John McCain has big decision: Who to pick as VP

[nhboy]

" WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican presidential candidate John McCain has a big decision ahead of him -- picking a vice presidential running mate whose presence on the ticket would reassure Americans concerned about McCain's age.
ADVERTISEMENT

McCain is 71 years old and would be the oldest person ever elected to a first presidential term. He has survived a bout with melanoma that left a long scar on his face and suffered harsh treatment as a Vietnam prisoner of war.

Voters do not typically base their vote on the vice presidential choice but they do want to be assured that the running mate would be able to take over if the president were to die or become incapacitated.

When questions arose about Ronald Reagan's age (69) during the 1980 election, Reagan picked one of the men he had vanquished for the Republican presidential nomination, George H.W. Bush, and Bush's reassuring presence largely silenced questions about Reagan.

It is a scenario not lost on the McCain team, which is waiting to seal the Republican presidential nomination before launching a search for the No. 2."

John McCain has big decision: Who to pick as VP - Yahoo! News

 

[Bruzilla]

That's going to be an interesting pick. Although there are a lot of Republicans rallying behind McCain because he's the nominee, these folks also know what a poophead McCain really is. I'm wondering if the real issue won't be on who McCain decides to pick, but actually who decides to take the job?

McCain's less than conservative credentials are going to require him to pick someone with real conservative credentials. Speaking for myself, if I were a conservative with hopes for higher office, I don't know how willing I would be to hitch my future to McCain's wagon. There is every possibility that McCain is going to lose, and if he does you go from being seen as "future presidential hopeful" to "former VP candidate who lost in 2008" overnight. If McCain does win, there's every possibility that he's going to become the scourge of the Republican party by kissing up to the Democrats, and if Conservatives turn on him in 2012 they are turning on you too.

I know we'll never hear about who turns the job down when offered, but I suspect that we're going to be hearing a lot of spin control on the less-than-ideal person who says "yes" to the offer. I'll be very suprised if a top-flight conservative takes the job.

 

[SamSpade]

The thing that gets me about the McCain candidacy is how much I've heard for years from Democrats and liberals that he is the ONE Republican they'd vote for in a heartbeat - but come November, not a one of them plans to vote for him, no matter who the Democratic nominee is.

 

[ylexot]

I figure Romney dropped out because he either worked a deal for the VP slot or was hoping that would help him get it.

 

[SamSpade]

I figure Romney dropped out because he either worked a deal for the VP slot or was hoping that would help him get it.

I think the original article nailed it well - if McCain is going to lose in November, being picked as VP is a certain way to never become President.

 

[SamSpade]

I've heard mutterings about picking Sarah Palin, Alaska's governor, although I can't see what she'd really add to the ticket other than being a woman.

 

[Pete]

I think the original article nailed it well - if McCain is going to lose in November, being picked as VP is a certain way to never become President.

being on a losing ticket leaves a lasting impression on voters minds.

 

[Larry Gude]

Ok...

There is every possibility that McCain is going to lose, and if he does you go from being seen as "future presidential hopeful" to "former VP candidate who lost in 2008" overnight.

...but, as has been discussed before, the GOP is a rather 'next in line' group of people. In 1996, former veep nominee Bob Dole was next in line. So, being a losing veep is not automatically the kiss of death. It can be; didn't do much for Quayle, but it's not automatic.

So, the point is that if you're the veep nominee, that's an awful lot of exposure and a pretty big opportunity; very hard to turn down. I mean, at the end of the day, folks are looking out for #1, not a party or the nation.

It still stuns me to see that the GOP does not have a sitting veep who is a candidate for the next step up. It is just beyond me how this happened.
It seemed like a natural that Cheney would retire at year six and the new person would have some time under their belt before the campaign started.

Strange times.

 

[Pete]

...but, as has been discussed before, the GOP is a rather 'next in line' group of people. In 1996, former veep nominee Bob Dole was next in line. So, being a losing veep is not automatically the kiss of death. It can be; didn't do much for Quayle, but it's not automatic.

So, the point is that if you're the veep nominee, that's an awful lot of exposure and a pretty big opportunity; very hard to turn down. I mean, at the end of the day, folks are looking out for #1, not a party or the nation.

It still stuns me to see that the GOP does not have a sitting veep who is a candidate for the next step up. It is just beyond me how this happened.
It seemed like a natural that Cheney would retire at year six and the new person would have some time under their belt before the campaign started.

Strange times.

But Bob Dole lost again. :shrug:

 

[Larry Gude]

Yeah...

But Bob Dole lost again. :shrug:

...he did. Richard Nixon lost. Then won. Bush 41 won. I thought the point was whether or not it's a good idea to be a veep or a veep nominee. All I am pointing out is that it is an awful lot to turn down and the results are a mixed bad, not an automatic kiss of death.

 

[SamSpade]

...but, as has been discussed before, the GOP is a rather 'next in line' group of people. In 1996, former veep nominee Bob Dole was next in line.

Not really. I always thought it was more like, the GOP never seemed to cultivate new leadership. They figured that like Topsy, it "just grew".

The Democrats have done this differently, either by promoting future leadership in key addresses, such as at the Democratic Convention (which worked for Obama - didn't work for Cuomo - and was mixed for Clinton, who was greeted with boos for his longwindedness). They also have something I don't know that the Republicans have - the DLC. They have reacted to continual losing and thumping to try to find other means to promote their leading candidates.

I always felt that Dole was the wrong man at the time but it was because the Republicans had only one other nationally know person at the time, and he was widely disliked - Newt Gingrich. Dole got in on name recognition by virtue of being Senate Majority Leader. I knew an awful lot of people who didn't know in 1996 that he'd been a VP candidate 20 years prior, just as I knew people who didn't know that Gore had run in '88.

...
It seemed like a natural that Cheney would retire at year six and the new person would have some time under their belt before the campaign started.

That would set an awful precedent, and I'm not in favor of it - a VP resigning for no other reason than political advantage. We've only had one other VP resign, and it's not as though it's the world's most demanding job.

I do think however, that had Clinton resigned in 1998, Gore probably would have been elected President in 2000.

 

[Larry Gude]

How is that...

That would set an awful precedent, and I'm not in favor of it - a VP resigning for no other reason than political advantage. We've only had one other VP resign, and it's not as though it's the world's most demanding job.

I do think however, that had Clinton resigned in 1998, Gore probably would have been elected President in 2000.

...awful? It's been known all along that Cheney would not run. You think it would be awful to interject...politics...into a veep choice?

I do agree that Gore would have won had the Dems thrown Bubba overboard.
Some might call that karma.

 

[Pete]

...he did. Richard Nixon lost. Then won. Bush 41 won. I thought the point was whether or not it's a good idea to be a veep or a veep nominee. All I am pointing out is that it is an awful lot to turn down and the results are a mixed bad, not an automatic kiss of death.

Nixon lost a squeeker (Daley) Bush won on Reagans coat tails. The only person besides Nixon I can think of who lost any race and came back to win was Reagan. He lost the 76 primary and came back to win the primary and the general in 80. Every other person I can think of who lost was tainted and never recovered. Seems the stink of losing doesn't go away in peoples minds.

I see what you are saying though, the GOP as a party does not shy away from candidates who failed in the past. The democrats are notoriously cruel to their past failures. Jimmy Carter being the exception and that was just recently. I think the party finally got as liberal as Carter. It took 25 years.

 

[Pete]

I do think however, that had Clinton resigned in 1998, Gore probably would have been elected President in 2000.

I have always said that. Given the lethargic nature of American voters having 2 years of being refered to as "President Gore" would have been enough to give him a convincing win.

 

[SamSpade]

...awful? It's been known all along that Cheney would not run. You think it would be awful to interject...politics...into a veep choice?

No I think the idea of a man RESIGNING his post in order to help position another candidate for election would be bad precedent. Only Agnew and Calhoun have ever resigned the office - Agnew, because he would have otherwise gone to jail - and Calhoun, because he disagreed with Jackson but was elected VP under the election system back then, and did not wish to serve with him.

However, I would not have had any problem with Cheney not running again in 2004 and letting the position be open to some one else, to make room for new blood in 2008. They didn't do that, which is consistent with the way I've said the Republicans have operated - they don't cultivate leadership, they forage for it.

 

[vegmom]

VP Wallace ran against Roosevelt in 1944 so Truman was picked as running mate for that election.

Gore ran unsucessfully in the 88 Dem Primaries.

 

[nachomama]

I think he should pick Pete.

 

[Pete]

I think he should pick Pete.

I would turn it down. The commute would suck.

 

[nachomama]

I would turn it down. The commute would suck.

It's not that bad. Really. Besides, you could carpool with Catt & Otter. :shrug:

 

[Pete]

It's not that bad. Really. Besides, you could carpool with Catt & Otter. :shrug:

I wonder if I could telecommute?