Even before Sen. Barack Obama won the requisite delegates to become the Democratic presidential nominee and long before a difficult general election contest, Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s office has been discussing a potential successor to the Illinois junior senator if he wins the White House, sources close to Blagojevich said Tuesday.
Though no names have formally surfaced from Blagojevich, sources said a key proviso would be to appoint a successor who would gain Obama’s approval.
Obama will have a huge influence on the choice of his successor if he is elected president. One doesn’t want to upset the president, particularly if one is under federal investigation.
* St. Sabina protests Pfleger’s fate: Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama and his advisers said although they were troubled by Pfleger’s remarks, they were saddened by his removal. Obama “just heard that news and obviously events of the last week have been disturbing,” said David Axelrod, Obama’s senior adviser. “I feel sad for him and for the church community. He’s done good work in those neighborhoods. All you have to do is look around to see it.”
* Meet the FOBO’S. Obama takes Chicago pals–and top fund-raisers–on campaign plane Tuesday
* Rahm Chooses: Illinois Congressman Rahm Emanuel — former Clinton aide and close Obama friend — comes out from under his desk (metaphorically) and endorses Obama.
In all sincerity… What genius decided to put McCain (speech-reading foibles and awkward, forced smiles) in a half-packed high school gym an hour before Obama (soaring oratory and minutes-long ‘applause gaps’) in a standing room only convention hall?
…Just asking.
Sen. McCain’s been lucky to have had the GOP side all too himself to rally his base and circle his wagons for these many weeks. Now that the TV cameras, and America’s eyes and ears, are going to start really paying attention to him the contrasts between the two candidates will become stark — from all the “personality” matters like charisma, etc. to the actual nuts-and-bolts policy points.
No matter what party or philosophy you support, it’s a great day to be an American!
- North of I-80 - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 12:30 am:
Obama doesn’t NEED Hillary as Veep… in fact it might be far safer if the Clintons were no where near DC. Curious if the Dem party will want to be done forever of the Clintons OR if they will force a joint ticket in attempt to win in Nov. No way to tell what the party of MI and FL Dem votes counting only 1/2 vote will want to do next.
- Frosty Da Snowman - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 6:21 am:
I think that Obama should look right in his own back yard for a veep and that person should either be Rod Blagojevich himself, Jay Hoffman, or Iris Martinez. I think that Martinez would be the first choice. She’s experienced, smart, attractive, well spoken and is a definite connection to the Latino community. Obama will need some propping up in the family values department and Iris will provide that.
As far as Obama’s replacement goes, there is only one choice - Lisa Madigan. Appointing Lisa as Senator will smooth things over with her dad for sure which will mean that something will finally get done in the House. Also, it would take her out of contention for the governor’s race.
Speaking of which…Patrick Fitzgerald had better polish up the resume because he’ll be so gone on the morning after the election. No more witch hunts and nothing but smooth sailing to a third term for Rod.
For future reference, if a presidential and vice presidential candidate are from the same state, then that state’s electoral votes don’t count in the final total.
Clinton as a VP would be horrible for Obama. First she stands for the very entrenched washington he is trying to say he opposes. Second, the Clintons narcisim would cause him to be in constant struggle for control.
It would be fun to watch, though. To be a fly on the wall as Hillary and Michelle bump into each other. Meow!
- Six Degrees of Separation - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 8:25 am:
Rich-
That provision came into play in recent history, with Dick Cheney changing his voting registration from Texas to Wyoming in order not to forfeit Texas’ electoral votes before the 2000 presidential election.
- Six Degrees of Separation - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 8:28 am:
Ghost-
With Bill Clinton as the “second husband”, I can just imagine Barack rolling his eyes at the prospect of 4 years of meddling and bimbo eruptions.
It’s not quite that they don’t count (the state’s electoral votes), but the electors from the state of IL would have to write in someone besides Hoffman as VP, for the state to count. IL electors aren’t allowed, under the 12th Amendment, to vote twice for candidates from the same state as themselves. So if it were a close general election, that would still get Obama into office, but it would raise the risk of an Obama-Huckabee or Obama-Romney, Obama-Jindal admin.
On the other hand, courts have been pretty loose about determining state of residence. Cheney was all-but a resident of the state of Texas, when Bush selected him (I think all he did was change his voter registration to WY). So if Hoffman bought a home or an apartment someplace across state lines and changed his voter registration, he probably would withstand a court challenge.
I find it hard to believe that Obama would select Hillary as VP, or that she would accept a Cabinet position and lose her Senate seniority in the process. The possibility of a Supreme Court nomination or offering her the star role on a health care proposal, as well as help with her campaign debt, seems more likely to me. But who can predict Hillary, really?
I wonder if Obama would want to appoint our Blago if the feds are still nipping at his pay to play heels.
In the early part of an Obama administration, all decisions will be closely scrutinized. For the Obama who is bringing change to Washington, the appointment of a state governor with legal troubles to the US Senate would raise early questions. Of course, by early 2010, maybe all of Blago’s troubles will have gone away and he will be completely vindicated…(not). Maybe they could finagle one of those trade association jobs. $750k a year for doing nothing but making a few speeches. He could phone it in.
I can’t believe Obama, with all those super smart advisors, would pick Hillary as his running mate. That might help in the election (although perhaps not as much as some believe) but it would be a recipe for disaster in the WH. Wondering what she and Bill were up to would consume much-needed attention and energy. She can emulate Ted Kennedy and develop a major Senate presence over time or he can put her in the next Supreme Court vacancy,
but the veep job should be off limits. He needs to pick a running mate soon to stop the speculation.
And she needs to move on. She has a great life ahead of her as a global icon and she needs to move into it.
I’d sooner vote for Huckleberry, Romney or Jindal as Democratic veep than HRC. Really. I just want the Clintons to be truly gone, and don’t care what it takes. Back at the US Senate spot, presumably Obama would consult carefully with Dick Durbin, who is most knowledgable about the Senate, has been a friend, mentor and unselfish supporter to Obama, and presumably would be taking the new person under his wing.
- Ravenswood Right Winger - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:02 am:
Obama elected POTUSA.
Blago appoints Jan Schakowsky US Senator.
She finds a federal job for her husband, convicted felon Robert Creamer.
Schakowsky makes sure Fitzgerald’s appointment as US Attorney for Chicago is not renewed.
Lon Monk appointed as US Attorney. Blago never gets indicted.
Ald. Joe “I hate foie gras” Moore lines up the Dem committeman to win the special election to replace Schakowsky.
Daley appoints David Fagus, 49th Ward Committeeman, to replace Moore.
in the words of Cubs fans everywhere: IT’S GONNA HAPPEN!
I’m sort of confused by the mass media’s assumption and support that Clinton would be the best VP for Obama.
1) After defeating the most entrenched Dem family in Washington on a message of change, putting them right back in place completely undermines your message.
2) The media and the republicans can recycle hundreds of clips of your number two criticizing everything about you. Hillary can continue to be McCain’s attack dog months after she’s stopped trashing Obama.
3) Obama and McCain’s negatives are about the same while Clinton’s are usually 5% higher. Why tie your horse to that wagon? The same huge segment that would have showed up just to vote against Hillary or a Clinton will now continue to show up.
4) Power struggles/ego clash after taking office. With both Hillary and Bill.
Some “healing” definitely needs to take place, although I’ve always been of the opinion that the drawn out primary season has done way more to energize the Dems than to hurt them. Rob N hits the nail on the head with his first post. McCain may have been a great candidate in 2000, but he’s pretty much a joke now. He fumbles through speeches, makes all sorts of errors, completely uncharismatic, on the totally wrong side of the issue on Iraq (not my opinion, going by the polls), and I may be the first person to ever point this out, but in case no one noticed, the guy is REALLY, REALLY, OLD. I think Obama wipes the floor with McCain no matter what, except the only thing I could see sinking it for him is having Hillary on board. She is a way more polarizing figure outside the context of the Dems demographics than within.
But if he really thought it was a good idea to make Clinton the VP, he should still spite Hillary and make it Bill (constitution is ambiguous on if that’s legal).
===But would Dick Durbin want to stay in the Senate if he had the choice. It has to be pretty tedious.===
He’s next in line for Majority Leader, which ain’t a bad job at all. They may give it to Clinton as a consolation prize, but if not, I’d bet he sticks around for a while.
Saw an interesting piece in the news the other day discussing that internaly the majority leader is not usually a well known national figure. The piece was disuccsing prior senators who had run for president and lost; but were unable to secure the majority position. The job traditionaly goes to an insider who is well liked by all and can act as the party glue. I doubt HRC would get this spot. She might get a committee leadership, but not the majority.
North of 1-80, you quip about the Dems’ compromise on the two state parties which broke the rules… but everyone seems to have forgotten that the Republicans have the exact same 1/2-vote sanctions in place for their own rule breakers.
–
Cassandra, Some people actually enjoy the legislative process. Sen. Durbin is one of those folks and he’s an adept “parliamentarian” who is well-versed on the rules and various options for how to get things done (or halted, as the case may be).
And, as Rich noted, he’s next in line for Majority Leader should Sen. Reid step down. As it is, Sen. Durbin is the #2 guy in the Senate, a pretty powerful place to be itself.
–
There’s absolutely no reason Sen. Obama must choose Sen. Clinton as his veep nominee. Should he give her her due and at least consider her? Sure. But he doesn’t have to pick her.
She may have had close to 18mil votes, but Obama had more (once you actually count all the people who voted, not the cherry-picked fuzzy math version of asterisked people who voted)…
And not every single one of those 18mil voters are in “Clinton’s Army” as Chris Matthews put it last night. Many of them will vote for Obama in the fall, a few will stay home, and others may vote for someone else. Same is true for people who voted for/against McCain in the GOP primaries…
Indeed, she may work out better as Sec. of Health and Human Services given her interest in healthcare.
For that matter, a hypothetical Pres. Obama (as he has indicated in the past) could very well follow in the footsteps on Pres. Lincoln and nominate John Edwards for AG or Sec. of Labor; Richardson or Biden for Sec. of State; etc.
Know what the best way to guarantee the Presidential nominee offers you the VP position? On the night he secures the nomination, don’t acknowledge his victory, have yourself introduced as the future POTUS, continue to raise funds, and rile all your base up as if to hold them ransom in exchange for it.
I mean, that’s what I would do.
- Truthful James - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:33 am:
Unlike Rob_N I found the McCain Speech to be earnestly compelling.
- Speaking at Will - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:35 am:
I was unable to watch the speeches last night, who spoke first, Obama or Clinton?
You know, Ghost, there is a possibiliy that Hillary might have fought so hard for the #1 spot, was in such a complete state of denial about losing it, and is now begging for the #2 spot so that she can reaffirm her own power and finally get rid of Himbo.
That could be part of the negotiation package: a happier, caring, and more loving Veep who would want nothing more than to work behind the scenes at state affairs and funerals…alot like the girl she used to be. (Call in the Image Consultants!)
They had some interviews on today from HRC talking about the love of her life and how she was basically overwhelemd by his presence and personality. I don’t think she can ever be rid of Himbo, but this is what drew her to him.
Barack Obama mentioned issuing “memorandums of understanding” in his speech to AIPAC this morning. The lessons of Springfield applied to U.S. foreign policy?
It will be interesting to watch how Barack handles the Hillary situation.
1. There’s no way in the world he wants her on the ticket or in his cabinet. The Clintons are the past and carry too much baggage. What a nightmare.
2. He needs to keep her from having her name entered for VP at the convention. She’s close to a majority of delegates on the floor, and there will be a huge effort to rally the hall for her if the issue isn’t dead and buried before Denver.
3. How does he do it? First, appeal to his donor base to help retire her debt (much of which is her own cash). Second, get her a good job. Three possibilities:
— Nomination for the first Supreme Court opening. That’s the best one; very hard to turn down.
— Support for Senate Majority Leader. Okay, but clearly a consolation.
— Bring Gov. Patterson into his cabinet to clear the way for Hillary to run for governor of New York. Patterson would have to play ball, but it would give her a big state to run, rather than being one of 100 in the Senate.
Regarding the Illinois Senate, not only would a Pres. Obama have an enormous influence, he will want it to be the strongest candidate possible to win on his or her own. That eliminates Rod, if he cares to listen, and he might not. Jan Schakowsky or Jesse Jr? I don’t think so. I think it’s Lisa, if she’ll take it.
- JonShibleyFan - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 12:25 pm:
I watched McCain’s speech and thought it awful (I think even the crowd began to cringe at his forced “that’s not change we can believe in” riff).
Hearing clips on the radio this morning, it sounded a little better. The visuals were just not good, and McCain is better speaking extemporaneously than from prepared text.
As far as replacing BO would go, should he go on to win in November, I can honestly say I’d told people I like Duckworth, long before Sneed’s column suggesting she’s got a line on the job.
She’s a woman. She’s a minority. She’s a disabled vet. She’s gaining valuable experience and doing a good job with the state Veteran’s affairs division. And most importantly, she’s on good paper with Obama.
I just don’t see Schakowsky getting the nod. Nor Jr. They’re certainly capable of doing the job well, but each would have a tough row to hoe in a statewide contest.
Just as Obama’s campaign was historic, so was Clinton’s. No one has come so close to a nomination and got nothing as a result. If she wants to be the VP nominee, it will be her’s whether Obama wants it.
The VP nominee is decided by the convention. If Clinton’s supporters are told she wants it, they will get it for her. They have almost enough delegates to get her the presidential nomination, so a VP nomination would be a cinch. Michelle Obama cannot stop it.
Most folks recognize that a great deal of Obama’s promises are malarky anyway, so with Clinton as his running mate, he will just pivot on his promises, just like he pivots on everything else hes said so far. No big deal.
Will an Obama/Clinton ticket win? Who knows? We won’t find out until it is tried. Playing guessing games this year has proven rather pointless, hasn’t it?
What we know now is that Obama has pulled in fewer votes than Clinton overall. He has fallen behind her by over 500,000 votes since March. The Democrats will be nominating the weaker of the two candidates if we look at primary results since March. Whether Obama resurges enough to offset the conditions Clinton and McCain voters have against him is unknown at this time.
But Clinton has been an outstanding candidate since March and she would be an excellent VP choice. She looks better than Obama, acts more natural without teleprompters than Obama, and has proven to be an incredible fighter for the Democrats. If Obama needs testicular fortitude, he needs to go with Hillary - he seems tapped out.
Clinton’s speech was the oddest “concession” speech I’ve ever seen. It’s as if the proverbial fat lady came on stage, coughed, whistled a note or two and then went back to the dressing room. Clinton made it clear that it’s not over yet.
- blueinaredstate - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 1:58 pm:
I don’t understand Vanilla Man’s statement that Clinton’s supporters can “get” her the VP nomination if she wants it. It’s not a situation where there’s one vote and the person with the most votes gets to be the Presidential nominee and the person who comes in second gets to be the VP nominee. Presumably, if a majority of the delegates vote for Obama, that same majority will vote for Obama’s choice for VP, whether it is Clinton or someone else. I just don’t see any scenario where she is “forced” on Obama.
And this whole deal about looking at the number of votes each of them got in the Democratic primaries and declaring one or the other a “stronger” candidate based on that seems questionable to me as well. A head-to-head Obama/McCain matchup is not the same as Obama/Clinton or Obama/Clinton/Edwards/Biden/Richardson/Kucinich (I know I’m leaving someone out) in the early going. It’s sort of like saying, ok, do you prefer red apples or green apples? Ok, more people prefer red apples over green apples, so that means more people will prefer red apples over turnips. Choosing Clinton over Obama is not equivalent to choosing McCain over Obama.
Yes, I understand that there are Clinton supporters out there who say they won’t vote for Obama in the general election. But I’ve gotta believe that some of that is a reflection of dealing with the fact that they have actually lost this thing. When it comes down to Obama v. McCain, you know that a lot (not all of course) of those Clinton supporters are going to vote for Obama.
Even Clinton supporters, notably PA Gov. Ed Rendell and NY Rep. Charlie Rangel, are questioning the tone and content of her speech from last night and suggesting that she see the light and concede.
And you need to check the batteries on your calculator. When all the votes are counted — primaries and caucuses, from January til now — Obama has more votes. Plain and simple.
Why are you carrying so much water for Sen. Clinton? Are you suddenly a Dem?
If your criteria is how a candidate has been doing since March (rather than since, say, the beginning) then how do you explain McCain’s repeated failure to crack 80% (and often barely even 75%) in primaries after he already had the nomination sewn up?
Clearly, the GOP better move to Huckabee or Romney or even Paul since they’ve been managing to capture such significant numbers of votes after March…
PS: Suggesting we ought to pay more attention to only the votes since March is akin to saying let’s only count the Election Day votes between 4 and 7pm, even if the polls are open all day.
VM, are you including Puerto Rico in that total, because if you are, I’m sure you know that they don’t vote in November.
Also, the only states that Clinton won since March which are in play in November are Pennsylvania (latest SurveyUSA has Obama with a 9-point lead over McCain), Indiana (latest poll has Obama up by 1), North Carolina (latest has McCain up by 3), West Virginia (no recent polling data) and S. Dakota (no recent data).
The most recent Survey USA poll out of PA has Obama up by 8. Somewhat more recent polls than Survey USA are from Quinnipiac which shows the margin at 6 points, and Rasmussen which shows a 2 point race.
Do not know your source on Indiana, but the most recent poll from the Hoosier State appears to be an April one from Research 2000 which has McCain ahead of Obama by 8 points.
The North Carolina poll you say has McCain ahead by 3 appears to be the most recent, but it is from a Democrat firm. The most recent Survey USA poll out of NC has McCain ahead by 8.
There do not appear to be any WV or SD since April, but McCain has been up by double digits in all matchups with Obama in those states. Exit polls from West Virginia showed a substantial number of Democrats claimed they would not support Obama in November.
Pennsylvania will certainly be in play, but I think you were quite generous to Obama in listing those other states.
- Rob_N - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 12:29 am:
In all sincerity… What genius decided to put McCain (speech-reading foibles and awkward, forced smiles) in a half-packed high school gym an hour before Obama (soaring oratory and minutes-long ‘applause gaps’) in a standing room only convention hall?
…Just asking.
Sen. McCain’s been lucky to have had the GOP side all too himself to rally his base and circle his wagons for these many weeks. Now that the TV cameras, and America’s eyes and ears, are going to start really paying attention to him the contrasts between the two candidates will become stark — from all the “personality” matters like charisma, etc. to the actual nuts-and-bolts policy points.
No matter what party or philosophy you support, it’s a great day to be an American!
- North of I-80 - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 12:30 am:
Obama doesn’t NEED Hillary as Veep… in fact it might be far safer if the Clintons were no where near DC. Curious if the Dem party will want to be done forever of the Clintons OR if they will force a joint ticket in attempt to win in Nov. No way to tell what the party of MI and FL Dem votes counting only 1/2 vote will want to do next.
- Frosty Da Snowman - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 6:21 am:
I think that Obama should look right in his own back yard for a veep and that person should either be Rod Blagojevich himself, Jay Hoffman, or Iris Martinez. I think that Martinez would be the first choice. She’s experienced, smart, attractive, well spoken and is a definite connection to the Latino community. Obama will need some propping up in the family values department and Iris will provide that.
As far as Obama’s replacement goes, there is only one choice - Lisa Madigan. Appointing Lisa as Senator will smooth things over with her dad for sure which will mean that something will finally get done in the House. Also, it would take her out of contention for the governor’s race.
Speaking of which…Patrick Fitzgerald had better polish up the resume because he’ll be so gone on the morning after the election. No more witch hunts and nothing but smooth sailing to a third term for Rod.
- Bill - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 7:07 am:
Excellent post, Frosty!
I’m glad that you have finally seen the light. Try not to melt this summer.
V.P Hoffman! Excellent!!
- so-called "Austin Mayor" - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 7:34 am:
Frosty,
Not even six-thirty in the morning and you’re already that drunk? Dude, you might have a problem…
– SCAM
so-called “Austin Mayor”
http://austinmayor.blogspot.com
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 7:40 am:
I’m really hoping that was a snarky post.
For future reference, if a presidential and vice presidential candidate are from the same state, then that state’s electoral votes don’t count in the final total.
- Ghost - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 8:07 am:
Clinton as a VP would be horrible for Obama. First she stands for the very entrenched washington he is trying to say he opposes. Second, the Clintons narcisim would cause him to be in constant struggle for control.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 8:16 am:
It would be fun to watch, though. To be a fly on the wall as Hillary and Michelle bump into each other. Meow!
- Six Degrees of Separation - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 8:25 am:
Rich-
That provision came into play in recent history, with Dick Cheney changing his voting registration from Texas to Wyoming in order not to forfeit Texas’ electoral votes before the 2000 presidential election.
- Six Degrees of Separation - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 8:28 am:
Ghost-
With Bill Clinton as the “second husband”, I can just imagine Barack rolling his eyes at the prospect of 4 years of meddling and bimbo eruptions.
- ZC - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 8:30 am:
It’s not quite that they don’t count (the state’s electoral votes), but the electors from the state of IL would have to write in someone besides Hoffman as VP, for the state to count. IL electors aren’t allowed, under the 12th Amendment, to vote twice for candidates from the same state as themselves. So if it were a close general election, that would still get Obama into office, but it would raise the risk of an Obama-Huckabee or Obama-Romney, Obama-Jindal admin.
On the other hand, courts have been pretty loose about determining state of residence. Cheney was all-but a resident of the state of Texas, when Bush selected him (I think all he did was change his voter registration to WY). So if Hoffman bought a home or an apartment someplace across state lines and changed his voter registration, he probably would withstand a court challenge.
I find it hard to believe that Obama would select Hillary as VP, or that she would accept a Cabinet position and lose her Senate seniority in the process. The possibility of a Supreme Court nomination or offering her the star role on a health care proposal, as well as help with her campaign debt, seems more likely to me. But who can predict Hillary, really?
- Ghost - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 8:33 am:
SIx, not to mention bein afraid of what he might find happening in the oval office or nearby closets
- susanne - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 8:43 am:
Obama’s replacement should not be someone backed by MJM. He has not been supportive of Obama.
- Ghost - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 8:51 am:
Obama will seek to have Rich Miller take over his senate seat, and VM will be his VP.
- Cassandra - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 8:53 am:
I wonder if Obama would want to appoint our Blago if the feds are still nipping at his pay to play heels.
In the early part of an Obama administration, all decisions will be closely scrutinized. For the Obama who is bringing change to Washington, the appointment of a state governor with legal troubles to the US Senate would raise early questions. Of course, by early 2010, maybe all of Blago’s troubles will have gone away and he will be completely vindicated…(not). Maybe they could finagle one of those trade association jobs. $750k a year for doing nothing but making a few speeches. He could phone it in.
I can’t believe Obama, with all those super smart advisors, would pick Hillary as his running mate. That might help in the election (although perhaps not as much as some believe) but it would be a recipe for disaster in the WH. Wondering what she and Bill were up to would consume much-needed attention and energy. She can emulate Ted Kennedy and develop a major Senate presence over time or he can put her in the next Supreme Court vacancy,
but the veep job should be off limits. He needs to pick a running mate soon to stop the speculation.
And she needs to move on. She has a great life ahead of her as a global icon and she needs to move into it.
- mike - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 8:54 am:
Three most frightening words in America: Senator Rod Blagojevich.
- Excessively rabid - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 8:57 am:
I’d sooner vote for Huckleberry, Romney or Jindal as Democratic veep than HRC. Really. I just want the Clintons to be truly gone, and don’t care what it takes. Back at the US Senate spot, presumably Obama would consult carefully with Dick Durbin, who is most knowledgable about the Senate, has been a friend, mentor and unselfish supporter to Obama, and presumably would be taking the new person under his wing.
- Ravenswood Right Winger - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:02 am:
Obama elected POTUSA.
Blago appoints Jan Schakowsky US Senator.
She finds a federal job for her husband, convicted felon Robert Creamer.
Schakowsky makes sure Fitzgerald’s appointment as US Attorney for Chicago is not renewed.
Lon Monk appointed as US Attorney. Blago never gets indicted.
Ald. Joe “I hate foie gras” Moore lines up the Dem committeman to win the special election to replace Schakowsky.
Daley appoints David Fagus, 49th Ward Committeeman, to replace Moore.
in the words of Cubs fans everywhere: IT’S GONNA HAPPEN!
P.S. Go White Sox!
Pingback Senator Rod Blagojevich? - A Chicago Blog - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:03 am:
[…] [Hat tip: Rich Miller] […]
- Sacks Romana - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:04 am:
I’m sort of confused by the mass media’s assumption and support that Clinton would be the best VP for Obama.
1) After defeating the most entrenched Dem family in Washington on a message of change, putting them right back in place completely undermines your message.
2) The media and the republicans can recycle hundreds of clips of your number two criticizing everything about you. Hillary can continue to be McCain’s attack dog months after she’s stopped trashing Obama.
3) Obama and McCain’s negatives are about the same while Clinton’s are usually 5% higher. Why tie your horse to that wagon? The same huge segment that would have showed up just to vote against Hillary or a Clinton will now continue to show up.
4) Power struggles/ego clash after taking office. With both Hillary and Bill.
Some “healing” definitely needs to take place, although I’ve always been of the opinion that the drawn out primary season has done way more to energize the Dems than to hurt them. Rob N hits the nail on the head with his first post. McCain may have been a great candidate in 2000, but he’s pretty much a joke now. He fumbles through speeches, makes all sorts of errors, completely uncharismatic, on the totally wrong side of the issue on Iraq (not my opinion, going by the polls), and I may be the first person to ever point this out, but in case no one noticed, the guy is REALLY, REALLY, OLD. I think Obama wipes the floor with McCain no matter what, except the only thing I could see sinking it for him is having Hillary on board. She is a way more polarizing figure outside the context of the Dems demographics than within.
But if he really thought it was a good idea to make Clinton the VP, he should still spite Hillary and make it Bill (constitution is ambiguous on if that’s legal).
- Cassandra - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:05 am:
But would Dick Durbin want to stay in the Senate if he had the choice. It has to be pretty tedious.
An Obama presidency might be a chance at a nice ambassadorship to Paris or someplace like that.
Or a Cabinet job, or WH advisor position.
Maybe we’ll have two Senate seats to fill….
- Wumpus - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:06 am:
Yes, end Washington Politics as usual and let Obama import Chicago politics.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:08 am:
===But would Dick Durbin want to stay in the Senate if he had the choice. It has to be pretty tedious.===
He’s next in line for Majority Leader, which ain’t a bad job at all. They may give it to Clinton as a consolation prize, but if not, I’d bet he sticks around for a while.
- Old Shepherd - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:21 am:
No matter how you slice it, today is a proud day for the Great State of Illinois.
- Ghost - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:26 am:
Saw an interesting piece in the news the other day discussing that internaly the majority leader is not usually a well known national figure. The piece was disuccsing prior senators who had run for president and lost; but were unable to secure the majority position. The job traditionaly goes to an insider who is well liked by all and can act as the party glue. I doubt HRC would get this spot. She might get a committee leadership, but not the majority.
- Rob_N - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:27 am:
North of 1-80, you quip about the Dems’ compromise on the two state parties which broke the rules… but everyone seems to have forgotten that the Republicans have the exact same 1/2-vote sanctions in place for their own rule breakers.
–
Cassandra, Some people actually enjoy the legislative process. Sen. Durbin is one of those folks and he’s an adept “parliamentarian” who is well-versed on the rules and various options for how to get things done (or halted, as the case may be).
And, as Rich noted, he’s next in line for Majority Leader should Sen. Reid step down. As it is, Sen. Durbin is the #2 guy in the Senate, a pretty powerful place to be itself.
–
There’s absolutely no reason Sen. Obama must choose Sen. Clinton as his veep nominee. Should he give her her due and at least consider her? Sure. But he doesn’t have to pick her.
She may have had close to 18mil votes, but Obama had more (once you actually count all the people who voted, not the cherry-picked fuzzy math version of asterisked people who voted)…
And not every single one of those 18mil voters are in “Clinton’s Army” as Chris Matthews put it last night. Many of them will vote for Obama in the fall, a few will stay home, and others may vote for someone else. Same is true for people who voted for/against McCain in the GOP primaries…
Indeed, she may work out better as Sec. of Health and Human Services given her interest in healthcare.
For that matter, a hypothetical Pres. Obama (as he has indicated in the past) could very well follow in the footsteps on Pres. Lincoln and nominate John Edwards for AG or Sec. of Labor; Richardson or Biden for Sec. of State; etc.
Look up Lincoln’s own cabinet to see what I mean.
- Learning the Ropes - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:32 am:
Know what the best way to guarantee the Presidential nominee offers you the VP position? On the night he secures the nomination, don’t acknowledge his victory, have yourself introduced as the future POTUS, continue to raise funds, and rile all your base up as if to hold them ransom in exchange for it.
I mean, that’s what I would do.
- Truthful James - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:33 am:
Unlike Rob_N I found the McCain Speech to be earnestly compelling.
- Speaking at Will - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:35 am:
I was unable to watch the speeches last night, who spoke first, Obama or Clinton?
- Kevin Fanning - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:38 am:
Clinton
- Cassandra - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:39 am:
So…..Harry Reid is leaving?
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:50 am:
Cassandra, all I know is a few months ago Reid offered the job to Hillary if she got out of the race.
- Rob_N - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 10:09 am:
James,
You are a conservative. You’re naturally going to be compelled to a fellow giving voice to your philosophy.
I was talking purely in terms of visuals, presentation, etc.
Try a mental exercise: How would you feel if Obama was saying what McCain said and vice versa?
Even Fox News and other conservative pundits panned McCain’s speech.
- Skeeter - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 10:40 am:
On a somewhat related note, I didn’t notice it but WXRT is reporting that after Obama’s speech, the audio played “The Rising” by Bruce Springsteen.
If so, it seemed like a terrible choice. It is a great song, but completely wrong for the event.
A much better choice would have been to “reclaim” “Born in the USA” from Reagan, since with Obama, the real meaning of that song would shine through.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 10:41 am:
You know, Ghost, there is a possibiliy that Hillary might have fought so hard for the #1 spot, was in such a complete state of denial about losing it, and is now begging for the #2 spot so that she can reaffirm her own power and finally get rid of Himbo.
That could be part of the negotiation package: a happier, caring, and more loving Veep who would want nothing more than to work behind the scenes at state affairs and funerals…alot like the girl she used to be. (Call in the Image Consultants!)
- Ghost - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 11:49 am:
They had some interviews on today from HRC talking about the love of her life and how she was basically overwhelemd by his presence and personality. I don’t think she can ever be rid of Himbo, but this is what drew her to him.
- Cosennza - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 11:59 am:
Barack Obama mentioned issuing “memorandums of understanding” in his speech to AIPAC this morning. The lessons of Springfield applied to U.S. foreign policy?
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 12:06 pm:
It will be interesting to watch how Barack handles the Hillary situation.
1. There’s no way in the world he wants her on the ticket or in his cabinet. The Clintons are the past and carry too much baggage. What a nightmare.
2. He needs to keep her from having her name entered for VP at the convention. She’s close to a majority of delegates on the floor, and there will be a huge effort to rally the hall for her if the issue isn’t dead and buried before Denver.
3. How does he do it? First, appeal to his donor base to help retire her debt (much of which is her own cash). Second, get her a good job. Three possibilities:
— Nomination for the first Supreme Court opening. That’s the best one; very hard to turn down.
— Support for Senate Majority Leader. Okay, but clearly a consolation.
— Bring Gov. Patterson into his cabinet to clear the way for Hillary to run for governor of New York. Patterson would have to play ball, but it would give her a big state to run, rather than being one of 100 in the Senate.
Regarding the Illinois Senate, not only would a Pres. Obama have an enormous influence, he will want it to be the strongest candidate possible to win on his or her own. That eliminates Rod, if he cares to listen, and he might not. Jan Schakowsky or Jesse Jr? I don’t think so. I think it’s Lisa, if she’ll take it.
- Patriot - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 12:21 pm:
An Obama/Clinton ticket will guarantee a McCain victory in Novemember. Go for it, Dems!
- Patriot - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 12:21 pm:
“November”
- JonShibleyFan - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 12:25 pm:
I watched McCain’s speech and thought it awful (I think even the crowd began to cringe at his forced “that’s not change we can believe in” riff).
Hearing clips on the radio this morning, it sounded a little better. The visuals were just not good, and McCain is better speaking extemporaneously than from prepared text.
As far as replacing BO would go, should he go on to win in November, I can honestly say I’d told people I like Duckworth, long before Sneed’s column suggesting she’s got a line on the job.
She’s a woman. She’s a minority. She’s a disabled vet. She’s gaining valuable experience and doing a good job with the state Veteran’s affairs division. And most importantly, she’s on good paper with Obama.
I just don’t see Schakowsky getting the nod. Nor Jr. They’re certainly capable of doing the job well, but each would have a tough row to hoe in a statewide contest.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 12:35 pm:
Just as Obama’s campaign was historic, so was Clinton’s. No one has come so close to a nomination and got nothing as a result. If she wants to be the VP nominee, it will be her’s whether Obama wants it.
The VP nominee is decided by the convention. If Clinton’s supporters are told she wants it, they will get it for her. They have almost enough delegates to get her the presidential nomination, so a VP nomination would be a cinch. Michelle Obama cannot stop it.
Most folks recognize that a great deal of Obama’s promises are malarky anyway, so with Clinton as his running mate, he will just pivot on his promises, just like he pivots on everything else hes said so far. No big deal.
Will an Obama/Clinton ticket win? Who knows? We won’t find out until it is tried. Playing guessing games this year has proven rather pointless, hasn’t it?
What we know now is that Obama has pulled in fewer votes than Clinton overall. He has fallen behind her by over 500,000 votes since March. The Democrats will be nominating the weaker of the two candidates if we look at primary results since March. Whether Obama resurges enough to offset the conditions Clinton and McCain voters have against him is unknown at this time.
But Clinton has been an outstanding candidate since March and she would be an excellent VP choice. She looks better than Obama, acts more natural without teleprompters than Obama, and has proven to be an incredible fighter for the Democrats. If Obama needs testicular fortitude, he needs to go with Hillary - he seems tapped out.
- Crafty Girl - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 12:58 pm:
Clinton’s speech was the oddest “concession” speech I’ve ever seen. It’s as if the proverbial fat lady came on stage, coughed, whistled a note or two and then went back to the dressing room. Clinton made it clear that it’s not over yet.
- blueinaredstate - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 1:58 pm:
I don’t understand Vanilla Man’s statement that Clinton’s supporters can “get” her the VP nomination if she wants it. It’s not a situation where there’s one vote and the person with the most votes gets to be the Presidential nominee and the person who comes in second gets to be the VP nominee. Presumably, if a majority of the delegates vote for Obama, that same majority will vote for Obama’s choice for VP, whether it is Clinton or someone else. I just don’t see any scenario where she is “forced” on Obama.
And this whole deal about looking at the number of votes each of them got in the Democratic primaries and declaring one or the other a “stronger” candidate based on that seems questionable to me as well. A head-to-head Obama/McCain matchup is not the same as Obama/Clinton or Obama/Clinton/Edwards/Biden/Richardson/Kucinich (I know I’m leaving someone out) in the early going. It’s sort of like saying, ok, do you prefer red apples or green apples? Ok, more people prefer red apples over green apples, so that means more people will prefer red apples over turnips. Choosing Clinton over Obama is not equivalent to choosing McCain over Obama.
Yes, I understand that there are Clinton supporters out there who say they won’t vote for Obama in the general election. But I’ve gotta believe that some of that is a reflection of dealing with the fact that they have actually lost this thing. When it comes down to Obama v. McCain, you know that a lot (not all of course) of those Clinton supporters are going to vote for Obama.
- Rob_N - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 2:25 pm:
Vanilla, Where do you get this stuff?
Even Clinton supporters, notably PA Gov. Ed Rendell and NY Rep. Charlie Rangel, are questioning the tone and content of her speech from last night and suggesting that she see the light and concede.
And you need to check the batteries on your calculator. When all the votes are counted — primaries and caucuses, from January til now — Obama has more votes. Plain and simple.
Why are you carrying so much water for Sen. Clinton? Are you suddenly a Dem?
If your criteria is how a candidate has been doing since March (rather than since, say, the beginning) then how do you explain McCain’s repeated failure to crack 80% (and often barely even 75%) in primaries after he already had the nomination sewn up?
Clearly, the GOP better move to Huckabee or Romney or even Paul since they’ve been managing to capture such significant numbers of votes after March…
- Rob_N - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 2:26 pm:
PS: Suggesting we ought to pay more attention to only the votes since March is akin to saying let’s only count the Election Day votes between 4 and 7pm, even if the polls are open all day.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 2:41 pm:
VM, are you including Puerto Rico in that total, because if you are, I’m sure you know that they don’t vote in November.
Also, the only states that Clinton won since March which are in play in November are Pennsylvania (latest SurveyUSA has Obama with a 9-point lead over McCain), Indiana (latest poll has Obama up by 1), North Carolina (latest has McCain up by 3), West Virginia (no recent polling data) and S. Dakota (no recent data).
- Establishment Republican - Wednesday, Jun 4, 08 @ 9:08 pm:
Rich,
The most recent Survey USA poll out of PA has Obama up by 8. Somewhat more recent polls than Survey USA are from Quinnipiac which shows the margin at 6 points, and Rasmussen which shows a 2 point race.
Do not know your source on Indiana, but the most recent poll from the Hoosier State appears to be an April one from Research 2000 which has McCain ahead of Obama by 8 points.
The North Carolina poll you say has McCain ahead by 3 appears to be the most recent, but it is from a Democrat firm. The most recent Survey USA poll out of NC has McCain ahead by 8.
There do not appear to be any WV or SD since April, but McCain has been up by double digits in all matchups with Obama in those states. Exit polls from West Virginia showed a substantial number of Democrats claimed they would not support Obama in November.
Pennsylvania will certainly be in play, but I think you were quite generous to Obama in listing those other states.