More than two have become prez. You’re using a meaningless filter of those who have been **elected **prez.
Probably want to count Benjamin Harrison, too. He was defeated for reelection as a senator a year before running for president, but it was the last important office he held before getting elected.
Right, but all of the others only became president due to the death or resignation of the President. Surely none of the Vice Presidents I mentioned in the OP, and Biden in particular, actually seriously considered that possibility.
And consider some of those Vice Presidents I mentioned:
–Gore gave up his Senate seat to serve as VP for eight years, ran for President and lost, at which point his political career ended.
–Quayle gave up his Senate seat to serve as VP for fours years, at which point his political career ended.
–Mondale gave up his Senate seat to serve as VP for four years, at which point his political career all but ended, except for serving as Ambassador to Japan a decade later and a failed bid for his old Senate seat.
–Rockefeller gave up the Governorship of New York, served three years as VP, at which point his political career ended.
It seems like Gore, Quayle, and Mondale could have kept their Senate seats and extended their political careers by many years.
Also consider politicians such as Gerald Ford (who gave up his position as House Minority Leader), and LBJ (who gave up his position as Senate Majority Leader). Both men only became President by accident; neither were re-elected.
Why not? Why on earth wouldn’t they?
Look, you asked why a politician would want to become VP. One obvious answer is that it’s a good path to actually becoming president. You brought this up in the OP but discounted most of the VPs who became prez, because of the path they took to be president. Who cares how they get there? All that matters is that they got there. The only relevant comparison is the proportion of VPs who became president to non-VPs who became president. The odds are much better for VPs.
Well, for one thing, it’s a pretty macabre thought process (i.e. “here’s hoping my running mate dies in office…”).
It also naturally leads someone thinking this to consider the possibility of themselves also dying in office, which is not a thought most people want to consider.
OK, let’s consider all VPs who became President vs. all non-VPs who became President, by whatever means.
Former VPs who became President: 14
Non-VPs who became President: 29
Proportion of VPs who became president = 14/43 = 32.6%
Proportion of non-VPs who became president = 29/43 = 67.4%
Would you like to reconsider that statement? :dubious:
Compared to a 1-in-600 chance from the Senate? The odds are much better for VPs.
Give us another route which has a great chance. “Non-VPs” is not a route.
The Vice President unambiguously has more power than a senator: He has all the power a senator has and then some. Yes, he only votes in a tie, but consider: If it’s not a tie, what would be the point of him voting?
Besides voting, of course, senators also have power in giving speeches, advising the President and others, introducing legislation, etc., but the VP can also do all of those things, and to a greater degree.
Fair enough. The Senate has traditionally been a terrible route to the Presidency.
I was simply addressing the mis-statement espoused by muttrox, using his exact terminology. He was the one who suggested comparing VPs to non-VPs, not me.
In any event, succeeding to the Presidency was only one of the possibilities I mentioned as a possible reason for a well-established politician wanting to be VP. The alternative, for a Senator, would be keeping one’s Senate seat.
Why is the denominator in your non-VPs 43? There are many many more non-VPs than 43. Depending how you count, it could be in the billions. Dr Deths figure of 600 is fairly reasonable, though it leaves out Representatives, Governors, Generals, and less distinguished folks.
Nope.
There haven’t been many “experienced” politicians who ran for Vice-President who hadn’t already made a serious run for President and gotten soundly beaten. Gore, Jack Kemp, Bush 41 and Humphrey all had reached for the big prize and not gotten it.
Lloyd Bentsen, Walter Mondale and Joe Lieberman hadn’t run for Prez. Bentsen was a career Senator who wasn’t going anywhere, Lieberman hadn’t had that much exposure on the national stage and Walter Mondale, though a veteran politician, was only 48 and still in Humphrey’s shadow. Nixon’s VP in 1960, Henry Cabot Lodge, hadn’t held a political office for eight years.
It could be that experienced politicians who accept the VP nomination may think (at least in the back of their minds) that this is their last chance.
While the VP’s power may be greater than it was in the past, I don’t think you can seriously argue that the VP’s power is greater than that of a Senator, especially someone like the Senate Majority Leader.
In the Constitution, the VP has almost no power whatsoever, hence Garner’s quote.
Consider John Adams’ quote: “My country has in its wisdom contrived for me the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived.” (Upon being elected as the first Vice President)
Consider another quote (source is wikipedia): “Once the election is over, the Vice President’s usefulness is over. He’s like the second stage of a rocket. He’s damn important going into orbit, but he’s always thrown off to burn up in the atmosphere.” – An aide to Vice President Hubert Humphrey
LBJ famously found himself powerless after being elected VP under Kennedy. He tried to preside over the Senate, but soon stopped attending Senate sessions after finding that his former fellow Senators ignored him. He was barred from committee sessions. And I would argue that there is far more power in creating legislation than simply breaking tie votes.
There have been 43 Presidents.
You stated:
The proportion of VPs who became president is 14/43 (32.6%). In other words, 14 of our 43 Presidents also served as VP.
The proportion of non-VPs who became president is 29/43 (67.4%). In other words, 29 of our 43 Presidents never served as VP.
I think after its all said and done a book by a vice president will sell more then a book by a senator. So why not go for the vice president slot. Better book rights
Actually, muttrox, I think I see what you are getting at: you are comparing the proportion of VPs who became president (out of all VPs) compared to the proportion of non-VPs who became President (out of all non-VPs).
The first number is easy to figure: There have been 46 VPs, and 14 of them later became President.
Obviously the proportion of non-VPs who became President (29) is a small number out of all possible non-VPs (hundreds of millions of people).
I wonder how many books Quayle sold after leaving office. 
Yes. The second number is much lower. So all else being equal, becoming VP is a good route to becoming P.
No. No no no no no. It’s 29 out of every single American who has never been vice president. That’s the relevant proportion.
I know it’s a picky point, but this of places is the places to be picky: Gore did not win an Oscar.
Well, his movie won best documentary. There’s plenty of pictures of him holding an Oscar. What exactly is your point you’re picking at?
no but he became a spokesman for the Potatoe industry 
given all the crazies that have been popping up on the right lately, I think Biden’s chances are pretty good sadly