Hillary Clinton for Sec. of State? (UPDATE: CONFIRMED – OBAMA MET WITH HILLARY ON THURS)

Posted by: Sister Toldjah on November 14, 2008 at 8:39 am

Please, please say it ain’t so!

There’s tons of speculation about it over at Memeorandum. Of what’s posted there so far, Marc Ambinder has the best inside info on this developing story.

I know Obama had to have made a lot of promises to a lot of people prior to the election, and that he’s in the middle of paying them back but considering the bad blood that exists between the Obama and Clinton camps, why on earth would he consider putting her in a high level cabinet position? Right now, from the reports I’ve read, it’s an idea his advisors are floating around. Let’s hope it’s not one that he himself has warmed up to.

Update – 10:48 AM: The AP is reporting confirmation from a Democrat source that Obama and Hillary met for a talk yesterday.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Trackbacks

12 Responses to “Hillary Clinton for Sec. of State? (UPDATE: CONFIRMED – OBAMA MET WITH HILLARY ON THURS)”

Comments

  1. I have a hard time imagining Hillary would be willing to give up her independent base in the Senate, from which she might launch an insurgent bid for the presidency in 2012, to become Obama’s employee.

    On the other hand, from a strictly schadenfreude point of view, the inevitable clashes between those two would be amusing to watch. ~o)

  2. Lorica says:

    I’m with Anthony, but I could see Bill as Ambassador to the U.N. Which in my mind would be worse yet. – Lorica

  3. I agree with Anthony and Lorica, can’t see her taking the position and leaving the Senate, where she has more power then being a dupe of The One, especially when he truly shows his blinding ignorance of foreign policy, and then would try and blame it on her.

    I think she will try and hose some of his ideas if they make it to the Senate.

  4. Eileen says:

    I kinda think she might want to be a Supreme Court Justice appointee…:o

  5. Leslie says:

    Well Obama’s from Chicago. He surely must understand Don Corleone’s rule:

    “Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.”

    If I’m him, I’d much rather have Hillary inside than running around outside trying to launch a “just in case he flops” 2012 campaign.

    Besides: she wouldn’t be at all bad at the job.

  6. Great White Rat says:

    I’m mostly with Leslie on this one. It would far more difficult for her to plot a 2012 campaign from the executive branch than from the Senate. Obama would not tolerate any guerilla warfare from his cabinet.

    If he blunders too monumentally, she could always resign somewhere around the 2010 elections and cite policy differences – and then launch her campaign. Even as private citizen Hillary Clinton, she would get substantial money and backing from PUMAs and the traditional left, assuming Dalai Bama has botched the job badly enough.

    As for her not being at all bad at the job – I’m not so sure there. She definitely would bring a bit more adult realism to the cabinet and to foreign policy than Obama has shown to date. The question is how likely would he be to listen to her, instead of the Pelosi/Soros/MoveOn types to whom he owes much.

  7. Just like Rahm Emanuel dismissed the initial rumors of his becoming Obama’s Chief of Staff, HRC is playing down the speculation of her becoming SoS and at least one report suggested a recent discussion between Obama and HRC was not about the cabinet post.

    She’ll either be offered the job or not. She will accept it for personal gain and/or to hedge her bets on 2012 since she would have to challenge Obama again in a primary if that is even reasonable.

    Odds are if she took the job if offered it would only be for one term even if Obama was re-elected.

  8. ew says:

    He bashed Hillary for a long time, right up until he won the nomination. I’m sure once that happened the liberal illuminati started making promises to hillary is she would help Obama get her supports. And she did so now it’s time for Obama to make good. But secretary of state, really?

  9. Dana says:

    Actually, I don’t have a problem with this one. Yeah, I think that there are much better choices out there (Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico seems the obvious choice), but, all-in-all, Mrs Clinton wouldn’t be much worse than anyone else he would be likely to pick. For our side, she’s more likely to screw up in the job; she has very little foreign policy experience, and her only executive experience — as health care tsaritsa — was a miserable failure.

    On the positive side, it gets her out of the Senate! If she wants to remain in the Senate for the rest of her life, the idiotic voters of New York would probably keep re-electing her, but as an Obama Administration cabinet officer, she maxes out in eight years — and very few cabinet officers last the whole eight years.

  10. NC Cop says:

    Didn’t the Bush haters go ape when Bush filled his cabinet with “friends and supporters”???? Once again we see it’s ok when a democrat does it, but the end of the world itself when a Republican does it.

    It’s gonna be a long 4 years……

  11. Leslie says:

    El Raton: Yep. Hillary would bring “adult realism” to the cabinet. (I would hope, however, that she remembers to NOT wear the ORANGE jacket when she visits Ireland.)

    And I think Obama knows it, too. He appears too pragmatic to really want to be dictated to by Moveon, and I don’t think he will be. Most practical pols start marginalizing the True Believers as fast as they can once they gain office. My guess is Obama’s one of them.

    Dana: As an “idiotic voter” from New York, I am here to tell you that (especially considering the lame candidates the GOP usually puts up as sacrificial lambs)I voted for Hillary. Twice.