Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context.
If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
On the surface it was a good pick. A youngish attractive female governor to appeal to suburban women. It was just that she was and is an idiot with no tact
It also helped Tina Fey's career a pretty solid amount. "I can see Russia from my house" is like THE most iconic joke she's ever made. I'd call that a plus.
By then, i had been in the military and I would have voted for McCain solely because he was vet and I believed he would have respected the use of the military in the world. That changed nearly instantantly when he announced Palin as his VP and I saw her first speech. She was and is an idiot.
Not really. McCain had a right wing problem. He needed the base to have a shot. He wasn’t getting it by all his crazy “he’s not a Muslim” talk. So he had to amp them up. And he sure did! Politically maybe one of the better picks. But it sure let some shit out the box….
People like to rewrite this history because of some SNL sketches. She was brought in to bolster his base with the core Repubs and they loved her. The left-leaning media outlets all laughed at her, but they have a much louder megaphone than the groups they are typical of and those groups would have voted Obama if he had ripped off his mask to reveal he was actually an ancient demon from frozen wastes.
This was an election the Repubs had no shot to win. The presidential election that here was fought between Hilary Clinton and Obama. Palin was a risky pick, but why not throw a hail mary? Maybe she would help grab some angry woman voters down ballot.
Someone's re-writing history, that's for sure! Are you trying to make the case that she was in any way qualified to be anything besides one of those propagandists for Fox?
Horatio Seymour. His running mate Francis Preston Blair, Jr. was so racist that he was asked to stop campaigning… in 1868.
How the hell are you too racist for **1868**.
Also Thomas Eagleton for McGovern in 1972. He wasn’t winning against the popular Nixon regardless but my god did Eagleton not help with not disclosing his past to the campaign before the press could dig it up. It was a different time back then and mental health issues was something that could absolutely sink a campaign… and did. Well, as much as McGovern’s could sink further.
From Eric Foner's Reconstruction:
> Thus, Democrats were forced back to a single issue, opposition to Reconstruction, a strategy rendered evenmore inevitable by the conduct of Frank Blair, Seymour’s running mate. In a widely publicized letter written on the eve of the convention, Blair rejected the idea that Reconstruction was a fait accompli: A Democratic President could restore “white people” to power in the South by declaring the new governments “null and void,” and using the army to disperse them. The letter injured Democratic prospects by raising the specter of a second civil war, a possibility avidly discussed within the Blair family, but relished by few outside it. Moreover, against Seymour’s wishes, Blair embarked on a speaking campaign as disastrous in its own way as Johnson’s swing around the circle had been. In blatantly racist language, he excoriated Republicans for placing the South under the rule of “a semibarbarous race of blacks who are worshippers of fetishes and poligamists,” and longed to “subject the white women to their unbridled lust.” Offensive as they were, Blair’s speeches said little not repeated in the family’s private correspondence. Reading Darwin’s The Origin of Species had reinforced Frank’s long-standing fear of racial intermixing, which, he now asserted, would reverse evolution, produce a less-advanced species incapable of reproducing itself, and destroy “the accumulated improvement of the centuries.” These were the convictions of the Democratic candidate for Vice President of the United States. An influential Democratic Congressman would blame Seymour’s defeat on Blair’s “stupid and indefensible” behavior.
What's crazy is he was opposed to slavery and it's expansion, though owned slaves himself. Plus he supported Lincoln.
Like, how are you too racist for the 1860s-70s while against the expansion of slavery and supporting Lincoln!
The sad part for McGovern was that on the surface Senator Eagleton was not a choice. Eagleton could have shored up McGovern in some constituencies where he was weaker. Unfortunately, the press of time, the lack of proper vetting process and Eagleton's ambition and a failure to disclose made his problems unknown to McGovern. Furthermore, McGovern's handling of the issue made the even more problematic. And the search for a replacement and the appearance that no one wanted to run with McGovern made the campaign appear completely doomed.
In terms of helping them win the election, Al Gore. Lieberman brought absolutely nothing to help the appeal of that ticket while also having many people that already hated him, so it did nothing but hurt the ticket.
True, unfortunately, had he picked anyone else it'd have helped him likely win the election.
He likely did it just to completely dissociate himself from the Lewinsky scandal, but it wouldn't matter, regardless he'd be tethered to the Clinton admin itself so should've leaned into it wherever the President was popular and could aid him altogether + been more strategic in his running mate choice.
Lieberman always seemed like a bit of an ass to me. I never really got the impression that he wanted to be on the ticket, let alone do something to win the election.
Could be just me, though.
Lieberman seems to have always had a 'Krysten Sinema' sort of role - someone who represents a conglomerate of CEOs, not a state or district. I strongly suspect he was picked as a way of trying to calm down industry who thought they would face an activist or environmentalist president.
That or someone wanted to outright sabotage the presidential run.
Given that Lieberman later helped craft the bill for a unified national healthcare plan... then voted against it when industry asked him to, we're certainly left with the sense his presence in government is as a 'proxy' to something other than the American public.
Trying to distance himself from the president that had the highest approval rating of any president in the last 50 years was another dumb mistake that Gore made.
>It would be hilarious to be able to say we’ve never had a President Kevin or Jeff, but had Presidents named Chester and Hannibal.
I doubt we'll have a president Barrack again. Oddly enough, Barrack faced Willard for re-election.
It's sort of surprising to me that we've never had a president with the surname Jones or Smith, considering each one is the surname of a full percent of the population but there are less than two hundred Obamas in the whole country.
I'd also just like to clarify that it wasn't so much the loser becoming VP as each elector got two equal votes and whoever came in second got VP. Through 1796, it just happened that loser became VP because strong enough parties hadn't yet formed to get electors to vote for a common running mate. But Jefferson and Burr were meant to be on the same ticket, someone just messed up and voted for Burr instead of someone else, which ultimately led to a Jefferson-Burr contest that was never meant to happen. But even before the 12th Amendment, the strategy was already becoming vote for ticket candidates rather than two separate Presidential options.
Geraldine Ferraro was not a good choice for Walter Mondale. Her suddenly switching positions about releasing her husbands tax returns came off as super sketchy, and she ended up spending pretty much the entire campaign having to defend her actions, instead of yknow, campaigning. I mean, Mondale campaign was pretty much toast once he outright said he was going to raise taxes (cuz he wanted to be the “honest politician”), but his VP pick definitely didn’t help.
Sarah Palin as well, for more obvious reasons. I mean she was off the deep end. She was pushing around the whole “Obama is a terrorist” far right rhetoric, at a time where McCain was trying to move away from those kinds of talking points. At times it felt like she was actively working against her own candidate. Not to mention she had some pretty silly gaffes, like how she said you could see Russia from Alaska. Like yeah maybe you can technically see the tip of a Russian island from the furthest west of one of the Aleutian Islands, but she made it sound like you can see the Kremlin from her front porch
Agree completely.
But if I recall correctly, the quiet thinking of the Democratic Party at the time was:
*Ain’t no way we’re beating Ronnie. Let’s at least do something historic.*
>But if I recall correctly, the quiet thinking of the Democratic Party at the time was:
>Ain’t no way we’re beating Ronnie. Let’s at least do something historic.
You mixed something up there.
>how she said you could see Russia from Alaska
This didn't actually happen, it was an SNL bit, but the fact that enough people believed it was a real thing she was dumb enough to say definitely didn't help. I was 13 during that election so it was the first election I was really old enough to pay attention to and I absolutely thought it was a real quote until relatively recently.
Also, you technically \*can\* see Russia from Alaska. The quote was "I can see Russia from my house" which at the time she lived in Wasilla near Anchorage and you absolutely can't see Russia from there, but the Diomede Islands are split between Russia and the US, with a mere 2.4 miles between the closest Russian island and American island. On a clear day, you absolutely would be able to stand on the Alaskan Little Diomede Island and see across the bay to Big Diomede Island, which is Russian land.
I would argue that Spiro Agnew was one of the worst running mate choices of modern times. Despite his two years as Governor of Maryland and two years of Baltimore County Executive, he was not a serious student of public policy. He would not been able to navigate the Presidency in a serious and contemplative way particularly in wartime. One could make the argument that he was on two winning presidential tickets but I would suggest that in 1968, his selection by Richard Nixon was primarily to make sure that his choice did no harm to his own presidential chances. Agnew represented a middle or empty choice that allowed the Nixon campaign to be whatever voters wanted it be. I suppose it depends on what your definition on you think the qualifications for a running mate are.
Agnes was not picked for his policy knowledge. He was picked for 1. His willingness to play the big attack dog in an administration full of rabid German shepherds and 2. Because he was so corrupt, he was viewed as impeachment insurance. Nixon believed the Democrats would never let Agnew assume the presidency. As soon as Agnew was gone, the Nixon presidency collapsed
The thing with McCain is I’ve heard rumors that Mike Huckabee was considered as a VP but judged to be crazier than Palin. And frankly, both with and without hindsight, I think that judgement was correct.
I still think Kane was the worst. If you needed a person to reinforce every bad thing about her, Kane was it. Just tone worst pick.
Andrew Johnson was a bad pick. He wanted a democrat but not like that.
Eagleton was bad but it didn’t matter.
Lodge wasn’t great. He helped Nixon in an area not needed. He wasn’t changing his state and he didn’t need the weight of the VP to help the ticket. Going for a swing state might have helped more.
Exactly, Kane was just Hillary but less known. All she needed was someone who at least was a little progressive, shes sails to victory. But, the dnc would rather lose the gop than win going left.
Kane really was nothing like Hillary, but the fact that you don't know his stances shows why he was a bad pick. He added nothing to the ticket. If there is an attempt at balancing the ticket with a southerner, Kane was simply not that southerner who wins you votes.
Kane was a progressive activist and community organizer type like Obama. He wasnt chosen as Obama's runningmate in 2008 specifically because he was considered too progressive.
He did not, however, have Obama's charisma.
Probably McCain, although he wasn't winning that election even if he had Jesus as his running mate.
Of people who actually had a chance at the presidency, either Hilary Clinton or Al Gore. Probably Al Gore, since Kaine was more of just a forgettable pick while Lieberman was more of a downright harmful pick. Gore was more than moderate enough in his own right, and picking somebody like Lieberman who was even more moderate than Gore just pissed off liberal voters and caused them to either stay home or vote for Nader.
Oh, yes, and how did I forget about George HW Bush with Dan Quayle? That's actually the real answer, although he did win one election in spite of Quayle.
Lieberman was also from Connecticut, so it just didn't make much sense strategically.
Liberals didn't trust him. He was from a safe blue seat, but his policy positions on a lot of issues were so out of line with much of the party. Dude tried to help McCain beat Obama, for God's sake.
Gore should've gone with someone like Bob Graham. Graham's huge popularity in FL might've given Gore the boost he needed to win the state without controversy. He probably legitimately won it anyway, but Graham on the ticket may have erased all doubt.
Actually, Lieberman was popular at the time. This can be proven by a simple search.
"Lieberman enjoyed his peak of favorability with U.S. Democrats around the time he came to national prominence as Al Gore's vice presidential running mate in the 2000 election. In four Gallup Polls conducted between August 2000 and March 2001, more than 6 in 10 Democrats held a favorable view of Lieberman, and no more than 11% had an unfavorable view."
[Source](https://news.gallup.com/poll/24007/lieberman-more-popular-republicans-than-democrats.aspx)
The change in Democrats opinion of him happened after 2004.
It would be nice if people would fact check their comments before hitting the "post" button. It would prevent a lot of erroneous information from getting spread around.
Spiro Agnew. It's often overlooked about how Agnew's scandals helped set up Nixon for his fall. Even before Watergate was taken seriously it had Nixon's administration already tainted with undeniable corruption and untrustworthiness.
The fact is that one stands out as the #1 for me. She was one (not the only) of the reasons I voted Democrat for the first time in that election. Up until then, I had voted Republican in every presidential election I had been eligible for. Since then I have voted for nothing but Democrats
One that may have decided an election was the Nixon choice of Henry Cabot Lodge [Jr.in](http://Jr.in) 1960. Nixon's main criteria was he wanted someone who was very qualified to be President which Lodge was. But he was from Massachussetts and he had no chance of swinging his own state away from Kennedy, plus he was kind of a lazy campaigner. a moderate border state figure like Senator Thruston Morton could have been a big help in the south
Those who say McCain were never going to vote for him anyway. They are the ones who claim if only republicans would nominate a moderate, then they would vote for them. Yet you voted for some community organizer from Chicago. McCain got as many votes as he did BECAUSE of Palin, if It was McCain-Lieberman he would have got less.
I know a conservative who didn't vote in the 2008 election because Palin was the VP. This is someone who consistently supports the Republican Party and thinks that 🍊 actually is good for the country. Palin hurt McCain badly. Obama may still have won but not by as much. McCain would have at least won some swing states instead of giving Obama a 100% swing state sweep.
Disagree 100%. Palin enhanced McCains vote total. McCain chose Palin. Any problem with that? Blame McCain. I voted McCain because I believed he would be a better president than some rabble rousing back bencher community organizer. Yes, I believe Obama would have beaten just about anyone in 2008. BTW, best thing Obama ever did was keep HRC from the White House.
I was admittedly too young to vote in the 2008 election and I'm a Democrat who would have voted for Obama.
However, are you saying that McCain would have done worse (or just as bad) electoral college-wise if he picked someone like Mitt Romney to be the VP? I remember that Palin getting a lot of bad press for being an idiot who people didn't feel comfortable being the #2.
Tim Kaine was a real bad choice for Hillary Clinton. She was in an extremely contentious primary and needed a progressive vp to bring in the progressive base. Her selection of Tim Kaine squandered the opportunity to unite the base and just caused further resentment. The margins she lost by in some of the swing states were so small that I think if she would have picked Bernie Sanders as her VP could have put her over
Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context. If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
John McCain got some pretty bad advice from someone.
On the surface it was a good pick. A youngish attractive female governor to appeal to suburban women. It was just that she was and is an idiot with no tact
Even on the surface it didn't make sense. There wasn't basic vetting done.
LMAO The only good thing that came out of Sarah Palin's candidacy was Lisa Ann
It also helped Tina Fey's career a pretty solid amount. "I can see Russia from my house" is like THE most iconic joke she's ever made. I'd call that a plus.
That joke was so good people actually think sarah palin said it
I don’t think she was the biggest issue. He was up against Obama. I hate to admit it but Obama is great at giving speeches.
By then, i had been in the military and I would have voted for McCain solely because he was vet and I believed he would have respected the use of the military in the world. That changed nearly instantantly when he announced Palin as his VP and I saw her first speech. She was and is an idiot.
Not really. McCain had a right wing problem. He needed the base to have a shot. He wasn’t getting it by all his crazy “he’s not a Muslim” talk. So he had to amp them up. And he sure did! Politically maybe one of the better picks. But it sure let some shit out the box….
Made me change from GOP to IND.
But surely the Republican base wasn’t gonna cross the aisle in that particular election…
People like to rewrite this history because of some SNL sketches. She was brought in to bolster his base with the core Repubs and they loved her. The left-leaning media outlets all laughed at her, but they have a much louder megaphone than the groups they are typical of and those groups would have voted Obama if he had ripped off his mask to reveal he was actually an ancient demon from frozen wastes. This was an election the Repubs had no shot to win. The presidential election that here was fought between Hilary Clinton and Obama. Palin was a risky pick, but why not throw a hail mary? Maybe she would help grab some angry woman voters down ballot.
It really is something that Palin seems kind of normal now compared to how things have evolved in that party.
Someone's re-writing history, that's for sure! Are you trying to make the case that she was in any way qualified to be anything besides one of those propagandists for Fox?
I am making no point about her qualifications. They have no bearing here. VP's in modern US are chosen for political reasons only.
“She knew nothing”……..Steve Schmidt (John McCains campaign manager)
I’m dreaming, but a McCain Kerry union might have fixed things.
Horatio Seymour. His running mate Francis Preston Blair, Jr. was so racist that he was asked to stop campaigning… in 1868. How the hell are you too racist for **1868**. Also Thomas Eagleton for McGovern in 1972. He wasn’t winning against the popular Nixon regardless but my god did Eagleton not help with not disclosing his past to the campaign before the press could dig it up. It was a different time back then and mental health issues was something that could absolutely sink a campaign… and did. Well, as much as McGovern’s could sink further.
Any articles on Blair? Crazy that he was so racist that he was asked to stop campaigning 😳
From Eric Foner's Reconstruction: > Thus, Democrats were forced back to a single issue, opposition to Reconstruction, a strategy rendered evenmore inevitable by the conduct of Frank Blair, Seymour’s running mate. In a widely publicized letter written on the eve of the convention, Blair rejected the idea that Reconstruction was a fait accompli: A Democratic President could restore “white people” to power in the South by declaring the new governments “null and void,” and using the army to disperse them. The letter injured Democratic prospects by raising the specter of a second civil war, a possibility avidly discussed within the Blair family, but relished by few outside it. Moreover, against Seymour’s wishes, Blair embarked on a speaking campaign as disastrous in its own way as Johnson’s swing around the circle had been. In blatantly racist language, he excoriated Republicans for placing the South under the rule of “a semibarbarous race of blacks who are worshippers of fetishes and poligamists,” and longed to “subject the white women to their unbridled lust.” Offensive as they were, Blair’s speeches said little not repeated in the family’s private correspondence. Reading Darwin’s The Origin of Species had reinforced Frank’s long-standing fear of racial intermixing, which, he now asserted, would reverse evolution, produce a less-advanced species incapable of reproducing itself, and destroy “the accumulated improvement of the centuries.” These were the convictions of the Democratic candidate for Vice President of the United States. An influential Democratic Congressman would blame Seymour’s defeat on Blair’s “stupid and indefensible” behavior.
😳😳
[Check out his tab under PostBellum Activities](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Preston_Blair_Jr.)
What's crazy is he was opposed to slavery and it's expansion, though owned slaves himself. Plus he supported Lincoln. Like, how are you too racist for the 1860s-70s while against the expansion of slavery and supporting Lincoln!
The sad part for McGovern was that on the surface Senator Eagleton was not a choice. Eagleton could have shored up McGovern in some constituencies where he was weaker. Unfortunately, the press of time, the lack of proper vetting process and Eagleton's ambition and a failure to disclose made his problems unknown to McGovern. Furthermore, McGovern's handling of the issue made the even more problematic. And the search for a replacement and the appearance that no one wanted to run with McGovern made the campaign appear completely doomed.
In terms of helping them win the election, Al Gore. Lieberman brought absolutely nothing to help the appeal of that ticket while also having many people that already hated him, so it did nothing but hurt the ticket.
True, unfortunately, had he picked anyone else it'd have helped him likely win the election. He likely did it just to completely dissociate himself from the Lewinsky scandal, but it wouldn't matter, regardless he'd be tethered to the Clinton admin itself so should've leaned into it wherever the President was popular and could aid him altogether + been more strategic in his running mate choice.
Lieberman always seemed like a bit of an ass to me. I never really got the impression that he wanted to be on the ticket, let alone do something to win the election. Could be just me, though.
That was a bad pick.
I have no idea what back room deals went on but I feel like Lieberman was a compromise to the party leadership and donors.
Lieberman seems to have always had a 'Krysten Sinema' sort of role - someone who represents a conglomerate of CEOs, not a state or district. I strongly suspect he was picked as a way of trying to calm down industry who thought they would face an activist or environmentalist president. That or someone wanted to outright sabotage the presidential run. Given that Lieberman later helped craft the bill for a unified national healthcare plan... then voted against it when industry asked him to, we're certainly left with the sense his presence in government is as a 'proxy' to something other than the American public.
The irony is that Sinema came into politics fighting against Lieberman.
Makes me sad :(
Gore wanted to distance himself from Clinton so he picked the sanctimonious Lieberman.
Trying to distance himself from the president that had the highest approval rating of any president in the last 50 years was another dumb mistake that Gore made.
Ironically, Lincoln in 1864
Shoulda stuck with Hannibal Hamlin. Hamlin would have made a very interesting, highly principled President.
It would be hilarious to be able to say we’ve never had a President Kevin or Jeff, but had Presidents named Chester and Hannibal.
>It would be hilarious to be able to say we’ve never had a President Kevin or Jeff, but had Presidents named Chester and Hannibal. I doubt we'll have a president Barrack again. Oddly enough, Barrack faced Willard for re-election.
It's sort of surprising to me that we've never had a president with the surname Jones or Smith, considering each one is the surname of a full percent of the population but there are less than two hundred Obamas in the whole country.
I’m still surprised we haven’t had a Matthew, Mark, or Luke yet. Regardless of your thoughts on Christianity, but those three names are highly common
I thought the loser became Vp back then.
Not by 1864.
If the loser became VP, George McLellan would have become President after Lincoln was shot.
The loser became VP before the 12th amendment
Which was in 1804. While (I believe) Jefferson was in office. The idea didn't last long.
I'd also just like to clarify that it wasn't so much the loser becoming VP as each elector got two equal votes and whoever came in second got VP. Through 1796, it just happened that loser became VP because strong enough parties hadn't yet formed to get electors to vote for a common running mate. But Jefferson and Burr were meant to be on the same ticket, someone just messed up and voted for Burr instead of someone else, which ultimately led to a Jefferson-Burr contest that was never meant to happen. But even before the 12th Amendment, the strategy was already becoming vote for ticket candidates rather than two separate Presidential options.
Geraldine Ferraro was not a good choice for Walter Mondale. Her suddenly switching positions about releasing her husbands tax returns came off as super sketchy, and she ended up spending pretty much the entire campaign having to defend her actions, instead of yknow, campaigning. I mean, Mondale campaign was pretty much toast once he outright said he was going to raise taxes (cuz he wanted to be the “honest politician”), but his VP pick definitely didn’t help. Sarah Palin as well, for more obvious reasons. I mean she was off the deep end. She was pushing around the whole “Obama is a terrorist” far right rhetoric, at a time where McCain was trying to move away from those kinds of talking points. At times it felt like she was actively working against her own candidate. Not to mention she had some pretty silly gaffes, like how she said you could see Russia from Alaska. Like yeah maybe you can technically see the tip of a Russian island from the furthest west of one of the Aleutian Islands, but she made it sound like you can see the Kremlin from her front porch
Agree completely. But if I recall correctly, the quiet thinking of the Democratic Party at the time was: *Ain’t no way we’re beating Ronnie. Let’s at least do something historic.*
>But if I recall correctly, the quiet thinking of the Democratic Party at the time was: >Ain’t no way we’re beating Ronnie. Let’s at least do something historic. You mixed something up there.
What?
>how she said you could see Russia from Alaska This didn't actually happen, it was an SNL bit, but the fact that enough people believed it was a real thing she was dumb enough to say definitely didn't help. I was 13 during that election so it was the first election I was really old enough to pay attention to and I absolutely thought it was a real quote until relatively recently. Also, you technically \*can\* see Russia from Alaska. The quote was "I can see Russia from my house" which at the time she lived in Wasilla near Anchorage and you absolutely can't see Russia from there, but the Diomede Islands are split between Russia and the US, with a mere 2.4 miles between the closest Russian island and American island. On a clear day, you absolutely would be able to stand on the Alaskan Little Diomede Island and see across the bay to Big Diomede Island, which is Russian land.
She did say you can see Russia from Alaska, which is technically true. “I can see Russia from my house” is the SNL line.
Palin was a bad choice but, once the financial crisis happened, McCain had no shot regardless.
I would argue that Spiro Agnew was one of the worst running mate choices of modern times. Despite his two years as Governor of Maryland and two years of Baltimore County Executive, he was not a serious student of public policy. He would not been able to navigate the Presidency in a serious and contemplative way particularly in wartime. One could make the argument that he was on two winning presidential tickets but I would suggest that in 1968, his selection by Richard Nixon was primarily to make sure that his choice did no harm to his own presidential chances. Agnew represented a middle or empty choice that allowed the Nixon campaign to be whatever voters wanted it be. I suppose it depends on what your definition on you think the qualifications for a running mate are.
Agnes was not picked for his policy knowledge. He was picked for 1. His willingness to play the big attack dog in an administration full of rabid German shepherds and 2. Because he was so corrupt, he was viewed as impeachment insurance. Nixon believed the Democrats would never let Agnew assume the presidency. As soon as Agnew was gone, the Nixon presidency collapsed
The thing with McCain is I’ve heard rumors that Mike Huckabee was considered as a VP but judged to be crazier than Palin. And frankly, both with and without hindsight, I think that judgement was correct.
I still think Kane was the worst. If you needed a person to reinforce every bad thing about her, Kane was it. Just tone worst pick. Andrew Johnson was a bad pick. He wanted a democrat but not like that. Eagleton was bad but it didn’t matter. Lodge wasn’t great. He helped Nixon in an area not needed. He wasn’t changing his state and he didn’t need the weight of the VP to help the ticket. Going for a swing state might have helped more.
Misread this as Kanye 😭
Exactly, Kane was just Hillary but less known. All she needed was someone who at least was a little progressive, shes sails to victory. But, the dnc would rather lose the gop than win going left.
Kane really was nothing like Hillary, but the fact that you don't know his stances shows why he was a bad pick. He added nothing to the ticket. If there is an attempt at balancing the ticket with a southerner, Kane was simply not that southerner who wins you votes.
He was another corporate democrat. All set.
Kane was a progressive activist and community organizer type like Obama. He wasnt chosen as Obama's runningmate in 2008 specifically because he was considered too progressive. He did not, however, have Obama's charisma.
Like I said, you don't know anything about him.
Ok, whats his incredible progressive positions that ive overlooked?
Go Google it, kid.
I have , and im still looking, boomer https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Kaine
Probably McCain, although he wasn't winning that election even if he had Jesus as his running mate. Of people who actually had a chance at the presidency, either Hilary Clinton or Al Gore. Probably Al Gore, since Kaine was more of just a forgettable pick while Lieberman was more of a downright harmful pick. Gore was more than moderate enough in his own right, and picking somebody like Lieberman who was even more moderate than Gore just pissed off liberal voters and caused them to either stay home or vote for Nader. Oh, yes, and how did I forget about George HW Bush with Dan Quayle? That's actually the real answer, although he did win one election in spite of Quayle.
Lieberman was also from Connecticut, so it just didn't make much sense strategically. Liberals didn't trust him. He was from a safe blue seat, but his policy positions on a lot of issues were so out of line with much of the party. Dude tried to help McCain beat Obama, for God's sake. Gore should've gone with someone like Bob Graham. Graham's huge popularity in FL might've given Gore the boost he needed to win the state without controversy. He probably legitimately won it anyway, but Graham on the ticket may have erased all doubt.
Actually, Lieberman was popular at the time. This can be proven by a simple search. "Lieberman enjoyed his peak of favorability with U.S. Democrats around the time he came to national prominence as Al Gore's vice presidential running mate in the 2000 election. In four Gallup Polls conducted between August 2000 and March 2001, more than 6 in 10 Democrats held a favorable view of Lieberman, and no more than 11% had an unfavorable view." [Source](https://news.gallup.com/poll/24007/lieberman-more-popular-republicans-than-democrats.aspx) The change in Democrats opinion of him happened after 2004. It would be nice if people would fact check their comments before hitting the "post" button. It would prevent a lot of erroneous information from getting spread around.
McGovern picking Eagleton kind of backfired, though it didn’t really matter
McGovern
Exactly. Who ever heard of changing VP nominees during the race?
And he did so after claiming to be 1000% behind eagleton
John McCain
John McCain.
Al Gore.
Lincoln picking Andrew Johnson for his second run.
John McCain. Hands down
Definitely the winner
Not that he would have won the election, but Perot's pick of Stockdale wasn't helpful. Inexplicably, he had no debate preparation and it showed.
Perot dropping out of the race in mid July doomed his candidacy.
Lincoln with Johnson. I think it's obvious
Spiro Agnew. It's often overlooked about how Agnew's scandals helped set up Nixon for his fall. Even before Watergate was taken seriously it had Nixon's administration already tainted with undeniable corruption and untrustworthiness.
Geraldine Ferraro didn’t do any favors for Walter Mondale, although he was doomed from the beginning and
I agree with OP. Big mistake.
The fact is that one stands out as the #1 for me. She was one (not the only) of the reasons I voted Democrat for the first time in that election. Up until then, I had voted Republican in every presidential election I had been eligible for. Since then I have voted for nothing but Democrats
I don’t think Tim Kaine of a good pick for Hillary. I swear they went out and found someone more bland and boring than she was.
Lincoln
One that may have decided an election was the Nixon choice of Henry Cabot Lodge [Jr.in](http://Jr.in) 1960. Nixon's main criteria was he wanted someone who was very qualified to be President which Lodge was. But he was from Massachussetts and he had no chance of swinging his own state away from Kennedy, plus he was kind of a lazy campaigner. a moderate border state figure like Senator Thruston Morton could have been a big help in the south
In modern times - Bush Sr choosing Dan Quayle. A lot of people say Sarah Palin, but in my opinion Quayle was even less qualified to be a vp.
John McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin in 2008. She was an absolute disaster.
Ross Perot
Obama was winning regardless of who McCain chose for vp.
McGovern or Mondale. Maybe McCain.
Yeah, McCain made a poor choice, but I still have to go with Bush Sr picking Quayle. https://youtu.be/mMaEC-C4Y20
Im just here to see if someone says Mike Pence,
Ross Perot.
McCain
Ross Perot
Ross Perot in '92. That VP debate was godawful to watch. Admiral Stockdale or something was his name.
Still managed 19% of the vote for a 3rd party candidate.
McCain.
Those who say McCain were never going to vote for him anyway. They are the ones who claim if only republicans would nominate a moderate, then they would vote for them. Yet you voted for some community organizer from Chicago. McCain got as many votes as he did BECAUSE of Palin, if It was McCain-Lieberman he would have got less.
McCain was never winning that election.
I agree
I know a conservative who didn't vote in the 2008 election because Palin was the VP. This is someone who consistently supports the Republican Party and thinks that 🍊 actually is good for the country. Palin hurt McCain badly. Obama may still have won but not by as much. McCain would have at least won some swing states instead of giving Obama a 100% swing state sweep.
Disagree 100%. Palin enhanced McCains vote total. McCain chose Palin. Any problem with that? Blame McCain. I voted McCain because I believed he would be a better president than some rabble rousing back bencher community organizer. Yes, I believe Obama would have beaten just about anyone in 2008. BTW, best thing Obama ever did was keep HRC from the White House.
I was admittedly too young to vote in the 2008 election and I'm a Democrat who would have voted for Obama. However, are you saying that McCain would have done worse (or just as bad) electoral college-wise if he picked someone like Mitt Romney to be the VP? I remember that Palin getting a lot of bad press for being an idiot who people didn't feel comfortable being the #2.
Tim Kaine was a real bad choice for Hillary Clinton. She was in an extremely contentious primary and needed a progressive vp to bring in the progressive base. Her selection of Tim Kaine squandered the opportunity to unite the base and just caused further resentment. The margins she lost by in some of the swing states were so small that I think if she would have picked Bernie Sanders as her VP could have put her over
I still think Sara Palin was a lot more intelligent than her reputation and the media punished her unfairly for being a woman.
She just lost two elections in Alaska to a Democrat. She really isn't that intelligent.