What do you think about incumbent VPs running for president?

[jpgray]

[krkaufman]

1. Good thing; so long as we're not including Cheney n/t

[jpgray]

2. Some bad points are the media attack lead time, and few primary opponents

Both of which can spell trouble. Just curious to see what people thought. I think it's a good idea.

[andym]

3. Neutral factor

Very few sitting VPs actually win.
Before Bush in 1988, Martin van Buren in 1834 was the last one.

Gore "won" in 2000, but it was a hollow victory.

There is a reason. VP's are usually chosen for regional balance (electability), not for overall national electability or as the best replacement for the president.

[starroute]

4. It doesn't have a very good track record

Going back to Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren, vice presidents have made weak candidates and (if elected) weak presidents. They carry too much baggage, not least the weight of having the ex-president looking over their shoulder.

"I'm just the same as so-and-so (only not quite as good or I would have been president myself)" is not a winning platform.

[beyurslf]

5. If history is precendent, it is not usually a good thing.

Nixon is the only person to be VP twice (Eisenhower) on the ticket and Pres twice on the ticket and win. And look at what happened to him.

[AP]

6. 8 years is along time to sit around not doing much that Americans register

as being totally relevant to their lives.

But, in the modern era, it worked for Bush (right) and it almost worked for Gore, in addition to numerous other candidates.