(1) HRC can't necessarily control the reactions of her supporters. And for that matter there will be some Obama-supporters-in-the-primaries who will be upset. (They had after all in many cases voted for him under the assumption that he was to the left of HRC.) The question isn't whether Obama could push the choice through the convention but whether choosing a vice-president who on practically every issue other than Iraq is a conservative Republican is going to win the necessary enthusiasm from Democrats in what looked like a close race. In the elections held since Roe v. Wade no Democratic presidential candidate has even dared to choose as a running mate a
Democrat who wasn't pro-choice on abortion--even though there were quite a few potentially available. (Just as no Republican presidential candidate has ever dared to choose a
Republican running mate who was pro-choice.)
(2) "The long history of Democrats reaching across the aisle for defense and foreign policy advice isn't going to ruffle many feathers in the party establishment." Uh, there is a slight difference between the vice-president and someone who merely advises the president on defense or foreign policy. THE VICE-PRESIDENT IS ONE ASSASSINATION OR HELICOPTER ACCIDENT AWAY FROM BECOMING PRESIDENT. (Sorry for the shouting, but some people don't seem to get it...) Even if voters are mostly indifferent to this possibility, I don't think Obama himself would be. Four US presidents have been assassinated, and some (including Ford and Reagan) have had very close calls--and that's even leaving disease and accidents out of the question...
(3) In any event, what advantage would choosing Hagel have for Obama? Evan Bayh (whose rumored possibility drew a lot of protests from liberals even though his voting record was fairly liberal) could at least conceivably make a difference in Indiana (though as it turned out, he wasn't needed for Obama to carry the state in 2008 and he almost certainly wouldn't have been enough to enable Obama to carry it in 2012.) There is no way Hagel could have enabled Obama to carry heavily Republican Nebraska, which in any event had only five electoral votes at most to deliver to a presidential candidate. (I say "at most" because it has three electoral votes chosen by congressional district as well as two at large.)
Nor would Hagel make much of an impression on Republicans in general. They were sufficiently angry at him over his criticism of Bush's Iraq policies--which we should remember were still quite popular with Republicans in 2008, who were arguing that "the surge worked"--that his generally conservative voting record did not much impress them. One issue can be enough to make someone a pariah in his own party--and when that happens, the other party cheers the pariah on. But it never puts him on its national ticket! There is a good reason that for all the talk of bipartisan tickets they never happen unless you count the very unusual circumstances of 1864--and Andrew Johnson's record as president is hardly much of an argument for bipartisan tickets.
(4) There is always
talk about some very unlikely people being nominated as vice-president, so the fact that there was talk about an Obama-Hagel ticket means very little. And what little talk there was about such a ticket (compared to other possibilities) was largely negative:
***
Let's start with the Democrats.
"Rule K" of the Democratic National Committee's own
"Delegate Selection Rules" clearly states that "all candidates for the Democratic nomination for President or Vice President shall … have demonstrated a commitment to the goals and objectives of the Democratic Party as determined by the National Chair and will participate in the Convention in good faith."
National Chair Howard Dean would be hard-pressed to convince his Party faithful that Hagel, who was a co-chair of McCain's presidential campaign, has demonstrated that required commitment. Though he has sided with Obama on the Iraq War, the senator from Big Red country hasn't exactly turned blue.
Hagel as a Democratic VP candidate "won't fly," said one Democratic senator who asked not to be identified. "He's way too conservative on social issues."
Hagel voted with the Republicans 79.4 percent of the time, according to a Washington Post analysis of 311 votes between January and September of last year. Both Americans for Tax Reform and the National Right to Life Committee rate Hagel with a 94 percent lifetime voting record. The American Conservative Union rates Hagel at 87 percent.
Hagel also took contrary positions to Obama on Supreme Court nominations, voting in favor of conservative Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito. And he was, according to some speculation in 2000, on George W. Bush's own short list for VP.
As for Hagel himself, a Democratic senator said that one of the most ardent floaters of the notion of Chuck Hagel as a running mate for Obama seems to be Hagel himself.
The Democrat added that Hagel is joining Obama on his upcoming trip to Iraq and Afghanistan because "no other Republican [senator] would go."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=5390306&page=1