The Obama Veepwatch, Vol. 4: Hillary Clinton

Name: Hillary Clinton
Age: 60
Resume: New York Senator, Former First Lady and Democratic presidential candidate

Source of Speculation: The buzz about a potential dream ticket started way back in January--when the outcome of the Democratic nominating contest was still unclear--and Barack Obama admitted as early as March that Clinton "would be on anybody's shortlist" for the vice presidency. But the chatter kicked into overdrive on the final day of primary season, June 3, when reported that Clinton finally told her supporters--either in response to a question or, according Buffalo News, by "bringing it up herself"--that she was

Backstory:

But as her chances of overtaking Obama's delegate lead dwindled over the next two months, aides and associates began reviving talk of a "dream ticket"--now with Clinton as No. 2. None was more vocal than the former president. "He is definitely talking it up, making no secret it would be a strong ticket for Barack Obama," George Stephanopoulos reported May 23 on "Good Morning America." "He believes she's earned the offer of vice president." By the time Clinton signaled in New York on June 3 that she would start to wind down her presidential campaign, behind the scenes, her next political push--a bid for the vice presidency--was already up and running. While supporters like Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Rep. Charlie Rangel pitched the idea publicly, Clinton was "le[aving] the door open" in private, according to a top strategist "

Obama, however, wasn't budging. In an interview with CNN on June 5, the Illinois senator told the chatterati (and perhaps Clinton) to "settle down," saying he's a "big believer in making decisions well, not making them fast and not responding to pressure." The Clinton camp got the hint. "She is not seeking the vice presidency, and no one speaks for her but her," they said in a statement. "The choice here is Senator Obama's and his alone." Still, it's clear that Clinton is at least under consideration. As first reported on this blog, when asked at a Florida synagogue on May 22 whether he'd put Clinton on his ticket, Obama responded with a reference to Abraham Lincoln's famous "Team of Rivals." "

Odds: Not likely. Clinton brings more pluses to the ticket than any other contender--but she also brings more minuses. For every possible pro, in fact, there seems to be an equal and opposite con. For example: proponents of the pairing say that Clinton would assist Obama electorally by solidifying his support among the 18 million voters--many of them older women, Latinos and working-class whites--who chose her over him in the Democratic primaries. That's undoubtedly true. But even though Clinton would shore up some of Obama's demographic soft spots, she could do him irreparable damage elsewhere.

Take those blue-collar voters. As the New Republic's Noam Scheiber has written, "working-class whites who vote in Democratic primaries are often very different from the working-class whites who don't." That is, while the first group seems to dislike Obama, the second group--i.e., Republicans and independents--seems to dislike Hillary. (Overall, 67 percent of Republicans have very unfavorable views of Clinton, 24 percentage points more than feel that way about Obama; among independents, Clinton's 32 percent negative rating among Independents is 10 points worse than Obama's.) The result: you "risk alienating two groups of working-class whites by putting her on the ticket." The math is grim. In the polls, McCain leads both Obama and Clinton among Caucasians without college degrees by a similar 10-12 point margin--which only goes to show that if "Hillary wins certain working-class whites whom Obama would lose to McCain, then... Obama must be winning certain working-class whites that Hillary would lose to McCain." In the end, it's unclear whether Clinton could help Obama win back the former. But she'd almost certainly hurt him with the latter.

Similarly, there's no way of knowing whether the people who will vote for Obama just because Clinton's on the ticket will outweigh those who will vote against him for the same reason. But with her disapproval ratings hovering around 50 percent, there isn't much room for error. "“Conservatives ‘distrust’ McCain, but they ‘hate’ Clinton," the National Journal's John Mercurio has written. "And hate is a far stronger motivator. It’s a passion that would propel them to turn out for McCain on Election Day in a way no terrorist attack, Swift Boat ad or gay-marriage amendment ever could."

We can apply this same pro-con pattern pretty much across the board. With substantial experience inside the White House and on Capitol Hill, Clinton is probably best prepared of all the potential veeps to steer Obama through swamps of D.C.; she'd serve as his brass-balls prime minister, "And while choosing Clinton might symbolize unity, in practice the pick would completely undermine Obama's promise to "change" the long legacy of partisan warfare and endless score-settling in Washington. Plus it would look weak.

Either way, don't expect a decision until late July--at least. Right now, the biggest road block is probably personal: after a bruising primary battle (with a messy conclusion), there's little sign of trust, chemistry or compatibility between the two politicians. For Obama--as for any president--those things are important. That's why the senator will spend the summer working to heal old wounds and unite the Democratic Party. If successful, he won't need to call on Clinton. It's only if Obama can't pick up the pieces that this particular dream--or nightmare--has any chance of coming true.