Picking a V.P.
Here’s what I think presidential candidates should look for when selecting a V.P., in order of importance:
* Able to handle the job of President.
I know it’s simplistic and almost naive, but shouldn’t that be a major factor? I don’t want the first black guy nominated by a political party and a man so old he looks like Colonel Tigh without the makeup picking Gov. Yahoo from Shitslvania just because the governor will help bring in a few more working-class Hispanic Jewish white voters.
There’s a higher than usual chance that the next President of the United States will not serve a full term in office. Besides racism and age, a terrorist assassination is a real threat. If you wanted to damage the psyche and disrupt the political system of America in the worst way possible, and not even have to spend much money or resources to do so, what better option is there than assassinating a President?
I know security has increased since the days when a nut like John Hinckley could run up to a President and take a few shots, but do you really think it couldn’t be done? I’m a little surprised it hasn’t been tried yet.
* Loves campaigning.
With the long campaign season and amount of media coverage we’ve had so far, it’s easy for anyone watching the process half-closely to wonder how anyone could be unfamiliar with the candidates at this point. But there are plenty of people who aren’t paying much attention and won’t for months, if at all. This is a particular problem for Obama, whose newness makes him unfamiliar to many voters. Going from town to town and holding rallies and meetings to get undecided voters a few hundred at a time is part of what it takes to win, and you need a V.P. who is personable and enjoys the process.
As long as this campaign season has been, I think Obama is in a race against the clock. His biggest obstacle to the presidency is unfamiliarity, and sometimes you just have to meet with people personally to get them comfortable with you. It’s a slow process that takes lots of time, and he needs a V.P. who could double his efforts.
On a related note, the traditional V.P. role in recent campaigns has been of attack dog–making vicious attacks that the presidential candidate wants to be heard but not from his own mouth.
* Not a gaffe machine / no skeletons in the closet
Self-explanatory. The V.P. candidate shouldn’t interfere with the campaign’s message and be a distraction.
I don’t put any value in picking someone to win a state. When has that worked recently? Edwards couldn’t help Kerry win N.C. in 2004, and Gore lost his home state in 2000.
I don’t put a lot of value either in picking someone to counter a candidate’s perceived demographic (e.g. older voters) or political deficiencies (e.g. foreign policy). Sure, that’s a nice bonus, but you could probably get as many votes picking someone that compliments a candidate’s strengths and getting higher turnout from your base.
George Bush picked Dick Cheney, someone the opposite of him in terms of age and foreign policy experience. Bill Clinton picked Al Gore, another young Southerner. They both won. What lesson can you draw from that?
I have no idea who Obama or McCain will pick. I’m surprised though how few people are mentioning John Edwards as a pick for V.P. I think he would make a good choice.
Update: As much as I hate the idea, by my own criteria, Hillary Clinton would be a good choice too.