The Vice Presidential Contenders: the Democratic Side

Last Week I talked about some of the people on McCain’s Vice Presidential short list, and this week it’s Obama’s turn.

Like I did with McCain, let’s hit the people being thrown around the most for Obama:

Tim Kaine – Tim Kaine is the current governor of Virginia.  The arguments in favor of Kaine include the fact that he’s not a Washington insider, enhansing Obama’s claim that he’s going to try to bring change to Washington.  Kaine was also one of Obama’s earliest supporters and is governor of a key swing state this year – Virginia – a fact which could also influence another swing state: neighboring North Carolina.

There are a few issues with Kaine, however.  Despite having 8+ years of executive experience – he was Mayor of Richmond for 2 years, Lt. Governor under Mark Warner for 4 years, and has been Governor of Virginia for 2 1/2 years – he may also be seen as inexperienced, which would just remind voters of Obama’s own inexperience.  Also, Kaine is a southern Democrat, meaning that the base of the party may not be completely thrilled with him.

Most people tend to think that Kaine is the odds-on favorite for being picked, and there definitely are positives.  But given that the main reason people haven’t switched to Obama yet is the fact that they’re still uncertain of his ability to be President, I’m not sure how wise it would be to pick someone who also doesn’t have much Washington or foreign relations experience as the 2nd man on the ticket.

Evan Bayh – It seems like Evan Bayh is always on the short list to be Vice President.  In a sense there is a good reason why: he has a good mix of (relative) youth and experience, being only 53 years old but already having 8 years of being governor and another 9 years of being senator under his belt already – clearing making experience not an issue.  He was also a Clinton supporter, perhaps making him a “bridge” candidate to her last remaining holdouts.  He also represents Indiana which has turned out to be a swing state so far in this election cycle as well.

The negatives mostly deal with the base of the party.  If the base dislikes Kaine, they really dislike Bayh.  He’s a former head of the DLC and member of the New Democrat Coalition and was an early supporter of the Iraq War and is generally hawkish.

Picking someone like Bayh might reassure people that Obama isn’t just a limp noodle when it comes to foreign policy, but it might give core democrats pause as to what Obama’s real intentions are.  It also raises the question of how compatiable they are given that Obama opposed the war from the start while Bayh supported it from the start.  However, like I said at the start, Bayh might be more of an issue with the base than everyone else, which might make picking him make more political sense.

Joe Biden – Another perrinial VP short list member, Joe Biden has served in the Senate for 35 years, and is the chair of the Foreign Relations Committee.

Biden’s positives is that, like Bayh, he would give Obama serious foreign relations credentials, possibly enough to match even McCain.   Biden is also generally liberal on most issues important to the Democratic Base.  He’s also been a vocal critic of Bush’s management of the war.

The main negative for Biden, at least for the Democratic base, is that he voted for the Iraq War resolution, though he did try to (and failed) to pass a much more stringent one with a clearer requirement that diplomacy should be used first.  Biden is also 66 years old, meaning he would be 74 after two Obama terms, likely leaving Obama with a choice of picking someone else as Veep in 2012 or having no clear successor in 2016.

However, in the end, there appears to be very few negatives and a lot of positives from my point of view in regard to choosing Biden.  The only real negative might be having such a Washington insider might damage Obama’s claim of trying to change Washington, but Biden might have enough of a reputation of being a fighter and a man with ideas to be able to overcome that.

Hillary Clinton – Of course, the obvious bridge choice to Hillary’s supporters would be to choose Hillary herself.  Being a Senator for 7 years and first lady for 8 has to count for something in the experience column as well.

The primary pluses for Hillary is that it’s a unification ticket – it would once and for all signal that all the wounds within the party over the primary are healed.  Hillary has also shown signs of performing better in states like Ohio, Florida, and Missouri than Obama – a boost which Obama could definitely use.

The primary negative is that choosing a VP candidate with the purpose of unifying the party doesn’t seem to be a good reason for picking a VP candidate.  Also, there are little signs that there is very much of a fracture within the party anyway.  Obama is losing about 10% to 12% of Democrats, which is pretty standard in any given eleciton cycle anyway.  One also has to consider whether Obama’s supporters have gotten over the primary and would support Clinton.  And I haven’t even gotten to the fact that Hillary could energize the Republican base and of course there is that whole problem with Bill.

The sense is that Hillary isn’t a very likely choice, and that’s probably a good idea.  Even though she did well in the primary, she isn’t necessarily “owed” anything – at least not to the point of giving her the VP slot – and I’m not even sure Hillary would be happy in the #2 slot anyway.

Kathleen Sebelius – Sebelius might be a best of all worlds kind of candidate.  She’s a woman, which might help pick up some of Hillary’s women supporters who may still be leery of Obama.  She’s an outsider like Kaine, but has more experience, being Governor of Kansas for 6 years come January.  The fact that she’s a two-term governor of a state like Kansas can probably give some conservative-leaning independents and democrats assurances, while having a progressive enough administration to appease the base of the party.

The only thing Sebelius really lacks is national security experience.  Also, some people have feared that picking Sebelius could make Hillary supporters angry as a sign of a lack of respect towards Hillary.  This may be an issue if there was still a large portion of the party who resisted supporting Obama, but that no longer appears to be the case, so I’m not convinced that picking Sebelius would have such an impact.  Sebelius also isn’t young, being 60 years old, making it questionable whether she would be a natural successor to an Obama presidency.

In the end, if age isn’t an issue, there appears to be little reason, other than a concern over national security experience, that should stop the selection of Sebelius.

Other people who have been talked about are Wesley Clark, Sam “I founded the DLC” Nunn, Chuck “You do remember I’m a conservative Republican, right?” Hagel, and Chris Dodd.

To me, the super duper short list should be a choice between Biden and Sebelius.  If Obama wants to shore up his foreign policy credentials, he can go with Biden.  If he wants an outsider, but still have someone with experience, he can go with Sebelius.  Those two shine so far above all the others than I’m not sure if there is a good reason not to go with one of those two.