U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
November 22, 2008 10:04 AM UTC
50 Comments
Loading ...
She would certainly be an asset. Add in the variable of Bill Clinton’s business deals, the situation could be murky. That’s for the lawyers to figure out.
As a politician, she’s a “known quantity.” She’s knowledgeable, capable, and respected. Leaders and diplomats would listen to her.
There would have to be the understanding between her and the rest of the administration that she serves the best iterests of the country and the Obama administration.
I think, while not perhaps an ideal SecState, she would be a solid voice for US interests.
Sorry, but Sen. Clinton’s reputation for intellectual and personal integrity is well known, and it’s not good.
Some of us have been paying attention since the Clintons popped up on the national radar, and we’re not impressed. In fact, the idea of having Sen. Clinton serve as America’s spokes person to the world is down right dismaying.
So, Obama’s got two integrity strikes against him in his appointments and another on the tip of his tongue.
Clinton and Eric Holder are tarnished by their behavior during the Clinton administration, and Bill Richardson made such a pandering, lying fool of himself during the primaries that he’ll be the third strike.
Obama’s judge of character is wanting. He may be appoint smart people, as David Brooks says, but smart people do dumb things and often lack integrity.
Sooner or later, voters will get it.
That’s why we libs/Dems/Americans kicked your sorry asses out on the street.
If you think these people are bad, how about almost all of the ones Bush appointed. Almost all incompetent and/or lacking integrity (see: Colin Poweell.)
How many investigations into relations/associations have there been under the Bush Administration? Integrity indeed.
How many lobbyists with questionable ties did McCain have in the uppermost level of his campaign? Bad judge of character, indeed.
Now answer me this- Who won the election with both popular and electoral votes in states that, until this election, were considered safe Republican states?
You fall back on the same insults and talk radio talking points without actually adding any new ideas or helpful information. But keep it up, we have another round of elections to win in 2010 with ideas to actually help people.
What are you tryin’ to say about Colin Powell?
😉
.
wouldn’t that make 4 in a row ?
.
For HRC, less so. I wanted her to stay in the Senate and be a great voice for the middle and lower classes – the next Ted Kennedy.
I actually think this is a brilliant choice for Obama and the nation both from the standpoint of how HRC will be as the SoS as well as the symbolism of the move.
…according to sources speaking to the NYT recently. No real leadership position or committee assignments.
And not enough to show for it. In State, she’ll have more measurable accomplishments and a chance to make her own legacy without having her name forever attached to her husband’s.
If the rest of the world finds her to be as terrifying as we do, it can’t be all bad.
does that work out to be a “good cop, bad cop” scenario?
Most conspiracy theories are garbage, as this one probably is, but it’s been floated on some R blogs.
What if the reason behind the State nomination is that the Clintons have something on Obama that would cost him the Presidency. Something so horrible that it might force him to resign, and that’s why Obama is appointing much of Bill’s staff.
Fun to think about. Total BS, but it’s a good mental exercise.
I’m guessing it’s a tape of him making out with Rove.
is going to be foreign birth. No way to disprove it well enough to make it go away.
…just showing a birth certiicate.
I don’t know why this is a problem – just fucking come up with it already.
The state of hawaii has publicly said his birth certificate is legitamit
Some people are never satisified no matter the evidence–kind of like not believing the science on global warming.
The Cabinet members are pretty far down the succession list.
I’m doing this from memory, so please correct me if I am wrong, but the succession list is:
Vice-President
Speaker of the House
President Pro-Tem of the Senate
and THEN the cabinet members in the order that their department was created.
It would be somthing far worse than a presidential scandal to reach the cabinet on this list.
I think being SOS really gives Hillary the opportunity for greatness that could only be exceeded by being President and to accomplish that she needs to do something great.
It will be interesting to see who gets appointed to replace her. Could it be Bill? RFK, Jr is reportedly interested and if he wants it I hope it is him. Otherwise, Bill if for no other reason than the entertainment factors. It would just thrill Gecko.
n/t
He’s perfect!
The Louisiana Republicans seem to have no problem keeping a senator who likes the ladies — for a price.
Isn’t Vitter’s Senate seat up in ’10? If so, will he be the GOP candidate?
Obama is putting together a team of stars, many who disagree with each other.
Conflict and different points of view drive good analysis.
Hillary is a good team player, she demonstrated it this summer after she lost the nomination, so she will give good honest counsel (often contradicting Obama) but she will execute the president’s orders.
There are only 3 downsides–Richardson deserves it, Hillary has not shown herself to be a good administrator (her campaign showed bad management skills) and state is a large agency, and finally the leaks are out of hand–Obama needs to get control of the leaks.
Great column by Brooks today explaining how Obama’s picks are top drawer. Well educated, non-ideological, pragmatic, experienced.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11…
I don’t really consider HRC the most qualified for reasons Danny sites and the Clintons as a couple and HRC as a manager are so train wreck prone.
However, the more I thought about it, the more sense it makes. For one thing it ties HRC’s success to the Obama administration’s success in a way it wouldn’t be if she were to remain as a Senator with visions of making another try for the presidency.
Also, SOS is really chief diplomat, not chief foreign policy making partner or coordinator between White House, State and Defense. That would be the National Security Adviser in the normal way of things. Obviously it wasn’t the case with Condi who’s main job as NSA seemed to be tutoring George with very little real muscle compared to Cheney, Rumsfeld and the rest of the real players. But that whole situation was an aberration.
As chief diplomat , HRC should be just fine and Obama can fire her if it comes to that. It is neither in his interest nor hers to have it come to that. It would make Obama look as though he had made a terrible error in judgement and would not advance HRC’s ambitions either. So HRC has as much motivation to make this work for the Obama administration as Obama does.
Bill will always be a concern but if Obama and HRC present a united front in keeping him on a short leash, the risk should be manageable. All in all, I see the advantages, my not being much of an HRC fan notwithstanding.
I just would have liked to have been there when they told Rush Limbaugh that he helped elect both of them into the Whitehouse.
I tried to call into Rushbo’s show for the first time in my life yesterday, and even though I got through to the screener I was denied speaking to the moron, I was going to thank him for everything he’s done for the Democratic Party.
There’s nobody right-wing radio would rather beat up on than Hillary, so Obama has done well. She’ll take a lot of the incoming fire that otherwise would have gone his way.
1) Bill Clinton is being more open with his finances for this than Obama ever was about his campaign financing. Go figure.
2) You’ve got to feel bad for Bill Richardson. He didn’t get the primary votes or VP consideration because everyone looked at him and said “Secretary of State. Easy.” (And since he’s not leaving New Mexico, you have to feel bad for New Mexicans, too)
Governor Richardson is going to be Secretary of Commerce, which was one of his top choices. From friends of mine who work with Bill, he’s doing just fine.
He should be pretty satisfied.
.
could never support Hillary for Prez because of how, on CBS in 1992, she dishonestly vouched for, stood by her patron.
Said she wouldn’t bake cookies, then turned around and, well, you know.
Maybe she emancipates herself for this SoS post, and that frees her for a Presidential run on her own merits in 2012 ?
.
her success is tied to the administration’s success. If it is seen as such a failure that the Dems would want to run somebody else, that somebody wouldn’t likely be the SOS who shared in the failure.
Now that Baucus is taking over the Health Care reform thing and Kennedy isn’t stepping aside… well Hillary doesn’t the blue sky insofar as Legislative Legacy goes. New York will quickly find another junior Senator, you can be sure, so her leaving will not create a numerical problem for the Senate Democrats. But, tell me again what her qualifications in foreign policy are? Besides having travelled a lot with Bill, I mean. Besides policy, what about management at Foggy Bottom?
Somebody tell me, because I’m not finding it, beyond being on the right side of SOME issues.
My biggest reservation is Bill. Will he stay on the reservation and/or refrain from being a pain in the ass? Or will he be a distraction, even embarrassment, to the country — fouling up the policy gestures and actions of the Obama administation? The man is enormously needy for attention and seems to lack a sense of proportion. Maybe the Obamites are thinking that he’ll be a problem regardless and that Hillary’s presence is the only tool to reign in the former President?
I’m thinking I’d make Hillary ambassador to France and Bill ambassador to Fiji. Easier to watch and less opportunity for big faux pas.
I think Hillary brings something important to State – that once-important quality that whoever sits in that seat makes sure they’re being heard in the policy-making decisions. Colin Powell would have been a far better SoS if he’d been able/willing to be a more forceful voice for reason in the Bush Administration. Rice is even worse in that respect. Hillary, if nothing else, brings a very firm presence back to the Secretary of State position.
She’s had experience with foreign policy in the Senate and as an advocate before and during the Clinton Presidency. Also, I think her long presence alongside Bill will give her a strong leg up in foreign relations.
Foggy Bottom I think needs more in the way of confidence and trust-building than it need management improvements. Clinton is a good candidate for that.
.
These are 2 rare posts that actually got me to rethink a long-held bias. Didn’t turn me 180, but I have a different perspective of Ms. Rodham as SOS now. As for foreign policy chops, she’s almost as big a fraud as Biden of the colonialist Biden-Gelb Plan. But she don’t need to be no expert – that’s what staff is for. It’s a leadership job, and it’s been vacant for so long that her tenure will be a tonic.
Powell was useless at SecState. He was inspiring as CJCS, where I guess he reached his limit. Bad as Rice has been in the job, I disagree with Phoenix and say she’s a step from Powell up as SOS. In case you’ve forgotten, Powell made approximately zero trips in his first 3 years in the job.
Rice was useless at NSA. Despite her acknowledged failure in that post, she was far better than her successor Hadley. Remember that the biggest part of his job is to coordinate what to do about Iraq & Afghanistan, and he punted on that, asking the Prez to hire a “War Czar” (you remember: 24 generals turned the job down before newly promoted LTG Lutz took it on.)
All national security decisions in this Administration are made by the political staff, headed up by the Veep.
………
So, in the last hour or so I just realized why Jones is being asked to fill the NSA post.
Looking over the Obama campaign team, and appointees in his incoming administration, there is even less military experience than in Clinton’s Administration, which at first was openly contemptuous of the military (if you don’t know about this, check out how Barry McCaffrey vaulted from 1 star to 4.)
Obama inherits a cadre of military generals and admirals who were apparently selected by the Bush Administration for their party loyalty. Fox Fallon and Eric Shinseki can tell you what President Bush thinks of competent, independent military advice.
Golly, the top US commander in Iraq today, Ray Odierno, was openly directing war crimes and ethnic cleansing 3 years ago. Our strategy in Iraq depends 100% on employing Mercenaries to guard convoys and defend compounds. Military intelligence organizations are engaged in domestic spying. The Air Force overflies allies with UAV’s without ever asking permission or even telling them. Military program managers are ignoring requirements in law to report to Congress. Etc.
So, a house-cleaning is needed.
Worse, the Bush loyalists installed at the highest levels are all going to recommend “Stay the Course” when Obama tells them on Day 1 to take the steps necessary to be out of Iraq in 16 months.
Bush thinks that an Obama Team with even less military experience and credibility than his (if that’s possible) will have to follow the advice of the top generals, even if they were promoted for political reasons rather than military.
A Merril McPeak or a Wes Clark lacks the martial heft/ gravitas to convince those American people yearning for “victory” that Bush’s generals need to be forcibly retired, or that the Iraq War needs to end. Neither one could stand toe-to-toe with 6′-5″ Odierno, or even with 5′-7″ Petraeus.
Jones fills that particular bill.
Look, no one is perfect for any job. And we face international challanges that we never have before, so we don’t know how well any individual will do.
But she is arguably better qualified than anyone else. She carries more gravitas than anyone else except her husband. No other appointee comes close. This gives her a bid advantage in her interactions with other countries.
It also really brings our party back together. SoS is one of the top 4 cabinet positions. So Obama is bringing her in to the top leadership of his administration.
Finally, as important as international issues are right now, domestic ones are even more critical. Having someone who can take the lead there means that it will get the attention needed.
As for Bill, I say make him ambassador to the Israel & Palestine. With that I think we could finally see a workable peace in the region.
In fact, I’ve been happy with everyone Obama has named (or leaked) so far.
I do wonder how well she’ll be at carrying out Obama’s directives given that she sleeps with (or at least pretends to) a former president with ideas of his own. It will, at least, be interesting to watch.
I’m really interested in what republicans he asks to serve in the admin aside from Gates, is any.
I’d like to see him name Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, and Arlen Specter to cabinet level posts.
if only it wouldn’t automatically hand you guys 3 Senate seats 🙂
Look, the core reason I preferred Obama over Hillary (after all my preferred choices dropped out) was his foreign policy worldview, including opposition to the Iraq invasion and willingness to engage adversaries thru diplomacy. And I suspect that Hilary, like Bill, is a proponent of US economic imperialism (aka “globalization”) that has wreaked havoc on workers and the environment here and in other countries. So my preference would be someone who is more in tune with my worldview than Hilary.
But you know what? Obama is the Pres, he gets to pick who he wants. I’m certainly confident that Hilary can handle the job, and hopefully it will work out fine. And I’m not really concerned about Bill going rogue, that is just a media and right wing red herring IMO. I think he could be as positive and substantive an ambassador as Eleanor Roosevelt was after FDR died.
See you in a week, I’m going to New Mexico to eat green chile and listen to the desert.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.co…
woman could not stand BHO? She told the entire world how inept he is and how he has absolutely zero experience, so now she wants to rub elbows with him?
Typical politicians.
who constantly runs for office. “Boo hoo, I hate politicians, but elect me so I can sit on the floor with them and serve on committees.”
Would it make you feel better if Hilary kicked some reporters on her way to the office?
…fight and snarl and then go have lunch, you are dumber than I already thought.
As they said (roughly) in The Godfather, “That’s personal, this is business.” (Or, “bidness” if you are GWB.)
…you seem uncharacteristically dim witted.