March 5th, 2008
11:45 AM ET
6 years ago

Clinton: This may be headed to a joint ticket

 Clinton said Wednesday the race may result in a joint ticket.
Clinton said Wednesday the race may result in a joint ticket.

(CNN) – The morning after primary wins in Ohio, Texas, and Rhode Island, Hillary Clinton said she would consider being part of a Democratic “dream ticket” that would include both her and presidential rival Barack Obama.

"That may be where this is headed,” she told the CBS Early Show during a marathon set of appearances on the network morning news shows. “But of course we have to decide who is on the top of ticket. I think the people of Ohio very clearly said that it should be me."

The New York senator has made the claim before. Last month, in one of several interviews where she said the scenario was a possibility, she told a Vibe interviewer: “Of course there is (a chance of a joint ticket). Of course there is. Now neither of us will answer this question because we don’t want to look presumptuous and premature. But it is more than fair to say that — of course there is.”

While Clinton has said a joint ticket is possible, the Obama team has largely avoided making similar statements. Some of the Illinois senator’s campaign surrogates have said they believe the claims benefit Clinton because they may convince Democratic voters drawn to the Illinois senator that a vote for her is essentially a vote for both of them - or a vote for him to head the ballot in eight years, after she has had her two terms on top of the ticket.

Primary season rivals who have successfully shared a presidential ticket after tough nominating fights include Democrats John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, and Republicans Ronald Reagan and George Bush.

– CNN Associate Political Editor Rebecca Sinderbrand

soundoff (916 Responses)
  1. James

    No president has ever won without Ohio. Now imagine if you also lose Florida. And then Pennsylvania. And then if you didnt even win Texas, California or New York. Or New Jersey. These are the states that determine elections. I'm sorry but Wyoming and Montana will not get it done for the democrats.

    March 5, 2008 12:07 pm at 12:07 pm |
  2. Hans (Zürich, Switzerland)

    If Obama wins the nomination, I WILL DEFINITELY give my vote to Ralph Nader!!!!!!!!!

    March 5, 2008 12:07 pm at 12:07 pm |
  3. Steve

    How long now until we have the "Can Bill Clinton be VP?" debate again?

    March 5, 2008 12:07 pm at 12:07 pm |
  4. CHERYL

    THE PEOPLE SPOKE LAST NIGHT! BORACKS RUN IS OVER!!!

    IT IS HIS OWN FAULT!

    HE DECIDED TO LIE ABOUT CANADA AND NAFTA!

    HE WILL BE HAVING MORE PROBLEMS FROM THE REZKO TRIAL!

    THAT COMBINED WITH SENATOR CLINTON WINNING ALL THE BIG STATES NEEDED TO WIN THE PRESIDENCY, HE IS DONE!

    I FEEL SO MUCH BETTER KNOWING IT WILL BE HILLARY! I TRUST HER!!!!!!!!!!

    March 5, 2008 12:07 pm at 12:07 pm |
  5. Great.....

    Just what this country need! The blind leading the deaf and dumb!!!

    March 5, 2008 12:07 pm at 12:07 pm |
  6. Vig

    Hillary should bide her time because more about Obama is bound to come to the surface and it will be negative because all the positives have already been wrung dry. Obama can keep flashing that smile of his, but at the end of the day, it's Hillary.

    March 5, 2008 12:07 pm at 12:07 pm |
  7. Grif

    Just stay the course Girl!!! Stamina is all you need...

    March 5, 2008 12:08 pm at 12:08 pm |
  8. Sansel

    How can anyone be so prejudice in one day ... deciding who is going to what for 8 years and even further???

    Anyway, it seems that the battle has just begun!

    March 5, 2008 12:08 pm at 12:08 pm |
  9. VOTE FOR GOODNESS AND HONESTY

    NO to a joint ticket. OMABA would have won last night except for
    Hillary dumping on him and lying and blowing his character
    out of the water. She is not a good person. OBAMA must win
    the presidency,

    I feel Starbuck above. SCREW the dream ticket.

    Hillary lies conives and cheats to win. We want no one
    but OBAMA. Now that would change the politics in
    Washington, nothing less!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    March 5, 2008 12:08 pm at 12:08 pm |
  10. CarlosnLA

    Enough of the party festive mode, it's time to get down to the business of putting a Democrat in the White House. That business requires actions, enough of just inspirational words. It's time to grow-up !
    ........Go Hillary ! ........Yes, She Will !

    March 5, 2008 12:08 pm at 12:08 pm |
  11. Maggie

    A Must say.....

    Obama is on his soap box chanting about his number of delegates. If we counted Michigan and Florida, who would have the most delegates???? Obama CHOSE not to include his name on the ballot, to impress the Democratic party, so STOP crying about the lost chance in those states OBAMA, and look at the BIG picture.....

    March 5, 2008 12:08 pm at 12:08 pm |
  12. Billy

    I think i just threw up a little in my mouth...

    March 5, 2008 12:08 pm at 12:08 pm |
  13. Jane

    Hillary the witch is awful! She will never catch up to Obama in the delegates and doesn't have enough self-respect to bow out now.

    OBAMA ALL THE WAY '08!!

    March 5, 2008 12:09 pm at 12:09 pm |
  14. Honesty

    It may be true that Hillary wants Obama, she sees potential in this 'kid' . He represents all she has fought for most of her adult life. Few remarkable people like Hillary are the ones behind the possibility of Obama. That is something people forget to remember or simply dont want to acknowledge. She has fought for civil rights, human and women rights for so long and that has had tremendous impact in the life of so many minority politicians. Her efforts in the African American community have been enormous and what he has done pales in comparison. So maybe she needs him a bit for a more cohesive Democratic party, but maybe she wants him a bit more than needing him, becuase she genuinely thinks that his candidacy is a reflection of his legacy. All this said. SHe is the one with the experience, the leadership, the stamina, the fortitute, and the knowledge to be the commander in chief. He is simply not ready.
    I think Richardson would be an excellent running mate and would likely consolidate the party just as much.
    Hopefully we can move on to get the situation clearer in the months to come and Hillary establishes herself as the leading Democratic Nominee for the democratic party. This is what should happen.

    March 5, 2008 12:09 pm at 12:09 pm |
  15. Nancy Feldman

    Hillary Clinton's intimating the idea of a joint ticket is a peripheral strategy at best (luring voters into the notion that a vote for her is a vote for both). Whether or not her campaign knows it, Hillary has long moved on to "plan B."
    If she's proven anything during this campaign, it's her pragmatism and her smarts– meaning she is calculating and she can count. She has a firm grasp on the inevitability of the popular delegate count, which will dictate the super delegate count. And she is not under-estimating the impact her continued negative barrage will have on her own party. Indeed, that is the centerpiece of Plan B.
    Hillary clearly has her sights on the 2012 general election, in which she can only be a player if John McCain, not Barak Obama, is President.
    And so long as the media showcases her false veil of hope in this election, her intentions will seem to many, honorable.

    March 5, 2008 12:09 pm at 12:09 pm |
  16. Arthur-Texas

    I hope Hillary does not pick Obama as her vp.He would only drag her down.She is a hard worker and will expect all her employees to do the same.Obama comes across as sort of lazy and would not fit in with the new Clinton team.

    March 5, 2008 12:09 pm at 12:09 pm |
  17. B. Smart

    . . .This sounds like a child trying to swindle another child out of his candy.
    Who needs her. After Senator Obama wins the rest of his delegates, I think that Senator Sam Nun or Ted Kennedy would make a great vp running mate.

    YES WE CAN!!!!!!!
    OBAMA/NUN
    OBAMA/KENNEDY

    March 5, 2008 12:09 pm at 12:09 pm |
  18. Rebecca

    "Some of the Illinois senator’s campaign surrogates have said they believe the claims (of a joint ticket) benefit Clinton because they may convince Democratic voters drawn to the Illinois senator that a vote for her is essentially a vote for both of them".
    YES Hillary's intent is to get people to vote for her–believing it means both–BUT this is divisive and NOT true.
    When making volunteer calls for Obama's campaign people have said it did not matter who they vote for as it would be a "joint ticket".
    She needs to be confronted on this FALSE claim of a joint ticket as it is a lie to benefit ONLY her.
    She also promised to submit her tax returns but has not. Her's are linked to Bill's with money making schemes partnering him and some unsavory people. He says he will sever relations with these connections IF she is the nominee. Do we want people in the most important office who's ethics and values are such that "it is ok to make money any way they can–UNLESS they are in the public eye"? NO!

    March 5, 2008 12:10 pm at 12:10 pm |
  19. Steve

    Let's admit it. the Hillary is the nasty fighter who will do what it takes to win. Obama is the charming and articulate guy who is almost impossible to dislike. Together they would be unstoppable. I am willing to put aside my distaste for Hillary as long as Obama gets on this ticket in some capacity. No matter what happens in 08 he will be president one day. Period.

    March 5, 2008 12:10 pm at 12:10 pm |
  20. Christina

    I would support a join ticket with Clinton at the top, which would give Obama the experience he needs. It's also what would completely unite the party, since core Democrats (I'm not talking Independents) are still basically split between Clinton and Obama. But people – PLEASE – stop it already with saying HIllary's campaign has played dirty tricks. Remember, it was Obama who initially started the smear tactics with his flyer about her stance on NAFTA – remember her surprise and anger about it and her "shame on you, Barrack!" comment? She hadn't done anything negative before that and had to respond to that attack, but her response didn't slander Obama. The "red phone" add didn't slander or sling mud at Obama at all – it just made people consider a very important question as to who they would really want to be President. How is that fear mongering or an attack?? It was an important question! Obama got himself into a mess by lying that a meeting with the Canadians never occurred (when it did) and by getting involved with Resko (what sane person would purchase a plot of land from someone who was being investigated? Plus, where did the campaign contributions come from?) Come one, people! If all of this were the other way around, not one of you Obama supporters (or the Media, for that matter) would have a problem with it, and you'd defend and justify him at every turn. Hillary defends herself, and you all claim they're attack adds against Barrack. Remember, he has NEVER been vetted by the press yet. There are things that we don't yet know about him, and they're definitely going to come out at some point and may end up hurting him. If you think Hillary's adds are attacks, wait until you see what the Republicans will do! Remember how they Swift -oated Kerry? Hillary is used to their evil (and sometimes illegal) games and knows how to respond – Obama, unfortunately, doesn't even know what's in store for him.

    March 5, 2008 12:10 pm at 12:10 pm |
  21. No way!

    No way in hell! Obama wons all the southern states and Hillary can won all the big states. However, a lot of independent votes, blacks, and young people will ONLY vote for Obama. Hillary is only helping McCain at this point.

    March 5, 2008 12:10 pm at 12:10 pm |
  22. AISHA

    NO,,,,HILLARY DOES NOT NEED OBAMA

    OBAMA,,WHO WENT TO HILLARY FOR ADVICE UPON BECOMING SENATOR AND NOW IN EVERY SPEECH OF HIS ,HE IS NEGATIVE TO HER ,,AND HE DRAGS BILL IN IT EVERYTIME ,,HILLARY DOES NOT DRAG ,,,MICHELLE,S STUPID REMARKS,

    OBAMA,,130 PRESENT VOTES,,FALSE NAFTA CLAIMS,,RENZKO

    WHY HILLARY WANTS TO ASK FOR TROUBLE BY HAVING OBAMA HIPPI LIBERAL ON THE SAME TICKET

    March 5, 2008 12:10 pm at 12:10 pm |
  23. JR from Philadelphia, PA

    Let's be real – no way Bill Clinton is taking a back-seat to anyone. He will be her Dick Cheney, whether he's on the ticket or not. No one in their right mind would want to be her VP. And if she's on the bottom of the ticket, it's still a threesome. Does anyone really envision Bill not trying to dictate to the president if his wife is the VP? I loved Bill Clinton, but the presidency is not a monarchy, and it's time for some fresh faces and fresh ideas. And after the negative campaign Hillary has run against Obama, borrowing tactics straight out of Karl Rove's handbook, she will never get my vote. What's next, a Willie Horton ad? Any ticket with a Clinton on it is a guarantee of more of the same: divisiveness, politics of destruction, lying and gridlock. Wait, we just had 8 years of that with Bush.

    Starbuck, I LIKE your thinking. Obama/Hagel is what I'd call a dream ticket.

    March 5, 2008 12:10 pm at 12:10 pm |
  24. PammyH

    It may be good for the party and I'm sure Hillary was trying to show that she would be a team player. However, has anyone considered that she may not be excited about him on the ticket with this Rezko deal going on? I swear, his relationship with that Syrian Swine IS going to catch up with him when that trial really gets rolling. Then all you folks that think Hillary is corrupt will see what corrupt REALLY looks like!

    March 5, 2008 12:10 pm at 12:10 pm |
  25. Gerri

    WHY IS THE MEDIA AND NEWS PAPER GIVEN SEN. CLINTON A FREE RIDE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY HAVE NOT PRESSUED SEN. CLINTON TO DISPLAY HER TAX FORMS AND WHITE HOUSE DOCUMENTS, TELL ME WHAT, WHAT SHE IS HIDING. SUPRISE, SUPRISE, SUPRISE?

    March 5, 2008 12:10 pm at 12:10 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37