Shrum States Clinton Wanted to Be Kerry Running Mate

[Dr Ron]

From Liberal Values:

http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=1234


Shrum States Clinton Wanted to Be Kerry Running Mate

The New York Daily News reports that Bob Shrum states in his upcoming book that Hillary Clinton’s associates pushed to get Clinton chosen as John Kerry’s running mate in 2004. The choice was rejected due to her high negatives:

Sen. Hillary Clinton’s agents lobbied for her to be John Kerry’s running mate in 2004, but she was crossed off the list as too radioactive, according to political sources and an upcoming book.

“A quiet round of polling helped guide the search. Hillary Clinton had high negatives - she would hurt the ticket,” Democratic guru Bob Shrum writes in his memoir, “No Excuses: Concessions of a Serial Campaigner.”

Clinton associates pressed Kerry to get her on the list of vice presidential candidates, well-informed sources confirmed to the Daily News.

[ginnyinWI]

1. aha.

So why should it be any different now, just a few years later? Is there any amount of money that can reverse "high negatives"? I really think that the only thing giving her high polling percentages is her name recognition. If given the choice between someone you "know" and someone you are completely unfamiliar with, you choose the one you know. And there is no accountablity in that choice--it's only a poll. When you have to vote for real--that's different.

And remember the comment made by Tweety last summer that we weren't supposed to hear about Hillary.
I suspect that somebody (RW or DLC) is manipulating/regulating the media on Hillary. We've seen recent Obama smears and Edwards smears, but few Hillary smears. Why hasn't Ann Coulter come up with one of her "gems" to describe Hillary?? The RW wants her in so bad because they know the real polling data on her.

[karynnj]

2. I wonder if Shrum could be trusted on this

He also has a strange story saying that he is sorry he pushed Edwards to vote for the IWR and that Edwards inclination was to be against it. This absolutely doesn't gipe with the fact that Edwards co-sponsored it and spent at least 2003 campaigning on the war being a good idea even though there were no WMD. Edwards has said he was not influenced to vote for the IWR, it was his decision. In this day of Utube and tons of tape exisiting from 2004, this makes no sense.

As to Hillary as VP, I guess she may have thought her only chance if Kerry won would be as VP. I imagine that Bill Clinton in the position of the VP's spouse would be awkward. I do remember all the old comments in the 1990s that Gore would pick her - though with Monica that clearly was out.

[ElizabethDC]

4. It's doubtful that it's true

at the time she said, publicly, that if Kerry asked her to be his running mate she would say "no thanks." And, if you read the whole original article, her people deny that she was interested.

[ProSense]

5. Maybe most of the stuff Shrum and McAwful have written isn't true. n/t

[karynnj]

6. I agree - I think this is simply Shrum trying to put out what he considers interesting tidbids

that he will have in his book.

Senator Kerry said that he would not speak about who was considered and to my knowledge hasn't. Supposely only Kerry and the person he had helping with the search had any knowledge of the selection - which would mean that Shrum would NOT know. (I assume Shrum et al may have focused group or polled opinion on likely Democrats and gave the results to Kerry - I do remember what you refer to of Hillary saying that if asked (and saying she hadn't been) she would say "NO".

[Luftmensch067]

3. Very interesting!

When I heard this reported on NPR this morning, the story was that Shrum was saying that HRC was on the list but never made the shortlist because of toxicity. And the reporter added that HRC states that she would have refused if asked! Very different spin, hm?

[Mass]

7. No clue if it is true or not, but she would not have been a worse choice than Edwards.

At least she would have gone on the attack.