A Governor for Vice President?

Liz Sidoti of the Associated Press has written a general guide to the top running mate prospects in both parties who are governors.

Voters have shown a clear preference for the executive experience of governors when choosing a presidential nominee, but that isn't going to be an option this year. The Republicans have already settled on a senator for their nominee, and the Democrats are in the process of choosing between two senators in the race to be their standard bearer.

American history has no precedent for a campaign with two senators running against each other for president. And, while the last sitting governor to be nominated for vice president was on the winning ticket, it's never been clear whether executive experience is considered as valuable in the vice presidency as it is perceived to be in the presidency.

Anyway, that vice president's record in office is not something most vice presidents would be eager to duplicate. I'm referring to Republican Gov. Spiro Agnew of Maryland in 1968.

And Agnew wasn't really picked for his executive experience. He was picked (so the story goes) because he had shown he could attract votes in a Democratic state (although that didn't translate to a GOP win in Maryland 40 years ago); because he was from a Southern border state and could help attract moderate voters in the South without being associated with the Deep South and the segregationist politicians of that region in that era; and because Richard Nixon believed Agnew gave a rousing speech nominating Nixon at the convention.

Sometimes running mates are picked for personal reasons.

In 1964, Barry Goldwater reportedly selected New York Rep. William Miller as his running mate because of the reputation Miller had for being a thorn in Lyndon Johnson's side.

And Nixon may well have selected Agnew because earlier in 1968, Agnew had been a foot soldier in the movement to draft Nelson Rockefeller -- but, after Agnew's apparent snub by Rockefeller in an episode detailed for history by Theodore H. White in The Making of the President 1968, the Maryland governor shifted his allegiance to Nixon.

And the rest, as they say, is history.

Running mates are selected for a variety of reasons. In past elections, they often were chosen for whatever value they were believed to bring to the ticket. Usually, the hope was to give the presidential nominee a foothold in a region where he appeared weak.

In the old days, that's what was called "geographic balance," but that doesn't seem to be as important anymore.

In 2000, for example, both nominees chose running mates who came from states their parties expected to carry that fall anyway. Republican Dick Cheney came from Wyoming, which hasn't voted for a Democrat since voting for Lyndon Johnson in 1964. And then-Democrat Joe Lieberman was from Connecticut, which last voted Republican in 1988.

Both parties, by the way, won the running mates' home states. The only nominee that year who failed to win his home state was Al Gore -- if he had carried his home state, history would have been radically different.

Four years ago, John Kerry picked John Edwards. On the surface, having a Massachusetts senator and a North Carolina senator on the ticket provided "geographic balance," but that selection was based more on a desire to unify the party than a realistic expectation that Edwards could help Kerry in the South against a Republican incumbent.

"Geographic balance" clearly had nothing to do with the 1992 Democratic ticket. Bill Clinton, then governor of Arkansas, chose Gore, then senator from neighboring Tennessee, as his running mate.

Of course, the more time a presumptive presidential nominee can devote to the decision, the better. At least in theory.

George McGovern didn't have much time in 1972 -- and apparently didn't use the time he did have efficiently. Only a few weeks after the convention, McGovern's choice was dropped from the ticket because of allegations about his mental health.

Anyway, I'd like to examine Sidoti's prospects by party.

REPUBLICANS

It seems to me that John McCain could do worse than choose Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. Young (44), with a reputation as a reformer, Palin's selection would not be without drawbacks.

She wouldn't bring a state to the Republican column that political experts don't already expect the party to carry in the fall. Alaska, after all, has voted in 12 elections since becoming a state in 1959. Only Lyndon Johnson carried it for the Democrats -- the year Palin was born. The rest of the time, Alaska has been (usually) solidly in the Republican fold. And, with 3 electoral votes, Alaska hardly qualifies as an electoral prize.

It can be argued that Alaska is sensitive to concerns about being used as an entry point for illegal aliens. And nominating Palin would give McCain the opportunity to make some history for the Republicans at the same time that the Democratic presidential nominee is making history of his/her own.

But balancing the age difference may not necessarily be a cure-all for the soon-to-be 72-year-old McCain. Having a young Dan Quayle on the ticket didn't appear to alter the dynamics for the then-68-year-old George H.W. Bush when he sought re-election in 1992. Nor did Quayle's presence on the ticket appear to be much of a factor when Bush defeated Michael Dukakis for the presidency four years earlier.

Also, I'm not sure Palin has the conservative credentials McCain needs to mollify the right wing of his party.

If McCain values conservative acceptability more than age or geography, he could do worse than Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, who was political affairs director for Ronald Reagan and chairman of the Republican National Committee when the party took control of both houses of Congress in 1994.

But, once again, the age factor will raise its head, even if McCain chooses to ignore it when making his decision.

Barbour may not be quite as young as McCain would need to counter the obviously youthful Barack Obama -- if Obama turns out to be the Democratic nominee. Barbour will turn 61 about two weeks before Election Day.

Now, I guess it really goes without saying that the age difference won't be that much of a problem for McCain if his general election opponent turns out to be Hillary Clinton. She will turn 61 only four days after Barbour does. The difference between Clinton's age and McCain's age wouldn't be so severe.

But the general assumption these days is that McCain will face Obama. In that scenario, age has to be considered. There is a difference of a quarter century in the ages of those two candidates, which translates to differences in national -- and global -- political, economic, and social views.

A potential running mate who could put a "blue state" into play is Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty. He meets the age credentials (he's 47), he's mostly conservative (he did vote for a gay rights measure as a freshman legislator in the Minnesota House, but later said he had made a mistake), and he's captured enough Democratic votes to be elected governor twice, having been elected to replace the Reform Party's Jesse Ventura in 2002.

He's also a McCain supporter of longstanding, and he will already be a focus of attention as host of the convention, with the Republicans gathering in St. Paul.

And, as governor of a state that lies along the nation's northern border, Pawlenty can contribute a fresh perspective to the debate on immigration and national security. To date, that discussion seems to have been dominated by talk about the southern border.

The presence of a governor from a northern state on the ticket might reassure skittish northern Republicans who have grown tired of the southwestern flavor of the national party in recent decades.

Minnesota only offers 10 electoral votes in the general election, but it could influence other Midwestern states. And, in the last two elections, a shift of only a handful of electoral votes would have reversed the outcome.

Speaking of recent elections, Sidoti points out that Florida is likely to be a swing state again in 2008, and McCain's primary victory there is seen as being due, in part, to the 11th-hour endorsement of Gov. Charlie Crist. Crist is young enough (51), and he was comfortably elected to succeed Jeb Bush in 2006 (52% to 45%).

He might be able to secure Florida for the Republicans in the general election, but, as Sidoti notes, Crist may not be sufficiently conservative to please the party's base. And that could spell trouble elsewhere.

Other GOP prospects among the governors, says Sidoti, are South Carolina's Mark Sanford and Utah's Jon Huntsman. Both governors have been McCain supporters in the past, but Sanford chose to remain neutral, as governor, this year. Both are 47, but Huntsman has the more dependably conservative philosophy.

Neither state has voted for a Democrat in decades -- South Carolina last voted Democratic when it supported Jimmy Carter in 1976, and Utah hasn't backed a Democrat since voting for Lyndon Johnson in 1964.

DEMOCRATS

With Obama in his 40s and Clinton in her 60s, requirements on age balance differ.

As do gender requirements, and Sidoti mentions two female governors who probably would be disqualified from consideration if Clinton captures the nomination.

Nevertheless, both women would bring a lot to the table if Obama is the one who is looking for a running mate. And both of them -- Janet Napolitano of Arizona and Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas -- are governors in usually "red states" who are Obama supporters.

Napolitano is 50 and she is the governor of McCain's home state. Although Arizona voted narrowly for Bill Clinton's re-election in 1996, that is the only time the state has supported the Democratic nominee since voting for Harry Truman in 1948, and it seems likely that Arizona will support its native son, McCain, in 2008 -- even if Napolitano is on the Democratic ticket.

Sebelius, who will be 60 by the time the Democratic convention is held in Denver, has been elected governor of traditionally Republican Kansas twice. She was elected in the nationally Republican year of 2002 with 53% of the vote and was re-elected in the nationally Democratic year of 2006 with 58%.

If Sebelius could put Kansas into play in the presidential race, that would be quite a coup. Kansas last voted for a Democrat in 1964.

If New Mexico's Bill Richardson doesn't decide to seek Pete Domenici's Senate seat, he might make an attractive choice. Not only has he been a candidate for president, but he is part Hispanic, which, as Sidoti notes, means that he "appeals to an up-for-grabs constituency in a politically shifting region." And his experiences in the Clinton administration gave him credentials in foreign policy.

And New Mexico has developed a reputation as a bellwether state. In the 15 elections since the end of World War II, New Mexico has only voted for the losing candidate twice (Al Gore in 2000, Gerald Ford in 1976). It only has 5 electoral votes, but getting the support of New Mexico may be the best good luck charm a candidate can have.

Joe Manchin of West Virginia could help, as Sidoti says, in a state George W. Bush carried twice. But, Sidoti doesn't point out that Bush was the first non-incumbent Republican ever to carry West Virginia. Historically, with no incumbent Republican in the race, West Virginia should be in the Democratic column in the fall. But Bush's victory there eight years ago brings that conventional wisdom into question.

Manchin's stock in West Virginia has been steadily rising, though, and there has been much talk of his future beyond the governor's mansion. He is 61 years old, and observers have mentioned him as a possible Senate candidate, as a possible member of a Democratic president's Cabinet and as a possible running mate. At this point, all I've heard about his electoral plans is that he is seeking a second term as governor this year. Considering that he received 64% of the vote in 2004, his prospects for re-election seem good.

Of course, his plans might change if he receives a phone call from the presidential nominee.

The other Democratic governors on Sidoti's list have declared their allegiances in the presidential race. Whether either will remain on the list will depend on which candidate emerges as the party's presidential nominee.

Ohio's Ted Strickland is a Clinton supporter. He could possibly bring swing-state Ohio into the Democratic column as Clinton's No. 2. He won the governor's office with 61% of the vote in 2006 and, although his age could work against him (67 by the time the convention begins), it isn't necessarily a deal breaker. His value as governor of electoral vote-rich Ohio might tip the scales in his favor.

Virginia's Tim Kaine is an Obama supporter. Virginia is a red state, but it has shown a tendency to support moderate Democrats (i.e., Jim Webb, Reagan's Naval secretary, who defeated Sen. George Allen in 2006 -- keeping Allen from seeking the GOP's presidential nomination this year).

Kaine was a practicing attorney specializing in civil rights for nearly 20 years. He had to overcome charges of extreme liberalism (opposition to the death penalty, support for gun restrictions and abortion rights) when he ran for lieutenant governor in 2001, but he did so successfully and went on to win the governor's office, 52% to 46%, in 2005.

Of course, there are other names being mentioned. There always are. Today is February 24. Neither party will hold its convention until August. This guessing game will continue for quite awhile.