This is an expansion of an earlier diary from 2008.
The modern history of VP selection by the presidential nominee alone is full of fiascos and lemons as candidates or actual VP's or even presidents. Instead, why not let the people choose the VP?
Or let the Convention decide. Throw it open to the delegates. This is what Adlai Stevenson did in 1956. He and Estes Kefauver had fiercely contested for the presidential nomination; but once Adlai had it, he gave the VP decision to the convention. At that point, Kefauver and John F. Kennedy scrambled for delegate votes, and Kefauver won in a squeaker.
Traditionally, candidates loudly shun any thought that they'd be #2. But once the top slot is filled, there is a brief scramble to be running mate, albeit totally at the whim of #1. The vice presidency is demeaned because, (a) it is despised by the main runners, and (b) it is solely a Putinesque prerogative of the presidential nominee.
Some recent exceptions to this pattern could also be a trivia question: "Who has actually run for Vice President in modern times prior to selection?" At least five:
1956: Kefauver and Kennedy, as mentioned above.
1972: Alaska Democratic Senator Mike Gravel nominated himself for VP (well, seconded, he says) at the Democratic Convention.
1976: Before the Republican Convention, Ronald Reagan announced that moderate Pennsylvania Senator Richard Schweiker would be his running mate, and they did some joint campaigning.
1992: Former Massachusetts Governor Endicott Peabody, Democrat, ran a declared campaign for the vice presidency.
Below the squiggle, I'll mention some bad VP choices by the main candidate, and some alternative possibilities, more democratic.
1952, 1956: Ike was allegedly disenchanted with his VP choice (even before the first election), but let Nixon get the better of him.
1960: JFK reportedly wanted Senator Symington on the ticket, but was blackmailed into accepting LBJ.
1964: Senator Hubert Humphrey was a good choice, but LBJ flaunted his own power by first dangling the slot in front of Senator Eugene McCarthy. Meanwhile, Goldwater chose RNC chairman William Miller, allegedly on the basis that he drove LBJ crazy.
1968: Nixon chose Maryland Governor Spiro Agnew, a relative nonentity who eventually had to resign for having taken bribes as governor.
1972: George McGovern's last-minute choice, Senator Tom Eagleton, had to resign early in the campaign for covering up his mental health problems, thereby helping doom the McGovern quest for the White House. Nixon already knew Agnew was a dud, but didn't want the trouble of replacing him.
1976: Gerald Ford — himself unelected both as vice president, and president — chose Senator Bob Dole for a runnning mate. Dole at the time was known more as a hatchet man than the statesman he later became.
1980: As mentioned, Reagan in 1976 had jointly campaigned with moderate Senator Schweiker, but in 1980 the Gipper settled at the last minute for rival George H.W. Bush, after Reagan was almost coaxed to have Gerald Ford do a re-run for vice president.
1984: Democratic nominee Walter Mondale, instead of a last minute pick, went to an extended interview process, but the still-autocratic result was just as bad: Geraldine Ferraro proved a weak and financially dubious candidate.
1988: George H.W. Bush selected Indiana Senator Dan Quayle, a mediocrity, who was not supposed to overshadow him. Jeb urged that Quayle be dropped in 1992.
2000: George W. Bush delegated Richard Cheney to find a VP, who chose himself, as agreed to by W., with very deleterious consequences for the Bush administration, the U.S., and the Middle East. Bush and Cheney fell out toward the end of the second term. but the damage was already done.
2000: Al Gore's Joe Lieberman was later to become a war-mongering, anti-Medicare ex-Democrat.
2004: John Kerry's John Edwards, like several other candidates here, was a source of regret to the head of the ticket even before campaign's end; and, as later discovered, in the middle of an affair.
2008: Sarah Palin: 'nuff said.
The moral all this is that (except 1956) the VP selection is in the undemocratic hands of one person, and in all too many cases, the choice is made for cynical or misguided reasons.
These instances suggest several possibilities which are more democratic:
1) That the national convention, not the presidential candidate, choose the VP.
[In a way, this happened at the 1948 Democratic Convention. Truman wanted a young William O. Douglas for VP, but Senator Alben Barkley, a 70-year-old Democratic warhorse, gave such a rousing keynote speech to the delegates, that the Convention prevailed upon Truman to take Barkley when Douglas declined. Barkley proved to be strong and beloved, both as a candidate, and as Veep.]
[On the other hand, part of the Democrats' debacle in 1972 was that the convention went wildly out of control, and nominated 77 VP candidates, mostly frivolous, thereby delaying McGovern's acceptance speech till way, way past prime time.]
2) That the presidential candidate propose several names for the convention to choose among.
[Those first two ideas might restore some interest to the convention — if indeed that is to be desired.]
3) That any presidential candidate not scorn the vice presidency, but evince willingness to serve in either office.
4) That one or more teams offer themselves as a presidential / vice presidential ticket in the pre-convention period, a la Reagan-Schweiker.
[Before Biden withdrew, there were momentary rumors of a Biden-Warren effort.]
5) That the presidential candidate present his or her cabinet choices in advance of the convention and election. The team would already be in place, and further add to the campaign repertoire of surrogates. [Eugene McCarthy toyed with that notion in 1968.]
Of course, we've had a few OK VP's nonetheless, while democratically chosen #2 candidates might indeed have been turkeys. They could also bring the same problems infesting politics in general: money, mediocrity, demagoguery, etc., plus built-in conflict with the top of the ticket. The vice presidency has been a mess since the earliest days of the Constitution. But the ills of democracy can be addressed by more democracy, not less.
The habit of this often-powerful office (and often accidental president) being solely the choice of a single person, is inimical to democracy. Avoiding 1972, let's bring more choice to the process; let's have more formal candidates for VP; let's have the people decide before a top-down misfit is foisted on us.