The 2008 Veepstakes

[babylonsister]

The 2008 Veepstakes

Who should round out the Democratic ticket? Prospect writers and editors weigh the merits and demerits of some of the oft-mentioned contenders.


The Editors | February 26, 2008



Though the Democratic presidential contest has turned into a longer-running show than anyone could have imagined, it's not too early to begin the quadrennial quest for the perfect Democratic vice-presidential running mate. Accordingly, the Prospect asked a group of journalists and politicos to name their picks and state their reasons, and what follows are our sketches -- please do not misconstrue them for endorsements -- of some of the most interesting possibilities. For the record, the two names our mentioners mentioned most frequently were Jim Webb (could bring Virginia and white working-class males and provide some national-security experience on either a Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama ticket) and Joe Biden (provides foreign-policy bona fides and age to Obama's youth). And, for the record, the names of Govs. Sebelius and Napolitano came up as running mates for Obama, not Clinton.

Since Super Tuesday, however, the calculus on the veep question has shifted. If Obama and Clinton continue to split the vote down the middle, all logic suggests that she (if she wins the nomination) will offer him the No. 2 spot as the best way -- maybe, the only way -- to ensure that both halves of the party march off arm-in-arm to the fall wars. Should Obama win the No. 1 spot, the reverse logic is also compelling, though it's harder to see Clinton accepting the veep spot than it is Obama. Conventional wisdom hardly suggests putting a woman and a black man on the same ticket, but if she brings the base and he the independents to the polls, conventional wisdom may prove mighty foolish.

That said, the woods are full of other options, and here they are.

-- Harold Meyerson

JIM WEBB

The freshman senator from Virginia, former marine, former Reagan administration official, and accidental Democrat, Jim Webb has not only walked away from last year's gridlock on Capitol Hill politically unscathed, his reputation has been burnished by the trials. Politico named him the congressional rookie of the year, announcing in a headline, "Anti-war Webb was talk of Senate from Day 1." And he consistently tops the list of notable names in the vice-presidential sweepstakes.

The reasoning is pretty straightforward: He has the military credentials, including two Purple Hearts, and is always up for a fight. As a 62-year-old white man from a "Southern" state, he would provide any kind of balance needed to a ticket led either by a too-well-known woman senator from New York or a not-very-well-known young black senator from Illinois.

He also could, potentially, bring Democrats a red state that would be an enormously helpful addition to their electoral victory map. Virginia has been trending Democratic in recent years with strong back-to-back gubernatorial wins in 2001 and 2005 (Virginia governors are limited to a single term), and Webb's shocker of a victory in 2006 over George Allen, who was at the time one of the front-runners for the GOP presidential nomination. Webb's name on the ticket may be exactly what is needed to turn Virginia blue in November.

But Webb's past, by Democratic standards, is checkered. He was Ronald Reagan's secretary of the Navy; he expressed very public concern about the ability of women to lead men in combat, and he loves, loves, loves his guns. Not the stereotypical traditional Democrat.

more...

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_2008_veepstakes

[GreenPartyVoter]

1. Ooh! I have been wanting to read something on this, thanks!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

2. do we have to have a military man? We need a Latino/a VP?

Since the latino vote is crucial to both sides maybe we need a Latino VP? Latinos were flocking to Bush and the GOP last time and it looks like they are going to Obama too. So that would be the black, latino vote taken care of. Now the woman - do we have a Latino woman from the south?

one would assume that because McCain is a ex POW etc that we need someone similar as the Dem VP. We tried that before with Kerry, nobody was prepared and the GP went for him. Biden is a possibility because of his long experience in foreign relations (Chair of Senate Foreign relations Committee), security etc.

Ofcourse they don't have to be elected officials to be VP do they?

[benEzra]

3. Webb would be great, I think.

But Webb's past, by Democratic standards, is checkered. He was Ronald Reagan's secretary of the Navy; he expressed very public concern about the ability of women to lead men in combat, and he loves, loves, loves his guns. Not the stereotypical traditional Democrat.

He's since stated he was wrong on the women-in-the-military thing, and being secretary of the Navy and opposing new gun bans are only surprising if your stereotype of a Dem is something crafted by Karl Rove.

Lots of Dems are pro-military (a lot are in the military), and lots of Dems own guns that give the repubs at the Brady Campaign fits.

Webb would be great, and could do a lot to defuse Obama's vulnerability on the gun issue, I think.

[Herman74]

7. Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio would be much better

More progressive, 16 years in Congress, and from a state significantly larger in population that Virginia, a state the Dems came closer to winning in 2004. Unlike your guy, Brown was never a Reaganite, and some of Webb's votes in the Senate have been on the side of the Republicans.

[benEzra]

9. Brown isn't all that well known outside of OH and would be a negative on the gun issue, IMO.

The ban-more-guns thing plays well in a few jurisdictions, but is a giant albatross in most of the country, and IMO someone who opposes new bans on popular guns would help defuse the issue some for the ticket.

I'm not stumping for Webb here (I think it would be good for him to stay in the Senate a while and do some good, and my favorite VP choice would be Bill Richardson at the moment), but if it were down to Webb vs. Brown, Webb is nationally known and I don't think Brown really is. Personally, I think Brown would have had tougher sledding in Ohio had he not been running against DeWine, who had equal liabilities on gun bans.

I like Webb a lot, and I think people like him (as he is now, not as he was 25 years ago) are very good for the Democratic party, and are helping make it a more inclusive, populist, and pro-civil-liberties alternative to the old-guard status quo.

[Herman74]

11. Ohio plus the Kerry states would win the election, Same can't be said...

...for Virginia, which would require the Dem nominee to turn at least one or two more red states blue.

In addition, Webb voted for the FISA Amendments Act (Bush spying) and the Protect America Act (more Bush spying). Neither Clinton, nor Obama, nor Brown voted for any of these two acts, and the discrepancy would be called into question by the Republicans, especially during the Vice Presidential debate. While Brown was cruising to victory against DeWine, Webb just barely managed to get more votes than did Macaca Man, so Brown would seem to be in a better position to help his running mate carry his state. Sherrod Brown has more government experience than does Webb. Unlike Webb, Sherrod Brown wouldn't have to explain sexist comments made in the past. Sherrod Brown has never been a Republican, in contrast to Webb, who was a Reaganite, and had to leave the Reagan Administration because he wanted to actually increase the size of the navy (this as the Cold War was ending), the Reagan Administration being too left-wing for him in this regard. With Sherrod Brown, progressives would not have to worry that there are right-wing tendencies lying dormant within.

Finally, it must be pointed out that Sherrod Brown gets a grade of "F" from Dick Cheney's organization, the NRA. Given that we liberals value human life over inanimate objects, we can stand up and applaud.

[Myrina]

4. ANYBODY but Bayh

... please oh please. He's such a Ken Doll. UGH.

[gateley]

5. GREAT article, babylonsister! Thank you -- recommend. nt

[babylonsister]

6. You're welcome, friend! nt

[Eric J in MN]

8. VPs often become presidents, and...

...I don't want a president who voted for retroactive immunity for phone companies.

Jim Webb's vote for retroactive immuntiy shows a disrespect for civil justice and civil liberties.

I used to want Webb to be a VP nominee, but not since that vote.

[Leopolds Ghost]

10. Why is Webb mentioned before Clark? Clark is the sure thing, not Webb or Richardson...

People forget that Webb fought hard for his Senate seat which gave Dems
the Senate. He wants to be a long-term intellectual Senator focusing on
military issues, like Daniel Patrick Moynihan in NY.

Warner's only leading in VA because Warner is a big-business DLC Dem.

If Webb's seat came up simultaneously, Virginians would come out
to vote for a Republican to balance out the ticket.

And Webb only won because he is a hawk -- except on Iraq. I think.

Like the "liberal" Mikulski in MD, Webb decided to vote for Telecom immunity.

Presumably he and Mikulski feel strong ties to the MIC, which is big in MD/VA.

Lots of people work for the Navy, NSA, etc.

Clark would be better, I think.

I would say Kerry, but the Democrats are so self-hating they would destroy
Obama if he picked Kerry (or a true progressive -- say, a protectionist).

Tim Kaine might give Dems Virginia, but he might fare no better
than Edwards because he is a devout "culture of life" Catholic,
so Kaine might get ripped to shreds by both sides.

Clark could probably deliver Arkansas and Virginia both. And possibly
Tennessee. Clark wouldn't have to worry about home state hate, because
Oklahoma will never vote for a black man.