Why did George HW Bush pick Dan Quayle as his VP?

[Moriarty]

I was recently reviewing info on Mr. Quayle, and the general consensus has always been that he isn't smart. I don't necessarily agree with this - malaprops notwithstanding - but the perception remains. Secondly, he came from Indiana, a smallish midwestern state - he didn't exactly bring the clout of a big state to the ticket.

So why was he the VP nominee? Any ideas?

My personal opinion, based on nothing but mere conjecture: Bush was embroiled in Iran-Contra during Reagan's administration, as the office of the VP ran the operation. Thus, he faced the real possibility of being dogged by investigations while he was President. So, to silence the political will to pursue that line of inquiry, he joined with an under-qualified VP (while Quayle wasn't, IMHO, dumb, he wasn't experienced enough to take on the Presidency). The public would not have tolerated any inkling that the President might face impeachment when the 2nd in command wasn't ready to be President (or, at least, wasn't perceived to be ready).

[BrainGlutton]

My understanding was he needed a social-religious conservative on the ticket to guarantee that vote.

[JohnnieEnigma]

I always liked Dan Quayle... I still do. I think he got a raw deal from the media...

Just saying...

[Two and a Half Inches of Fun]

I think there was also a perception that he would appeal to younger voters.

[Bryan Ekers]

My personal opinion, based on nothing but mere conjecture: Bush was embroiled in Iran-Contra during Reagan's administration, as the office of the VP ran the operation. Thus, he faced the real possibility of being dogged by investigations while he was President. So, to silence the political will to pursue that line of inquiry, he joined with an under-qualified VP (while Quayle wasn't, IMHO, dumb, he wasn't experienced enough to take on the Presidency). The public would not have tolerated any inkling that the President might face impeachment when the 2nd in command wasn't ready to be President (or, at least, wasn't perceived to be ready).

I doubt it was that devious - rather somebody in the party machine figured Quayle was handsome and would attract female voters and his family was heavily into publishing so the Republicans could count on a number of newspapers on their side, and Quayle had a pretty good election record - unseating incumbents and the like.

Had he been a better public speaker, it wouldn't surprise me if he could've seriously challenged on Clinton in 1996, but once that "doofus" label stuck (as "wimp" glued itself, just as unfairly, to Bush41), he was in trouble. If I could've fed Quayle lines during the debates, I'd've told him to say:

Lloyd Bentsen: I knew Jack Kennedy... you're no Jack Kennedy.
Quayle: Well, Senator, y'all may be from Texas, but you're no Lyndon Johnson, either.

[Little Nemo]

Lloyd Bentsen: I knew Jack Kennedy... you're no Jack Kennedy.
Quayle: Well, Senator, y'all may be from Texas, but you're no Lyndon Johnson, either.Bentsen: I never said I was. But you just compared yourself to Kennedy.

Bentsen's comeback wouldn't have worked if Quayle hadn't set himself up. And the fact that Bentsen had a comeback ready shows that Quayle had made a habit of comparing himself to Kennedy.

[Bryan Ekers]

Bentsen: I never said I was. But you just compared yourself to Kennedy.

Quayle: I wasn't aware that trying to recapture the promise and optimism of 1960 would offend you so much, Senator.

[MovieMogul]

Bentsen: I never said I was. But you just compared yourself to Kennedy.

Bentsen's comeback wouldn't have worked if Quayle hadn't set himself up. And the fact that Bentsen had a comeback ready shows that Quayle had made a habit of comparing himself to Kennedy.If Quayle was the kind of guy who could make an adequate comeback to Bentsen's (rather awesome) remark, then he would never have given Bentsen an opening in the first place.

I think Bush was pretty out of touch with the "younger" generation and thought that Quayle could connect with that demographic, not realizing his VP was just as square as he was.

[robby]

...Quayle: Well, Senator, y'all may be from Texas, but you're no Lyndon Johnson, either.
If Quayle had said this, he would have come across even more like an idiot, at least throughout the South.

Y'all is a contraction for "you all." In other words, y'all is plural.

(I see this mistake made all the time by people not from the South. Why is this so hard for people to understand? Here's a hint, it you wouldn't substitute the phrase "you guys" for "y'all," then don't use the word. Just use the word "you." "Y'all" is a actual word with an actual meaning, not just random "Texas-speak.")

Also, when did Bensen ever compare himself to LBJ?

[Siam Sam]

I grew up in Texas. "Y'all" is technically plural, but it is often used to address an individual. OH yeah.

[dalej42]

I've always thought it was the Spiro Agnew reason. There was no one who could add to George HW Bush's appeal, only people that could hurt the ticket.

Jack Kemp would have overshadowed Bush. Dole was already a vice presidential loser with Ford, plus he was probably seen as needed in the Senate. There's no way a Reagan cabinet member would have been chosen: too much connection with Iran-Contra.

Bush did what Nixon did. Get an unknown. It worked. Even though Quayle was the butt of jokes, he didn't cost Bush a single state in 1988 or 1992.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

At the time (1992), I thought that retaining Quayle really hurt Bush. I know it would have been politically risky and unusual to dump him, but I think keeping him helped keep Bush from getting re-elected.

And I think, yeah, Quayle really was that stupid, despite post-hoc efforts to resurrect whatever reputation he might have had. The man was honestly an imbecile.

It wasn't just a few malapropisms and the evaulation of him by a professor as the "most vapid" student he ever met. I loved that video of him eating salad at a luncheon where Reagan was speaking. Every single person in the room is turned in their seat and is watching Reagan, while Quayle mindlessly sits there munching away staring off into space and people sitting near him give him glances as if to say, "What's with this guy?"

[Martin Hyde]

Why wouldn't a Reagan cabinet member have worked? No one surely believes the entire cabinet was involved in Iran-Contra? That has certainly never been my understanding.

Plus, I think people are over-estimating how Iran-Contra impacted at the time. I remember it was definitely a "big controversy" but the Reagan administration earned its "teflon" reputation. The outrage was mostly forgotten by the time Bush was running IMO--based on my recollections of the time.

In truth Dan Quayle was a rising star, he was like a 1980s Republican Barack Obama. He was elected to Congress at age 29, the Senate at age 33.

It wasn't until the 1988 Presidential campaign that the ugly truth about Dan Quayle surfaced. Maybe he made some terrible gaffes in his campaigns for the U.S. House or Senate--but they were never known nationally. Starting with the election of 1988 and going until the end of the first Bush Presidency Dan Quayle was transformed from being a rising star in the Republican party to being an absolute laughing stock.

I can honestly say he's public image may have fallen farther and faster than most Vice Presidents in American history. Spiro Agnew probably holds the record on this--although Aaron Burr is definitely in the running as well.

[jayjay]

I think he picked Quayle in the first place to grab some credibility with the conservatives, period. There was a serious belief on the more conservative side of the Republican party at that time that George H.W. Bush had very soft conservative credentials, having come more from the Country-Club Republican demographic. Quayle added some hard-right credentials to the ticket, anti-communism and "family values". Remember, also, that Quayle wasn't always a joke (and still isn't to the far-right core of the Republican party). He only became one after he got more national exposure.

As to why Bush kept him for his disastrous second run, I think you can look to GHW's famous loyalty to those who are loyal to him (unlike his son, to whom loyalty flows and doesn't return). It wouldn't be sporting to drop Quayle after Quayle gave him four good years of loyalty.

[Martin Hyde]

And I think, yeah, Quayle really was that stupid, despite post-hoc efforts to resurrect whatever reputation he might have had. The man was honestly an imbecile.

My impression has always been that Quayle was genuinely as stupid as he was portrayed. Maybe not as stupid as SNL showed him, but I've never seen anything to suggest he wasn't quite stupid.

He's also extremely egotistical, comparing himself to JFK and he is, to date, the only Vice President to have established a museum for himself.

[TV time]

At the time Bush was preceived as a Texan/New Englander, Quale came from the Midwest and it was felt he could help draw the midwest tighter to the Republican banner.

Bush was also seen as something of a moderate, and Quale was felt to be more conservative. He was also, as was mentioned earlier, seen as a representative of "youth". And coming out of the Reagan presidency this was seen as a positive for the Republicans.

[Moriarty]

I grew up in Texas. "Y'all" is technically plural, but it is often used to address an individual. OH yeah.

I always thought the plural of "y'all" was "all y'all".

[BlinkingDuck]

I always liked Dan Quayle... I still do. I think he got a raw deal from the media...

Just saying...

Yes, I agree.

I was not a fan of Dan Quayle. He wasn't a genius. However, he was not dumb. What happened to him was a media shark-feedy frenzy. Everything he did was twisted in the worst possible light.

The one that really got me was the Tomatoe spelling bee thing. This was the one where the kid spelled it Tomato and Quayle said that he thought it was spelled Tomatoe.

The media jumped all over it calling him a moron and worse. When I went to the dictionary on my shelf, both spellings were listed.

Shameful. Absolutely shameful. I was young and a very liberal Democrat at the time and I think this was the first time I really, truely cast a skeptical eye to the media. If they could show him in such a bad light over this, how much other stuff are they embellishing?

The other example was speaking Latin in Latin America. It was a JOKE! The people there knew he was joking but the media ran with it.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

Yes, I agree.

I was not a fan of Dan Quayle. He wasn't a genius. However, he was not dumb. What happened to him was a media shark-feedy frenzy. Everything he did was twisted in the worst possible light.

The one that really got me was the Tomatoe spelling bee thing. This was the one where the kid spelled it Tomato and Quayle said that he thought it was spelled Tomatoe.

The media jumped all over it calling him a moron and worse. When I went to the dictionary on my shelf, both spellings were listed.

Shameful. Absolutely shameful. I was young and a very liberal Democrat at the time and I think this was the first time I really, truely cast a skeptical eye to the media. If they could show him in such a bad light over this, how much other stuff are they embellishing?

The other example was speaking Latin in Latin America. It was a JOKE! The people there knew he was joking but the media ran with it.It was actually potato. His spelling of it may have been acceptable in the 19th century, but not the 20th, and it was fairly stupid not only to misspell it but to call out a kid for his spelling of it and get into an argument with him about it.

If you want to go point by point rebutting or undermining all of his "malapropisms," you'll be here a long long time. A few of my favorites are the "What a waste it is to lose one's mind, or not to have a mind..." bit. Of course, this was to the United Negro College Fund, in reference to their slogan "A mind is a terrible thing to waste."

And speaking of Latin America, isn't that where he once told them "happy campers you have been and happy campers you will be"?

And he didn't do any favors for himself when he was first named by Bush, when he came across as extemely excitable.

[42fish]

Yes, I agree.

I was not a fan of Dan Quayle. He wasn't a genius. However, he was not dumb. What happened to him was a media shark-feedy frenzy. Everything he did was twisted in the worst possible light.

The one that really got me was the Tomatoe spelling bee thing. This was the one where the kid spelled it Tomato and Quayle said that he thought it was spelled Tomatoe.

The media jumped all over it calling him a moron and worse. When I went to the dictionary on my shelf, both spellings were listed.


It was potato that he added the superfluous 'e' to. And while I can't speak to dictionary on your shelf, a check with dictionary.com indicated that neither 'tomatoe' nor 'potatoe' were considered legit spellings.

To be fair to Quayle, he did have a (semi-)excuse: the word was misspelled on the card that he had been given. Of course, it doesn't say much for his intellect (or at least his spelling bee potential) that he didn't notice something was funny.

[Bryan Ekers]

The "I've always loved California; I practically grew in Phoenix" quote gets unfairly taken out of context. Residents of Phoenix often make day- or weekend trips to California (the border's about 150 miles west) and Quayle apparently spent many of his summers there in his youth. He'd've had ample opportunity to visit southern California.

Regarding the misprinted spelling-bee flashcard; as I understand it, Quayle looked at it, thought "Hmm, that's funny", showed it to a teacher who said "Hmm, that's funny."

I can't help him on the "losing your minds" bit, though.

[Freddy the Pig]

It's often forgotten now, but the original explosion over Dan Quayle had nothing to do with his intelligence, but with his avoidance of service in Vietnam by clouting his way into the National Guard. In this regard Quayle was something of a pioneer as both subsequent presidents had related "issues".

As for why Bush picked Quayle, he needed both a Northerner and a bridge to social conservatives, and candidates who combined those attributes were a little scarce.

[scabpicker]

I grew up in Texas. "Y'all" is technically plural, but it is often used to address an individual. OH yeah.



Anyone you've heard use it in such a way was competeing with Quayle in the upperclass twit of the year conest. If he did say such a line when fed to him, it would have just let everyone know his foolishness sooner.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

Regarding the misprinted spelling-bee flashcard; as I understand it, Quayle looked at it, thought "Hmm, that's funny", showed it to a teacher who said "Hmm, that's funny."
You don't remember it? I don't recall any sort of flashcard. As I recall it, the kid wrote it on the board, and Quayle says something about his missing something. The kid looks at it and is confused. Quayle says that there's an e on the end. I recall the kid saying that there wasn', and Quayle insisting, but I could be wrong about that part. I do recall the kid looking very dubious and reluctant as he adds the e on the end.

I'm sure the video of it must still be around.

The man was an absolute moron. Wasn' there something about some letterhead with a spelling error in it too?

[Krokodil]

1) For whatever his shortcomings as a public speaker, Dan Quayle was an incredibly gifted fundraiser. That alone made him a handy guy to have around.

2) "Y'all" means roughly the same thing in the South that "vous" means in France and "usted" means in Spanish. One can apply it to an individual, but seldom to a person that the speaker knows well.

[CurtC]

I grew up in Texas. "Y'all" is technically plural, but it is often used to address an individual. OH yeah.
I've lived in Texas almost 47 years now, and I don't believe I've ever once heard a native speaker use it as a singular pronoun.

Once, however, I called a colleague in my company in a smallish office in upstate New York, an office where I knew pretty much everyone well. The guy I was calling wasn't in, and I got the office secretary. I wanted to ask how everyone up there is doing, and what I said was "How are y'all?" She replied "I'm great, thank you." I realized then that she thought I was using it as a singular pronoun.

Maybe people get the impression that it's sometimes a singular pronoun from similar misinterpretations?

[DSYoungEsq]

Anyone you've heard use it in such a way was competeing with Quayle in the upperclass twit of the year conest. If he did say such a line when fed to him, it would have just let everyone know his foolishness sooner.
There are plenty of people in the South who use "y'all" to refer to a singular person. I suspect, without making a study of it, that this is likely to be a regional thing to some extent. But I've had numerous acquaintances over the years who did it, and trust me, I'm not used to hanging out with really uneducated people. ;)

[Frylock]

Anyone you've heard use it in such a way was competeing with Quayle in the upperclass twit of the year conest. If he did say such a line when fed to him, it would have just let everyone know his foolishness sooner.

No. Another Texan here to say, lower class uneducated people just going about their daily business use "y'all" in the singular quite regularly.

-FrL-

[Death of Rats]

I've lived in Texas almost 47 years now, and I don't believe I've ever once heard a native speaker use it as a singular pronoun.

Once, however, I called a colleague in my company in a smallish office in upstate New York, an office where I knew pretty much everyone well. The guy I was calling wasn't in, and I got the office secretary. I wanted to ask how everyone up there is doing, and what I said was "How are y'all?" She replied "I'm great, thank you." I realized then that she thought I was using it as a singular pronoun.

Maybe people get the impression that it's sometimes a singular pronoun from similar misinterpretations?

I don't know about Texas, but my relatives from Georgia and S.C. have used it as a singular to and around me all of my life...


Unless I have a multiple personality syndrome I am not aware of. :)

[Little Nemo]

Quayle: I wasn't aware that trying to recapture the promise and optimism of 1960 would offend you so much, Senator.Here's the actual transcript:Tom Brokaw: Senator Quayle, I don't mean to beat this drum until it has no more sound in it. But to follow up on Brit Hume's question, when you said that it was a hypothetical situation, it is, sir, after all, the reason that we're here tonight, because you are running not just for Vice President — (Applause) — and if you cite the experience that you had in Congress, surely you must have some plan in mind about what you would do if it fell to you to become President of the United States, as it has to so many Vice Presidents just in the last 25 years or so.

Quayle: Let me try to answer the question one more time. I think this is the fourth time that I've had this question.

Brokaw: The third time.

Quayle: Three times that I've had this question — and I will try to answer it again for you, as clearly as I can, because the question you are asking is, "What kind of qualifications does Dan Quayle have to be president," "What kind of qualifications do I have," and "What would I do in this kind of a situation?" And what would I do in this situation? [...] I have far more experience than many others that sought the office of vice president of this country. I have as much experience in the Congress as Jack Kennedy did when he sought the presidency. I will be prepared to deal with the people in the Bush administration, if that unfortunate event would ever occur.

Judy Woodruff: Senator [Bentsen].

Bentsen: Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy: I knew Jack Kennedy; Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy. (Prolonged shouts and applause) What has to be done in a situation like that is to call in the —

Woodruff: Please, please, once again you are only taking time away from your own candidate.

Quayle: That was really uncalled for, Senator. (Shouts and applause)

Bentsen: You are the one that was making the comparison, Senator — and I'm one who knew him well. And frankly I think you are so far apart in the objectives you choose for your country that I did not think the comparison was well-taken.Quayle wasn't saying anything about bringing back "promise and optimism". He was saying he has as much congressional experience as John Kennedy. As Bentsen said, Quayle was the one who made the comparison. So saying he failed to live up to his own standard was a legitimate shot. If Quayle actually had possessed more Kennedyesque qualities, Bentsen's response would have failed.

[jayjay]

If Quayle actually had possessed more Kennedyesque qualities, Bentsen's response would have failed.

Well...relatively young, good hair...um...that's all I got.

[Moriarty]

This link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imHK5-JhxXg) includes video of the "potatoe" incident.

So, is the reputation for idiocy well deserved? Or, at the least, an inability to speak intelligently in public? If so, I'm still struggling to understand why he wasn't vetted better by the Bush people. Surely, an insider like GHWB had lots of people he could call on for a running mate, who also had appropriately conservative credentials or fundraising capabilities, but who were not such a potential embarrasment.
I guess I still don't know why you would choose a running mate who was a liability over someone who could have been an asset.
Then again, Bush did win in 1988, so maybe an ineffectual VP wasn't really a liability, after all.

[Shodan]

Quayle wasn't saying anything about bringing back "promise and optimism". He was saying he has as much congressional experience as John Kennedy. Which, as it happens, was quite true.As Bentsen said, Quayle was the one who made the comparison. So saying he failed to live up to his own standard was a legitimate shot. No, it wasn't - to the degree that any of this kind of snark is illegitimate.

Quayle didn't claim to be better than Kennedy. He claimed to have more experience. Bentsen responded to something Quayle didn't say.

What Quayle might have said originally was that he had more legislative experience before running for Vice-President than Bentsen did when Bentsen ran for President. Also true, and something for which Bentsen probably didn't have a prepared response.

Not that it isn't water under the bridge. It was a cheap shot, but hell - it was a campaign. And Bentsen lost anyway.

Regards,
Shodan

[Captain Amazing]

He was saying he has as much congressional experience as John Kennedy. As Bentsen said, Quayle was the one who made the comparison. So saying he failed to live up to his own standard was a legitimate shot. If Quayle actually had possessed more Kennedyesque qualities, Bentsen's response would have failed.


Yeah, but to be fair to him, he didn't say he was as competant as JFK, or as good a leader as JFK, just that he was as experienced as JFK.

[Little Nemo]

So, is the reputation for idiocy well deserved? Or, at the least, an inability to speak intelligently in public? If so, I'm still struggling to understand why he wasn't vetted better by the Bush people. Surely, an insider like GHWB had lots of people he could call on for a running mate, who also had appropriately conservative credentials or fundraising capabilities, but who were not such a potential embarrasment.
I guess I still don't know why you would choose a running mate who was a liability over someone who could have been an asset.
Then again, Bush did win in 1988, so maybe an ineffectual VP wasn't really a liability, after all.If you're old enough to remember the 1988 election, you'll recall that Bush already had the problem of being overshadowed by Reagan. The last thing he wanted was a powerful Vice-President who would also be compared to him. So Bush intentionally chose a relative lightweight for his running mate.

[Little Nemo]

No, it wasn't - to the degree that any of this kind of snark is illegitimate.

Quayle didn't claim to be better than Kennedy. He claimed to have more experience. Bentsen responded to something Quayle didn't say.

What Quayle might have said originally was that he had more legislative experience before running for Vice-President than Bentsen did when Bentsen ran for President. Also true, and something for which Bentsen probably didn't have a prepared response.

Not that it isn't water under the bridge. It was a cheap shot, but hell - it was a campaign. And Bentsen lost anyway.Yeah, but to be fair to him, he didn't say he was as competant as JFK, or as good a leader as JFK, just that he was as experienced as JFK.It was not a cheap shot at all. Quayle said he was qualified to be President* because he had as much time in Congress as John Kennedy had had. Bentsen said that Quayle was no Kennedy.

If Michael Dukakis had been foolish enough to say that he was as qualified as Reagan to be President because he'd also been a governor, then Bush would have been justified in telling Dukakis he was no Ronald Reagan. And it would have been just as effective a comeback as Bentsen's was.

If you're going to compare yourself to another person, you had better make sure you can stand up to the comparison. Quayle set himself up for the fall.

*For those who don't recall, Brokaw was alluding to a recent occasion when Quayle had been asked if he was ready to be President if it happened. Quayle basically muffed the question and said he was only running for Vice-President. This was jumped upon and many people were saying that anybody who wasn't ready to be President shouldn't be running for Vice-President either.

[Siam Sam]

Anyone you've heard use it in such a way was competeing with Quayle in the upperclass twit of the year conest.
Since I was hearing it in Texas a number of decades before anyone had even heard of Dan Quayle, I seriously doubt that. And many of the ones saying it, to this day even, could hardly be accused of having upper-class aspirations.

[Siam Sam]

I've lived in Texas almost 47 years now, and I don't believe I've ever once heard a native speaker use it as a singular pronoun.
I have no way to explain that. I lived in Texas for 23 years and heard it all the time. Used it myself, too, was just natural.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

This link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imHK5-JhxXg) includes video of the "potatoe" incident.

So, is the reputation for idiocy well deserved? Or, at the least, an inability to speak intelligently in public? If so, I'm still struggling to understand why he wasn't vetted better by the Bush people. Surely, an insider like GHWB had lots of people he could call on for a running mate, who also had appropriately conservative credentials or fundraising capabilities, but who were not such a potential embarrasment.
I guess I still don't know why you would choose a running mate who was a liability over someone who could have been an asset.
Then again, Bush did win in 1988, so maybe an ineffectual VP wasn't really a liability, after all.Thanks for that link. If you watch those videos, and particular the ones where he's talking about the millions of people who died because of Hitlerism in this nation's history, or the part about him explaining that Hawaii is an island in the Pacific that is here, I don't see how anyone could doubt that that was one stupid, stupid person. Really. Just pure rank idiocy.

[Koxinga]

I have no way to explain that. I lived in Texas for 23 years and heard it all the time. Used it myself, too, was just natural.

I guess this is one of those "you say potato, I say pot-tah-toe" things. You're from West Texas, right? Central Texas here, and not only did I never hear it used in the singular, I (and everybody I know) would have regarded such usage as moronic. Like some transplanted northerner trying to fit in and overcompensating by wearing pointy-toe cowboy boots and a bolo tie every day. "Wall HOW-dee, yee-AHHLLL!!!" Bleahchch.

ETA: to make this a bit more relevant to the OP, the latter image pretty much sums up how we regarded George HW Bush when he played up his Texan credentials.

[Frostillicus]

When you look up the phrase "deer caught in the headlights" in the dictionary, there is a picture of Dan Quayle right after hearing Lloyd Bentsen's JFK line.

[Frostillicus]

This thread reminds me of a now-outdated joke that I thought was hi-larious in the early 90s:

Q: What do Marion Barry and Marilyn Quayle have in common?

A: They both occasionally blow a little dope.

[jimmmy]

FWIW the Washington Post at the times sums it up:

Bush Picks Quayle, `Man of the Future,' as Running Mate; Senator Selected In Effort to Woo Younger Voters
| Date: 8/17/1988 | Author: David Hoffman
The Washington Post

Vice President Bush, reaching out to "a young man born in the middle of this century and from the middle of this country," today selected Sen. Dan Quayle (R-Ind.) as his 1988 running mate.

The surprise choice signaled a bid for support from a new generation of voters and an effort to shore up the Republican ticket in the troubled Midwest.

Abandoning his original plan to keep his choice secret until the last day of the Republican National Convention, Bush announced the decision amid a frenzy ...

You can read (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE5DF1430F93BA2575BC0A96E948260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all) their first presser together here. Bush cites his youth, shared values and him being a midwesterner. And I think those, along with and echoing the reasons already given, were in fact partial reasons: Quayle was young (it is easy to forget now- esp. since he's still kicking but Bush was at the time going to be the second oldest President Inaugurated in the 20th Century and was the 4th oldest ever), Midwesterner (the Midwest was entering a post-industrial and post-family farm adjustment period that would continue to accelerate over the next decade or so and that was a potential danger battleground for the GOP) and the shared values blah-blah means DQ is conservative

[The Flying Dutchman]

In truth Dan Quayle was a rising star, he was like a 1980s Republican Barack Obama. He was elected to Congress at age 29, the Senate at age 33.



And that is why Bush picked him. Bush believed the vice-presidency was the way to the presidency and he set up who he thought was the best man to continue the Rebublican dominance in the presidential office after his own eight years.

[dropzone]

No. Another Texan here to say, lower class uneducated people just going about their daily business use "y'all" in the singular quite regularly.I will have you know that when I lived in Virginia, the Southest state of all, based on SNOTTINESS, not the more-arbitrary measurements, "y'all" was plural and "ya'll" was singular. And just TRY to sound them differntly, you PARVENUS!!

And, as a dyed-in-Yankee-blue Northerner, Dan Quayle was an idiot obviously picked by GHWB as some sort of Southern Compromise that didn't remotelywork. We just thought of him as a retarded buffer that kept GHWB in office. Which he may have, since people were more exciteable back then.

[Argent Towers]

Quayle was pushed heavily by the Manx-American lobby.

[Measure for Measure]

Here's the actual transcript:Quayle wasn't saying anything about bringing back "promise and optimism". He was saying he has as much congressional experience as John Kennedy. As Bentsen said, Quayle was the one who made the comparison. So saying he failed to live up to his own standard was a legitimate shot. If Quayle actually had possessed more Kennedyesque qualities, Bentsen's response would have failed. You missed something that a live viewer might not have. Here's the transcript (http://www.debates.org/pages/trans88c.html). Brit Hume asks Quayle what he would do if the President were incapacitated. What steps would he take.?

Quayle says that he would say a prayer. Then he talks about his experience and complains that he's asked about hypothetical situations all the time. WTF?

Ok, so Quayle hit his talking points. Brit Hume asks the same question later in the debate: What's the first thing you would do if you had to take over the Presidency in an emergency?

QUAYLE: "I don't believe that it's proper for me to get into the specifics of a hypothetical situation like that." Then blah-blah about experience.

Right.

Later the question is asked for the third freaking time: see the Little Nemo quote.

Lloyd Bensen voiced the frustration of millions when he delivered his memorable put-down. Then Bensen addressed the question; he talked of pulling together a meeting with the Joint Chiefs of Staff (presumably) when Quayle interrupted him out of turn.

Republican revisionists would have us believe that Quayle was just a misunderstood young man. Sorry, but that's simply not the case.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

Republican revisionists would have us believe that Quayle was just a misunderstood young man. Sorry, but that's simply not the case.That's what perplexes me. I see that there is this effort to rehabilitate Quayle's reputation, and to suggest that he wasn't really very, very stupid. I don't understand why they would bother?

What benefit is it to anyone to try to argue Quayle out of having been stupid. It isn't like he carries the mantle of the Republican party. He's an essentially forgotten VP from a one-term administration that nobody's particularly fond of.

Is it because Republicans later put forth the lesser Bush, who is often regarded as somewaht less than brilliant? Do they not want a pattern to emerge? The only reason I can see for trying to cover that up is that they want to keep doing it in the future.

But really, why bother taking the time to pretend that Quayle wasn't just plain dumb?

[Siege]

It wasn't his stupidity that got to me (although I was living in Hawai'i when he informed us it was an island in the Pacific). It was his hypocrisy. Mr. Quayle was a hard-core pro-lifer who believed abortion should be illegal. Fair enough. What put me off him once and for all is, while he was vice-president, someone asked him what he would do if one of his daughters was raped. After some back-and-forthing, he said he would want her to have the option of having an abortion. That is what made me want to tell him that that's all the pro-choice movement is asking for -- that women have the option.

I'm sure Mr. Bush, senior, didn't realize how much of a problem he'd be as vice-president. I suspect he was trying to appeal to young conservatives and find someone suitable to pass Reagaon's torch on to. After all, Mr. Bush wasn't seen as that much of a social conservative. It just didn't go as well as he planned.

[Siam Sam]

I guess this is one of those "you say potato, I say pot-tah-toe" things. You're from West Texas, right? Central Texas here, and not only did I never hear it used in the singular, I (and everybody I know) would have regarded such usage as moronic. Like some transplanted northerner trying to fit in and overcompensating by wearing pointy-toe cowboy boots and a bolo tie every day. "Wall HOW-dee, yee-AHHLLL!!!" Bleahchch.
Yes, West Texas. But I did hear it in other parts of Texas, and other posters in this thread have indicated they've heard it elsewhere in the South. I suspect it's one of those things done so often that one may not notice it, but then stopping to think about how it sounds, it doesn't sound quite right.

[Elendil's Heir]

...he is, to date, the only Vice President to have established a museum for himself.

In fairness to DQ (and I'm no fan), it's a museum to the Vice Presidency itself. IIRC, his Indiana boosters wanted to build a museum just about him, but he insisted it more broadly be about the Vice Presidency and not just a one-man ego trip.

Hentor, the "happy campers" remark was during DQ's visit to Pago Pago. The other misspelling I remember was the word "beacon," which was misspelled with a "k" in the Quayles' Christmas card one year.

jimmmy is right about why Bush the Elder picked him. I remember the Bush team also placed great stock in the fact that he'd cosponsored a jobs-training bill with Ted Kennedy and thus showed (or so they thought) that he could work in a bipartisan manner on Capitol Hill. I think they really thought DQ was a fresh, youngish, conservative pick who would compliment Bush's elder-statesman image. IIRC from the press coverage at the time, they were appalled when DQ was so quickly revealed to be a shallow, less-than-brilliant guy, but dropping him from the ticket would have been too stark an admission that they'd screwed up, so they kept him on.

[Siam Sam]

Some of the Dan Quayle verbal oddities have turned out to be Urban Legends. Many are real, but others have been falsely attributed to him, and it's become difficult to separate the actual from the myth. Snopes has a page on this here (http://www.snopes.com/quotes/quayle.asp).

[Little Nemo]

jimmmy is right about why Bush the Elder picked him. I remember the Bush team also placed great stock in the fact that he'd cosponsored a jobs-training bill with Ted Kennedy and thus showed (or so they thought) that he could work in a bipartisan manner on Capitol Hill. I think they really thought DQ was a fresh, youngish, conservative pick who would compliment Bush's elder-statesman image. IIRC from the press coverage at the time, they were appalled when DQ was so quickly revealed to be a shallow, less-than-brilliant guy, but dropping him from the ticket would have been too stark an admission that they'd screwed up, so they kept him on.And don't dismiss the lightweight factor I mentioned above. If Bush had picked somebody like Jack Kemp as his running mate, there would have been rumblings from the right that it was Bush that should be dropped from the ticket.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

Hentor, the "happy campers" remark was during DQ's visit to Pago Pago. The other misspelling I remember was the word "beacon," which was misspelled with a "k" in the Quayles' Christmas card one year.Actually, the one I had in mind was:

Office of the Vice President... The Council on Competativeness.
-- the letterhead on stationery, complete with misspelling, found in Dan Quayle's old White House office by Clinton adminstration staffers. (Newsweek, 2/8/93)

[Clothahump]

If Quayle had said this, he would have come across even more like an idiot, at least throughout the South.

Y'all is a contraction for "you all." In other words, y'all is plural.

(I see this mistake made all the time by people not from the South. Why is this so hard for people to understand? Here's a hint, it you wouldn't substitute the phrase "you guys" for "y'all," then don't use the word. Just use the word "you." "Y'all" is a actual word with an actual meaning, not just random "Texas-speak.")

The plural of "y'all" is "all y'all".

Imagine the family dinner at Thanksgiving. Last minute marching orders are being issued.

"Geraldine, y'all go get the cranberry sauce and put it on the table. Billy Bob, y'all go bring in the turkey platter. Cletus, Sally, Timmy - all y'all run out in the yard and tell the grownups that it's time to come sit down at the table, then go wash up."

The names have been changed to protect the innocent, but that was the way it was in our Texas family.

[Sam Stone]

Time to stand up for Quayle a bit... Certainly his education and grades are nothing to write home about, but the guy turned out to be a very good politician. Not only he win re-election at home by a landslide in a year when other Republicans were losing all over the place (the year the Democrats took back the house), but in the Senate he had a very good reputation. No one thought he was dumb. He managed to make his way onto some powerful committees, and did a very good job on them. He worked with Ted Kennedy to pass the Jobs Training Partnership Act of 1982, which is still considered a landmark piece of legislation. He chaired a committee on Senate Reform. He served on the Armed Services, Budget, and Labor and Human Resources committees.

As Vice President, he's widely considered to be one of the most active Vice Presidents. He chaired the National Space Council, and the council on competitiveness. He became the administration's representative to the House and Senate, where he won high marks for inclusiveness and his ability to bring all sides together. He was also very active in foreign affairs and traveled to more countries than any other Vice President.

As for all his gaffes, they come down to several factors - being uncomfortable in front of the media, and a tendency to go off-script. Politicians protect themselves from uttering gaffes by learning a few tricks, such as, "If you don't know the answer to a question, answer a question you do know, even if it wasn't asked." For example:

"Governor, what do you think about the current HIV situation in Africa?"

Govenor slick: "Of course we are concerned about the situation in Africa. In my years as governor, I've traveled extensively and I've seen horrible problems around the world. Here at home, I've worked to address these problems by yada yada yada. We must always have concern for the downtrodden, whether they be a poor person with HIV in Africa, or an unemployed steelworker in my state."

Quayle wasn't very good at this. He'd try to answer the question, even if he wasn't totally sure of his facts. That always gets you in trouble. Or, he'd give someone that 'Deer in the headlights' look while he tried to formulate a reasonable answer.

Another problem was that his malapropisms fed into his weakness, which was that he was young and inexperienced. The press always likes to find evidence to fit a pre-conceived story line, and once they have it, they'll hang onto you like a pit-bull and blow up every little gaffe that enhances that story line.

Coupled with the fact that the press is generally hostile to conservatives, and that the opposition loved every bit of it and started 'enhancing' the perception with outright lies and urban legends, and there you go.

The same thing happened to Gerald Ford, who slipped a couple of times while the cameras were rolling, and became a 'klutz'. He was the butt of 'klutz' jokes in the media for his entire presidency. And yet, he was probably the best athlete to ever hold the office.

Quayle's not a genius. He's was a good, hard working Congressman, Senator, and Vice President who was hounded mercilessly by the media.

As for why he was chosen, I remember at the time that the Boomers were becoming politically powerful, and there was lots of talk about how Bush was out of touch with them. Quayle was the first Baby Boomer to run for national office, and it was thought that he would act as a bridge to the new generation.

Here's his official Senate Biography (http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/generic/VP_Dan_Quayle.htm)


"No Vice President took as many shots—unfair shots—as Dan Quayle," declared Senate Republican Leader Bob Dole. "And no Vice President withstood those shots with as much grace, good humor, and commitment to not back down." Barbara Bush similarly saluted Quayle for being "a superb vice president." He was loyal and smart, she insisted. "There is no question that he had a perception problem, and it was politically chic to kick Dan around. It was darned unfair." Admitting that he had been bruised by the experience, the former vice president kept his sense of humor. When asked about his handicap in golf, Quayle quipped: "My handicap is the same as it has been ever since I became vice president: the news media."

[squeegee]

Sam, Quayle may have, and probably did, get a bad rap. However, someone who chairs the National Space Council, and then gives the following statement, is just so far beyond mortal gaffing that its difficult to believe in his competence:Mars is essentially in the same orbit [as earth]....Mars is somewhat the same distance from the Sun, which is very important. We have seen pictures where there are canals, we believe, and water. If there is water, that means there is oxygen. If oxygen, that means we can breathe.

[vison]

Has there ever been a thread about why Nixon chose Spiro Agnew?

[Measure for Measure]

Let's also remember that there were a wave of Quayle rehabilitation stories in the press during the Bush I era. Journalists love posing "counter-intuitive" stories.

They were not convincing. And chairing the Space Council is typical fare for a sitting Vice President: they are regularly handed 3rd tier issues. Gore had competitiveness. Johnson had Vietnam (which became first tier after he became President).

---------- Politicians protect themselves from uttering gaffes by learning a few tricks, such as, "If you don't know the answer to a question, answer a question you do know, even if it wasn't asked."

But that was Quayle was doing when asked what the first thing that he would do if he became President! He just talked about his experience.

[Elendil's Heir]

Let's also remember that there were a wave of Quayle rehabilitation stories in the press during the Bush I era. Journalists love posing "counter-intuitive" stories....

In early 1989, some columnist - Safire? Wicker? mebbe Broder? - started a "Dan Quayle Rehabilitation Watch," keeping an eye out, and asking his readers to do the same, for the first story in which DQ's hitherto-unappreciated statesmanship, wisdom and mad political skillz would be illuminated. Sure enough, about two years later, the Washington Post had a multipart series (!) on just that topic.

[missred]

Time to stand up for Quayle a bit... Certainly his education and grades are nothing to write home about, but the guy turned out to be a very good politician. Not only he win re-election at home by a landslide in a year when other Republicans were losing all over the place (the year the Democrats took back the house), but in the Senate he had a very good reputation.

Sam, as someone who not only lived in Indiana, but served as a Democratic precinct vice-committeewoman in the congressional district next to Mr. Quayle's in those years, I can honestly tell you that the Republicans would have sent anybody with an "R" behind his/her name to Washington. In that area (at that time), the citizens might elect a Dem in a local or state election, but always a Pub for a national one. So his re-election was not really that big of a coupe.

As for all his gaffes, they come down to several factors - being uncomfortable in front of the media, and a tendency to go off-script. Politicians protect themselves from uttering gaffes by learning a few tricks, such as, "If you don't know the answer to a question, answer a question you do know, even if it wasn't asked." For example:

"Governor, what do you think about the current HIV situation in Africa?"

Govenor slick: "Of course we are concerned about the situation in Africa. In my years as governor, I've traveled extensively and I've seen horrible problems around the world. Here at home, I've worked to address these problems by yada yada yada. We must always have concern for the downtrodden, whether they be a poor person with HIV in Africa, or an unemployed steelworker in my state."

Quayle wasn't very good at this. He'd try to answer the question, even if he wasn't totally sure of his facts. That always gets you in trouble. Or, he'd give someone that 'Deer in the headlights' look while he tried to formulate a reasonable answer.

I would have to agree with you here.


Quayle's not a genius. He's was a good, hard working Congressman, Senator, and Vice President who was hounded mercilessly by the media.

I would consider him as mediocre. YMMV.

As for why he was chosen, I remember at the time that the Boomers were becoming politically powerful, and there was lots of talk about how Bush was out of touch with them. Quayle was the first Baby Boomer to run for national office, and it was thought that he would act as a bridge to the new generation.

Here's his official Senate Biography (http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/generic/VP_Dan_Quayle.htm)

I would also have to agree with this.

[Mr. Miskatonic]

Let's not forget the draft dodging accusations. At one point a vet called him a cowardly draft-dodger to his face and he was left flummoxed. IIRC they pulled him off the campaign trail for a few days of 'training' after that incident.

[BarnOwl]

Does anyone remember a particular moment in a Quayle-Bentsen debate when the matter in question was job outsourcing? I cannot remember any of the details but the (Republican!) administration was running ads on the matter—in domestic magazines, already.

Bentsen mentioned how this was so and Quayle shouted back something like "It's not so!!"

They went back and forth with Quayle just shouting him down. No evidence to the contrary, and no discussion. Just short outbursts like, "We didn't do it!" And the debate moved on.

Anyone else recall this? It's funny now, in retrospect, but I was furious at the time because I'd seen one of those ads.

[Bryan Ekers]

Here's the actual transcript... uayle wasn't saying anything about bringing back "promise and optimism".

I appreciate the amount of effort you went to, but I wasn't offering up my post as a quote of what Quayle had actually said, but what I would have told him to say, had I been feeding him lines in 1988. Little Nemo offered up a hypothetical Bentsen reply to my hypothetical Quayle reply, and I replied with a hypothetical Quayle reply to Nemo's hypothetical Bentsen reply to my hypothetical Quayle reply to Bentsen's original comment.

I was mildly looking forward to restaging the entire debate.

[Elendil's Heir]

...I was mildly looking forward to restaging the entire debate.

My grandpa has a barn. My mom could sew costumes. Let's do it!

[Bryan Ekers]

Huh, I didn't even notice that it was Little Nemo himself that researched the debate.

[Little Nemo]

I have to admit that my research for this thread consisted of a couple of minutes on wikipedia. The internet has made intellectual laziness so easy.

The amazing thing is that Quayle got so thoroughly beaten by Lloyd Bentsen of all people. It's not like Bentsen has otherwise had any reputation as a skilled debater. During the 1992 campaign, Mario Cuomo was being considered as a possible Vice Presidential candidate. That debate would have been brutal.

[E. Thorp]

Why wouldn't a Reagan cabinet member have worked? No one surely believes the entire cabinet was involved in Iran-Contra? That has certainly never been my understanding.

Plus, I think people are over-estimating how Iran-Contra impacted at the time. I remember it was definitely a "big controversy" but the Reagan administration earned its "teflon" reputation. The outrage was mostly forgotten by the time Bush was running IMO--based on my recollections of the time.That's the way I remember it too.


In truth Dan Quayle was a rising star, he was like a 1980s Republican Barack Obama. He was elected to Congress at age 29, the Senate at age 33.Well, I don't remember this. Granted I paid less attention to national politics in the 1980s (as a high school and college student) than I do now, but I always thought Quayle was unknown to most people when Bush picked him. Obama, on the other hand, arrived in Congress a celebrity.

[jayjay]

During the 1992 campaign, Mario Cuomo was being considered as a possible Vice Presidential candidate. That debate would have been brutal.

And even more highly entertaining! Cuomo has a reputation as a rhetorical streetfighter. He would have left Quayle lying face up staring into the sun.