If you hate VP talk, or if you're just tired of hearing everyone's take on who he/she will be and why it does or doesn't make sense, step away from the water cooler and move on to other things. I'm getting my two cents in before the credits roll. I'm also unabashedly supporting Joe Biden in the horse race that the institutional media has framed for us between Evan Bayh, Tim Kaine, and Joe Biden. Follow me after the fold to find out why...or go away and come back when I have something more to your liking. ;)
The first question that must be asked in the search for the Vice President is, "What is the VP's purpose?" I think I can answer that fairly succinctly.
The purpose of the Vice President is:
- Create a Perception
- Attack and Defend
- Don't Get in the Way
Creating a perception is something that you must do to win a campaign. It's a matter of branding. Obama's campaign has put him up there with Nike, Microsoft, and McDonald's. You know how he's done it, so no need to get into it here. The VP is an extension of the branding, and operates on a couple of different fronts. First, the VP has to avoid contradicting the established brand, but must enhance the places that the brand is weakest. Second, the VP has to demonstrate that they are capable of stepping in as president should the #1 person die, fail, or run away with the circus.
Obama's weaknesses with the base come from the appearance that he's run to the center on things like FISA and perhaps trade. His weakness, as projected from the right, is his lack of patriotism, Americanism, experience, and whiteness, and the risk posed to our national security as a result of each of those things. The independents and undecideds are mainly worried about his lack of experience and generally his unfamiliarity on the national scene. The right is looking to play on a lack of faith or trust in the independent/undecided demographic by employing their framing. An Obama VP has to be a sufficiently progressive partner for the left and an established patriot, red-blooded American, with experience and security credentials to balance out the ticket to counter the right attack.
Bayh is the enemy of the progressive left, although he is easily painted by the campaign as an experienced, patriotic American with nothing particularly threatening or exotic to pick at. Indiana is a safe place to balance out Indonesia, in other words. He has little security cred, and even hurts the Obama argument that he was right on the war since Bayh was a cheerleader for Bush in the leadup to our invasion of Iraq. That's a big minus.
Kaine is a Catholic from Virginia with great blue-collar roots and a pedigree that almost mirrors Obama's. It may be that his background is too similar to Obama's that he fails to fill in the blanks in the resume sufficiently to be a decent VP candidate though. He supposedly draws blue-collar, white, Catholic voters that would be described by the institutional media as Reagan Democrats, thereby securing enough of the white vote to win the election. That's something to consider. The problem comes from the lack of security cred, and the scary proposition for many Americans that he'd be #2 in line for the presidency should anything go wrong. He's not exactly a national figure.
Biden handles almost all the perception issues single-handedly. He's got some support in progressive circles, and the Progressive Democrats of America featured a piece in December of 2007 that included the following description:
If one surveys the ratings of human rights, civil rights, labor, and environmental organizations, Biden is one of the most liberal Senators. His composite long-term rating by the League of Conservation Voters is the highest among the senators running for president. Biden entered politics as a county councilman, and began to establish himself as a voice for small businesses, for the environment, and for civil rights.
Although Biden voted incorrectly in 2002 for the infamous permission on Iraq, his record on Iraq has since been the most innovative and courageous of anyone in Congress.
The right can't paint Joe as unpatriotic, un-American, inexperienced, or a risk to national security. He's been around a very long time and has a strong record on foreign affairs and national security thanks to his chairmanship of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, of which Obama is currently a member. He's also a vocal regular on the Sunday morning news shows, so he has a familiar face. About the only drawback to that is that his famous face is accompanied by a famous mouth, which plays well with his allies, but not so much with his detractors. That brings me to point #2.
Attacking and defending is an important function of the Vice Presidential candidate. This is true both in the campaign as well as the administration. The president has to be poised, cool, collected, and positioned as the rational wise man/woman at the helm. The VP can be an attack dog, sniping, growling, biting, and bullying those who would stand in the way of the president's agenda. Cheney was brilliant at it, although he used there is such a thing as "too far" and he certainly made a habit of crossing that line on a daily basis, with no conscience to speak of. Biden is a great boxer in the national media. When Bush spoke from Israel's Knesset in May, calling out Obama in so many words, Biden leaped to the rescue saying:
"This is bullshit. This is malarkey. This is outrageous. Outrageous for the president of the United States to go to a foreign country, sit in the Knesset ... and make this kind of ridiculous statement."
A lengthier statement from the Center for American Progress was aired on CSPAN in which Biden takes Bush and McCain to task for their public positions on diplomacy. Tell me you can't get behind this kind of attack from an Obama VP:
Another clip that I think illustrates the force of his personality, if nothing else, is this gem from the questioning of Attorney General Mukasey on the politicization of his department:
Of course, the same loaded gun has gone off in his own face in recent days as well with some insensitive remarks about Indian-Americans and Indian immigrants, as well as a poorly phrased comment on Obama himself as the first articulate, legitimate African-American candidate, or something to that effect. You win some and you lose some with the man, but he isn't afraid to get his hands dirty. The benefit of a Biden VP in this regard is that he's got a long standing presence on the talk programs that affords him a certain leeway and status. If McCain has the media in his pocket in some way, Biden can boast a little advantage as well. He can go out there, throw around his weight a bit, and it won't make waves the way it might with a less familiar figure.
Just to provide a little contrast, I thought I'd throw up a recent clip of Kaine trying to defend himself against some Karl Rove attacks. I think he does a fair job, but the criticisms that Rove throws out there could stick and frankly I think the response is defensive. If you're defending, you're losing:
The VP job in an administration is something akin to an executive whip. Someone in that position has to be able to descend on Congress, round up the usual suspects, whip them into following the party line, and ramming through legislation via the force of his/her personality. Bayh and Kaine have no such standing in the Congress. Biden knows the place like the back of his hand and is such a high profile member that I would think he should have no problem shaking the place down in the event of any trouble. He knows enough of the people on both sides of the aisle to use sugar when needed, and he carries enough fire in his belly to use salt when required. I like him in this regard, and I think it may be his strongest value point as a VP, although it may not show up in conventional thinking right away.
Not getting in the way is also very important. The Obama campaign is a well-oiled machine and has stayed on message brilliantly. A VP in this environment must also be able to understand the goal, the tactics and strategy, and execute them according to the plan. There's no reason to believe that Bayh or Kaine would be any different than Biden in this respect. In fact, Biden's greatest strength could be a weakness in comparison to a good number of the other potential VPs. In the end, I think Joe Biden has been a great Democrat though, and he's been the carrier of the Party torch for a good many years without any difficulty. He's done what he's been asked. He's led when the time has been right, and he's followed by standing back when the time has required him to do so. He knows this is Obama's show. He knows his role and he'd execute it with all the vigor and passion that he could muster.
One more important job for the Vice President that fits both the perception category and stands on its own as a fourth potential job is the notion that the Vice President should be someone that you can trust to be president if need arises. I mentioned this a bit earlier, but it's worth exploring a bit more in context here. Biden can be president. I doubt anyone would seriously question that from a purely practical standpoint. One might argue about what kind of president he would be, but the resume and the experience are there. He'd take the 3am phone call and nail it. He'd project strength and it's easy to close your eyes and conjure up an image of him at the Oval Office desk addressing the nation on some major event of the time. That's good.
Now, close your eyes and try to picture Evan Bayh making that critical address. Finished? Now try Kaine. Okay? If you keep playing that game, keeping in mind both your own personal perception and the likely perception of the larger voting public, you'll start to get an idea of the importance of this game. Hillary Clinton would obviously pass. Gore would pass. Would Richardson? Dodd? Feingold? Nunn? Hagel? I would tend to think most of the American people would feel on edge about any of the final list of people named. Remember, it's not a matter of actual ability. It's a matter of perception. It's a matter of trust and familiarity. In some years this is less important. With Obama it's critical. There are already enough people out there who doubt him for his race, his lack of experience, or his fresh face. Pairing him with another marginally familiar character does little to allay the fears that are floating out there.
To play this game with McCain, we can plug in Meg Whitman and watch him lose. Would America allow a 72-year old president to be backed up by the CEO of E-Bay? Don't answer that. How about Joe Lieberman? He's hated by the left and the right, and no one wants him as the #1 guy. No one. Tim Pawlenty? Who? No one knows Tim Pawlenty. If you're McCain, the last thing you want to be doing is spending your time and money introducing the nation to your VP. You can go down the list of the characters and play the "close your eyes" game we just played. Charlie Crist? Kay Bailey Hutchinson? Bobby Jindal?
I think he'd do well to pick either Romney or Tom Ridge for the spot, if only because a 72-year old president needs a good, familiar, steady backup. Romney looks the part as does Ridge. Ridge has some baggage that would hurt him with the base, but he was on TV enough as the Director of Homeland Security to give the American people that safe, fuzzy feeling. The "close your eyes" game might confirm it with you if you're honest with yourself. This is the simplistic, but all important litmus test for a VP. It's heightened importance in this campaign comes from the makeup of the candidates. One is a but unfamiliar and some would argue untested. The other is old as dirt and losing his marbles. Play the game and ask the question. I say Biden passes with flying colors.
There is little doubt that Joe Biden will have a spot in an Obama administration, be it the Vice Presidency or the Secretary of State job. He'd excel in either. The value of Biden in the VP slot is his ability to control the narrative, stay on the attack, frame the debate, and lend some experience and credibility on foreign policy to the Obama campaign, already strong on the economy in the eyes of the voting public. If you neutralize that McCain advantage, even though it's false in the first place, you neutralize his entire campaign. If you eliminate the doubt about who's going to keep the babies safe at night by choosing a known entity with a strong resume you end the debate. If you choose someone who takes the media bull by the horns and swings it around like a rag doll, you free up the "hope" candidate to stay on the positive. For those reasons and many more I like Joe Biden. Say what you will...
UPDATE: Andrew Romano over at Newsweek's blog "Stumper" also makes an interesting case that covers my diary and some of the comments below as well. Good supplemental reading.