February 4th, 2008
09:30 PM ET
9 years ago

Clinton chairman: Obama would be good running mate

(CNN) - One of Hillary Clinton's top advisers said Monday Barack Obama could make a good running mate if the New York senator is the Democratic Party's nominee.

Appearing on NY1's "Inside City Hall," Clinton Campaign Chairman Terry McAuliffe praised Barack Obama’s ability to “excite people,” adding that Clinton “needs to make sure the next, whoever the next vice president is, could take over if anything happened to her” - though he said it was too early to seriously discuss potential vice presidential picks.

When he was asked directly whether adding Obama to a Clinton ticket would be a good idea, he responded: “Sure it would. Absolutely. How could you deny consideration of someone who has excited so many people?”

NY1 is owned by Time Warner, the parent company of CNN.

At CNN's debate in Los Angeles Thursday, both candidates were asked about the possibility of a joint ticket, regardless of who held the top spot – a suggestion that prompted cheering from the audience. Both suggested it was too early to discuss potential running mates.

-CNN's Alexander Mooney

soundoff (702 Responses)
  1. virgilT

    Good try Terry. Spin, spin away, but I really doubt Hillary will have to worry about choosing a Vice President. I think history has finally caught up with the Clintons.

    February 5, 2008 01:48 pm at 1:48 pm |
  2. Trevor

    Name me one Obama accomplishment. One - that's it...that's all I'm asking. He's a great speaker, motivator, exciter...I believe that. But what has he accomplished? Handing over the White House to someone simply because he excites you is an emotional decision, and not logical.

    February 5, 2008 01:50 pm at 1:50 pm |
  3. Taylor

    this whole thing is a joke. CNN is a fake!!!! CNN does a million stories on Obama and in the last 30 seconds they throw in Hillary. Hillary's campaign was right when they said Obama is getting a free ride from the media. If the media played something else other than Obama strories than i bet you Clinton would still have her 30 point lead like she did a couple weeks ago. and another thing this whole endorsement thing is out of line. all we hear about is obama's million endorsements, well what about hillary's. oh wait CNN never meantions them, even though she has a list just as long as obama's.

    CNN doesnt = Politics, more like CNN= OBAMA.

    Hillary deserves the same media attention as Obama. But when wednesday comes and Hillary wins more votes and Delegates than all you obama people can go cry to Oprah WInfrey.

    H I L L A R Y 08'

    February 5, 2008 01:50 pm at 1:50 pm |
  4. Walt, Belton,TX

    Obama wuld be wasting his time as Hillary's VP and Obama could never trust her enough to be his VP. Slick willie would always be in the wings hustling whatever.

    February 5, 2008 01:52 pm at 1:52 pm |
  5. Jeff

    Experience...hmm...George Bush supposedly had experience. So much for that theory. Abe Lincoln did NOT have much experience, he spent 8 years in the Illonois statehouse; he had only his values, VISION, and common sense, to contend with civil war and reconstruction. JFK only served 6 years in the senate. Nixon had plenty of experience..hmm... Obviously experience is not the critical factor in the success of a president.


    February 5, 2008 01:53 pm at 1:53 pm |
  6. Bag the Billster

    This is ridiculous to say the least!! There is NO CONSISTENCY between these two people......Obama is for changing Washington, DC, from its current grid-lock! Shrillary (crying) Clintoon only wants the same old mantra for the political climate in W, DC! End of subject here!!

    February 5, 2008 01:55 pm at 1:55 pm |
  7. clayton

    You can get Ronald Reagan without a Jimmy Carter. Go Hillary!!!!

    February 5, 2008 01:56 pm at 1:56 pm |
  8. Bag the Billster

    More propaganda from CNN.......'CLINTOON News Network'!!!!!! Just trying to marginalize Obama at any cost!! Stupid idiots!!!!

    February 5, 2008 01:56 pm at 1:56 pm |
  9. tony rome

    my fair tax, your an idiot.and i can go on about your comments ,.let us just start with your name.a fair tax is relative to what you make.so what you call yourself is misleading. you should call yourself '"tax cheater", or "I hate taxes.com" tell me what is american about you. it escapes me . your a loner.

    February 5, 2008 01:59 pm at 1:59 pm |
  10. ejm

    Hillary's adviser sounded dismissive of Obama. I'm with the other Obama supporters: no Hillary under any circumstance. At best, I'll abstain if she gets the nomination. At worst, I'll vote Republican for the first time in my life. Enough of the Clintons and their dirty tactics. They care for nothing and no one except themselves. Their behavior in South Carolina proved that. When Obama wins, I hope he'll choose either Richardson or Edwards. If the ethically-challenged Clintons win and Obama accepts a VP offer, Obama will lose my respect and I'll vote against them. Obama supporters want change, REAL change! And we want someone with integrity and sincerity; not lies and tears on cue. Here's a question for Hillary's adviser: Why wasn't Hillary "experienced" enough and smart enough to vote against the Iraq war when 133 Representatives and 23 other Senators were? Where was all that "experience" you keep talking about? And why did she also vote to give Bush an excuse to talk about war with Iran? Hillary is nothing but another Bush. She refuses to admit errors in judgement and she's a war monger.

    February 5, 2008 02:00 pm at 2:00 pm |
  11. Big J

    How does a guy with a 100% liberal voting record "Unite the country". My goodness, I am so tired of such sophmoric thinking.

    February 5, 2008 02:07 pm at 2:07 pm |
  12. Anonymous

    Typical, typical McAuliffe - why would Obama be a good running mate instead of the NOMINEE? Oh wait, he's gotta wait his turn...nice going with the very subtle race code, Terry. And you did a great job running the DNC and it's influence right into the ground all those years. Thank G-d for Howard Dean - the reason why we're all energized and excited about Super Tuesday and the vote is because of people isn't because of YOU, Terry.


    February 5, 2008 02:11 pm at 2:11 pm |
  13. Anonymous

    It would have been nice for Obama to have completed his first term in the Senate before deciding he was experienced enough to run for office. Voted for Hillary today.

    February 5, 2008 02:11 pm at 2:11 pm |
  14. dm92

    "The last time this country voted for inexperience and vague promises, we were rewarded with 9/11, a war in Iraq over non-existent WMD's, a housing market crash and a near-recessesion."

    Obama has experience and Hillary helped him into this war! Have you bothered to look at what her 'experience' has wrought: the war, an unfair bankruptcybill, an attempt at a flag-burning amendment. Get real, she will never be President, even if she gets the nomination, too many dems will not vote for her.

    February 5, 2008 02:15 pm at 2:15 pm |
  15. Steve

    Leave it up to McAuliffe to be able to deliver an insulting compliment. Obama is operating from a postion of power no Hillary. Obama currently is leading Clinton in the Delegate count. Hillary's the one that should be begging for a running-mate offer.

    McAuliffe is a still a scumbag. Always has been, always will be.

    February 5, 2008 02:16 pm at 2:16 pm |
  16. Robert, New York City, NY

    They are both way off on how to handle the economy and pretty much everything else.

    Obama – Hillary, Hillary-Obama

    Who cares – both would be a disaster!

    February 5, 2008 02:16 pm at 2:16 pm |
  17. Bunny

    Why would Obama ever think of being Hillary's running mate, she represents the same old ideas and Obama is move for change. Dream on.

    February 5, 2008 02:17 pm at 2:17 pm |
  18. E.Budvis

    I am a conservative GOPer who might vote for Obama in the general election if he was running against robot -romney, but would never – ever – ever vote for a ticket with HRC. If O runs as hillary's veep-he is a total sell out

    February 5, 2008 02:20 pm at 2:20 pm |
  19. Jackson

    The Clinton/Obama ticket was the plan all along. The various dust-ups were precisely planned and scheduled. This was told to me by a Clinton campaign person, pretty high up in the campaign planning, who quit in disgust.

    February 5, 2008 02:27 pm at 2:27 pm |
  20. Rod Guinyard

    Obama would not and should not consider the polarizing Clinton as his running mate should he win the nomination.

    The overwhelming majority of democratic votes for Obama are a rejection of the past and a look toward the future with a fresh face on what could become the shining star of democracy, the UNITED States of America.

    One nation.

    February 5, 2008 02:34 pm at 2:34 pm |
  21. Will

    She has to win the nod from her party first. . .

    See how arrogant she and her administration would be? Already putting the cart before the horse.

    Obama is the better of the two!

    February 5, 2008 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  22. Farnsworth Dye

    Barack Obama – the fresh candidate.

    As I sit here and read all of the comments a few are making about no
    experience. Come on, how many of you are just quoting someone else
    like uncle Jed -and you have no idea of what no experience means.

    No one running for president has experience being president until they
    have been elected and out of office. Then they have experience.

    It's time for a change – let's get all out dated old world war two thinking
    and throw it out the window. IT"S TIME FOR SOME FRESH IDEAS.

    Barack Obama PROVIDES THAT!

    February 5, 2008 02:42 pm at 2:42 pm |
  23. jh

    Obama should not run as Hillary's VP – though it sounds like a good idea, given that Obama has no "experience," it would seriously jeopardize his political future, just like Gore. Also, for all those making the argument about Hillary's experience – what experience? Thirty-five years experience? What was she actually doing during that time. So, she was in law school, she worked on the McGovern campaign, she worked as a corporate lawyer, she served as first lady of Arkansas, first lady of the U.S, and then a meager seven years in the Senate. All the experiences she touts working with children's health care, etc. amounts to about one to two years of actual service. So even Obama's three years on the streets in Chicago after he graduated from Columbia outdoes her.

    Finally, when has experience been a necessity? FDR only had four years as governor before becoming president, Teddy Roosevelt had even less. What we need now is not experience at being a politician, we need intelligence, something that Hillary does not have. She failed the bar, he graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law. He taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago, one of the finest places of higher learning in America, while she sat on those corporate boards. Make no mistake, Obama is not wishy-washy touchy-feeley Carter either; he's a smart, intellectual, professorial type. Even his vocabulary during interviews indicates that. Carter had idealism, but he lacked Obama's common sense approach. Lastly, After seven years of chimpy in the White House, I can't imagine a better contrast. He can probably do math too, so at least his budgets won't leave billions of dollars unaccounted for.

    February 5, 2008 02:48 pm at 2:48 pm |
  24. Eric

    All for Clinton in 2008!

    Long as she's on Obama's ticket!

    February 5, 2008 02:56 pm at 2:56 pm |
  25. Stan

    Just what experience does Hillary possess ? Obama has been in the senate for 2 yrs. what experience does he possess Wasn't Hillary in charge of BIMBO eruptions while she was in the White House?

    February 5, 2008 02:57 pm at 2:57 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