If you put a gun to my head, I’d tell you the conventional wisdom is on target.When you go to bed a week from tonight, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) will likely be the de facto Democratic nominee and the odds-on favorite to become the 44th president of the United States. But likely is not certain. And in an election season of countless surprises — Mike Huckabee’s rise, Hillary Clinton’s fall, John McCain’s comeback —anything is possible. That’s right, folks: Hillary Clinton is down, but not out.

Her survival strategy is straightforward enough: Win Texas and Ohio on March 4, dominate the 11 remaining contests (particularly Pennsylvania’s April 22 primary) and win a disproportionate share of the still-uncommitted “superdelegates.” A tall task, to be sure, but not inconceivable.

What tactics the Clinton campaign plans to use, however — beyond hoping for an Obama gaffe or scandal — is anybody’s guess. It seems Hillary has already played every card in her deck — the inevitability card, the Billary card, the experience card, the gender card, even the race card. But she has one left in her pantsuit pocket — the dream-ticket card — and now is the time to use it. Starting in tonight’s debate, Hillary Clinton should make abundantly clear that, if nominated, her intention is to make Barack Obama her running mate.

Let’s face it. The only reason most Clinton voters are ordering Hillary as the entrée is that she comes with a side of Bill. So why not make it a meal deal and add desert? Vote Hillary, get Bill and Barack! Call it three-for-the-price-of-one. It’s an offer most Democrats would find hard to turn down. Polls show that Democrats like both of their candidates. They yearn for the peace and prosperity of the ’90s, yet are drawn by the soaring oratory of a candidate promising hope, change and unity. They like Clinton for her resume, Obama for his personality. In their heart of hearts, most wish they could have them both.

Wolf Blitzer raised the possibility in a recent debate, asking the candidates about a potential “dream ticket.” The Democratic audience burst into collective orgasm.

Obama responded first, calling such speculation “premature.” It was his polite way of saying “over my dead body.” For reasons apparent to most observers, Obama doesn’t want or need Hillary — he’d be far better off picking an elder statesman with military and/or foreign-policy experience (i.e. Jim Webb, Joe Biden, Sam Nunn). And even if he did offer her the job, she wouldn’t take it. Hillary would rather bank on her high-flying rival crashing and burning in November, at which point she could say “I told you so” and challenge a 75-year old President McCain (or his vice president) in 2012.

Clinton echoed Obama’s answer to Blitzer’s question, poo-pooing the dream-ticket idea. It was, I believe, a huge missed opportunity. What was clear then — and even more so now — is that Hillary Clinton will not become president unless it’s with Barack Obama as her vice president. At this point, there’s simply no way for her to win a general election after alienating half her party when she already alienates half of America.

Even the most optimistic Clinton comeback scenario entails her pulling something less than kosher — trying to un-disqualify the Florida and Michigan delegations, bribing/blackmailing enough superdelegates to overcome Obama’s insurmountable lead among primary and caucus delegates, even stealing some of those so-called pledged delegates (which, a look at DNC rules shows, aren’t actually pledged). Compensating Obama with the number-two slot on the ticket would be the only way to quell an all-out rebellion by his supporters.

Make no mistake: By no means does Hillary want Obama on her ticket — the Clintons hate anybody who steals their spotlight — but she won’t have a choice. She might as well acknowledge as much up front.

Obama, of course, could and would tell voters that he has no desire to be vice president (which, incidentally, is what every vice president in history has said at one time or another). He could even take a pledge — you know, like his famous 2004 pledge to serve out his full senate term, his now-iffy 2007 pledge to “aggressively pursue” a public-financing pact with the Republican nominee and his utterly unrealistic pledge to have all combat troops out of Iraq within 16 months. In other words, he could make a promise with zero credibility.

I’d bet that most rational Democrats believe that, all things being equal, Obama would make a better president with some vice-presidential seasoning. Now if only Hillary would offer them that choice…