The Mating Game
It's perhaps inevitable that the vice presidential speculation has started earlier than usual this year, with George W. Bush and Al Gore having wrapped up their respective nominations in record time. There's a long stretch of summer between now and the conventions and the punditry needs some grist for prognostication and pontification. Now that the Hillary-Rudy New York Senate race has been canceled, the veepstakes has become the best source for drama in this election summer.
Does this mean that the vice presidential selection process and its ultimate fruits will be overemphasized? Probably. Watchers of history will point out that the only vice presidential choice in recent years that really made a measurable difference was that of Lyndon Johnson by John F. Kennedy in 1960. In an election that was closer than Richard Nixon's razor stubble, Johnson delivered Texas to Kennedy. By any reasonable analysis, Kennedy does not get Texas or any of the nearby Southern states without Johnson, and loses the election.
In other years, however, the effect has been harder to pinpoint. It can be argued, for example, that Mondale's labor support was indispensable to Carter's victory in 1976, but there's no way to know for sure that Carter would not have defeated Ford without someone else on the ticket. And we've seen how a nominee's choice of running mate can hurt a candidacy, in such cases as Geraldine Ferraro, Thomas Eagleton, and Dan Quayle. Additionally, the success of the Clinton-Gore ticket in 1992 and 1996 meant that it was even possible to dispense with the conventional wisdom that the vice presidential choice must confer some sort of balance, whether it be in terms of region or age or ideology. The pairing of two white, baby-boomer men from neighboring Southern states rather established a tone for the overall candidacy, which now seems to be as valid a goal as any in crafting a ticket.
Whatever strategy ultimately followed by the respective nominees, this season's intense speculation and hype may actually be warranted. Like 1960, this race between a sitting vice president and a young, charming up-and-comer shows every sign of being tighter than a Knicks-Heat playoff series. If a vice presidential choice can tip a few electoral votes into a candidate's column, it very well could make the difference.
If Bush picks his running mate on the basis of his or her ability to deliver a key state, he's got a slew of potential candidates in the industrial Midwest and former rust belt, the line running through Michigan, Illinois, and Ohio where many, including many influential Bush advisers, believe this election will be decided.
In Michigan, speculation has centered on Governor John Engler. But the state has gone decisively to the Democrats in the last two elections and one has to wonder what Engler could realistically do for Bush in the general election that he wasn't able to accomplish in a Republican primary that went to McCain.
In Ohio, the names most often mentioned are those of Senator George Voinovich and Congressman John Kasich. Word is that Bush doesn't think Kasich, who ran briefly against Bush for the nomination, is quite "ready" for the job, but Voinovich represents an intriguing possibility. He's a strong campaigner and an ethnic, pro-life Catholic whose presence on the ticket might have appeal in the northeast as well. Picking him would be a bold move and might make a difference in a state where Clinton squeaked past Bush senior in 1992. Illinois Governor George Ryan's name has crept into the discussion as well lately, but there are worries that he might have some fundraising problems from past elections.
It has been noted in this space and elsewhere that George Bush has so far run a very Clintonesque general election campaign, staking out positions on traditionally Democratic issues just as Clinton has done on Republican turf. Should he carry this line of thinking into his vice-presidential selection process, he might look for a running mate who can help him further his "compassionate conservative" image.
Old Bush family friend, New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman, comes to mind as fitting the bill, a pro-choice woman from a middle-Atlantic state that went for Bush senior in 1992, but some on the conservative wing grumble that she has been far too outspoken about her position on abortion to ever past muster, even in a season where the right has shown a greater degree of pragmatism than in the past. New York Governor George Pataki's name surfaced in the wake of Bush's crucial New York primary victory over McCain but most feel that there's no compelling reason to choose him-his pro-choice views would make conservatives uncomfortable and it's doubtful that he could deliver New York to Bush in November.
Since Bush is looking for the point where his various strategic lines intersect, where electoral strategy meets ideological, personal, and regional balance, he finds Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania sitting on that very spot. Pennsylvania is arguably the closest big state in play, with Bush and Gore running neck-and-neck.
Recent polls and the gut instincts of many political observers suggest that having Ridge on the ticket could tip the state to Bush, which would be a huge loss for Gore. Ridge clearly wants the job and with his background-blue collar upbringing, Harvard on financial aid, a Bronze Star in Vietnam, work for Bush senior in 1980, he might be a hard choice to resist. Most regard him as the frontrunner, but the so-called Christian right - Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and company - are asking Bush to just say no. Ridge, a Catholic, is also pro-choice. The fear is that whatever votes Ridge could gain Bush among moderates and so-called Reagan Democrats, he would lose them from Christian conservatives who decided to stay home or vote third-party on Election Day.
A host of others have been mentione as well. Candidates such as Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana or Chuck Hagel of Nebraska would lend Midwestern appeal, while Senator Fred Thompson, who's a hell of a campaigner, would pose a challenge to Gore in his home state of Tennsessee. One in particular who very much bears watching is John Danforth, a retired Senator from Missouri. Missouri's a battleground state, though not a huge one, but Danforth offers more than that. A 16-year veteran of the Senate before leaving five years ago, he would lend what some Republicans say is much-needed gravitas to a Bush ticket. He's popular in his state and, as a pro-life Episcopal minister, is sure to mollify the GOP's conservative base.
Of course, if Bush had his druthers, he'd go with Colin Powell all the way. Their recent appearance together in Washington along with other Republican foreign-policy heavyweights advocating the China trade bill re-ignited wishful thinking along those lines. But on the inside, where those close to both Bush and Powell insist that it just isn't going to happen, and on the outside, where anyone can hear Bush and Powell's straightforward denials of consideration and interest, it just doesn't look like it will come to pass-at the moment. If Bush were to offer Powell a package deal, such as vice president AND Secretary of State, who knows? But if you're a betting man, it remains a very long shot indeed.
And if we're talking long shots, let me just add my own personal blue-plate special: Don Rumsfeld. Mark well, I'm not saying that Bush is even considering him but perhaps he should. His resume, certainly, comes up all face cards - Ivy League wrestling champ, naval aviator, congressman, head of the OEO (to help minorities), White House chief of staff, Secretary of Defense, and CEO of two successful corporations. He was born, raised, and lives still in Illinois. Are you listening, all those who say Bush needs someone from a big Midwestern state?
Next week, we'll look at Gore's field.