The Choice of Vice-Presidential Candidates (Edexcel A-Level History): Revision Notes
The Choice of Vice-Presidential Candidates
Introduction to vice-presidential selection
In American presidential elections, the choice of a vice-presidential running mate is made by the presidential candidate themselves. This decision is strategically important because it can influence the outcome of the election. Presidential candidates typically attempt to balance the ticket by selecting someone from a different part of the country to increase their electoral appeal to voters across the United States.
The strategy of geographic balance has been a cornerstone of American electoral politics for decades. By choosing a running mate from a different region, presidential candidates aim to broaden their appeal and win electoral votes in states where they might otherwise struggle.
Historical examples of this strategy include:
- John F. Kennedy (Massachusetts) choosing Lyndon Johnson (Texas) in 1960
- Ronald Reagan (California) choosing George H.W. Bush (Texas) as his running mate
The vice-presidential candidate can also be chosen to compensate for perceived weaknesses in the presidential candidate's experience or expertise.
Barack Obama's choice: Joe Biden
In 2008, Barack Obama selected Joe Biden from Delaware as his vice-presidential candidate. Although Delaware is one of the smallest states in the USA, Biden was not chosen for geographic balance. Instead, Obama's choice was based on strategic considerations related to his own perceived weaknesses.
Why Biden was chosen
Biden brought several key strengths to the campaign:
- Extensive political experience: He had served as a US senator since 1973, giving him 35 years of experience in national politics
- Foreign affairs expertise: Biden was particularly knowledgeable in foreign policy, an area where Obama was considered weak and vulnerable to criticism
- Credibility: His long career provided gravitas and experience to balance Obama's relative newcomer status
Strategic Ticket Balancing: Obama-Biden 2008
Obama's choice of Biden demonstrated a strategic approach to addressing his vulnerabilities:
- The Weakness: Obama was a first-term senator with limited foreign policy experience, making him vulnerable to attacks
- The Solution: Biden had 35 years in the Senate and chaired the Foreign Relations Committee
- The Result: The ticket combined Obama's message of change with Biden's experience and credibility
This exemplified how vice-presidential selection can be used to create a complete and balanced ticket.
This selection demonstrated Obama's awareness of his own limitations and his strategic thinking in addressing them through his choice of running mate.
John McCain's choice: Sarah Palin
John McCain selected Sarah Palin, the former governor of Alaska, as his vice-presidential running mate. This was a historically significant choice as Palin became only the second woman ever chosen for this position in American history. The first had been Geraldine Ferraro, who was Walter Mondale's running mate for the Democrats in 1984 (Mondale suffered a heavy defeat).
Initial impact of Palin's selection
McCain's choice was initially seen as a bold and potentially successful decision. Following the announcement of Palin's candidacy, poll ratings for McCain rose significantly. At one point, McCain led Obama by 48 percent to 45 percent, reversing Obama's previous advantage.
McCain hoped Palin would achieve several objectives:
- Appeal to women voters: Particularly those who might have supported Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries
- Connect with ordinary Americans: Palin claimed to represent the small-town 'hockey moms' of America who worked hard to raise their families
- Energise the conservative base: She was an enthusiastic supporter of the National Rifle Association, which opposed any form of gun control
The Palin effect
However, what became known as the Palin effect soon emerged, and it was decidedly negative for McCain's campaign. As Palin spent more time on the national stage and faced media scrutiny, serious problems became apparent.
The Palin Effect: A Cautionary Tale
The term "Palin effect" became synonymous with a vice-presidential choice that backfired spectacularly. Rather than energizing the campaign as intended, Palin's performance on the national stage raised serious questions about McCain's judgment and damaged his electoral prospects. This demonstrates how a poorly vetted or unprepared running mate can transform from an asset into a significant liability.
Palin's weaknesses
Palin displayed several critical shortcomings:
- Widespread ignorance of key policy areas: She appeared to lack basic knowledge about important political issues
- Lack of foreign affairs knowledge: Her understanding of international relations and foreign policy was severely limited, opening the Republican campaign to ridicule
- Limited national political experience: As a former governor of Alaska, she had little experience with national politics
- Tendency to make gaffes: She frequently made embarrassing mistakes during the campaign
- Homespun demeanour: While this was initially seen as authentic, it increasingly made her appear unprepared for national office
The Katie Couric interview
A particularly damaging moment came during Palin's interview with Katie Couric of CBS News, broadcast live on national television in September 2008. When asked to explain how Alaska's proximity to Russia gave her foreign policy experience, Palin's response demonstrated her lack of understanding.
The Russia Response: A Campaign-Defining Moment
When Katie Couric asked Palin to explain her foreign policy credentials based on Alaska's proximity to Russia, Palin responded that foreign policy experience came from the fact that Russia was a neighbouring country and that Russian leaders flew over Alaskan airspace.
Why this answer was problematic:
- It was geographically questionable (Russian leaders flying to the USA would likely fly over the Atlantic)
- It made no logical sense (flying over a location does not give someone below foreign policy experience)
- It revealed a fundamental misunderstanding of what constitutes genuine foreign policy credentials
This response became a defining moment that exemplified Palin's unpreparedness for national office and was widely ridiculed in the media and by political commentators.
Media portrayal and public perception
The media played a significant role in exposing Palin's weaknesses. The popular television show Saturday Night Live ran regular features where a comedian portrayed Palin as an incompetent figure, reinforcing negative perceptions among viewers.
However, public perception of media coverage was deeply partisan (divided along party lines):
Gallup Poll Data - September 2008: Perception of Palin Media Coverage
According to Gallup Poll data from September 2008:
- 54% of Republicans believed media coverage of Palin was unfairly negative
- Only 18% of Democrats thought the coverage was unfairly negative
- 33% of all Americans believed coverage was unfairly negative
- 35% thought it was about right
- 21% thought it was unfairly positive
This shows that Republicans felt their candidate was being treated harshly by the media, whilst Democrats were more likely to think the coverage was fair or even too positive.
Interestingly, McCain himself was perceived more favourably by the public in terms of media treatment:
- 53% of Americans believed media coverage of McCain was about right
- Only 30% thought coverage was unfairly negative
Impact on McCain's campaign
Far from being the bold, successful move McCain had hoped for, the choice of Sarah Palin ultimately damaged his chances of winning the presidency. What was intended to energise the campaign and appeal to new voters instead:
- Made the campaign appear unserious and poorly thought-through
- Raised questions about McCain's judgement in selecting a running mate
- Provided ammunition for opponents and comedians
- Undermined confidence in what a McCain-Palin administration might look like
As one commentator noted, Palin was not only embarrassing herself but had quickly become a national joke. The article from AlterNet described watching her interviews as "like watching a train wreck" and noted that "candidates for national office usually get better as time goes on. Palin is clearly getting worse."
Significance for the 2008 election
The contrasting vice-presidential choices made by Obama and McCain reflected their different strategic situations and ultimately contributed to the election outcome. Obama's selection of the experienced Biden shored up his weaknesses, whilst McCain's choice of the inexperienced Palin exposed his campaign to ridicule and damaged his credibility. This demonstrates how crucial the vice-presidential selection can be in determining the success or failure of a presidential campaign.
Key Points to Remember:
-
Presidential candidates choose their vice-presidential running mates to balance the ticket and increase electoral appeal
-
Joe Biden was chosen by Obama for his extensive experience (senator since 1973) and expertise in foreign affairs, compensating for Obama's perceived weakness in this area
-
Sarah Palin was McCain's bold choice as only the second woman vice-presidential candidate in US history, initially boosting his poll ratings
-
The Palin effect saw her campaign performance deteriorate, with her lack of knowledge (especially in foreign policy) opening the Republican campaign to ridicule
-
Media coverage of Palin was perceived very differently by Republicans (54% thought it unfairly negative) and Democrats (only 18% thought it unfairly negative), showing deep partisan divisions
-
Palin's poor performance, particularly in the Katie Couric interview, damaged McCain's chances rather than helping him, demonstrating how a vice-presidential choice can make or break a campaign