, as well as Bill. But Kerry may be desperate enough to take her, and her money. She certainly would not want him to pick Edwards, who could cut her off from the trial bar if he really wanted to.

FDR was the only losing VP candidate (1920) in the 20th Century to make it into the White House. There's not much point in being associated with loser Kerry. If he wins, then she's stuck behind him for 4-8 years. No way Hillary would take the VP, it's much too small for her.

But the VP gets the nomination if he wants it. So if they think Kerry can win she has to take the job. Or they can just keep leaking dirt on him to make sure he loses.

Bush could choose Rice if he appointed Cheney as Secretary of State to replace Powell who will be leaving. Otherwise, if Bush chose Rice without retaining Cheney in an important position in the administration, I for one would be damned disappointed. Damn disappointed.

Disappointed "big time."

Cheney's ill and a political negative. He's gone.