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

[missred]

@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.

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

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]

@Little Nemo

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]

@Bryan Ekers

…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]

@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.

That’s the way I remember it too.

@Martin Hyde

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]

@Little Nemo

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.