For Obama, McCain, a Shortlist on Running Mates: Albert R. Hunt
Commentary by Albert R. Hunt
May 19 (Bloomberg) -- Over the past 50 years, 17 men and
one woman have been chosen by the major parties to run for the
vice presidency of the U.S. Only one -- Lyndon Johnson in 1960
-- demonstrably affected the outcome of the presidential race.
This is worth remembering as the nation enters the
quadrennial feeding frenzy over completing the tickets. It's a
big decision for Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack
Obama and will send important signals; it probably won't make
much difference on Nov. 4.
``People vote for president, not vice president,'' says
Stu Spencer, who directed the campaigns of Gerald Ford in 1976
and Ronald Reagan in 1980.
``The politics of picking a vice president are constantly
overstated,'' adds Richard Moe, who was Vice President Walter
Mondale's chief of staff and now heads the National Trust for
Historic Preservation. ``But the decision does tell us much
about how that person will tend to govern and what his values
are.''
As Moe and Spencer acknowledge, that doesn't mean there
aren't political considerations, including comfort levels and
contributions that a No. 2 person can make to the tone and
effectiveness of a campaign. This is why two of the most oft-
speculated possibilities -- Hillary Clinton on the Democratic
side and Condoleezza Rice for the Republicans -- wouldn't work.
The diatribes last week from the Clinton camp after
Senator Edward M. Kennedy said an Obama-Clinton ticket was
``not possible,'' suggests they want Obama to ask her. That may
be so the New York senator, 60, can reject it.
`Masochistic' Choice
Worse for Obama would be if he asked and she said yes.
``It would be masochistic for him to bring Billary to the White
House,'' says Harry McPherson, who was counsel to President
Johnson and is one of Washington's wisemen. ``It's like Macbeth
or maybe a second-rate Elizabethan horror drama.''
Just picture the stage on the final night of the
Democratic National Convention in Denver on Aug. 28: Barack,
Michelle, Hillary... and Bill. Sorry.
Obama, 46, an Illinois senator, should also ignore advice
that he pick someone who can carry a particular state.
In 1988, Texas Democrat Lloyd Bentsen was a good choice;
still, the ticket was clobbered nationally and in the Lone Star
state. Other than Johnson, the only vice presidential candidate
in the last half-century who clearly changed the outcome of a
state was Ed Muskie in his native Maine in 1968; his ticket
lost the general election.
No Rookies
Also, neither McCain nor Obama should pick someone who has
never run for office. Politics is tougher than it looks; it's
no place for novices.
Thus, Carly Fiorina or Condi Rice, both attractive
potential candidates, aren't realistic possibilities. Moreover,
the last thing McCain wants is to pick someone associated with
this historically unpopular president: That would rule out
George W. Bush's former budget director, Rob Portman.
What both McCain and Obama want is a selection that will
be viewed as uplifting and address a potential vulnerability.
Some clearly meet that criteria, starting with Johnson in
1960. Democrats Al Gore 1992 and Mondale in 1976 gave a lift to
the presidential nominees, as did Republicans George Herbert
Walker Bush in 1980 and Dick Cheney in 2000.
Quayle, Ferraro
Just as often, a vice presidential choice hasn't mattered.
No one would argue that Dan Quayle was an uplifting choice for
the first President Bush, who nonetheless won a convincing
victory in the general election. Likewise, while Geraldine
Ferraro, the first woman selected, wasn't the asset that
Mondale hoped for in 1984, any ticket he assembled would have
been trounced that year.
As for vulnerabilities, Obama needs a running mate with
national security credentials. The inexperience card, which
McCain will stress repeatedly, isn't about tax policy or health
care; it's about foreign policy.
If there's a traumatic incident on Oct. 20, it'll be more
reassuring to nervous voters if Obama has a national security
heavyweight by his side.
For McCain, 71, there are two prerequisites: someone who
isn't identified with the Bush administration -- if the McCain
mantra will be inexperience, the Obama drum will beat about a
third Bush term -- and who has some credibility on economic and
domestic issues, not among the Arizona senator's strengths.
Premature Talk?
Although both candidates are thinking about this decision,
people close to both of them insist that talk of a shortlist is
premature. Fair enough. Yet it's also not hard to guess where
these two smart guys will end up.
For Obama, here's a good bet for a shortlist: former
Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Sam Nunn, a favorite
of the party's conservative wing; current Senate Foreign
Relations Committee Chairman Joe Biden; Reagan's former Navy
secretary and now Virginia Democratic Senator Jim Webb; and New
York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
(Bloomberg is the principal owner of Bloomberg LP. I
thought talk of his independent presidential run was quixotic,
yet while he might not want it -- he's not a natural No. 2 --
he would bring economic and security heft to a ticket.)
McCain's list would include former Massachusetts Governor
Mitt Romney, even with their frosty personal relations during
the presidential campaign; Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty --
if he can avoid silly moments like talking on a radio show
about his lack of a sex life with his wife -- and Connecticut
Senator Joe Lieberman.
Lieberman, who ran as the Democratic vice presidential
nominee in 2000, is now an Independent and a McCain supporter.
If McCain thinks the social right of the Republican Party won't
bolt even though Lieberman has been pro-choice on abortion and
pro-gay rights, a good hunch is this is his personal
preference.
If you disagree, send in your own shortlist.
(Albert R. Hunt is the executive editor for Washington at
Bloomberg News. The opinions expressed are his own.)
To contact the writer of this column: Albert R. Hunt in
Washington at ahunt1@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: May 18, 2008 08:53 EDT