Talk Elections

I saw this discussed among some talking heads and I was curious as to what people here thought. 

SoS

VP if you're young, SoS if you're old.  Clinton and Biden would probably agree to trade jobs if they could

I don't know about Clinton being alright with switching jobs, though I don't know. On the whole, though, I agree with you.

I voted SoS because if you're of average national political age (55 or so) SoS would be better.

VP of course. You are next in line if anything happens to the 1# man in the country.

SOS = you can be fired or booted.

VP if your ambitious. You get high visability while only having minimal responsibility.

VP hands down.

Being Vice President would be a lot cooler.

SoS by far. Remember that historically, it's very uncommon for vice presidents to be as powerful as Dick Cheney. John Garner once famously said, "This job ain't worth a bucket of warm piss." Dan Quayle spent most of his time attending funerals for foreign dignitaries. LBJ went from being powerful senate majority leader to being essentially powerless, as JFK basically exiled him to presiding over the senate. Hillary may not have wanted the VP slot, as the VP's only official duty is to break ties in the senate. Biden, on the other hand, may have seen it as an easy retirement.

VP

I think you're right, Biden saw this as a way to solidify his "elder statesman" credentials while not having to really do anything.

Opinion appears closely divided on this question.  IMO, it is a close call and perhaps more dependent on the specific individuals involved.

The Vice Presidency is technically the higher ranking job. It also strikes me as easier, due to the fact that there are few specified job duties.  Because there is a possibility of working on both domestic and foreign policy, it also seems the more flexible office.  Much of the office's authority depends on the deal stuck between the President and Vice President.  For the ambitious, the VP can fundraise and campaign for other candidates, building up valuable political chits for the future.  Due to the fact there are few specified job duties, the VP may wind up doing very little, which can become a perception problem if the press points it out.

The Secretary of State is solely focused on foreign affairs, but is the master of that realm.  He or she has a huge jurisdiction, giving the occupant a vast, global platform to pursue a wide range of policy matters.  Unlike the VP, the SoS is responsible for overseeing a large federal agency and has clearly defined (and very important) job duties.  It is a far stronger position to get things done and carve out a legacy -- but the high level of responsibility means the SoS is more likely to be criticized for actions deemed wrong (as opposed to just being seen as a do-nothing).  Also, the SoS can be fired at any time.

Both jobs are high profile and come with their own private jet and bodyguards.

Well... personally, I'd much rather be SoS.

+1

Secretary of State is power. Vice President is a stepping stone to a greater power.

SoS could be a stepping stone, but Cabinet secretaries don't really get the name recognition and publicity that they used to receive.

Personally, I'd rather be SoS.