The important difference showed tonite in the debate

[TheDoorbellRang]

For the most part I thought both candidates gave a strong showing tonite -- either one has a platform for America that any Dem could be proud of, and they defended themselves well. Hillary's low point was continuing on about the "plagiarism" thing after Obama had deftly reduced it in the audience's mind to something petty when they should be discussing issues. But she redeemed herself at the end with some truly sincere comments that were quite -- dare I say it -- inspirational.

But Obama did something thruout the debate that I think will stick in folks minds. He emphasized over and over that a wonderful platform cannot be implemented without a strong coalition, and that he was the one that could bring people together to get it done. Now I think after all these years of increasing polarization between red states and blue states and conservatives and liberals, some of us here -- and I'll bet a lot of folks watching tonite -- were thinking about some recent conversations with conservative friends or B*shbot coworkers or fundamentalist relatives who've said they like Obama and plan to vote for him. And after those conversations we start remembering something that's been forgotten for some time: we do have a lot in common with each other, after all. Obama is the catalyst in this. So I think each and every one who's had one of these chats with an erstwhile political "enemy" will realize that if Obama can sway old Hector down at the coffee shop then by golly he can sway some of those stubborn R's in Washington. We'd all like to see those good ideas go to Washington and flourish instead of die. The old bipartisan politics of giving the Republicans the American pie if Democrats could have the crumbs becomes Obama's new bipartisan politics: "That pie looks delicious. Let's all have some."

And after seeing them together tonite, I'm going to go out on a limb and say I bet he picks Hillary as his V.P. He's good at bringing people together, and they'll both be good at getting stuff done.

[Windy]

1. No. He needs someone like Zinni or Clark...I used to say Webb, but not after the telecom vote. nt

[TheDoorbellRang]

4. What about Clark for secretary of defense?

And we already figured he can't have Zinni as V.P. Think of the heyday they'd have with the OZ campaign.

[tammywammy]

6. Clark hasn't been out of the military long enough to be Sec. of Defense

[TheDoorbellRang]

9. That's right. I forgot that. Dang!

Do you know offhand what the time constraints for that are?

[Big Blue Marble]

16. It is ten years.

He is almost there. 2010

[Big Blue Marble]

15. Ha, I had to change my sig line after that vote.

it used to say Obama/Webb the era of incompetence is over.

Sadly, he is not the one we are looking for. Clark is great except he works for Hillary.
I know nothing about Zinni's politics. I agree he needs a man with a strong military background.

But who is the question.:shrug:

[THUNDER HANDS]

2. two points

one, Obama looked great tonight. Didn't get knocked off stride and had no moment that slowed his momentum down at all.

two, Hillary is not going to be VP. You don't put someone in your VP slot who makes news when they "sound" or "look" human.

[tabatha]

3. Too bad her truly sincere comments that were inspirational

were lifted from Edwards and Bill Clinton.

But I agree with you about Obama.

[TheDoorbellRang]

11. Yeah, I just read that on another thread. Ironic. n/t

[Emit]

5. He's the uniter. n/t

[bellasgrams]

17. He's the divider, you can see it right here on DU

[Emit]

18. What?

Was all of DU supposed to give Hillary the nod?

What the heck?

75% are for Obama and you say he's the divider.

Go figure!

[John Q. Citizen]

7. Obama has run a grass roots campaign. If he can win a big victory in November,

by a large margin, then you can bet he will have the political muscle to make congress get on board.

Reagan did the same thing to the Dems in a way. Yet without the grass-roots component that Obama has. And Reagan never had Repo control of both houses.

I seriously don't believe that they will run together. If they do, they will have to start from scratch with a brand new message, and their just isn't time for that.

If he runs with Hill, he throws his "change" message out the window. I suppose his new message could be "make new friends but keep the old," or maybe 'Change, but only a little bit.'

The problem is that the Repos aren't going to just roll over and die. If Obama jettisons his message he has spent a couple of years investing in and developing, then it's a big gamble just so some Dems can feel really good about both candidates on the same ticket.

I hate to be pragmatic, but that's how I see it.

[TheDoorbellRang]

12. Good point. I hadn't looked at it that way. n/t

[zulchzulu]

8. Obama better NOT have a Clinton anywhere near the White House

As an ardent Obama supporter for a while, the last thing he needs is to have the Clintons anywhere near his administration. They are trouble magnets. I'll do all I can to make sure they are in NO WAY in the Obama administration.

Otherwise, we're screwed.

[TheDoorbellRang]

10. I guess I was feeling magnanimous

there for a moment. :-)

But I do think he'll surprise everyone with a cabinet of folks with very diverse points of view. I think he'll emulate Lincoln in that regard.

[AZ Criminal JD]

14. I'm sure you will have great influence on Obama

[ginnyinWI]

13. I think she'd love to be asked

but I doubt it will happen. He has already defined her as something belonging to the past. It needs to be someone else. I also don't think he'd pick Edwards, because he's been bringing out JE's populist message all by himself this last week or so. His choice will probably not be one of the candidates, and not be a Washington insider.