Is the effect of the VP greatly overrated on this forum?

Lunar
Atlas Superstar

Posts: 30,404

Show only this user's posts in this thread

	Re: Is the effect of the VP greatly overrated on this forum? « Reply #25 on: July 09, 2008, 05:11:51 AM »
	« edited: July 09, 2008, 05:32:28 AM by Lunar »

The importance of the VP is often UNDERSTATED too. Here's why:

1) The VP supplements the candidate's image. It's not always a matter of this VP helping in this state or that one, but more like helping or hurting the ticket overall. If McCain chooses a 36 year old, that could highlight his own age whenever the two are together, making more voters feel that McCain does not belong in the Oval Office because of his age. If Obama chooses Richardson, that might make voters who were uncomfortable about voting for a minority even more so, possibly pushing them over the edge (in addition to other things).
2) The VP choice is a signal of the overarching plan the candidate is going to take himself. If McCain chooses Ridge or Lieberman, that's a far cry from Romney or Sanford.
3) Some VP choices have more of a local effect than others. Ones who are wildly popular in their home state, feel a good personal connection with their home state, have been around there a while, and possess a powerful local organization are going to do more than those that have been out of office for a while (Gore's not going to help in TN), haven't won a statewide election (Portman in OH), or haven't done anything in the state in ages (Jones in MO). Bayh might help Obama in Indiana for all of the above reasons, or possibly the same for Conrad in North Dakota.
4) A VP candidate can also make some local impacts besides winning the state. Someone like Rendel can tap great fundraising networks and someone like Crist can save McCain money in an otherwise expensive state by making McCain confident that he can win Florida with less money spent on ads and organization.

Choosing a VP is more about macro strategy than squeezing out an electoral vote here or there, although that's not a bad bonus if it's there.

I agree that there is a tendency of people to say that this or that VP will win a state (or gosh, help out in an entire region) which is entirely false in most circumstances since most VP's aren't wildly popular, well-connected, locally personable state relics that swing voters are truly significantly comforted by. Webb, for example, has not been a senator long and barely won against an opponent who used a racist slur on tape. Portman has been out of office and was only elected on a district level. Not too many Ohioans are going to vote McCain because an ex-Ohioan congressman that none of them knew existed is on the flip side of the ticket (probably not that many would even flip within McCain's own district). Because the VP has to have been in the state long enough that swing voters feel comforted by the VP's presence on the ticket, there are very few options for these two 'Washington outsider' candidates.

Logged

Iosif is a COTHO
Mango
Jr. Member