Columns
Editor's Notes: VP sweepstakes should center on 2 governors
By James Bennett
When Arizona Sen. John McCain and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama choose their vice presidential nominees this summer, the selection will carry considerable weight for one of the few times in political history.
McCain would be 72 on Inauguration Day, the oldest president sworn into office if he wins. The age factor and McCain’s unimpressive domestic credentials have caused heated debate in the Republican Party over the choice.
Obama, in contrast, would be 47 if he prevails. His lack of executive and foreign-policy experience stand out like a skinny kid on Muscle Beach. But his nasty Democratic Party nomination fight with New York Sen. Hillary Clinton and his disconnect with women voters underscore the necessity to unite the party. His decision will spread his message of change in Washington if he makes the right call.
Analysts and advisors are overthinking the McCain decision, which should not be surprising if you consider history. The GOP has a long track record of weak vice-presidential picks: Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. in 1960, William E. Miller in 1964, Spiro Agnew in 1968 and 1972, Dan Quayle in 1988 and 1992, Jack Kemp in 1996 and Dick Cheney in 2000 and 2004.
Only Bob Dole in 1976 with former President Gerald R. Ford was an inspired choice. But in 1996, when Dole was the presidential nominee, he made one of the biggest blunders of his political career by picking Kemp instead of McCain. The GOP lived to regret the decision, considering Kemp’s ineffectiveness as a campaigner and lack of crossover appeal with voters.
This year, McCain’s decision should be easy. To win the election, he must win Florida. If he chooses Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, a tough-on-crime former Attorney General with an outstanding personality, he will take Florida out of play for the Democrats and make it harder for Obama to find an electoral path to victory.
Leave it to Republicans to try and outthink the room, however. Conservatives will push hard for a more right-wing candidate. They want former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (both failed presidential candidates) or South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford. Neither can match Crist’s charismatic appeal.
Romney’s blue-blood disconnect with Middle America was extreme, underscored by the time during the campaign when he went into KFC and tried to eat fried chicken with a knife and fork.
Obama’s decision is not that difficult, either. The conventional wisdom is that he should pick Clinton to unite the party or pick an old-timer like former Georgia Sen. Sam Nunn or former Gen. Wesley Clark to solidify his foreign-policy credentials. In reality, either decision would be catastrophic.
Messages of hope and change are the only reason Obama stands on the precipice of defeating Clinton for the Democratic nomination. She and former President Bill Clinto are the problem Obama has decried since announcing his candidacy. If Obama picks her, he invites the same old politics back into the White House. He does not need Nunn or Clark, either. He needs candidates with fresh faces and fresh points of view.
Back in January, I told the gang on Channel 6’s “Arizona Illustrated” that Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano would be Obama’s No. 2. They laughed at my prediction, saying a Democrat would never turn over the state to a Republican by resigning. GOP Secretary of State Jan Brewer would take over if Napolitano were to step down to run with Obama.
The other commentators — as is often the case with pundits — were thinking small. Being governor of Arizona pales with the opportunity to ride with a once-in-a-lifetime force like Obama and to be a heartbeat from the presidency.
Though Napolitano is cautious and lacks passion on some issues, she would close the party’s gender gap. She would bring expertise on the simmering immigration debate and tough budget choices. More powerfully, her voice criticizing McCain would carry more weight than anyone. The governor would point out what McCain has not done for Arizona, particularly his failure to deliver immigration reform and his inability to comprehend the tidal wave of foreclosures in his state.
The talk-show jungle would have a field day at Napolitano’s expense at first. She has faced whispers about her sexuality since entering politics. She said she’s not a lesbian — “just a straight, single workaholic” — but she’ll be asked by voters, interviewers and critics why she never married or had children. Personally, I could care less about her orientation as long as she’s effective. Not everyone shares that point of view.
The conjecture will continue nonstop until there’s an announcement from McCain or Obama. The best choices, Crist for McCain and Napolitano for Obama, are clear to me but not the high-priced geeks on the GOP and Democratic payrolls.
The decision is pivotal and potentially explosive. The country’s future hangs in the balance.
Contact Editor James Bennett at 547-9770 or jbennett@gvnews.com. His next appearances on “Arizona Illustrated” will be June 13, June 20 and June 27. Respond to this column with a Letter to the Editor by e-mailing letters@gvnews.com. Comment online at www.gvnews.com.
McCain would be 72 on Inauguration Day, the oldest president sworn into office if he wins. The age factor and McCain’s unimpressive domestic credentials have caused heated debate in the Republican Party over the choice.
Obama, in contrast, would be 47 if he prevails. His lack of executive and foreign-policy experience stand out like a skinny kid on Muscle Beach. But his nasty Democratic Party nomination fight with New York Sen. Hillary Clinton and his disconnect with women voters underscore the necessity to unite the party. His decision will spread his message of change in Washington if he makes the right call.
Analysts and advisors are overthinking the McCain decision, which should not be surprising if you consider history. The GOP has a long track record of weak vice-presidential picks: Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. in 1960, William E. Miller in 1964, Spiro Agnew in 1968 and 1972, Dan Quayle in 1988 and 1992, Jack Kemp in 1996 and Dick Cheney in 2000 and 2004.
Only Bob Dole in 1976 with former President Gerald R. Ford was an inspired choice. But in 1996, when Dole was the presidential nominee, he made one of the biggest blunders of his political career by picking Kemp instead of McCain. The GOP lived to regret the decision, considering Kemp’s ineffectiveness as a campaigner and lack of crossover appeal with voters.
This year, McCain’s decision should be easy. To win the election, he must win Florida. If he chooses Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, a tough-on-crime former Attorney General with an outstanding personality, he will take Florida out of play for the Democrats and make it harder for Obama to find an electoral path to victory.
Leave it to Republicans to try and outthink the room, however. Conservatives will push hard for a more right-wing candidate. They want former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (both failed presidential candidates) or South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford. Neither can match Crist’s charismatic appeal.
Romney’s blue-blood disconnect with Middle America was extreme, underscored by the time during the campaign when he went into KFC and tried to eat fried chicken with a knife and fork.
Obama’s decision is not that difficult, either. The conventional wisdom is that he should pick Clinton to unite the party or pick an old-timer like former Georgia Sen. Sam Nunn or former Gen. Wesley Clark to solidify his foreign-policy credentials. In reality, either decision would be catastrophic.
Messages of hope and change are the only reason Obama stands on the precipice of defeating Clinton for the Democratic nomination. She and former President Bill Clinto are the problem Obama has decried since announcing his candidacy. If Obama picks her, he invites the same old politics back into the White House. He does not need Nunn or Clark, either. He needs candidates with fresh faces and fresh points of view.
Back in January, I told the gang on Channel 6’s “Arizona Illustrated” that Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano would be Obama’s No. 2. They laughed at my prediction, saying a Democrat would never turn over the state to a Republican by resigning. GOP Secretary of State Jan Brewer would take over if Napolitano were to step down to run with Obama.
The other commentators — as is often the case with pundits — were thinking small. Being governor of Arizona pales with the opportunity to ride with a once-in-a-lifetime force like Obama and to be a heartbeat from the presidency.
Though Napolitano is cautious and lacks passion on some issues, she would close the party’s gender gap. She would bring expertise on the simmering immigration debate and tough budget choices. More powerfully, her voice criticizing McCain would carry more weight than anyone. The governor would point out what McCain has not done for Arizona, particularly his failure to deliver immigration reform and his inability to comprehend the tidal wave of foreclosures in his state.
The talk-show jungle would have a field day at Napolitano’s expense at first. She has faced whispers about her sexuality since entering politics. She said she’s not a lesbian — “just a straight, single workaholic” — but she’ll be asked by voters, interviewers and critics why she never married or had children. Personally, I could care less about her orientation as long as she’s effective. Not everyone shares that point of view.
The conjecture will continue nonstop until there’s an announcement from McCain or Obama. The best choices, Crist for McCain and Napolitano for Obama, are clear to me but not the high-priced geeks on the GOP and Democratic payrolls.
The decision is pivotal and potentially explosive. The country’s future hangs in the balance.
Contact Editor James Bennett at 547-9770 or jbennett@gvnews.com. His next appearances on “Arizona Illustrated” will be June 13, June 20 and June 27. Respond to this column with a Letter to the Editor by e-mailing letters@gvnews.com. Comment online at www.gvnews.com.
Copyright © 2009 - Green Valley News and Sun