Mediaboss Marketing

Why? There's no part of politics and campaigns more dictated by arcane conventional wisdom than the veepstakes.

That conventional wisdom goes like this: The presidential nominee is primarily guided by the electoral map when making his (or her) pick. The person who winds up as the choice is someone the presidential candidate believes will help him deliver a particular swing state or an area that the ticket badly needs in order to win.

That pick, which is six decades old at this point, remarkably continues to dominate the way that many people -- including many political types -- think about the vice presidential selection process. But even a cursory look at recent history suggests that making a geographic, political pick isn't really a thing anymore.

Let's go through the last seven elections, shall we?

* 2016: Donald Trump picks Mike Pence, who is from Indiana, a state that the Republican presidential nominee had carried in every election but one since 1964. Hillary Clinton picks Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine, from a once-swing state but one that by 2016 had moved solidly toward Democrats.

* 2008: Barack Obama selects Joe Biden from Delaware, a reliably Democratic state at the presidential level. John McCain picks Sarah Palin of Alaska, which is not a swing state.

* 2000: George W. Bush picks Dick Cheney of Wyoming, one of the most conservative states in the country. Al Gore picks Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, a state that hasn't voted for a Republican for president since 1988.

* 1996: Bob Dole picks Jack Kemp, a Congressman from New York. Dole/Kemp lose New York.

See what I mean? With the possible exception of Gore in 1992, there simply isn't an example of a VP candidate either being chosen to deliver a single state (or region) and then delivering that single state (or region). (In the case of Clinton picking Gore, I would argue that pick was much less about Gore being from Tennessee and the Clinton campaign's desire to win the Volunteer State than it was about doubling down on Clinton's image of a new sort of Democrat emerging from the South.)

So if VP choices aren't really made based on geography anymore, then what are they based on, you ask?

"Number one, is this a person who could be president literally tomorrow? Secondly, is this a person that I could work with, that I would want to work with day in and day out, in good times and hard times, inside the White House to serve our country? And third, can this person help me win? And with Tim Kaine, I answered all three of those questions affirmatively."

Notice the order Clinton put the priorities of picking a running mate?

1. Could this person be president

2. Personal relationship

3. Political considerations

What Clinton reveals here is that, contrary to the way most of the public thinks about the VP pick, it tends to be a governing decision rather than a purely political one. (Notice I said "purely" political. Because of course, there are politics in it.) And seen through that lens, the recent VP picks make sense.

Trump goes with Pence because he believes Pence, a former member of Congress, can work with the Washington establishment (and serve as a validator for Trump among that skittish group). Clinton picks Kaine because he is a competent bureaucrat who has spent time in the executive and legislative worlds and who, not for nothing, shares a deep religious faith with her. Romney picks Ryan to help him deal with Congress but also because they are both part of the fiscal-first wing of the GOP. Obama chooses Biden as a trusted Washington hand. Ditto Bush and Cheney. Even McCain's pick, which was a total disaster in retrospect, was about his affinity for another fellow "maverick" who had stood up to the establishment.

What all of these presidential candidates have realized is that vice presidential picks don't really get you into the White House. The simple fact is that people -- or at least the vast majority of people -- do not vote for the second-in-command. Think about it in your own life. If you need surgery, what matters more to you: The surgeon who will be doing the actual procedure or the person who is the trusted assistant? If your kid is a gifted athlete, do they choose what college they go to because of the head coach or because of the assistant coach? Right. So why would voting be any different?

To the extent that VP picks matter, it's in what they can bring once you are already in the office. Biden, for his part, seems to see things through that lens.

What we tend to forget -- and what Biden's quote is a useful reminder of -- is that people running for president are still, well, people. In picking a coworker, they want to find someone who, first and foremost, they believe is able and who they can get along with day in and day out.

Who, then, does that suggest Biden might pick? Susan Rice, the former national security adviser in the Obama administration, certainly jumps out to me -- if Biden sticks to the idea of making a pick based on relationships -- and governing.

Follow this link:
Everything you've heard about picking a vice president is wrong - CNN