A co-presidency?

Hillary Clinton beat Barack Obama last night in PA by 8.6%. The way this was reported makes a big difference--it was reported as ten points last night and this morning. Psychologically that's a lot bigger than 8.6%. If it had been 7 points all night and then crept up to 8.6, it would be a different story. Eight points is in the gray range, vulnerable to calls to step down, while ten puts Hillary above her critics.

Hillary's victory speech was exhilarating. She is the comeback kid for a third time. She's a fighter, and had this amazing line about "The American people deserve a president who doesn't quit." It's hard not to sympathize. When Barack attacks Hillary, he runs into a double trap--Hillary can gain sympathy as a woman, plus it tarnishes Obama's golden-boy image. That image has lost some of its luster. He outspent her 3-1, at least according to Hillary last night, and started attacking her a little bit (about half of the polled voters said he attacked her unfairly, with two-thirds saying the same of Clinton).

At this point Hillary desperately needs cash. If she doesn't get the money, she has to close up shop. Candidates bow out when they run out of funds, as Brownback said bluntly to the first question at his news conference dropping out of the race. Hillary was on Good Morning America this morning begging for money, sounding really excited about all the donations "flowing in," and giving the web address, etc. etc. etc. It was almost verging on pathetic.

So it's entirely possible that Hillary will run out of dough and be forced out of the race. But at this point the candidates seem tied. And I have to mention an idea that's on my mind.

Why can't the two of them agree to be co-presidents? Hillary would be president (since Obama's young enough to have his own eight years in office after Hillary's two terms). Obama would be vice-president. But Hillary would handle domestic policy, and Obama would handle foreign policy.

The response that comes back is, "What experience does Obama have with foreign policy?" Well, that's true. A veep choice of Jim Webb would be better for either of these candidates, to shore them up on it. Yet no one is really prepared to be president when they get in, and Obama could "focus like a laser" on international issues, where he is seen abroad as being a big change in America's relation to the world.

The international situation is so important right now that a VP slot and a foreign policy portfolio would mean major power, and set him up for future presidential runs of course. Could the two of them work together? Perhaps things would get really strained, and Hillary as pres would always have the upper hand. Obama thinks he can win this thing outright, so he's unlikely to accept it.

I'm intrigued by the idea, and interested in what others think.