If Swann wins, it is by no means too early to talk about him at the bottom of the ticket in 2008.
I'd say something about this, but after thinking about and considering George W. Bush's fast-track to the presidency, I won't.
Exactly. I'm not even saying its good or bad to fast-track the guy, but if he wins, he will be fast tracked and end up on any GOP shortlist for VP.
I should point out that GW Bush was elected in Texas in 1994 and reelected in 1998.
Yeah, so he had basically five and a bit years of experience when he started his campaign. That's one more year than Mark Warner has, and I've heard tons of people say that his lack of extensive elected experience is one of his biggest weaknesses.
It wasn't as little experience as Swann would have were he made the VP nominee in 2008, but you have to admit that it was still very little, comparatively speaking. To my knowledge (correct me if I'm wrong), the only person elected President of the United States with less elected experience than George W. Bush was Jimmy Carter, who had only four years as governor of Georgia (excluding the very early presidents, of course).
There is also the issue that this is the presidential slot we're talking about. People would probably care less about the experience of the guy in the VP slot if the person in the presidential slot had a lot.
