First point: there is absolutely no reason to ask a politician about whether he or she would accept a VP invitation. None. Not even in the days leading up to the selection, and certainly not months in advance. It's simple: almost anyone offered the job would take it, but almost no one will say so in advance. So just don't ask.
Second point: polling people about how a VP pick would affect their vote choice is a total waste of time. Voters don't know what will affect their vote choice, and even if they are familiar with the politician in the question they can't predict how they would feel about that pol after the selection, and the convention speeches, and the rest of it. Nothing wrong with getting favorable/unfavorable ratings of various politicians, but that's about the best you can do now, and it's not much -- especially since non-disastrous VP picks usually make very little difference, anyway.
If people want to speculate about who the pick will be...well, idle chatter is part of the game. But c'mon, reporters: you have limited time to question politicians and limited resources to ask polling questions; might as well save them for something that's at least not a complete waste over everyone's time.
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No, it's not a waste of time, if you expect to win a state(s) as a result of a VP pick. You have to poll that, to know for sure. That's the whole point of the legendary art of "ticket balancing".
ReplyDeleteAnd reporters asking potential VP's if they're interested isn't any more stupid than anything else reporters ask about these days. Reporters are mostly stupid. Duh.
But frankly, if I was preparing my shortlist for my VP selection, I'd be interested to see what the candidates did when the stupid reporters came sniffing around. Their reactions might give useful insight into their qualifications. So it's not a useless exercise, even now. It tells us something about the people, depending how they answer the (stupid) question.
I've read that McGovern's VP fiasco was a result of going with a poorly vetted candidate because almost no one would take the job.
ReplyDelete"No, it's not a waste of time, if you expect to win a state(s) as a result of a VP pick. You have to poll that, to know for sure. That's the whole point of the legendary art of 'ticket balancing'."
ReplyDeleteIa there any empirical data that a VP pick helps someone win state(s) he wouldn't win otherwise?
Anon 11:42,
ReplyDeleteIt can help a bit, a couple of points, in one state. That's about it. Can't hurt much, either, unless there's a real fiasco.
David,
That's right that McGovern had trouble finding someone. But he was also working on it at the last minute, during the convention. That's extremely unlikely to ever happen again.
Most inside reports suggest the Palin pick was pretty last minute.
ReplyDeleteIt was last minute against a phony deadline -- and in the midst of months between nailing down the nomination and the real deadline. McGovern had a real excuse for doing it half-assed; McCain certainly did not.
ReplyDelete