TNR BLOGS

November 19, 2008 | 5:54 PM
November 19, 2008 | 5:27 PM
November 19, 2008 | 4:19 PM

November 19, 2008 | 4:23 PM
November 19, 2008 | 1:04 PM
November 19, 2008 | 12:43 PM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
11.06.2008
The Right Way to Speculate About Veeps

Just a quick thought on Obama's VP deliberations per yesterday's post on all the people being mentioned, Jim Jones among them. If you go through that list--which, according to MSNBC, includes Jones, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, John Edwards, Evan Bayh, Kathleen Sebelius, Ted Strickland, Mark Warner, Tim Kaine, Jim Webb, Bill Nelson, Jack Reed, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Tom Daschle, and Sam Nunn--you see people who'd bring vastly different assets.

I spot at least five (overlapping) groups: People who could help unite the party (namely Hillary), add national security bona fides (Jones, Kerry, Webb, Reed, Biden, Nunn), appeal to a swing constituency (Sebelius, Strickland, Warner, Kaine, Webb, Nelson, Nunn), who would signal "ready to be president on day one" (Hillary, Kerry, Biden, Dodd, Daschle, Nunn), and who would double-down on Obama's non-traditional pol/outsider/change message (Jones, Sebelius, Kaine, Warner, Webb).

Once you break it up this way, it's tempting to look at the most compelling people in each category and call them "first tier," the next most compelling people in each category and call them "second tier," and so on. But, in reality, I don't think it works that way. I suspect Obama has a pretty good idea of what he values and doesn't value in a running mate, which means there are entire groups whose members have almost no chance of getting the nod, and entire groups whose member have a decent chance.

For example, it would be tempting to say that Biden (probably the leading contender in "ready on day one") and Webb or Sebelius (leading contenders in the outsider/change category) have roughly equal chances of being named VP. But I'd guess Obama has on some level already decided whether he wants to send a "ready on day one" message or an "extra helping of change" message. And so, in reality, either Biden has a great shot, or Webb and Sebelius have a great shot, but they don't all have a great shot.

All of which is to say that while all VP speculation is essentially pointless, speculating about what Obama's looking for may be slightly more productive than who Obama's looking for.

P.S. Peter Beinart and Jonah Goldberg had some good thoughts in this vein in their recent bloggingheads appearance.

Update: A commenter urges me to add Bill Richardson to the list, in the outsider/change category. I left him out because he wasn't on First Read's list, whose authors noted that anyone they didn't include (throw Wes Clark in there, too) had basically fallen out of the running. That may or may not be true, but that's who I was relying on for my baseline.

--Noam Scheiber   

Posted: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 2:29 PM with 8 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

lymon1 said:

Not that I favor him, but I'd definitely include Bill Richardson in the "appeal to swing constituency" category.  The *only* reason I think Sebelius has a shot is that I think Sarah Palin is a dark horse candidate for McCain and she'd be a pre-emptive blow (the same dynamic makes me discount Webb a bit, though he's far from out and/or a bad pick).

June 11, 2008 3:02 PM

arsenal89 said:

In general, I think the leaked list at this stage is almost always a diversion.  Here’s a theory.  The Jim Jones rumor is a trial balloon to gauge Democrat’s reaction to a military man on the ticket.  The real military man Obama wants on the ticket?  Ret. General Anthony Zinni, who’s military and international relations record is more attuned with Obama. He is a real “intellectual” General

with degrees in economics, international relations and management and supervision.

June 11, 2008 3:45 PM

WaltB said:

"People who could help unite the party (namely Hillary)" - Give me a break!  She's been doing her absolute best to split it apart for months, and gave only one speach (probably written by Obama) that was unifying.  You've obviously been living on another planet for the past few months!

June 11, 2008 4:17 PM

GSpinks said:

"(probably written by Obama)"

I'm SO glad I'm not the only person in America who had that thought!

I think Obama is looking for someone who fits closer to the original role of VP, while still retaining full credentials in the Change department (demonstrably non-partisan, well reasoned positions and able to think ideas through to completion).

If there is actually a signficant field of contenders after this criteria, he will probably develop additional metrics based on the contenders available; but I'm not convinced there will be more than 3 that meet this initial criteria.

June 11, 2008 4:54 PM

Rhubarbs said:

WaltB, that's ungenerous. The first part of Hillary's speech was clearly taken, sentence by sentence, from her own regular stump speeches. Then she pivoted to the Obama endorsement, which sounded a lot more like Bill than either Hillary or Obama. Then it was back to Hillary's voice with the whole women's liberation bit, though that was actually a bit more rousing than Hillary is usually capable of. That may have been the speech Obama wanted to hear, but the text itself sounded like it was all Clinton.

June 11, 2008 5:13 PM

jemerk said:

It won't be - re Cheney - Jim Johnson.

June 11, 2008 6:16 PM

liberal reformer said:

Joe Biden is a foreign-policy wonk and he has the experience but he will never be selected beause he is a loose cannon at times. It is amazing that anyone seriously believes that Bill 'the Groper" Richardson will get the nod. He has two strikes against him: (1) He helped Monica get a job and (2) He likes to glad-body women too much to appeal to a vetting committe and to Barry, the ultimate boss,

June 11, 2008 9:21 PM

eharder2 said:

I think people make the mistake of being too wonky in arm-chairing these picks.  I like Peter's (in the bloggingheads link) suggestion of Evan Bayh based purely on the principle of a handsome/young guy ticket.  It's these very base considerations that really effect the populace at large.  

June 12, 2008 1:22 AM