Andrea Mitchell reported on tonight’s NBC evening news broadcast that two individuals close to the transition have stated that Hillary Clinton is under consideration for Secretary of State.
Hillary Clinton at the Harkin Steak Fry in Indianola, Iowa in September 2007 and Senator Tom Harkin (D) (right, background).
Okay. That would make sense.
But I would rather she be the Senate Majority Leader. She could run the joint and get stuff done. Bill would be a good Secretary of State. Or Ambassador to the UN.
…sort of like the Chet Edwards as VP speculation was last summer. Put HRC’s name out there, and the media feeding frenzy ensues–while they quietly vet the real candidate(s) out of sight, out of mind.
I’d prefer HRC as Majority Leader also, but wouldn’t mind her at State if it comes down to it.
Andy
Alton IL
was – “what a waste of Hillary”.
Maybe because I think she has the capability of being the next Ted Kennedy in the Senate if left to her own devices and her own power base.
This rumor actually confounds me because it became pretty clear that Obama and Hillary were not on the same page regarding foreign policy. Personally, I strongly agree with Obama’s more nuanced and peaceful view of the world.
I admire Hillary a lot and would be delighted to see her role in government expand but Sec of State puzzles me.
Also, I believe he also has quite a bit of foreign policy activity. His low key approach should be well received in a world that has suffered 8 years of Dubya threat and swagger.
And I can’t imagine why she would want it. It’s a step down for her, for one, and it’s probably temporary. SecState used to be a path to the presidency in the early days of the republic, but nowadays it’s a short-term position. Still prestigious, but Hillary’s better off where she is and eventually getting some seniority.