E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS From NBC’s Andrea Mitchell
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton dismissed rumors circulating today that President Barack Obama could be considering making her his running mate for his re-election race in 2012, saying that she has "absolutely no interest" in changing course.
Asked about the speculation by Time Magazine CEO Ann Moore at a professional women’s conference, Clinton said that Vice President Joe Biden is doing “a wonderful job” and that she has “absolutely no interest and no reason for doing anything other than just dismissing these stories and moving on.”
“Both of us are very happy doing what we’re doing,” she said.
White House senior advisor David Axelrod told NBC News this morning that any reports about Clinton replacing Biden on the ticket in 2012 are “absolute fiction.”
*** UPDATE *** White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters Wednesday that the rumor is "absolutely not true."
"It's not a discussion" within the White House, Gibbs said, adding that the president believes that "the decision to pick Joe Biden is one of the best decisions that he has made in the past few years."
The report, he said, "is a bit of a head-scratcher."
NBC's Chuck Todd and Mike Viqueira contributed reporting.
Leave a Comment:
Oh well, the PUMAs and the right wing just won't go away.
I would really like to get through the 2010 elections before we start with more non-troversies...
Is that asking too much?
"Both of us are very happy doing what we're doing," she said.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Is Hilary referring to her last appearance on Barney and Friends along with Biden, Baby Bop, B.J. and Barack and, of course, the Barney Bag ("stimulus"/ "bail outs"/ "union-only contracts"/ "pay offs to Big Insurance, Big Pharma and Wall Street")?
That's how the progressive democrats are running this country (into the ground) and talking (lying) to citzens.
Like they belong on Barney and Friends.
Would anybody put it past them to play "musical chairs" and have Hilary run instead of Barack and keep Biden?
___________________________________________________________
Change the channel and VOTE THEM ALL OUT
This is a great example of how the media (Time magazine) can create a non-story. What did they expect to hear? Does anyone with the brain of a goose think that Hillary would say, Yep, I'm getting tired of the travel and I think I would like to be the first woman V-P?
There is an eternity between now and election 2012. It too early to even speculate!
Thanks Madison for confirming my suspicion about your age...
No doubt when you grow up you'll become a bona-fide Fox Noise zombie... lol
LOL, Have you ever Noticed from the Democrats/liberals/communist on this page that when they are talking about the Republicans and 2012 its never to early to talk about it.. But when they start talking about the Democrats, its to early..
Haha.. you guys are so predictable, this is the best comedy on the internet.
Bev...
For once you are correct...! The Right will not go away. It's the only HOPE this country has for survival.
The Democrats are governing. The Republi-Baggers are not.
Know the difference.
Steve. You might have made a good point but when you called us communists, you lost credibility. If you care to check our "communist" comments previously on FR threads discussing GOP 2012 hopefuls, you would see that most of us said--it is too early to tell who will emerge in 2012, let's get 2010 out of the way first.
Is this 'news release' expected to fire up the left? Is the idea to offer 'hope and change' for the next several presidential elections with Hilliary sliding into the WH after BO retires? I don't think the Clintons want to be associated with the Chicago machine - this would take the spot-light off of Bill & Hilliary and project an image of handing over the WH; "Here Hilliary, I am giving you an opportunity to succeed me!"...Yeah, I can see HRC swallowing that line and saying "Thank you for giving me this opportunity. I couldn't have done it without you".
This 'non-release' smells of pandering by 'un-official BO supporters' to the HRC supporters and saying you will get what you want if you vote for the Senators & Congressmen that I want in office...another quid pro quo.
Bill N AZ -- it's not a new rumor; it's an old one that has floated around a few times. This time Bob Woodward mentioned it so it gets more traction with his new book out. Even if it were a trick, it cannot be compared to the dirty tricks of Karl Rove and pals--they're very good at putting social issues on ballots to make sure the evangelicals vote.
Jody, Iowa - Yes, I understand that it is an old rumor. I ask that you keep the allusions to other issues (i.e. Karl Rove) for other conversations. The result of placing other issues within the content of this discussion is that the focus is changed from the current 'non-news' to ad hominem attacks from all political persuasions. The issues should be - Why was this article released? What purpose does it serve? What result is anticipated by its release? Who has something to gain/lose by its release (Yes, marketing the book is an issue)?
You have too much time for the irrelevant Bill and you focus too much on intrigues best befitting a jobless and childless housewife or househusband.
J. Richter:
Irrelevant? Perhaps. I prefer the word 'amusement' to 'intrigues'. How one spends one's time is of no concern to anyone other than the individual. As I am neither jobless nor a househusband, your comment can be construed as rather condescending to those who are at home. I infer a very high level of self-importance from your comment - was it your intent to be snide?
Bill N AZ. The focus on the topic was there, to make a valid point about the topic you were the one who threw out the idea of a trick which had nothing to do with the topic. I merely pointed out in context of your remark that republicans are good at tricks themselves.
Enough said for what we agree was an irrelevant contribution Bill :). LOL.
This is not news; it was mentioned early this year. I would never say "never" but VP Biden has proven himself invaluable to Pres Obama; they work together well and respect each other. The same goes for Obama and Clinton, Clinton and Biden. Even if it were being discussed, does anyone think that the WH, Obama, Biden or Clinton would confirm it and undermine their current positions--Biden has two more years as VP. The only thoughts I have regarding this rumor is that it was discussed in 2008 that Biden was interested in the Sec of State job, there were questions about how former Pres Bill Clinton would impact Hillary as VP--we now see that Bill has done an excellent job of staying out of the conversation. If any consideration would be given to this rumor, perhaps Clinton and Biden would swap jobs.
cdahl. I did not see your invitation until this morning. I had no idea how close you are. If I head your direction one of these days, I will give notice on FR and accept the welcome mat invitation for a visit and maybe a quick tour of your company.
"Absolutely no interest" in changing course
_________________________________________________________________________________________
That's why we need to vote them ALL out
Swapping rotten apples for rotten oranges just because they're different? It might just be stupid enough to work!
"I am not a witch." -- Christine O'Donnell
____________________________________________________________
At least citizens can elect someone they KNOW is not a witch.
Is anyone REALLY sure about Nancy Pelosi?
I expect no good to come from California.
Madison. Does that mean you plan to vote against all republican incumbants in your state? Or does that mean only democrats should be voted out? As for Nancy Pelossi, she is an excellent, smart female Speaker of the House--just because you do not like her politics does not make her evil but it does make you small.
She's on record having said 1 term as SOS, and then she's retiring.
Anon Monster!
That 'SWAP' happened in 2008 and you are right... it really didn't work that well did it?
Yes, my comment was definitely meant as an indictment of only one party, and not of politicians in general.
Perhaps you should change your handle. InterestedInBickering, perhaps?
Looks like I touched a nerve! ;-)
How do I know that... you instantly showed your fangs and attacked! LOL!
Way to go!
Slow workday.
I consider myself much more of an anklebiter than a troll of bigfoot proportions.
LOL! :-)
Why would Hillary want #2 in 12 when she could seek #1 in 16 after a very successful Democratic Administration and the momentum it would have to catapult her into the big white house?
Why would Hillary want #2 in 12 when she can run as #1 in 12. The way things are going by 2012, Christine O'Donnell will be able to beat Obama.
I won't be the least bit surprised to see her make a run for 1 in '12, either. If Hillary wanted 2nd chair, she'd have been Obama's running mate in '08. She has her eyes on the big prize.
I think if the democrats lose congress, Hillary will run for President, either against Obama, or Obama will pull a President Johnson and decline to run for another term. I don't believe Obama, if the republicans control congress, will move to the center and compromise as President Bill Clinton did.
Why would Obama not run for a second term? He is really doing quite well considering the mess Bush and buddies left him, and by the way Hillary is unelectable.
One reason Obama might not run for a 2d term is his ego. I believe he would rather not run than be defeated. The Clinton's also have big egos and have one objective and that is to get back in the White House. I can remember when a lot of people voted a split government, (congress one party and the president the opposite party) and it seemed to work better than what we have seen the past 20 or so yrs. We need compromise in government, not a complete domination by one party.
sfcret, I dont agree. Obama will not move to the center. I do not believe the Repubs will control per the Dems are finally waking up. All the Dems need do is show up at the polls and vote.
The Repubs lose credibility when then they scream against the Healthcare bill only to want to repackage it as their own. Look at the new Pledge to America. The Dems will do just fine. Hil is fine as the # 3 person.
Everett, pleeeeeease, wake up. Do you really believe that Obama won't move to the center when the Republicans either take control of both houses, control of either house, or slash into the super majorities that the libs have currently in both houses? Then again, from your rhetoric, I can only assume that you are an ultra-lib who has bought into the snake oil of "hope and change"; even when it's presented from by empty suit!
Why would any of you libs believe for a minute that the annointed one wouldn't bounce slap happy Joe in favor of the retread? Our Joke in Chief has already left many carcusses under the bus of those that supported him on a number of issues (and vice versa I might ad; seen any democrat candidates for congress touting their "yes" vote on health care reform as one of their pillars for reelection?).
No my friends, a narcissist cares only about onesself and noone else; Barry is a textbook case.
KFC is running the Hillary Clinton special this week: 2 small breast, 2 large thighs and 2 left wings for $4.99 in honor of her service-Bill the role model Clinton special is next week!
John Nance Gardner described the Vice Presidency as "not worth a bucket of warm piss". Why on earth would Hillary take that downgrade?
Besides, she may very well be fighting for the nomination to the Presidency in 2012.
Hillary! has no ambition to play second fiddle to Barry Obama. Fortunately, she'll be too old to run in 2016. If the DNC decides to throw Barry under the bus in 2012 because of an unchanged and damaged economy, Hillary! would still have to face voters - who know that she also pushed a more stringent "health care reform" when Billy Bob was President.
And she wasn't gona run for President either !