Like GrimReefa, I can't believe I would make this suggestion, especially after the smear job she did on Obama in the primary and vowing that I'd be hard-pressed to ever vote for Hillary.  But here I am, adding a few more pragmatic points to Grim's...

If you had told me a month ago - hell, probably a day ago - that I would suggest what I am about to suggest, I would have told you that you were crazy, but here it is anyway:

I think Hillary Clinton would be a solid running mate.

I can hear the complaints already.  Hillary is the DLC wing, she is everything we've worked to defeat, she is the personification of the middle-of-the-road bumbling that helped bury this party for 40 years, she goes against the Change theme, etc., etc.

But hear me out - or read me out, anyway.

Senator, if you pick an insider, pick the best one.

As impressive as his record is and as much as I love and respect him, I believe this is food for the opposition.

Just saw this on HuffPost in article "Progressives Sound Alarm About Obama Campaign" quoting John Aravosis at America Blog:

There is an incredible discontent out there with the way this campaign is being run. The fact that the discontent isn't being recognized, isn't being assuaged, is disturbing. People aren't worried about the election, they're becoming despondent about it. They're not motivated to work twice as hard, they instead feel as if they've had the wind knocked out of them. This is far beyond a healthy skepticism as to whether Obama can win. While Obama's attacks today on McCain are heartening, we need to see more of it. People need to see that Barack Obama has as big of balls as John McCain and, well, Hillary Clinton.

I have supported Obama from the first day, mostly by donating money but later by writing letters to the editor in support of Senator Obama. Here in Dupage County I am part of the Democratic parties’ letter writing group, now when we write letters we share them with the group for feedback and critiques. One day a letter came to my inbox that slammed Obama in favor of Clinton. I was surprised to say the least and I dared to ask the writer, someone I had never met but had agreed with on many occasions, why such anger towards Obama? Her response was an eye opener and in the weeks to come the "leader" of the letter writers had to separate us – well at least is a metaphysical over the internet e-mail sense. After that it was flame on – instead of just supporting Obama I went after Clinton and her supporters which kicked off my first ever diary on Kos.

That's the big question. The way Hillary skewered Obama during the Democratic Primary with pointed statements that McInsane is more qualified to be president leaves serious room for doubt.

More after the jump.

All right, I don't hate Hillary.  But I did hate her campaign, and I hated it in a big, big way.  I could list all of the horrible tactics pursued in the Penn/Rovian playbook, but I don't want to invite Hillary supporters to unload on Obama's shortcomings, so I'll stay mum.  "They're horrible people," I think, was my comment in the midst of the campaign's end.  Let that speak to my deep animosity toward the Clintons for their campaign.

So why in the world would I be excited, even overjoyed, to see Hillary get the VP nod?

Let me start off by saying this: it won't break my heart, or even mildly upset me if it doesn't happen.

But right now, I am susceptible to the idea of an Obama/Clinton ticket.

I think the contrast between the two conventions will be an absolute game changer.  The Democratic National Convention next week (next fucking week!) is liable to be one of the great exhuberant moments in American political history.

It is going to be a momentous occasion, bolstered by the massive energy carrying the party right now in the face of an imperiled republic, whom, despite all noted concerns; is facing unnoticed threats to its very existence seen less than a handful of times prior in its history.

Here are some things to consider.

Today in the Huffington Post, Rebecca Curtis's "Summer Love, Fall Freak-Out" is the latest commentary to threaten Barack Obama, and his supporters, with the Bradley effect if he does not pick Hillary Clinton as his running mate. Despite the long list of cases of such an effect, her argument is anything but compelling. Instead, it becomes another example of Clinton supporters reverting to the politics of fear.

So Hillary came to the area yesterday.  Obama campaign locals were encouraging people to go.  And I was curious to check it out, too.  See what the crowd was like.  An hour ahead of the doors opening, this was what I found:

This was about the same time that people had been asked to show up to volunteer.  But they had all the volunteers they needed by then.  Española is the county seat of Rio Arriba County, a heavily Democratic, largely Hispanic county which went for Hillary on Super Tuesday.  It is said that people in Rio Arriba wouldn’t vote for Obama unless Hillary came in person to ask them to.  And so she did.  

It was a dutiful performance, with a ritual feeling to it.  The laconic mood was perhaps related to a hot day, and a non-air-conditioned venue.

Last week, when Obama announced they will have Hillary Clinton the roll call, I thought it was a solid show of unity!

Unfortunately, I was wrong!

I was hoping high profile Clinton supporters like Gov. Rendell would vote for Obama to show their satisfaction with the Obama candidacy

In preparation for the upcoming Democratic National Convention in Denver, it's best to map out a small, but effective little guide to first timers and those watching from home.

Crossposted at The Daily Obama.

A disclaimer:  this is not advocacy, just my analysis.

This is adapted from an email I wrote to Nate Silver after reading his blog entry: Democratic VP Buyer's Guide:

There is an important strategic implication of choosing Hillary Clinton now. Three of the worries/concerns that people had about Clinton would be that she would: fire up the Republican anti-Clinton machines, in times of both money and energy, as well as do the thing that John McCain couldn’t do–unite the Republican party.

copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert.  BeThink.org

Throughout the ages, life has been but an allegory for the Shakespearean drama Macbeth.  When people observe the strength of a wedded woman, they wonder.  Might she be the spouse behind the man?  Couples whose passion for power burns brightly may be reminiscent of those who perform in the tragedy played out on many a theatre stage.  A pair, married partners, in the present, may be as characters in a revival of the this best-known of William Shakespeare's tragic productions.  The tale, written in centuries long past, often evokes reverie of today's truths.  Only the characters differ.  

If this dramatic piece, were to be performed today, possibly, Hillary and Bill Clinton would be cast as the main characters.  The two are slightly more modern, and a bit less morose than the actors in years gone by.  

John McCain and Barack Obama are perfectly tied in Ohio, according to the newest survey from Public Policy Polling (August 12-14, 2008 survey of 950 likely General Election voters)

Obama had led in PPP’s June and July polls of the state. It’s 45-45 with 10% undecided.

It seems that 17% of democrats are voting for McCain, and 8% are undecided. Most of them white and older in age. I guess Ohio would be a state that the Clintons need to go to to stump for Obama.

Here are the details.

[From the Frog Pond]

You know, Lanny Davis is right.  Sen. Ted Stevens, like all individuals under federal indictment, is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.  Ted Stevens has been indicted by a grand jury for committing seven felonies.  And last Thursday, in new filings in the case, prosecutors revealed that Ted Stevens turned a $5,000 investment into a $155,000 profit through the use of an $31,000 interest-free loan that was both improper and never disclosed in his senate filings.