I accept the nomination for Vice President of the United States.

Those are the words Hillary Clinton will utter at the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis, Minnesota this September. And no, that’s not a typo; in fact, I will repeat it: Those are the words Hillary Clinton will utter at the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis, Minnesota this September.

You know, I’m not one to tout that I can foresee the future (though I do believe I am mildly clairvoyant) because I wholeheartedly believe to my core that most times, you can foretell what is going to happen if you listen carefully enough to what people are saying. I wrote a post earlier in my bloghood about how I thought that by listening to pundits and radio show hosts and politicians about what to do regarding Iran, you could infer that John McCain would win the election in November. Now, I am almost positive he will win. Why you may ask? Because Hillary Clinton is going to utter those words above at the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis, Minnesota this September. I know many of you are perplexed…? But for those of you who actually are, come with me as I weave this tangled web of deception that will be the biggest political rope-a-dope of American history.

Ever since her concession speech, Hillary Clinton has been very low-key. It’s almost scary how off the radar she’s been considering that this time last year, actually to the day, she was debating about China and preparing to assure America and herself in the coming months, December to be exact, that the Democratic Party’s primary would be wrapped up by February 5 and she would be the first woman to be the overwhelming Democratic Party nominee for POTUS. But of course we know what happened: the inevitable candidate with a wealth of experience dodging sniper fire, raising children one village at a time and amassing 18 million votes (not counting caucuses..? I’m still confused by that) to claim the popular vote was dethroned in the process of her coronation by a fresh face at the ball. Soon after her defeat, she conceded and threw her support behind the newcomer, Barack Obama, and her husband followed in tow. We have only seen her maybe four times since that fateful day in early June. And of those four times, if that, only one has been to campaign with Obama, which she and her husband said they would do, and that was during the “Show of Unity” in New Hampshire. In fact, we have seen more of Hillary’s familial counterparts than we have her. And yet, with all this pomp and circumstance of promising to hit the ground running in order to assure that Senator Obama is elected POTUS in November, one of the most galvanizing political families in American political history has campaigned (and by campaigned I mean showed up somewhere with Obama and spoke to more than just themselves or other politicians) a combined total of once. Hmmm, interesting. Well I assert, why campaign for a party/candidate when you’re going to accept the vice presidential nomination for his opposition? How do I know this? Watch:

This past Sunday, I was watching Meet the Press and in the roundtable discussion that occurs after the featured guest(s), I heard this:

MR. BROKAW: What do you think the chances are that Joe Lieberman will stay a D, Democrat, come the next term?

MR. MURPHY:…I will make one convention prediction. I think Hillary Clinton will give a pretty well-received speech, actually. I don’t think she’ll be the keynote. But–and I can’t ever prove this, but I’ll predict she votes for John McCain. I’m going to be watching those Chappaquiddick poll results very closely. She wants an adult…

MR. MURPHY: No, no, no, no. I believe it. I would bet money if there’s a way to prove it, because she wants to race in four years. She’ll be back. She’ll never stop running. And she wants an adult on foreign policy, and that’s OK.

Mike Murphy, a Republican strategist, suggested that Hillary Clinton would vote for McCain because the vote sets him up to win now and sets her up to run again and win in 2012. He also suggests she will vote for McCain because she wants an adult, i.e. not Obama, to run the helm on foreign policy. (Morgan Warners has problems with Murphy’s choice of words and understandably so.) Now of course, when I heard this, I thought nothing of it because I mean, she is entitled to vote for whomever she wants and after the primary season and her efforts post-primary, I can understand not being moved to vote for the person who you may inwardly feel stole what you felt belonged to you. But then this morning, I saw this:

John McCain may choose a Democrat for his running mate.

Do you see what I see? (Imagine the Christmas carol.)

Now granted, there’s a possibility that Obama will choose a Republican as his running mate as well but all the major Republican politicians he and his team are looking at have at least come out in open support of his candidacy or an aspect of it. I have not heard any Democratic politician come out in open support of McCain or his stances. That is except for two: Bill Clinton and McCain’s running mate (Thanks Rachel Maddow!):

She has endorsed McCain throughout this process and the RNC has already used her words and Bill’s (others’ too) in favor of McCain. Mix in disgruntled voters who are ready to march on Denver during the 45th anniversary commemoration of the March on Washington (ironic!), little to no effort to campaign since early June and a husband who is quoted as saying that his wife and her once opponent are “very close” and you have a dish of deception served a la mode. Both McCain and Clinton have something to gain: he can garner enough votes to push himself past Obama from her constituents, who are so loyal to her they won’t help pay down her debt, and she can not only become the first female Vice President of the United States but also the Republican she once was and always wanted to be. Rope-a-dope indeed!

I guess my only question is: will people overlook this ultimate flip-flop as a guise for political expediency and adeptness or because Clinton has America’s “best intentions at heart”? I’m not sure and of course, this is all conjecture(?) but for all of our sakes, I hope I don’t hear or see Clinton doing double duty in the upcoming weeks. It may just be a change that no one believed (in), but it could catalyze a resounding cry of “Yes we will!” while riding on the Straight Talk Express all the way to the steps of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

~ by thingzfal1apart on August 8, 2008.