Ferraro as VP candidate

Factual Questions
1

In a recent article in the Los Angeles Times, “Veep Game Keeps Political Suspense Alive - Sunday, March 26, 2000” the topic of vice president candidate choices was discussed. The article contained the following:

I don’t remember Geraldine Ferraro hurting Walter Mondale’s chances. Was it because she was a woman? If anything, I thought that was supposed to help him, not hinder him. Is there anyone around with a better political memory that could tell me what the author of the article was thinking?

2

She came off as strident, and with few ideas.

Her hubby was also involved in some kind of bribery scandal.

I don’t remember much more.

3

Hmmm… I know that her husband was caught in some kinky business dealings, but that might have been after the campaign.

4

I don’t have a good idea of Ferraro’s overall effect on the Mondale candidacy. Most of the people I knew at the time thought she was a better candidate than Mondale. I thought she was better than Reagan and Bush as well.

Here are some reasons she might have heard the ticket:

There were vague mumblings of her husband being involved with some shady people (clearly I’m not the best source to illuminate this one…).

Some people didn’t like either of them because Mondale was said to have picked her “just because she was a woman”. Which implies, I suppose, that it’s mere coincidence that she had six years experience in the U.S. House…? All the people Mondale seriously considered for running mates(Lindy Boggs, et al.) were women, because he chose to balance the ticket in that way. I suppose it’s just fine to balance the ticket geographically, but not sexually? Bulldinky, if you ask me, but I’m a squishy pinko type anyway.

Some people said she was too inexperienced. I don’t know quite what these people’s standards for experience are, but I think it’s weird when tycoons, generals, and clerics are unblinkingly pushed as great Presidential material, but a three-term Congresswoman is “too inexperienced”. I suspect sexism is the only thing that really matters here: there are a number of ways someone can gather the experience necessary to be considered Presidential timber. Service in Congress, governorships, high military office, or leadership of large businesses are the main one. All of these have historically been male dominated - no big deal there, history is history and a lot of times it’s unfair.

I just think it’s wretched that whenever women do break into an institution (like the U.S. House), suddenly that doesn’t count as real experience any more. U.S. House experience was enough for Gerald Ford (sure he was re-elected more times than Ferraro, but shallow do you really thing the learning curve is?). No, it’s not the U.S. House that counts, it’s the Senate and Governorships. Whoops, women can do those jobs too. Oh, yeah, what really matters is experience as the CEO of a major corporation, or service as a multi-star military officer. That’ll show the skirts!

Am I reading Hippocrates right?
He’s not just a big box for storing large semi-aquatic mammals, is he?

5

Rats. The parenthetical comment in my last paragraph is supposed to read, “… but how shallow do you think the learning curve is?” That is, how much more do you keep learning after your 25th re-election?

6

Quite frankly, I doubt Ferraro did anything to hurt that woeful ticket. Mondale’s overwhelming loss was due to his pledge to raise taxes and Reagan’s convincing people that they were better off under him than under Carter. Mondale hurt himself plenty enough.

Mondale got only his home state, which no candidate (unless his opponent is from the same state, naturally) loses, and DC, whose electoral votes might as well be given straight to the Democratic party without even bothering to hold an election.

Chaim Mattis Keller
ckeller@kozmo.com

“Sherlock Holmes once said that once you have eliminated the
impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be
the answer. I, however, do not like to eliminate the impossible.
The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it that the merely improbable lacks.”
– Douglas Adams’s Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective

7

And furthermore, he only barely squeaked by in Minnesota. The difference in their vote totals was less than 1%

8

Mondale’s candidacy in 1984 was pretty much hopeless from the beginning. Reagan was enormously popular and his re-election was virtually assured. So Ferraro certainly didn’t hurt anything.

That said, she probably didn’t help. As others have noted, there were questions being asked about some of her husband’s business dealings during the race and her son was apparently involved in some drug use (although I don’t remember if this was known during the campaign or came out later).

I think on a larger scale her vice presidential candidacy hurt the party because is was so blatantly pandering. The Democrat powers-to-be appeared to think they would score big among women voters by choosing a female candidate for an inconsequential job in a hopeless campaign. I’m betting many American women noted that in other countries female candidates were already running for and winning the top spots.

9

Thank you folks. I did remember her husband being accused of some improprieties, but I didn’t think the “scandal” was big enough to justify the LA Times article’s assertion that Geraldine Ferraro “harmed” Walter Mondale’s campaign.

I am going to assume that the writer of the article included her as an example to seem bi-partisan, and her name would balance the mention of Dan Quayle.

10

I’m going to borrow Little Nemo’s quote and re-rig it to make my point about ticket balancing:
I think on a larger scale his vice presidential candidacy hurt the party because is was so blatantly pandering. The Democratic powers-to-be appeared to think they would score big among southern voters by choosing a southern candidate for an inconsequential job in a hopeless campaign. I’m betting many southerners noted that in other countries candidates from rural and historically marginalized regions were already running for and winning the top spots.

You can apply the masculine pronoun to your choice from the following: John Garner (D-Texas, 1932 and 1936), Lyndon Johnson (D-Texas, 1960), Lloyd Bentsen (D-Texas, 1988), John Sparkman (memory getting hazy … D-Alabama, 1952?). Being from the South wasn’t the only consideration for any of these men, but it was certainly an important factor. Republicans have similar, if more geographically dispersed, patterns of VP selection: Spiro Agnew was chosen partly to appeal to southerners; George Bush was sort of a Texan.

11

Ooops. You’ll have to ignore the word “hopeless” in my expropriated Little Nemo quote. Lots of those campaigns were successful.

12

I got a chance to hear Ferraro speak at my aunt’s college (SUNY Morrisville) graduation. She certainly sounded like a confident and well spoken woman and much more charismatic, IMO, than Mondale. The ticket, and platform, simply didn’t have much of a chance against Reagan though.

13

Maybe you’re thinking is a little too naive?
Just like there should be no age discrimination by an employer…
The old school thinking is still out there, and quite powerful.

Beyond this, sadly, I think Mondale was still labelled by a stigma in people’s minds of memories of the economic disaster during the Carter Administration.

“They’re coming to take me away ha-ha, ho-ho, hee-hee, to the funny farm where life is beautiful all the time… :)” - Napoleon IV

14

::This is a test post. Please ignore it::

::If you see multiposts above, please ignore them, too. I’ll clean them up::

15

The fact that Mondale’s campaign was hopeless was part of the point I was making. I would have been more impressed if the Democrats had chosen a female candidate in a real contest (maybe even, gasp, as a Presidential candidate). Instead I got the impression that a couple of party hacks got together and said:
“Look’s like Reagan’s a lock for four more years. We don’t have a chance.”
“I got an idea. Let’s put a dame on the ticket. We’ve already lost the White House, but maybe the chicks will be so impressed they’ll vote for our other candidates. We might pick up a couple seats in Congress.”
“Good idea. Can’t hurt anyway. Who should we pick?”
“What difference does it make? It’s not she’s going to get elected or anything.”

Of course, before I condemn the Democrats, I should point out that the Republicans haven’t even gone this far.

16

Thanks for clearing that up, Nemo. I missed the substance of your post the first time around. In any case, I have always thought of this as more of a personal decision on Mondale’s part, rather than a group decision by Democratic leaders. Tip O’Niel discussed it with Mondale, but I don’t know who O’Niel recommended.

17

Little Nemo:

Perhaps not…but it was a Republican president who nominated the first female Justice to the Supreme Court, and Elizabeth Dole was the first female to officially run for either major party’s presidential nomination (even though she had to drop out for lack of money).

Perhaps Republicans are a lot less sexist than people think…

Chaim Mattis Keller
ckeller@kozmo.com

“Sherlock Holmes once said that once you have eliminated the
impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be
the answer. I, however, do not like to eliminate the impossible.
The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it that the merely improbable lacks.”
– Douglas Adams’s Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective

18

Shirley Chisholm ran for President in 1972. She participated in several primaries, and finished second in New Jersey IIRC.

Pat Schroeder considered a Presidential bid in 1988 (or was it 1992?), but dropped out due to lack of money.

I think Carter appointed more women to Federal judgeships than Reagan did, but I’ll have to find a cite for that one.

19

If I’m not mistaken, didn’t Elizabeth Cady Stanton (or was it Victoria Woodhull?) run for president in the late 19th century? She may not have been affiliated with one of the major parties (did she actually run under the Socialist ticket?), but she certainly got a good deal of publicity.

20

And her candidacy was so highly regarded by the leaders of the Republican party, she couldn’t even get her husband’s endorsement.