I kind of like Dan Abrams's program on MSNBC.  He is basically fair in his treatment of the various candidates, praising and criticizing them where appropriate, and without any obvious slanting based on his personal preferences.  On last night's (May 14) program, Mr. Abrams suggested that Barack Obama would be an absolute fool not to offer the vice-presidential nomination to Hillary Clinton.  He said that he would be open to opposing arguments, but it was apparently obvious to him that Clinton would be a huge asset to Obama, and that Obama's supporters should forget about their own dislike for Clinton, and accept the fact (?) that she would be the VP prospect who would best help Obama get elected president.  At the end of the program, Mr. Abrams read a couple of emails that were both of the "Are you crazy?" variety. 

Because Mr. Abrams indicated that he welcomed feedback, I emailed the following to him last night.  I tried to leave my personal feelings about Hillary Clinton out of the argument:

Dear Mr. Abrams,

You are an excellent legal affairs reporter.  As a political analyst ... I think you should stick to legal affairs.  In my opinion, your premise that it is obvious that Hillary Clinton has earned the right to at least be offered the vice-presidential post by Barack Obama is seriously flawed.  You stated that many Obama supporters are opposed to Clinton being on the ticket due to a dislike of Mrs. Clinton, and implied that this was the only reason for that opposition.  Then, you read a couple of emails from viewers who disagreed with you, mentioning such things as selling one's soul.  As an attorney and political observer, you are all too aware that it is easy to ridicule the most exaggerated arguments by the other side. 

I will concede one point in the case for Mrs. Clinton as a running mate for Mr. Obama.  She does appeal to segments of the voting population (working class whites and older white women) whose support Obama has so far been unable to get in large numbers.   

The case against her inclusion on the ticket is more compelling to me. 

As you are well aware, voter turnout is the key to winning most elections.  Clinton hurts Obama in two ways here.  First, a great many Obama supporters are drawn to Obama because of the "change" theme.  Independent of specific policy issues, these voters expect a different approach to problem solving in an Obama presidency.  They expect an end to demonizing the political opposition, working across the political aisle to accomplish the people's business, reducing the influence of lobbyists, etc.  Putting Mrs. Clinton on the ticket will deflate the enthusiasm of most Obama supporters, which would almost certainly depress voter turnout by supporters of Obama, and also down-ticket Democrats.  Second, there is no greater motivator for Republican-leaning potential voters than to have Hillary Clinton on the ballot.  Republicans and conservatives not happy with Senator McCain will be energized to vote for him if it means voting against Hillary Clinton. 

Besides the doubly negative (at least from the Democrats' perspective) effect of Clinton-for-VP on voter turnout, it is my opinion that the open contempt shown for months toward Barack Obama by both Hillary and Bill Clinton cannot be forgotten.  I never was one of those people who said that Hillary Clinton should quit the race when it became apparent that her odds of winning the nomination were slim.  She could have campaigned in the manner that Mike Huckabee did on the Republican side.  Governor Huckabee stayed in the race after it was apparent that he had almost no chance, but he stayed in to promote his own candidacy and issues, not to tear down the front runner of his party.  Senator Clinton could have done something similar, but she decided instead that her best bet was to trash her chief rival for the nomination of her own party.  Either speaking directly or through surrogates, Senator Clinton dropped hints that Senator Obama is a Muslim, implied that he and/or his wife are unpatriotic, belittled Obama's experience to the point of suggesting that her supporters should vote for McCain if Obama is the Democratic nominee, reminded the public about Obama's drug use as a teenager, and played to people's racial fears.  Reasonable people can differ over whether or not these are legitimate campaign tactics, but it all suggests to me that Clinton's presence on the ballot would be poison to Obama's election prospects.  The president and vice-president do not have to like each other, but they have to be able to work together, and the vice-president has to treat the president with respect.  All available indications are that Hillary Clinton regards Barack Obama as an upstart who has robbed her of something she believed was rightfully hers.  The "dream ticket" would likely turn into a nightmare in a hurry. 

Finally, there are several good vice-presidential possibilities available, who could strengthen an Obama-led ticket without all the baggage that Clinton would bring in.  My personal preference is Joe Biden, who I think would make the best president in the event that it becomes necessary for the vice-president to assume the top job.   A close second for me is Bill Richardson.  Both of them are seasoned veterans, having good relationships with segments of the party not entirely comfortable with Obama.  Jim Webb or Wesley Clark could fill a perceived need for strong national security credentials.  Claire McCaskill might be a good choice if it is thought that a woman on the ticket would be valuable, especially given the circumstances this year.  There are also some high profile political leaders who have been strong Clinton supporters who could be considered, particularly governors who might also fill a perceived experience factor that Obama lacks. 

My suggestion is that, after Clinton has formally conceded the nomination to Obama, it would be a good idea for Senator Obama to consult with Senator Clinton regarding the vice-presidency.  He can discuss a few possibilities he has in mind, and solicit her opinions.  However, he should not offer the job to her, and he should not offer her a veto over his choice.  Consulting means exactly that.  He can listen to her advice, but the decision would be his.  I hope that she would appreciate the respect that such a consultation implies, but it should go no farther than that.  Obama might best be able to unite the party by choosing a running mate who has been a Clinton supporter, but not Clinton herself. 

The above was the text of my message to Mr. Abrams.  I think I may have closed with something like, "Love and kisses, The Bard of Wilmette"  but it was getting late, and I do not recall for sure.