By many accounts, Barack Obama has made his choice for Vice President on the Democratic ticket and will announce it later this week.
According to most pundits, it's the first and most important choice a candidate for the nation's highest office can make.
Most commentators ask, who is on the short list and why?
These are interesting question, but are they the best questions to ask? The handicap narrative always works -- who is ahead, who is behind -- but it also does not necessarily advance our understanding or thoughtfulness about this important choice.
Let's review, for starters, why the VP choice matters. First, that person is potentially next-in-line to become President. And though it's only happened four times in more than 230 years, the transition from VP to POTUS happens overnight and without direct election.
The VP choice also can help win the election, and govern thereafter. Everyone agrees that since the disastrous choice of Dan Quayle in 1988 as Vice President to then-President George H.W. Bush, the role of the office has grown substantially both in terms of election-potential and impact on governance. Put simply, the best VP candidates in 21st century look good and act smart.
Let me add one more: chemistry. In 2000, Bush picked Dick Cheney (his head of the VP selection effort), a move which signaled a kind of external chemistry to conservative constituency groups that drove the Bush victories that year and four years later. Cheney was a true believer, a behind-the-scenes operative who would do the tough deeds and make the most faithful arguments of importance to the conservative base.
Clinton's choice of Gore in 1992 showed a similar amplification. Gore was like Clinton -- a Southerner, policy wonk, and ambitious politician eager to reclaim the White House after 12 long years. Chemistry, I'd argue, is less about the relationship between the two politicians and more about the external brand they create together.
So.....in that light, who is the best choice for Obama? Better yet, who is the best choice for the nation?
My favorite from the begining has been Jim Webb. The Democratic US Senator from Virginia in 2006, a former Republican cabinet secretary in the Reagan White House (Secretary of the Navy), writer and author of several best-selling books, and father a young man currently serving in Iraq, Webb meets all of the qualifications listed above. Webb has said he is out, so let's remove him from the list.
I also like, frankly, Hillary Clinton. She meets all of the qualifications stated above in spades, and if it weren't for husband Bill's boorish (and boyish) behavior during most of 2008, I think she would be the frontrunner for the job.
Many have suggested Joe Biden is the front-runner. He'd be a good pick. A bit loose of the tongue at times, but a solid individual.
Frankly, I'm thrilled Chris Dodd continues to be mentioned for the job and think he would be excellent. I'm not sure Chris adds significantly in terms of electability, but in terms of governance and external chemistry, it's harder to imagine a better choice.
There are other names being floated -- Governors Tim Kaine and Kathleen Sebelius among them --but don't think either of them meet the three standards listed above. In that vein, I also think Evan Bayh won't do. Nice guy, but....asleep at the podium. I worry he simply does not have the capability to lead the nation.
So, who should it be? What choice would benefit the nation most?
Because I am writing, and not actually choosing, I will take the liberty of making three (!) choices.
First, either Chris Dodd or Joe Biden. Experience, gravitas, ballast, etc. Just what the ticket needs.
But if not them, and if Obama thinks he could manage her partner, my choice would be....Hillary Rodham Clinton.
If Obama picks her, the election is over. Between the Clinton name, the dynamic of having a ticket with the first African-American and woman, and the power of having yesterday's leadership join Obama's forward-looking coalition, I think there is a strong case to make for her selection.
Maybe most importantly, it's not a Democratic case but an American case. Hillary Clinton knows the crucible of defeat, and she also knows optimism. In that vein, she really embodies the spirit of this great nation and if called to this role, I think she would be a terrific VP.
Stay tuned.
