3 ways to pick a veep
By Thomas Oliphant | June 22, 2004
WASHINGTON
THE HISTORY that John Kerry has been poring over as background for his running mate selection discloses some interesting and relevant points.
The truly helpful choices since FDR in Chicago 72 years ago (Kerry's starting point), have added real value for established presidential nominees or made important points about new-face candidates.
John Nance Garner for FDR and LBJ for John Kennedy in 1960 added the heft of top Democratic congressional leaders as well as a critical state (Texas) and cement for Yankee nominees in a basically solid South.
George H.W. Bush for Ronald Reagan grafted moderation onto a conservative movement in 1980. Walter Mondale and Dick Cheney made new or inexperienced nominees Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush seem more anchored. A surprising nod by Bill Clinton to Al Gore in 1992 stands almost alone for its important reaffirmation of Clinton's intent to be a New Democrat by adding another New Democrat from a border state to his Middle America-centered candidacy.
In historical context, John Kerry is an interesting hybrid -- an experienced national politician from the Northeast with strong national security credentials but weak roots in his party, and someone not yet well known to the country. That is about to change big time, which is why his choice will be so revealing.
I'm told Kerry is fond of the cliche that veeps ultimately don't matter the way the top guy does. It's a cliche because it's true, but it is a sign of hubris to belabor the point. In modern politics the choice begins one of the three major periods during which voters take a serious look at the candidates -- call it the convention period, which starts with a pre-convention veep choice and ends with the presidential acceptance speech. Along with the fall debates and the campaign's final week, the period is crucial, and the running mate choice starts it.
Kerry has three ideas in front of him -- a tactical choice, a national security move, and something from the value-added tradition. This year, tactics involve the Midwest and Florida -- in this case former House Democratic leader Dick Gephardt, Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack, and Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana; or Florida Senators Bob Graham and Bill Nelson.
The national security move, which would be a surprise given Kerry's credentials in this area, is based on current events. It would require a dark horse on the order of nominal Republican Bill Cohen of Maine, Clinton's second-term defense secretary.
The value-added idea is where Senator John Edwards of North Carolina dominates. Edwards has been Kerry's principal surrogate since the primaries ended. Most recently, over the weekend, he was dispatched to party conventions in Louisiana and Texas. The result, no matter where he goes in the country, is always the same -- another dramatic demonstration of Edwards's ability to communicate with ordinary people, not all of them partisan or even Democrats, followed by a clamor for him to be the veep.
It is not simply or merely the gift of gab. What Edwards brings is an understanding of why most American families are worried about their present and future instead of just watching the last quarter's job statistics. His appeal, uniquely documented during and after the primaries, is both national and Southern, and it has an added, generational element. In addition to an ability to reach the relatively nonpartisan directly, Edwards has also shown a unique ability to reach younger voters -- as befits a 51-year-old who represents a post-9/11 world.
It is sometimes forgotten, moreover, that Edwards is also experienced from his Senate term as a centrist. Thrust into the limelight by an unabashed admirer, named Kennedy, it was Edwards who angered his own trial lawyer supporters by fashioning an approach to reforming the civil litigation system that avoided surrender to the special interests seeking exemption from responsibility for malpractice, but instead focused on curing real defects. This was one reason Kerry pal John McCain came aboard the bandwagon for a patients' Bill of Rights.
It was also Edwards who was chosen to shape the constitutional case for campaign finance reform, another topic dear to Kerry's and McCain's hearts, when it was before the Senate. Edwards's arguments turned out to be both accurate and eloquent when the law was basically upheld by the Supreme Court.
I remain unimpressed by the oft-heard case that their chemistry is awkward. I am more impressed by Kerry's ability to consider the advantages he will gain by extending himself and his candidacy.
Tactical ideas are natural in what still looks like a close election. Concentrating on the security front is also natural, though if Kerry himself doesn't fill this bill, no veep can help him. It is the strategic choice that beckons most persuasively. There are many ways Kerry can get heads to nod approvingly. Edwards would change the national equation; he is the best new breeze to hit the national Democratic Party since Bill Clinton.
Thomas Oliphant's e-mail address is oliphant@globe.com. |
