Every four years, the sun dawns over the “silly season” of pre-convention blather in
Washington, centered mostly, on which of the prospective candidates for the
vice presidential slot seemingly makes the most sense.
Inevitably, the conversations are dominated by those who know the least and
have the least experience in campaigns come up with the lamest reasons why a given
party’s nominee ought to nominate so and so, the more gimmicky, the better.
There is but one reason and one reason only to pick a vice presidential running mate
beyond the obvious qualifications; and that is to unify a political party. For many years, both parties
operated in more or less a state of equilibrium and so wisely, the moderate Eisenhower picked the
conservative Nixon. The conservative Nixon picked the moderate Lodge, the conservative Reagan picked
the moderate Bush and so forth. On the Democratic side, the moderate JFK picked the conservative LBJ,
the conservative LBJ picked the moderate Humphrey, the conservative Jimmy Carter picked the
moderate Mondale, and so forth.
As the parties have become more polarized, thanks in part to Barry Goldwater in
1964 and George McGovern in 1972, the tickets have become closer ideologically. Still,
the GOP has its more conservative elements and its more moderate elements. Think
Club for Growth vs. Ripon Society. The Democrats meanwhile have Moveon.org
Vs. the “Blue Dog Democrats.”
John McCain and Barack Obama are no different, getting an unwanted earful emanating form the
cacophony of absurdity from the punditry classes at the local drinking salons of Washington, on cable
television and the Internet.
The possibility that Hillary Clinton might have won the Democratic nomination led
some Republicans to argue for picking a woman for the GOP ticket, the evident reason
being to out-pander the Democrats.
Obama does not have the problem of McCain, given his status. He simply needs to
pick a boring white guy who is seen as incorruptible, stable, a family guy. Think Evan
Bayh.
But now that Obama is on his way to the Democratic nomination, the woman talk has
died down in the GOP though it set off a mad scramble to find an African-American to
go on the GOP ticket. Problem is, they are in short supply these days in the Republican Party. So the
next best thing the panderists thought was Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana. Jindal is a conservative,
a Brainiac, and is also only about 12 minutes older than the constitutional age limit for the office. The
panderists liked him though because he is a minority, of Indian descent. (Not that
Indian, the other Indian.)
Give him a couple of years to mature, though, and he will be one of the GOP’s most
interesting leaders along with Gov. Sara Pallin of Alaska. Tough, smart, anti-corruption---which is sorely
needed in the criminal enterprise that passes for a political parties these days.
Others still argue for former Massachusetts Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, suggesting
he would bring the conservative movement with him. This argument identifies McCain’s
problem but Romney may not be the solution.
McCain has yet to unify the conservative movement that is not a wing of the GOP
but the glue that holds it together. Conservatives have been battered and bewildered
by eight years of betrayal, of Rovism, of Bushism and many are openly discussing the
possible strategic advantage of losing in November and having a government dominated by extreme
left wing liberals as a means of rebuilding populist conservatism.
The idea of picking Romney begs the question, if Romney was the darling of
conservatives, then why didn’t he get the nomination in the first place? Is it possible
that grassroots conservatives have become choosy shoppers, having been told by Bush
that he was one of them but then went and behaved like those other guys?
Upon scratching the surface, conservatives found out Romney supported mandates
in Massachusetts, antithetical to people who believe Freedom is their organizing principle.
Continued... |