Edwards Not Likely To Matter Very Much
By Paul M. Weyrich
July 8, 2004

John Kerry has finally picked his vice presidential nominee. The speculation was getting monotonous. Susan Estrich staked her career on the proposition that Senator John Edwards of North Carolina will be Kerry's selection. It appears that she gets to keep her job. (Susan Estrich, former manager of the Dukakis campaign, is currently, among other things, the Robert Kingsley Professor of Law and Political Science at the University of Southern California.)

Certain other pundits in the media were relying on the Kerry friendship with Rep. Dick Gephardt that goes back 20 years. They thought Gephardt would be the pick. Of late the Kerry camp has let it be known that the presumptive Democratic nominee believes his pick must have extensive understanding of national security issues, so some media thought that meant former Senator Sam Nunn. Nunn is fairly conservative but less so than was John McCain who temporarily derailed the Kerry campaign because he "just said no". Nunn, who himself thought of running for President, changed his position from pro-life to pro-abortion. That made him more acceptable to the zoo.

Which VP nominee has really helped the presidential nominee in the past 40 years? I would suggest one: Lyndon Johnson, running with JFK in 1960. I think Johnson helped John Kennedy in the South and border states. John F. Kerry, who has been pretending to be JFK for years, could have selected Nunn for the same reason. Would Nunn have done for Kerry what Johnson did for Kennedy? I rather doubt it. If the rap on Kerry is that he lacks charisma, Nunn certainly would not have overshadowed him. The master of the understatement, Nunn is soft and quiet and can, at times, put an audience to sleep faster than Kerry.

Still, in an election where Iraq is likely to dominate the mind of the electorate, Nunn might have convinced the electorate that he could help fight terrorists, especially if Kerry announced that, if elected, he would put Nunn in charge of that task. So I suppose Nunn could have helped Kerry in the South but so could Edwards and Gephardt. In fact, Gephardt was the candidate the White House most feared running against.

Look at the various VP nominees selected over the years by the winners. In 1964, LBJ picked Senator Hubert Humphrey (D-MN). Humphrey, who could give a rip roaring rousing two-hour speech at the drop of a hat, brought LBJ almost nothing.

Richard Nixon picked Maryland Governor Spiro Agnew in 1968. He surely didn't help Nixon and may have hurt him. He apologized five times for major gaffes he made along the way.

In 1976, former Governor Jimmy Carter picked Sen. Walter Mondale (D-MN). He brought Carter very little and was dull, so he couldn't even whip up the folks as Humphrey did.

In 1980 Ronald Reagan picked former CIA Director and Reagan rival George Bush. Reagan was worried about John Anderson, who was drawing significant strength in polls at the time. It turned out that circumstances changed so that Reagan could have probably selected Sen. Jesse Helms and still won. Bush, after two terms as Reagan's quiet VP, shocked the political world and chose Sen. Dan Quayle (R-IN). Through no fault of his own, but because of news media rage at being upstaged by Bush, Quayle did not help Bush and may have hurt him a bit.

Then Bill Clinton took Sen. Al Gore as his number two choice. Gore did almost nothing for Clinton because he was such a close copy of the Arkansas Governor.

George Bush, of course, in 2000 picked Dick Cheney. Supposedly he brought a sense of "gravitas" to a prospective administration...someone who understood foreign affairs where Bush supposedly did not. Following the three debates in which Bush did well, that issue disappeared so Cheney in the election didn't bring much to the polls. He has brought a great deal to the Bush Administration in running the country. But if, as expected, Cheney runs with Bush again this year he will do little electorally to help Bush get re-elected.

If history is any guide, Kerry is doing well for a challenger and George Bush could be in deep trouble. Media types keep saying how remarkable it is that after months of pounding Bush is still running neck and neck with Kerry. Rather it is remarkable that Kerry, who had to face the incumbency of George Bush and millions of dollars spent telling the voters that Kerry wants to raise taxes and is weak on defense, is still in contention. After the convention Kerry could move into a solid lead.

So now that Kerry has chosen Edwards as Veep, it probably won't matter much after all when it comes to his election. Edwards is second choice to Senator John McCain (R-AZ). The Charlotte Observer notes, "Inexperience never stopped [Edwards] from leaping into the unknown before. He knew little about domestic policy and less about foreign affairs when he ran for the U.S. Senate. He is seeking the presidency with less than five years of legislative training, against a war-tested incumbent..."

John Edwards is telegenic and comes from the swing state of North Carolina. A skilled and persuasive trial lawyer, the Kerry camp is pinning their hopes on this first-term senator's ability to strike a responsive chord with working-class Democrats in a way that the more politically experienced but charismatically challenged populist, former House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt (D-MO), failed to do in his own bids for the Democratic Presidential nomination. One question worth asking is whether Edwards' ascension represents a diminution of organized labor's clout within the Democratic Party or Gephardt's own loss of support from union leaders? After all, Dean had done well in winning support from unions such as AFS-CME and SEIU, which carry clout within the party. But organized labor lacks the numbers it once did, and the trial lawyers are a well-heeled constituency. It also reflects Kerry's confidence since it is easy to imagine Kerry's advisors being concerned that Edwards, with his more outgoing and vibrant personality, would overshadow his Massachusetts colleague.

The point is simply this. In years gone by the vice presidential pick was looked at as a ticket balancer. With the choice the presidential candidate brought different wings of the party together, or balanced one part of the country with the other. New York Gov. Tom Dewey chose California Gov. Earl Warren in 1948 to join one end of the country with the other.

No longer is the Veep expected to bring a region of the country along with him. Dick Cheney delivered a whopping three electoral votes from Wyoming, which Bush would have carried any way (if by a smaller margin). What he did bring was a sense of calm competence. Surely he could be president if something happened to Bush.

The vice presidency has been re-invented since the 1950s. Alben Barkley (D-KY.) was the last vice president to perform in the traditional role of that office. He essentially presided over the U.S. Senate.

When Dwight David Eisenhower became president, taking Richard Nixon with him as vice president, he gave Nixon considerable responsibilities. Nixon represented this country abroad a number of high profile times including in the famous kitchen debate with Premier Nikita Khrushchev, during which Nixon said prophetically (pointing his finger at Khrushchev),"Your grandchildren will live under freedom." From that time on, the VP was more than a ticket balancer. LBJ was in charge of the space program under JFK. And on it went through the present era. Bill Clinton placed Al Gore in charge of many important programs and projects. Probably no Veep has had the influence and importance of Cheney.

Kerry said he was willing to think "outside the box". That didn't get Nixon or Bush 41 very far.

The vice presidential choice will not be judged on what ticket balance Edwards can bring. Rather he should be looked at in the context of modern vice presidents. How well can he assist a president in governing? And if the president can't function, could he become a successful president?

If you were sitting on the edge of your chair, waiting for Kerry to make his choice, relax. Edwards is likely to matter little.

-------------

Paul M. Weyrich is Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.

--------------------

Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.