We Wait, and Wait, and Wait…
I have to say, Obama putting off his VP announcement this late is fairly interesting. For one, it’ll be the shortest turnaround from VP announcement to convention in modern political history—the convention starts on Monday, remember—and now that it’s this late they might even (and might as well) wait for a convention VP unveiling (which would be pretty cool, actually).
This is interesting for two reasons. The first, is since McCain decided to wait until the day after the convention to announce his VP, Obama has essentially wrapped up convention buzz with VP buzz, so there’s every reason to suspect that the sum total will in fact step on McCain’s announcement. Particularly if Obama’s is the more interesting pick, they’ll be virtually no turn-around time from his VP pick to McCain’s, which hurts McCain both in finding some oxygen for his own announcement, and hoping for some blowback on Obama’s.
The second reason it’s interesting is one that Nate Silver highlights, and I agree with:
And this year, the circumstances are especially poor for a late roll-out. The pre-convention coverage will have to compete with the Closing Ceremonies. The convention coverage will have to compete with The Clinton Show. There isn’t really a post-convention period, since the Republicans will hold their convention the week after.
If you leave yourself with a candidate who hasn’t been adequately branded, you give yourself two problems. One, the Obama-Who? Effect, i.e. underscoring the fact that Obama is inexperienced and unknown. And two, the fact that the candidate won’t have the stature to draw large crowds on the campaign trail, or to maximize their exposure as a potential surrogate for you.
All of this points strongly to the known knowns: Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton.
The fact is, part of the point of selecting somebody like Kaine or Sebelius (both with about 40% name ID), is the process of voters getting to know them. Those are picks that, one would think, you’d like a little time for, both so voters can stew about it, the campaign can deal with questions as they come up, and the cw on your pick forments. All of that is hijacked something fierce if it’s VP/DNC/McCainVP/RNC with Olympics thrown in. We’ll be well into September before anybody can really digest the VP pick, and if it’s less than stellar or something comes out, that’ll sink in right in time for the first debates. Oops.
Conversely, if you’re picking somebody like Biden and Clinton, a convention-unveiling (or close enough) is about the perfect way to do it. Send a unity message, don’t leave the media much time to grumble about lacking a new face, give them the most hospitable stage possible to underscore the strength of a known pick, yadda yadda. Imagine, for instance, if Clinton were announced as the VP in July. Now contrast that to announcing her on the first day of the convention. It’s night and day.
Of course, all of these reasons are also reasons why, if it is a Kaine or Sebelius, Obama may have botched the timing. As for McCain, I said early that he ought to have gone first; that’s even more true now. If it’s a Romney or Pawlenty, we’re going to be nearing October before anybody even notices.
What, you didn’t get the text message?
Comment by Rojas — 8/22/2008 @ 2:56 pm
Didn’t sign up for it.
Comment by Brad — 8/22/2008 @ 2:58 pm
Well, according to Politico it ain’t gonna be Hillary unless Obama is using a Ouija board to do the choosing. And I will say again that not choosing Hillary could very likely be Obama’s undoing. We’ll see.
Comment by James — 8/22/2008 @ 3:10 pm
I’m actually thinking it might well be Hillary.
Comment by Brad — 8/22/2008 @ 3:11 pm
I think Brad’s post here points to a larger reality: that by turning this into an event, Obama has more or less set an expectation that he can’t meet without a suprising and dramatic pick.
To engage in this kind of political theatre for the sake of rolling out Kathleen Sebelius strikes me as very, very unwise. Which is not to say that he won’t do so; it’s just a political miscalculation.
My opinions on Hillary Clinton are the exact opposite of James’s. I think selecting Clinton would spell the complete and utter end of Obama’s “new politics” branding. But as Brad notes, the choice of Clinton would explain the drama we’re being asked to undergo.
Comment by Rojas — 8/22/2008 @ 3:18 pm
If it is, it will be without the vetting process (according to Politico). I will add, just as I have said a number of times here, if it is Hillary, Obama will be our next president, but had better sleep with a gun under his pillow. If it isn’t Hillary, Michelle can suspend her drape selection process right now. It’s sort of damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t I fear. But, alas, that’s what happens when you deal with the Clintons.
Comment by James — 8/22/2008 @ 3:20 pm
Rojas, branding doesn’t get you elected, votes do.
Comment by James — 8/22/2008 @ 3:21 pm
I don’t know how many people will vote for Barack Obama unless he appears to be a bold and confident alternative to the usual.
If Obama puts Clinton on the ticket, it means he’s no longer trying to sell his own brand; he’s just trying to sour America on the alternative. That’s not the way forward for him. He has to clear the bar in terms of people’s confidence in him as a President; otherwise they will vote for a headless chicken over him.
Obama is transformative or he’s toast.
Comment by Rojas — 8/22/2008 @ 3:26 pm
And then there is Chet Edwards.
Comment by James — 8/22/2008 @ 3:31 pm
I think Obama can work his way around all of that, Rojas. After all, he will be president and he says he wants someone to challenge his assumptions. He could easily sell it as “The will to change and the experience to make it happen”, yaddy ya. The main problem for him with selecting Hillary (other then his health prospects) is her record on the Iraq war.
Comment by James — 8/22/2008 @ 3:35 pm
I don’t know if you can complain that your opponent is a member of the upper crust and then turn around and nominate a man named “Chet”.
Comment by Rojas — 8/22/2008 @ 3:35 pm
Actually, I don’t know if you can nominate a man named “Chet” under ANY circumstances.
Comment by Rojas — 8/22/2008 @ 3:36 pm
You’re right. Surely the framers of the Constitution made some provision to avoid such a travesty.
Comment by James — 8/22/2008 @ 3:38 pm
Were it Constitutional, we’d have been spared the historical tragedy of the Arthur administration. No; the people alone have the authority to hold back the rising tide of Chet-dom.
Comment by Rojas — 8/22/2008 @ 3:44 pm
Oh yeah, Arthur. He’s one of those ones that no one gives a rat’s ass about.
Comment by James — 8/22/2008 @ 3:50 pm
More of a national repressed memory than anything else.
Fear the Chet.
Comment by Rojas — 8/22/2008 @ 3:52 pm
The more I think about it though, the more even I have to admit that a Clinton-as-VP unveiling at the convention would be about the best political theater in modern convention history.
Comment by Brad — 8/22/2008 @ 4:46 pm
It is wholly conceivable, Brad. First, the notion that Clinton hasn’t been vetted totally overlooks the fact that she was Obama’s primary opponent and the Obama people probably have her DNA mapped and know what color her vibrator is and what she calls it. If he does indeed tap her as veep, a) it is a risk to be sure, b) it means he recognizes the realities of not picking her; the same ones I have set forth and you dismiss as the Nostradamic ramblings of an old fool, and c) Obama is very shrewd (and shrewed).
Comment by James — 8/22/2008 @ 4:57 pm
All I can say in response to Brad’s last comment is that even though I disagree with almost every policy position Barack Obama takes, I’m confident that he’s intelligent enough to realize that picking Hillary as is running mate would be the biggest political mistake of his life.
Even if he could guarantee the White House by doing so.
Comment by Doug Mataconis — 8/22/2008 @ 5:24 pm
It would be controversial, for sure.
Still, I think James might not be such an old fool at that on this one.
Comment by Brad — 8/22/2008 @ 7:38 pm
I agree Doug. I will say that she is a problem for him no matter how he plays it. Having her as VP is a pretty sure thing for him (I think), but is so perilous that it borders on physical danger. Not selecting her is politically perilous in its own right since I conjecture (with great confidence) that she will do everything she can to undermine his campaign even as she waves hes banner. It’s who she is.
Comment by James — 8/22/2008 @ 7:43 pm
I still think she can’t do much but have Bill be a passive aggressive twat, which he’s pretty much going to do no matter what anybody says.
As for problem for him as VP, I’m not so sure (besides the “sleep with a gun under your pillow” point). “Keep your enemies close” and all that. She could function a little like a Cheney, serving as a lightning rod for criticism while Obama rises above it. Having Clinton eat shit for Obama for a living for the next 8 years has to have its appeal in the Chicago inner circle.
Comment by Brad — 8/22/2008 @ 7:45 pm
All good points, Brad. You still underestimate the almost diabolical ambition that lies within Hillary’s DNA.
Comment by James — 8/22/2008 @ 7:50 pm
Time to end the speculation.
I admit it: I am Obama’s nominee for Vice President.
Comment by Rojas — 8/22/2008 @ 9:17 pm
MSNBC is reporting that both Bayh and Kaine have been told that it isn’t them.
Which validates what I said above, as I am neither Bayh nor Kaine.
Comment by Rojas — 8/22/2008 @ 9:46 pm
Well, it won’t be Sebelius. Her name is too long for the bumper sticker. I believe in using science.
Comment by James — 8/22/2008 @ 10:15 pm
Clinton or Biden or Sebelius then.
Comment by Brad — 8/22/2008 @ 10:26 pm
He really needs to announce his choice or all this hype could very well backfire on him. It is beginning to feel like the announcement of the new American Idol.
Comment by James — 8/22/2008 @ 10:38 pm
Nancy Pelosi. Remember I said that because I might deny it later.
Comment by James — 8/22/2008 @ 10:42 pm
Yeah, the hype is definitely something that could backfire. If it’s Biden, it’s fine, but if it’s somebody like Sebelius, basically everything about the pick comes down to her convention speech (again noting she is not otherwise slated to speak at the convention). Thankfully, it sounds like Bayh and Kaine are out, and both would have the largest chance of backfire in terms of monumental anti-climax.
Comment by Brad — 8/22/2008 @ 11:11 pm
Outside chance: Chuck Hagel?
Now that would make for some damn fine convention theater.
Comment by Brad — 8/22/2008 @ 11:12 pm
Looks like it’s Biden – or at least that’s what Politio says that the AP says that some Obama associates told them.
Comment by Liz — 8/22/2008 @ 11:16 pm
As you know, third hand gossip is always right.
Comment by Liz — 8/22/2008 @ 11:17 pm
Fourth hand for those of us reading your post.
Comment by Cameron — 8/22/2008 @ 11:28 pm
One final thing to add before bed:
If the timing doesn’t backfire, I agree with kos, the Obama people have played this one about as well as it can be played. Hard to remember a VP rollout that actually had hype that lived up to the hype of the hype.
Also, something that’s been tying campaigns in knots the last few cycles is how to get cell phone numbers.
Obama probably bagged 50 million of them in one fell swoop, just in time for the general election financing to begin.
Comment by Brad — 8/23/2008 @ 12:20 am
I bet Kaine lifted his left eyebrow when he got the news. Call it a hunch.
Comment by James — 8/23/2008 @ 12:25 am
I purposely didn’t sign up for the notification for that exact reason.
And 50 million seems like an exceedingly high estimate. My guess is more like 3 million, which would be a major coup in and of itself.
Comment by Cameron — 8/23/2008 @ 12:25 am
A sure way to make people hate you is to spam their mobile phone, Brad. If raking in mobile numbers was the goal, then he just made at least 10 million enemies.
Comment by James — 8/23/2008 @ 12:29 am