While most eyes are glued on the 2012 presidential race, this week some of the attention has drifted over to who would serve as the running-mate for each candidate.
I thought that Sarah Palin had been thoroughly pushed out of the spotlight earlier this year, when she officially announced that she wasn't running for president. But it looks like she may edge her way back in this election cycle in the VP role again. This week, Newt Gingrich commented that if he were chosen as the Republican nominee, he would consider naming Palin as his VP, or a cabinet secretary.
According to The Huffington Post:
"She is certainly one of the people you would look at," Gingrich said at a tele-town hall hosted by the Faith and Freedom Coalition in response to a caller's question about whether he would consider Palin as a vice presidential candidate.
[He continued:] "I am a great admirer of hers, and she was a remarkable reform governor of Alaska. She's somebody who I think brings a great deal to the possibility of helping in government and that would be one of the possibilities. There are also some very important cabinet positions that she could fill very, very well. I can't imagine anybody that would do a better job of driving us to an energy solution than Gov. Palin, for example. Tell her that she would certainly be on the list of one of the people we would consider."
Some writers are hoping that the Democratic ticket gets shaken up this year, too. Robert Reich at Business Insider is pulling for Joe Biden to switch over to the Secretary of State position, bumping Hillary Clinton up to the VP role. The switch-up, Reich proposed, could be a smart decision to extend the Democrats' reign in Washington.
Why do I say this? Because Obama needs to stir the passions and enthusiasms of a Democratic base that's been disillusioned with his cave-ins to regressive Republicans. Hillary Clinton on the ticket can do that.
The deal would also make Clinton the obvious Democratic presidential candidate in 2016 -- offering the Democrats a shot at twelve (or more) years in the White House, something the Republicans had with Ronald Reagan and the first George Bush but which the Democrats haven't had since FDR. Twelve years gives the party in power a chance to reshape the Supreme Court as well as put an indelible stamp on America.
So, what do you think, Projectors? Does the Democratic party need to be shaken up? And would you be able to get through another year with Palin in our daily political news?