In presidential elections during my lifetime much has been made of vice presidential candidates and their effect on the election.
The first presidential election I can remember was in 1960, JFK vs Nixon. I was only a child and had little idea what this thing was all about but JFK’s selection of LBJ is explained in simple terms as a way to bring in the votes needed to carry southern states. I don’t recall any particular electoral reason applied to Nixon’s VP choice, Henry Cabot Lodge Jr.
The 1972 election, Nixon vs. McGovern, started out with Spiro Agnew as VP under Nixon already, and presidential challenger George McGovern initially nominated Thomas Eagleton, a Missouri senator to be his VP, but then it came to light that Eagleton had received electro-shock treatments for depression and McGovern to succumbed to the notion that Eagleton would not be a fit president and then nominated Sargent Shriver as a replacement. There was much more to that election including something a hotel called The Watergate in Washington, but the need to change the VP candidate likely was one of the influences in making Nixon’s win a landslide.
In a notable case George Bush the elder ran for president in 1980 with VP candidate Dan Quayle who was often portrayed in the media as a village idiot, but Bush won anyway. Later VP candidate Sarah Palin received the same treatment but he presidential candidate John McCain ended up losing. It’s certainly debatable whether or not the VP choices made a significant difference in an election.
The talking heads make a big deal out of every VP candidate, some make a difference, others don’t. I’d like hear what other VPs made a difference in elections, beneficial or detrimental to their presidential candidate, or having no effect at all.
Mike Pence. I think a lot of people underestimate how crucial he was for Trump in 2016 due to his deep ties with evangelicals and movement conservatives, two parts of the Republican coalition that were not initially sold on Trump.
Bush ran in ‘88 & ‘92 and Nixon was going to win big in ‘72 no matter what. I’ve never seen the VP pick swaying an election Much. Pence might have been some help but evangelicals were not going to vote for Hillary anyway.
If I were a POTUS candidate I’d pick a well seasoned Senator, especially when the balance in the Senate was tight.
Regarding McCain/Palin. My state, Pennsylvania, was won by Clinton. I’ve always believed that had McCain chosen former PA Governor Tom Ridge as his running mate, he would have won Pennsylvania and perhaps the election. Ridge was a conservative (in the more traditional, moderate definition of the word) and may have put him over the top in other states as well.
McCain was known to have considered Ridge as his running mate but caved to the religious right and rejected him. Why? Though a conservative, Ridge was pro-choice. So instead, McCain chose an unvetted village idiot as his proposed second in command, and in my opinion, she cost him the election. Thank God! The idea of that nitwit being a heartbeat away from the presidency scared a lot of people.
Every time batshit crazy Caribou Barbie comes out of the woodwork to haunt us again, I curse John McCain for inflicting her upon us.
Sure, but the alternative for them wasn’t voting for Clinton, it was staying home on Election Day.
Just to be clear, I don’t think many people vote based on who’s name is at the bottom of the ticket. Where a good VP pick can be helpful is in the months before Election Day, getting the Presidential candidate entrees to leaders in certain constituencies, helping him understand what resonates with them and building credibility.
I agree. I did not think the country at large was ready, at that time, to elect a black man President. But they ran against Bush more so than McCain and they won,
On the other hand, Al Gore could have done a lot better than Joe Lieberman. Had he gone with even a generic mainstream Democratic governor, he could very well have won.
FWIW I think Hillary Clinton would also have beat McCain, he she managed to beat Obama in the primaries. Who knows how that would have turned out, and where we would be today. Either way, McCain really didn’t have a chance.
On paper No way should Gore have lost that race. But he was dull as watching paint dry and some people were holding him accountable for the Clinton sleaziness. Plus right wing radio was in full bloom, Limbaugh, Belling, etc… A better VP choice may have had the opposite effect of outshining Gore.
That could be. I’m probably projecting backwards based on what we now know of Joe Lieberman. At the time most Democrats probably wouldn’t have guessed that he would end up as a Republican leaning independent.
My personal take is that a VP pick might, and I emphasize might, help you shore up a single state or constituency (Lieberman was supposed to tip FL.) but for them most part the best you can hope for is that they don’t hurt the ticket
I don’t take much stock in the effect of VPs on the election, but I thought more people might. As I pointed out with Quayle and Palin, really bad choices don’t matter that much, at least they don’t seem to swing the race one way or the other.
My best bet would be LBJ making the difference for JFK in a tight electoral race. Pence may have helped Trump look legit to the traditional conservatives in the GOP more than he helped with the evangelicals who turned out to be more in line with Trumps ‘revenge on the libs’ theme than any religious concern they had been pretending. Harris has been described as “demographically advantageous”. It’s hard to say she swayed any additional people to reject Trump but may have increased the turnout for Biden.
I know so little about the VPs in distant past before I was born I can’t weigh in on them, but I have heard the conclusion that in general VPs weren’t considered any more important to the outcome of the election than they are in office afterwards. That is coincidentally (or not) about about the same level of import whether they win or lose.
Though in the case of 2016, Pence only needed to sway the election a little, as it was so close in the 3 states that ended up deciding it.
I strongly believe that if Clinton picked her first choice as VP, Sherrod Brown (she ultimately decided against it, because she didn’t want to lose a Democratic Senator), she likely would have won.
I’m going to argue that McCain was totally justified in choosing Palin. Prior to his VP selection, he was on a slow but sure-steady path to defeat. The old white boring guy just couldn’t compete against the black young charismatic Obama, no chance. So McCain needed something shocking and interesting that would inject some enthusiasm into his campaign. Had he chosen a boring VP, McCain would have simply hammered the final nail into his own coffin.
To blame Palin for the eventual loss makes no more sense than to complain that a Hail Mary pass in the ending seconds of a football game fell incomplete. A Hail Mary, by definition, is unlikely to succeed - it’s only done because there’s no other choice.
I had considered voting for John McCain, but when I saw Caribou Barbie interviewed, I knew I could not vote for him, because we didn’t need that woman anywhere near the Oval Office, except as a tourist.
