« Do Veeps Matter? | Main | Rays Fever! »

Why Veeps Matter

27 May 2008 05:21 pm

Even though he starts out agreeing with the David Brooks column I was just arguing with, Josh Patashnik comes around to an point I can get behind:

... it also surprises me how little regard some people have for the vice presidency. I've heard people argue against Webb, Chris Dodd, and Evan Bayh on the grounds that their selection would jeopardize a safe Democratic Senate seat. This isn't a totally irrelevant consideration, but it should still be way down there on the priority list. There are a hundred senators, and seats change hands relatively frequently.

By contrast, a vice-presidential nominee is somebody who (in addition, of course, to being potentially a heartbeat away from the presidency) will instantly become one of the four or five most recognizable figures in the party, and will likely be a frontrunner for the presidential nomination at some point in the future. It's somebody who, with any luck, will be popular enough to campaign with and raise money for candidates across the country for years to come. And yet the conversation hardly focuses on this at all. One of the most important things a party does is cultivate talent for the future, and selecting a vice presidential nominee is absolutely critical in that regard. It's like deciding what to do with the top pick in the NFL Draft. Are you going to wind up with a Peyton Manning, or a Tim Couch? I can give you three reasons why the GOP presidential field was so weak this year: Dick Cheney, Jack Kemp, Dan Quayle.

Granted, there are other factors to consider ... But far and away the most important question is: Is this somebody you want closely identified with your party brand for the next two decades? Anyone trying to make the case for selecting a particular running mate should be prepared to explain why the party will benefit if that person becomes, overnight, one of its biggest names.

As far as the GOP's (rather thin) roster of rising stars goes, I think this argument would militate against picking Bobby Jindal and in favor of picking Sarah Palin. Jindal already has a national profile (and a movement-conservative cheering section), and having him as the whiz-kid Republican Governor of post-Katrina Louisiana is arguably better - both for the party and for him - than having him as the (very) junior partner in a weak Republican administration that's facing off against an ascendant Democratic Party. Palin, on the other hand, has no such national profile, and absent unforeseen developments is unlikely to obtain one so long as she's occupying a governor's mansion that's just south of Yellowknife. Like Jindal, she's a great political story, but it's hard to see how that story gets told unless the Palin brand gets taken national somehow - and it might be worthing risking subjecting her to the "losing veep's curse" to give her a place on the national stage.

That said, it's be hard to blame her if she wanted to put her family first for the next few years or so.

Comments (19)

Here's an important piece of advice: If it looks like it's going to be McCain/Palin anyway (and that should be a "no brainer" for Team McCain), McCain should announce NOW or VERY SOON, rather than later towards the convention. There's currently a growing chorus for Obama/Hillary (as VP) ticket (in fact the Dems are likely aware of the Palin phenomenon). If the GOP waits while movement for Hillary as VP grows -- even worse until after it is solidified that Hillary will/could be VP pick -- selecting Palin will be portrayed by Dems/liberal media more as a reaction by GOP selecting its own female (overshawdoing Palin's own remarkable assets), rather than McCain taking the lead on this. Selecting Palin now or early (contrary to the punditocracy) will mean McCain will be seen as driving the course of this campaign overwhelmingly, and the DEMS will be seen as merely reacting. And, there's absoultely no down-side to this because even if Hillary is a no-go as VP for Obama, the GOP gains by acting early. McCain the maverick. Palin the maverick. Do it now!

There's no reason, and actually substantial negative, in McCain waiting to see what the Dems do first insofar as his picking Palin as VP, because, no matter who Obama picks, Palin is by far (and I mean far) the best pick for McCain and the GOP, especially in this time of GOP woes. The GOP can be seen as the party of real 'change' (albeit I hate that mantra, change, change, bla bla), while not really having to change from GOP core conservative values, which Palin more than represents.

In light of the current oil/energy situation, as well as the disaffected female Hillary voters situation, and growing focus on McCain's age and health, Palin is more than perfect -- now.

(Perhaps Team McCain is already on to this.)

And how about "who would make a good President in an emergency?". That's the biggest question of all, far more important than all the others.

Gov. Palin comes out on top there as well.

Ted:
And how do you know that Palin would make a good president in an emergency?

Ted, you make a very good point, but I think 'Hillary' should be changed to Sebelius. She, not Hillary, satisfies this point that Patashnik and Douthat can get around.

McCain's veep should be Palin; Obama's should be Sebelius.

Just throwing that out there...

Um....forgive me if this sounds sexist, but just how is it going to fly politically for a mother to be running for national office while raising a newborn baby? I mean, she just gave birth last month, and she's immediately going to start campaigning for VP? I personally don't have a problem with that, but won't there be some backlash from much of the electorate?

Also, how is McCain going to press the experience issue against Obama if his own running mate has just as little or less experience than Barack?

Finally, what the heck is up with the names that Palin and her husband have selected for their children?:

http://politicalduel.blogspot.com/2008/05/sarah-palin-will-she-make-your-children.html

Here's a tidbit from the article.

Chronological note: It is in fact possible that Piper Palin was named after the character from Charmed. However, Willow Palin would have been born well before the premiere of Buffy

Oh no, wrong pop culture reference biznatches. The Gov's child was clearly named after the red headed midget from the movie of the same name. You'll see I was right when they name their next male child Madmartegen.

Palin's next few children will be named Spike, the Chosen One, Drusilla, Harmony and the WB.

Let's just hope Palin doesn't name her next kid The CW. No child should bear such a burden.

In all seriousness, it seems one term too soon for Palin at this point. She would make McCain look positively geriatric by comparison in the photo ops.

A 2012/16 vice-presidential (or presidential) run for Palin would make a lot more sense.

Too soon, lack of experience??? Are you kidding.

She's got miles more experience and qualification than Obama and Hillary combined (admittedly Obama sets the bar pretty low). And she has a family-supportive husband.

Rob Portman, though unknown to the country, is very well known to DC media and to the old school Republicans. He's also a team player and Ohio resident who has real experience with budgets and trade.
I'm starting to think he's the front runner.
Never took PAC money and never angered the evangelical wing of the party.
The media will spend a few weeks "exploring" his squeaky clean background and give McCain some donuts for the inspired choice.

"She's got miles more experience and qualification than Obama and Hillary combined (admittedly Obama sets the bar pretty low)."

Huh?

Clinton has six years in the U.S. Senate.
Obama has eight years in the Illinois Senate and 3 years in the U.S. Senate.

Palin has six years as mayor of a town of 5,000 people and a little over a year as governor.

Time to go back to JohnMcCain.com and get better talking points, trooper.

Clinton has never managed a government entity.
Neither has Obama. They have zero executive experience.

There is a whole different set of skills to be a governor as compared to being a senator. Palin now has almost 8 years under her belt of executive experience.

Laura says: "Palin now has almost 8 years under her belt of executive experience."

Perhaps you recall the case of the highly-experienced executive who took office on January 20, 2001.

Dumbya Bush, now the even more highly-experienced BIGGEST FUCKUP in American history. I wouldn't hire him to supervise a Wendy's nightshift.

Your argument is inane.

I just want to let everyone know that I didn't write the comment at 7:16 PM on May 29. I would never use a tired cliche like "Dumbya" to make legitimate criticisms of our terrible chief executive. I also wouldn't say "your argument is inane." I'd accuse you of being a Bushpig who's too stupid to stop feeding from the Repiglican trough. Or... something. Maybe I'd accuse you of blowing trannies. Whatever elevates the debate, you know?

http://www.newsweek.com/id/139335/page/1

"Ever the populist, Palin has asked the legislature to pass a bill that would give every resident $1,200 to help pay for gasoline. This proposal isn't a slam-dunk either, but no doubt Hugo Chavez would be proud."

There was a biography of Palin, SARAH, by Kaylene Johnson recently published. It's a good book and a quick way to get acquainted with her background. As for the children's names, Track is named after the track and field season in which he was born, Bristol after Bristol Bay, Alaska, Willow after the state bird (the willow ptarmigan), and Piper after her father's Piper Cub airplane. Don't know what Trig is named for.