---

VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES WHO HELPED THE TICKET By Rhodes Cook Editor, The Rhodes Cook Letter For additional analysis, check out The Rhodes Cook Letter! Subscribe Now! There is an old saying in politics that vice presidential candidates are never more important than on the day they are selected. After that, they tend to retreat to the back of the stage, some more noisily than others. On Election Night, they barely rate more than a mention. But a few number twos have had more impact on the election than that. They have added important qualities to the national ticket. Often it is gravitas, vigor, or a broad-based geographical or ideological appeal that greatly enhances the electability of their party’s presidential nominee.  From this vantage point, four vice presidential candidates since World War II have clearly done just that: Democrats Lyndon Johnson in 1960, Edmund S. Muskie in 1968, Al Gore in 1992, and Republican Dick Cheney in 2000. Whether Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will make the list is a very open question. John McCain’s choice for a running mate has energized the socially conservative element of the Republican base. But coming into this week’s vice presidential debate with her Democratic counterpart, Sen. Joe Biden, the Palin effect had clearly begun to ebb. And McCain has fallen back in the polls to about the level that he was at the time he picked her.  Buttressing the Ticket The most effective vice presidential candidates buttress their party’s ticket for the entire general election campaign. LBJ did so back in 1960. As the Senate majority leader, he added political leadership credentials to the Democratic ticket headed by the 43-year old Massachusetts Sen. John F. Kennedy. Johnson also served as the ticket’s emissary to the South, highlighted by a 3,500-mile, whistle-stop tour across the region in October that was informally dubbed the “Cornpone Special.” Johnson’s campaigning helped hold much of the South, including his home state of Texas, for the Catholic Kennedy.  Eight years later, Sen. Edmund S. Muskie, provided a different sort of ballast to the Democratic ticket. His strength was not geographic nor was it a political resume. Rather, Muskie’s prime asset was a calm, low-key demeanor that enabled him to reach out to disaffected anti-Vietnam War Democrats that were distrustful of the party’s standard-bearer, Vice President Hubert Humphrey. Wall Street Journal Online Articles by Rhodes Cook: Vice Presidential Candidates Who Helped the Ticket Presidential Campaign Enters Last Big Stage: The Fall Debates The View from Fairfax County, VA 1984: A Cautionary Tale for Sarah Palin Obama’s Challenge: Carving Into the Republican ‘L’ The Past as Prologue: Winning Missouri In Lincolnesque fashion, the craggy-faced Muskie stressed trust and conciliation, and when confronted by hecklers, it was his manner to invite them onto the stage to express their grievances. As such, he acted as an important bridge to disgruntled elements in the Democratic electorate and helped Humphrey close a double-digit gap in the Gallup Poll after the Democrats’ fractious convention in Chicago.  As the fall campaign unfolded, Democrats made Muskie a key feature of their advertising campaign, particularly in contrast to his gaffe-prone Republican counterpart, Maryland Gov. Spiro Agnew. Among an array of examples, Richard Nixon’s vice presidential pick referred to an Asian reporter as “the fat Jap” and at one point noted, “If you’ve seen one city slum, you’ve seen them all.” A Democratic radio ad began with the sound of a thumping heart and asked: “Ed Muskie – or Spiro T. Agnew: Who would you rather have a heartbeat away from the presidency?” Another Democratic ad, made for television, began with “Spiro Agnew for vice president,” followed by gales of laughter. And then the tag line: “This would be funny if it wasn’t so serious.”  The Humphrey-Muskie ticket ended up losing in 1968 by a margin of less than 1 percentage point. That the final outcome was that close was in no small measure a credit to Muskie.  Going Against the Political Grain  Bill Clinton’s selection of Sen. Al Gore as his running mate 24 years later went against the political grain. Both were in their mid-40s. Both were well-steeped in public policy. Both were from neighboring states in the mid-South: Clinton, Arkansas, and Gore, Tennessee. But the young, all-Southern ticket clicked together, amplifying Clinton’s message of generational change. They had such synergy that between the July convention and the November election they made a total of seven full-fledged bus trips together, with Gore cheerfully taking on the role of Ed McMahon to Clinton’s Johnny Carson.  As the campaign progressed, Republican President George H.W. Bush took to ridiculing the environmentally conscious Gore as “Ozone man” or simply “Ozone.” But Gore’s selection helped flip the course of the campaign. Clinton trailed in the polls entering the Democratic convention. He was well ahead afterwards.  Over the last half century or so, most of the Republican presidential candidates who have won have done so by decisive margins, rarely needing any assist from their running mates. An exception was Texas Gov. George W. Bush, whose presidential race in 2000 against then Vice President Gore was as close as they come. The most prominent aspect of Bush’s candidacy was his famous family pedigree.  His VP choice of Dick Cheney – a former chief of staff to President Gerald Ford, former House minority whip, and a former secretary of defense – added some needed gravitas to the ticket. Noted Democratic communications strategist Bill Knapp: Cheney’s experience “provided an alibi for people being for a less experienced candidate (in Bush).”  The jury is out on whether Gov. Palin (or Sen. Biden, for that matter) will find herself on the Mount Rushmore of vice presidential candidates. At this point, she could just as easily end up as a drag on the ticket, or in that broad middle ground where many number twos find themselves on Election Night … as a barely mentioned afterthought. (Posted on Oct. 2, 2008, in the Political Perceptions section of The Wall Street Journal Online)