Do VP Choices Matter?

CBS News' Kathy Frankovic Breaks Down Polling Evidence From Past Presidential Elections

(CBS)  This column was written by CBS News director of surveys Kathy Frankovic.

---

Would adding Hillary Clinton to his ticket help the presumptive Democratic nominee, Barack Obama? Do vice presidential candidates matter?

The survey evidence is mixed, on the extent to which vice-presidential choices help a ticket win. Although one obvious reason for choosing a vice president is to help carry a particular state or region, many past choices have come from states that reliably vote for one party or the other. John F. Kennedy’s choice of Texan Lyndon Johnson, in 1960, is probably the last time a vice presidential candidate brought his home state along and made a difference. But when George H.W. Bush chose Senator Dan Quayle in 1988, it wasn’t because he was worried about carrying reliably Republican Indiana. Nor was his son, George W. Bush, worried about losing Wyoming’s three electoral votes in 2000, if he didn’t choose Dick Cheney.

The vice-presidential choice says something about a presidential candidate’s judgment, and frequently it cements a particular view of that presidential candidate in the minds of voters. Since the choice is typically made during or just before a party’s nominating convention, it may also be a way to add excitement to a ticket.

That was certainly the hope in 1984, when Walter Mondale picked Geraldine Ferraro as his vice-presidential nominee. Having the first woman on a major party’s ticket may have excited women’s groups, but only 23 percent of Democratic voters said they were “really excited about it” in a CBS News/New York Times Poll conducted right after he nomination. And nearly as many Democratic voters (19 percent) thought it was a “bad idea.” The exit poll that CBS News and the New York Times conducted that general election day suggested that- despite her supporters’ excitement - Ferraro’s presence on the ticket could only account for a gain of less than one percent of their national popular vote. In any case, whatever her impact, she and Mondale lost resoundingly to Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush.

But sometimes a vice presidential candidate appears to make more of a difference. Before the 1992 Democratic convention, our polls showed George H. W. Bush leading Bill Clinton by four points, 36 percent to 32 percent, with independent Ross Perot at 26 percent. After the convention and the nomination of Al Gore as Clinton’s running mate, plus Perot's temporary withdrawal from the contest, Clinton held a 23-point lead over Bush in the CBS News Poll.

But mostly the impact is less than that. Gore’s choice of Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, narrowed the gap between him and George W. Bush from 15 points to 10 points. Bush's naming Dick Cheney as his running mate had no discernible impact on support for the Republican ticket.

In 2004, Democrat John Kerry’s chose John Edwards, who had finished second to Kerry in the primaries. After the addition of the former North Carolina Senator, the Kerry-Edwards ticket had a five-point edge over Bush-Cheney, whereas before picking Edwards, Kerry had led Bush by just two points.

Only one in five voters admit that the choice of a vice presidential candidate has a great deal of influence on their vote - 21 percent said that in 2000, 16 percent in 2004. And in fact, elections are not about the vice presidential candidate. If they were, the outcomes might be different. In 1988, Democratic vice presidential candidate Lloyd Bentsen was viewed as having enough experience to be president - and by nearly a two-to-one margin. By more than two to one, voters thought Republican Dan Quayle did not have enough experience. When pitted head to head, just before that election, in a hypothetical vice president-only vote, Bentsen led Quayle 53 percent to 28 percent. But Quayle and his presidential running mate, George H.W. Bush, easily won that election.

So what about 2008? Nearly all the names now being discussed are not well-known except for the best-known - Hillary Clinton.

If she were chosen by Obama, Clinton probably would be the most well-known vice presidential nominee since Johnson. In the last CBS News Poll, conducted just as the nomination process was winding down (May 30-June 3), eight in ten registered voters had an opinion about her - even more than had an opinion about Obama. Forty one percent of registered voters viewed each of them favorably, but Clinton elicited more unfavorable opinions (39 percent) than Obama did (31 percent were unfavorable towards him).

Months ago, Obama himself was talking about how he was more electable than Clinton, basing his claim on poll data showing small differences in head to head matchups. In our new poll, he leads McCain by six points, 48 percent to 42 percent. But three in ten Democrats who supported Clinton for the nomination in that poll say right now that they would either vote for McCain or NOT vote at all in November (and in her head-to-head match-up with McCain, Clinton actually led by nine points, 50 percent to 41 percent).

Polls taken five months before an election aren’t much better predictors than the polls Obama was citing three months ago. They may even be worse predictors. But it’s fair to say that whomever Obama chooses will say a lot about him. Right now, about a third of the Clinton supporters may not be thrilled about the Obama victory. Just as many of those Clinton voters DON’T have a positive view of Obama as do have a positive view. But three out of four of them say Obama SHOULD pick her as his running mate. Maybe THAT choice would excite them about Obama’s candidacy.

[seah5]

If Obama wants 18 mil votes and wants to win in Nov. he would choose Clinton.

If not he best come up with someone the country loves, respects and knows what they are doing. other wise he loses against McCain in Nov.

[nanging3]

www.thepetitionsite.com/1/removable-
of-father-michael-pfleger

Please sign to remove %u201CFather%u201D Pfleger permanently !

[l00ker]

*** Inviting? More like Juan Mccain on any ticket sounds like a loser! Why would you vote for Amnesty Juan Mccain? You want over 12 million illegals to be given amnesty? You want us all to have to learn Spanish? Say no to amnesty mccain!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by trbundro1277 at 01:10 AM : Jun 06, 2008
+ report abuse


Now that Hill-no one is illegal-Billary is out of the picture, no one should vote for any candidate who even mentions giving amnesty and full citizenship to these illegal Julio come late-lies.

[joecoolswat]

boycot-china....were you offended by the speeches at Obama''s church, making fun of Hillary ? Don''t they know that you are democrats too?....were you also offended by what happened in FL/MI to those votes, with Howard Dean''s desire to nominate Obama?....Please consider voting for a man of honor, John McCain

[libra127]

There is an interesting article on the relative electability of Clinton, Obama, and McCain in today''s NY Times. It is called "Vote by Numbers" by Op-Ed Contributer Neil deGrasse Tyson:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/06/opinion/06tyson.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin

It analyzes current polls to show that Clinton would beat McCain, but McCain would beat Obama in the GE.

[thgdriver]

Did you know today is the 64th anniversary of D-Day in Normandy?

You can''t find one word about it at CBS. It''s sad they decided to ignore the fact.

God bless the soldiers who fought and died in the largest land invasion in human history. Their efforts and sacrifice helped keep our first amendment in place.

[bigsk8fan]

yes, vp choices do matter. just look at how much harm cheney has done to america and the world.

[nolalou]

My wife and I went down to our local Pierce County party headquarters two days ago and offered to help in anyway we could. WE WERE TURNED AWAY AND TOLD THAT THEY DIDN%u2019T NEED ANY FORMER CLINTON HELP AND THEY TOOK OUR TELEPHONE NUMBER. I WATCHED THE LADY THROW OUR NUMBER IN THE TRASH! I experienced it because I was there! Is that the kind of healing that you Obama elitists want?
Posted by boycot-china

If that happened, don''t give up, instead report the incident to Obama HQ, write , email or whatever. That kind of treatment is not acceptable, and I would hope it''s an exception. Obama will need Hillary''s supporters if he is to have any chance to win in November. If he has campaign workers like the one you describe, they should be fired, or if they are volunteers they should be told their services are no longer needed.

[willymack]

Obama and the media that support him are trying to project him as a statesman. A statesman he is not. The Government must undergo change and I give him some credit for jumping on a correct theme. Americans have long been bewildered and befuddled by a corrupt congress with a current approval level significantly lower than Bush. The major problem with American voters are that they are stirred by lofty words, and vote according to their emotions instead of being realistic. The big question is who has enough experience and leadership to even begin to change this nation. Sorry to say it is not Obama. His billion dollar spending programs will be a waste of money and a lot of it will go to those who are corrupt. McCaine does not have to go there (corruption) because his wife has more money than he can spend in 3 lifetimes. He, like JFK is not as succeptable to corrupton, which is why both John and Bobby Kennedy were assinated. Americans better listen closely to John McCaine and compare his reasoning to Obama''s lofty dreams.

[boycot-china]

To DANA417 and the rest of the True Color Democrats. I am a loyal but really mad Democrat who has 7 voting family members. We campaigned energetically for Senator Clinton, but now we want to do the same for Senator Obama, but calling us %u201CYou angry Dems who vote McCain are Morons%u201D does not heal but promote Senator Obama%u2019s true colors of racism and division. My wife and I went down to our local Pierce County party headquarters two days ago and offered to help in anyway we could. WE WERE TURNED AWAY AND TOLD THAT THEY DIDN%u2019T NEED ANY FORMER CLINTON HELP AND THEY TOOK OUR TELEPHONE NUMBER. I WATCHED THE LADY THROW OUR NUMBER IN THE TRASH! I experienced it because I was there! Is that the kind of healing that you Obama elitists want?

[briannorwood]

Do VP choices matter?

Gee, I dunno, go ask Mr. Potatoe Head! LOL!

[flolake]

"Sorry, we can''t process your request right now..."

So much for the poll feature. A common response lately to ALL CBS polls. Perhaps I''ll forego future polls @ CBSNews.Com.

[boycot-china]

Facing criticism, Obama CHANGES his Jerusalem stance last night. How many other issues is he going to CHANGE for the election? I am still very hurt and shocked that it took so long for Senator Obama to finally quit his Church and he only did so in response to quieting the complaints. Here''''s another example of Senator Obama''''s hypocritical CHANGE stance. He complained openly about a white Imus, but was very careful not to apply the same intense scrutiny to his black pastor. What''''s the beef? Senator Obama tried to mend the racial barrier that he has created, but in reality he created more of a CHANGE and divide instead of a healing. Why is Senator Obama lying to America? He lost my vote, because he''''s trying to pull another con job just like the dirty land developer that Senator Obama still accepts money from. Yes, the same developer that was in court this week for illegal money laundering. The same guy who gave the Obama family special rates on the Obama''''s multi-million dollar home. I wonder if Senator Obama is going to CHANGE his story on that one too?

[jsmithcsa]

Good question, but insufficient follow-up.

A better reporter would have explained why presidential candidates made the decisions they did, not just the results -- that''s really what we should be trying to understand isn''t it?

Kennedy, for example, took Johnson as his VP to remove a powerful rival from the Senate.

G W Bush took *** Cheney for balance -- foreign vs domestic focus -- not knowing, of course, that AQ would attack us.

I suspect Pres Reagan and G H W Bush took their VPs as understudies -- in other words, to grow future presidents.

These decisions have gone on since we started selecting VPs this way (initially it was the "runner up" in the national election) -- Lincoln''s choice of Andrew Johnson in 1864 is a great example of this selection and one that is particularly apt given Obama''s speeches. Lincoln selected Johnson over his incumbent VP in order to begin the healing process for a divided nation -- isn''t that what Obama''s always going on about?

Let''s see some better analysis CBS. Get on the stick.

[fuzzybear9]

Hello American Voters

``
Do VP Choices Matter?
CBS News'' Kathy Frankovic Breaks Down Polling Evidence From Past Presidential Elections

``

well that would seem like a good question.

but actually not,

If Presidential choices don`t matter.

why would choices for Vice President matter ?

well lets see, through out history we have had,

Harry Truman,
Lyndon Johnson
almost had Spirew Agnew
George Bush Senior

so ya maybe it does matter, I`m all for having
a Good Reverend in the position.

sincerely Fuzzy Bear

[msthang104]

Obama needs to choose someone with military experience and not Hillary. We only need 1 president, not 3!

[jack3213]

Respect is something you earn, it is not an entitlement. Clinton has always projected a sense of entitlement and has not shown or given clearly enough respect to Obama over the last year for him to choose her as VP. He will not only appear weak he will lose, anyway, in spite of it.

[ptsdveteran]

Lets see, If the President were killed, wouldn''t the VP take over? Obama would be a fool to have Hillary as VP!!!!!! He would be so busy watching his back, that he wouldn''t function well! Remember all those people that were on the Clintons SH_ _ list, that so mysteriously were murdered!!! Obama should pick a VP that is intelligent and cares about our Country and its people. Not one that feels the Country and the people owe her something!!!!! Get my drift, Hillary?

[cyberus-2009]

Of course the VP choice matters.

Cheney was the best life insurance W could buy.

Not even the looniest loon would pull the trigger on W knowing Cheney was waiting to take over

[montana_dad]

Obama will lose my vote in a HEARTBEAT if he puts HRC on that ticket. I cannot stand that woman.