Though we’ve been at odds with Sen. Clinton at times throughout the past two years, we wanted to congratulate her, as well as her staff and supporters on a hard fought and spirited campaign. I hope over the coming weeks and months, the two teams can come together and create a massive force to take on John McCain in the fall.

Last night, the Democratic Party made history. Check out this great picture from our friends at the Huffington Post.

(click on the image to expand)

My brother was on MSNBC a few minutes ago discussing the final hours of the nomination fight between Obama and Clinton. I think he did a good job, but what do I know…I just work here.

By now we’ve all heard speculation about whether an Obama/Clinton ticket would, in fact, be a winning ticket for Democrats in November. This chatter will only get louder in the days ahead as activists, media, bloggers and others weigh in on what the potential pay-offs would be for such a union.

The arguments that I’ve heard for and against the “dream ticket” are all largely based on political calculations. That is, can Senator Clinton deliver lower-income and women voters to Senator Obama in the general election? Or, with Clinton off the ballot and campaigning on Obama’s behalf, does this not matter because these demographics will likely be reliable Dems in the fall?

While I don’t think anyone can divorce politics completely from the decision making process, I do not believe that, in the end, this will be the primary factor in whom Obama chooses to be his running mate.

In the end, this decision will need to be about trust.

By suggesting this I don’t wish to insinuate that Senator Clinton is not trustworthy. However, after going through this long primary campaign, I can only imagine the bad blood and harsh feelings that may exist between these two individuals. Sure, their policies are similar and they certainly share a desire to get our country back on track. But let’s get real; they have been through a tough fight and it may take a bit of time for wounds to heal.

There is plenty of precedent for primary rivals embracing one another and running successfully on the same ticket. I would have given anything to be in the room as Kennedy and Johnson made their amends and joined forces in 1960. Same thing in 1980 with Reagan and H.W. Bush.

There will be a time in the coming weeks “at a place and time of her choosing” where these two political rivals will have to sit down and talk through their issues.

And, while I have been skeptical of Obama choosing Clinton for some time largely due to the politics of such a decision, no one knows how this discussion will go. Will these rivals decide to agree to disagree? Or, will they put the recent past aside and decide to, as others have before them, establish trust and move forward together in a historic run for the White House in 2008.

Well, the Ricky Martin primary is at least. With 3 contests remaining for the Democrats, Ricky Martin has decided to bravely step out on a limb and flex his muscle (political and other) in support of the great Senator from New York, Hillary R. Clinton.

We here at DoubleSpeak have calls into the managers of Menudo to see when and where they will endorse.

Big day for America. Big day for Hillary Clinton.

It is worth noting, however, that Ricky Martin was the headliner for George W. Bush’s inauguration ball in 2001.

Civility and harmony are not words which typically depict the 2008 election cycle. And after what has already been a rather venomous campaign season, it may seem as though the chances of Republicans and Democrats coming together on the big issues we face are at best, unlikely.

But alas, a ray of hope remains.

This morning, the Save Darfur Coalition, an alliance of more than 180 faith-based, advocacy and human rights organizations, released a joint-statement signed by all three major party candidates, Obama, Clinton and McCain, in unity over ending the genocide in Darfur.

While not unprecedented in presidential politics, this statement represents a defining moment in the struggle to call the world’s attention to this crisis. Today all candidates have spoken in one voice and declared that ending genocide in Darfur is a priority of not just a U.S. Administration but also of the international community, which is primarily tasked with handling situations of this nature.

Here’s an excerpt of the statement:

“As we campaign for President of the United States over the next several months, we expect there to be significant focus on the many differences between us,” reads the statement, which is also featured today in a New York Times advertisement. “It is with this awareness that we are taking the uncommon step of issuing a joint statement about an issue. After more than five years of genocide, the Sudanese government and its proxies continue to commit atrocities against civilians in Darfur. This is unacceptable to the American people and to the world community.”

In addition to the statement, the Coalition has taken out a paid advertisement in the New York Times with signatures from the candidates.

The past seven years of Bush Administration foreign policy have been destructive in terms of America’s ability to be a moral leader in the world. The Bush Administration characterized the situation in Darfur as genocide yet, as on so many other issues, it has offered empty rhetoric in place of meaningful action towards confronting the regime in Khartoum, Sudan.

January 20, 2009 will be a new day for America. Whichever candidate is administered the oath of office will be tasked with cleaning up Bush’s messes and, when it comes to Darfur, implementing a policy that truly works towards ending the genocide.

Today, we should all pause and regardless of political party, be proud that when it comes to ending genocide each of the candidates are ready to declare “never again.”

Continuing on a T-Mac theme, we’ll just let Josh Marshall take this one:

If I’m not mistaken Terrry McAuliffe just announced two new goalposts.

1. Hillary has gotten more votes and delegates since March 4th.

2. Hillary has gotten more votes in a nomination race than anyone in history. “Hillary Clinton has now received more votes than any candidate ever running for president in a primary.”

As I said in this morning’s episode of the TPMtv, I think that over the last week there’ve been tentative but hopeful signs of a deescalation of tensions between the two campaigns. But some of this stuff is just ridiculous. Point one sounds like it’s probably true. What relevance it has I have no idea. Point two though is really the kicker. Even if you change the rules and fully seat Michaigan and Florida and count them for the popular vote totals and don’t count any portion of the Michigan “uncommitted” (which were understood a the to be for Obama) vote for Obama, Hillary is still behind in the popular vote total. The only way she moves ahead in popular vote is if you do all that and don’t count four of the caucus states.

That’s right, Hillary’s “more votes than anyone else” total doesn’t count caucus-goers in Iowa, Maine, Nevada and Washington where vote totals were not reported. What’s that about counting every vote and disenfranchisement?

UDPATE: Jonathan Alter has more on the serious flaws in the Clinton argument over at Newsweek.