PSD, HRC, and BO

Comments

There's no way for anyone to know the answer to this other than Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Patty Solis Doyle. And maybe not even Solis Doyle. So why are we spending so much time talking about it?

Posted by Gabriel | June 17, 2008 6:34 PM

She knows Axelrod and is well connected to Chicago. Relax, people.

Posted by comatose | June 17, 2008 6:37 PM

Shut up about Hillary Clinton, Marc, you tool. Please. It's not about her.

Posted by xx | June 17, 2008 6:47 PM

So.Sick.Of.Hearing.About.This.

I'm glad you put this poll up, because it puts things into perspective-- most people don't believe this means anything, unless you're a sensitive Clinton supporter who hasn't quite gotten over the loss.

Posted by Natascha | June 17, 2008 7:02 PM

Probably just pandering to the Latino vote. Not like Obama to take a public slap at Clinton so soon after she conceded -- he's not that clumsy.

Posted by owl | June 17, 2008 7:26 PM

I agree that I can't see Obama choosing to slap Hillary in the face just before they are going to make a joint appearance together; and whose to say that Patti and Hillary aren't on good terms. She didn't work out for her campaign but that doesn't mean that they hate each other. If Hillary is chosen as VP, she'll have her own private camp anyway...I suppose speculation could be that Patti would be a friendly mediator.

Posted by JS | June 17, 2008 7:46 PM

What is this "slap in the face" stuff?

It is a slap, and a well-deserved one. He's showing HIllary he's not going to kowtow to her ridiculous demands and what is she going to do? Not support him? He has all the power at this point, and this move is letting her know that he's not intimidated.

Posted by michael Ravitch | June 17, 2008 7:53 PM

.
It means he picked someone who failed in her most recent endeavour.
.

Posted by JSF | June 17, 2008 8:14 PM

You need to add "It reaffirms that there never was a chance for Hillary to be on the ticket."

Also, two years into Obama's administration will we still be parsing every move of his to determine just how much of a "slap in the face" to Hillary it is? This is rapidly reaching parody territory.

Posted by taricha | June 17, 2008 8:19 PM

The poll is TRICKY because it has always been a near certainty that having Hillary as VP was not a possible option. So, hiring PSD didn't change any chances of that.

It did however, signal something. No, Really. Given that there are many jobs on the campaign, I believe it is a signal that Hillary is not being considered.

I personally think that those Hillery folks who felt the Slap! rightly called it.

Posted by Jane | June 17, 2008 9:11 PM

I'm with taricha and Jane--she was never a serious possibility, by March she was impossible, she asked in May and was turned down. This means PSD has a job with the campaign, as will many, many other Clinton staffers--e.g. the guy who ran Texas.

And a hardy "ha ha" to all the "ooh, ooh, something happened, it must be another slap in the face to Hillary!" people. Everything he does with respect to veep will be considered such, including breathing. Given that, why should he worry about it?

Posted by Deborah | June 17, 2008 10:20 PM

The more intriguing question is what does naming Solis Doyle (whose Blackberry includes name and number of every Latino/Hispanic political office holder in the country) mean for Richardson?

Was the appointment cleared by him? Does it raise or lower the possibility of an Obama-Richardson ticket?

Posted by Bill in Oregon | June 17, 2008 10:42 PM

The most intriguing question to me is, why is this considered an "obvious" slap in the face? There are a lot of reasons other than offending Hillary for adding PSD to the team, and it's hard to see Obama's interest in offending anyone if he can avoid it, so why *must* it be perceived as a slap?

I can understand harboring a suspicion given the high emotions, but it seems like asserting that it must be an insult says more about the perceiver than the perceived.

Posted by Jon M. | June 17, 2008 11:13 PM

I think it is doubtful that HRC has ever seriously been considered for VP in the Obama camp.

But why would Obama hire PSD as Chief of Staff for a future VP pick? Sure, she's from Chicago and Axelrod has said good things about her in the past. No big surprise there, but why announce that specific post for PSD during this period (with the Clinton sensitivity issue)?

They could have announced she would be joining the campaign in more vague capacity such as a consultant or role yet to be determined, etc.

I think the Obama camp was clearly sending a message that he is not intimidated by the Clintons, will not be choosing Hillary for VP and that he's in charge now and will be running things from Chicago. Period.

Posted by Scott | June 18, 2008 12:07 AM

.
Your post-politcal man hoodwinked all of ya and turned out to be a typical Chicago politican -- and "better" at it than most...

... and interesting enough is now being hailed for that skill by the very same people who previously said he was above all that crassness.

... by the same people who said that the B* couldn't open her mouth without the precise pre-calculation of the Devil.

BO either knew it would be a slap and did it intentionally, or knew it and didn't care.

But anyone that says it was not a slap are calling him stupid.
.

Posted by JSF | June 18, 2008 6:50 AM

There are plenty of people who are determined to have their feelings hurt. Not much you can do about them. I don't think Hillary Clinton is one of them but her supporters are another story. The following things are a slap in the face, choosing any VP other than Hillary Clinton, choosing Richardson who betrayed the Clinton's by endorsing Obama (so Richardson is out because he was probably the most useful endorsement of the campaign for Obama?), choosing a woman other than Clinton, hiring anyone Clinton might not get along with.

I don't have any problem with Clinton being chosen for the VP. I do have a problem with certain Clinton fans having such a thin skin about everything. Clinton won't be Obama's VP. There are lots of other good choices. Hillary Clinton is very good but not superlatively good, and rather than this being personal I think it is about having a VP who can more credibly oppose the Iraq War than Clinton is able to.

Posted by Michael Foody | June 18, 2008 9:26 AM

Jon M: Can you think of anything pertinent to the veep choice that would not be considered a slap in the face to Hillary Clinton? We already have offering it to her, not offering it to her, offering it to one of her supporters, and not offering it to one of her supporters. A little subgroup of diehards is determined to denounce everything that happens--possibly including the phase of the moon--as a slap in the face to Hillary Clinton until such time as the media gets bored with covering them or I have drunk all of my tea playing the shots game. (Probably the former--my mug is already empty.)

Scott: Evidently in 2000 and 2004 the announcement of the veep's chief of staff came a week or two before the announcement of veep. For thoughts on who, I suggest tnr.

Posted by Deborah | June 18, 2008 10:05 AM