Veepstakes bombshell: McCain-Rice?!

ABC News reports that, according to GOP strategist Dan Senor, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is "actively...campaigning" for the vice presidential spot on John McCain's ticket. Drudge is going nuts with this.

Senor's evidence seems a little thin, though. He cites Rice's unexpected appearance at some sort of Grover Norquist conservative confab a week-and-a-half ago, and... well, that's it. If he's extrapolating that she's "actively campaigning" from that data point alone, I'm highly skeptical.

In any event, I expect we'll see Rice tamping down this speculation, through a spokesperson or otherwise, probably tomorrow. The key will be the language she uses. Will she issue an out-and-out denial? A half-denial? A non-denial denial? (She's already sorta kinda denied interest, for whatever that's worth.)

[UPDATE: John McCain has already issued a non-response response: "I did not hear that [she's campaigning for the spot]. I missed those signals. I think she's a great American, I think there's very little that I can say that isn't anything but the utmost praise for a great American citizen, who served as a role model to so many millions of people in this country and around the world. But as I mentioned to you, we're not talking about the [veep selection] process because it just then gets into things that could easily to spill over into an invasion of privacy."]

If Rice does want the VP spot, I don't see the downside for McCain. She's young, smart, articulate*, well-respected, and obviously qualified to be president from day one. And of course, the benefits in the identity-politics game are obvious; she's the perfect antidote to either (or both) the Dems' "historic" candidates.

Once upon a time, I thought Rice was a problematic pick because she's so closely associated with the Bush Administration and the Iraq War. But at this point, McCain has already tied himself so closely to those things that I don't see how her presence harms him. He's been harshly critical of the Rumsfeld strategy, but unless I'm mistaken in my understanding of the Bush Administration's internal dynamics, Rice is not exactly considered a member of the "Rumsfeld wing." In any event, I think she'd help McCain more than she hurts him**, and tapping her would be a political masterstroke.

*and clean! ;)

**I may, however, be underestimating the significance of the ralcitrant racist voting bloc, which would be left with no major-party options in a race between Obama and McCain-Rice. I'd like to think there aren't enough of these folks (in swing states, at least) to really hurt McCain if they stay home, but I could be wrong.

Comments

[Mad Max, Esquire]

A black lesbian who was more wrong on the war than McCain. Yeah, that should work.

[Brendan Loy]

Max, who's going to play the "lesbian" card? Hillary? Who's going to play the "black" card? Obama? Whatever identity-politics-based disadvantages she might have, the Democrats can't exploit. And she more than makes up for those disadvantages, I think, by bringing aboard some disaffected Hillary supporters if Obama wins, or disaffected Obama supporters if Hillary wins. A McCain-Rice ticket would add major fuel to the fire of the Democrats' fears of losing key demographics to the GOP after a divisive primary battle that leaves one side or the other feeling alienated.

[gahrie]

The Media and the nutsroots( say the Kos kiddies) would try to attack Condi as a both an inauthentic lesbian (whether she comes out or not) and an inauthentic Black woman.

However I really think that strategy would backfire, and that most Republicans would be satisfied with a "Don't ask, don't tell" strategy about her sexuality.

I don't know if choosing her would be a good election strategy, but it would sure be fun to watch the left make complete hypocrites of themselves once again as they attacked her.

[Dave]

Amen.

I've long thought that Rice is the best choice out there for VP. Here's hoping there's even more to this story than meets the eye. She's a natural pick - conservative enough to woo the Bush wing of the party; congenial and intelligent enough to attract moderates; ambitious enough that VP will be a legit stepping stone; and imaginative enough that VP will not pigeonhole her abilities.

If she's up for it, this is a no-brainer for McCain.

[Doc]

I think we all know how the Democrats would attack Rice: "Golly, I expect those evil Republicans will make a huge fuss over _______, 'cause they're such racists/homophobes/mysogynists. Not that we would, but you know, she's ______, and we're worried about those hateful Republicans bringing it up. We're totally cool with ______, so we would never make an issue of ______."

[Youngblai]

Okay, just for fun, could we list Condi's accomplishments? I'm being totally serious here in looking for a reason (other than ID politics) McCain should select her as VP. Because if there's one time in my adult lifetime that I think the VP question really matters, it's with a man whose been tortured for several years and will be close to "average life expectancy" on Inauguration Day.

Sorry, but I'm having trouble saying, "President Rice" without a wave of fear. Decent National Security Advisor, fair Sec State does not equal "ready to be President." While the Dem side doesn't even inspire that much confidence in me, I don't think we should be racing towards the least common denominator here.

[gahrie]

She was a professor of political Science at Stanford, a provost at Stanford (executive experience), the national Security Advisor and the Secretary of State.

Her accomplishments compare quite favorably with presidents of the past.

[Joe Mama]

Condi and Michelle Obama in a steel cage death match!

[Angrier and Angrier]

If Condi is a lesbian, the Republican Religious Right will get around to outing her and making an issue of it.

Besides the identity politics stuff, the fact is McCain can't win if he runs as Bush's 3rd term. It would be disastrous for him to have any prominent member of Bush's Administration on his ticket, including Rice.

[Joe Loy]

Indeed, gahrie ~ and in fact her relevant résumé goes considerably further than even that; see, e.g., here (official bio) and here (wikipedia).

"Decent National Security Advisor, fair Sec State does not equal 'ready to be President.'"

Oh, pfui, Youngblai. If it doesn't, then Nothing does (with the bloodyobvious exception of being a President seeking Re-election). Certainly it bestows at the very least Equal readiness as being a young first-term Senator, and old 4th-term Senator, or a middle-aged 2nd-term Senator & former First Lady.

"I don't think we should be racing towards the least common denominator here."

Oh f'Chrissakes, Youngblai. Least common denominator?? Condi Rice??? Mymymy. Evidently your Bar is set in the Stratosphere. :> I've heard of wanting Egg in one's beer but you're takin' the old Cake, here, bub :).

[Brendan Loy]

McCain can't win if he runs as Bush's 3rd term. It would be disastrous for him to have any prominent member of Bush's Administration on his ticket, including Rice.

The problem with this argument is, I think McCain is already running for Bush's 3rd term, whether he likes it or not. Certainly that's how the Dems are going to portray it (I expect we'll be hearing the phrase "Bush-Cheney-McCain" more and more in the coming months), and I don't see how McCain can really get himself out of that corner, given his strong support for the Iraq War. It would be different if we were talking about putting Rummy on the ticket, but I think he can still distance himself from the Rumsfeld-Cheney strategic blunders with Rice on the ticket (though one possible stumbling block is whether she will be willing to air the administration's dirty laundry on that issue), while maintaining his overall support for the war.

On the other hand, maybe I'm looking at this too much as political junkie. To the average American moderate/swing voter who leans toward McCain, that "lean" is probably based more on a vague impression of him being a maverick reformer/outsider than on his specific policy positions vis a vis Iraq or any other issue. I suppose Rice's presence on the ticket could damage that brand. So maybe you're right.

"If Condi is a lesbian, the Republican Religious Right will get around to outing her and making an issue of it."

Not before the Democrats do.

[Angrier and Angrier]

"and I don't see how McCain can really get himself out of that corner"

Two words: Saint Joe

[Youngblai]

Joe,

With all due respect, I think that my bar is set quite reasonably. My point with the "least common denominator" is that I think the two Dem candidates are woefully underqualified. Saying Condi has more experience than them is, well, sorta like someone saying they can beat their toddler in basketball.
To me, the ideal Vice President has to have the following characteristics:

1.) Has run an organization of some size successfully;

2.) Can bring in some region or demographic that the main candidate would otherwise have to fight for;

3.) Has above average situational awareness of the international community-- if the main candidate is weak in this area, preferably to a degree that the VP can serve as an advisor;

4.) Capable enough to step over the main candidate's still warm body and assume national control yet not so ambitious as to openly hope for this event.

Now, Condi meets #3, but I would argue that I've seen little that makes me think her ability to meet criteria 1, 2, and 4 outweighs the "rotting albatross around neck"-effect her candidacy would have on the McCain Campaign. Why do I feel this way:

On #1--State is still a mess (to include being almost a hindrance in the larger War on Terror) so that sort of eliminates her large organization experience. Now, arguably someone would have had to possess the ruthlessness of Beria mixed with Machiavelli's scheming to actually clear out Foggy Bottom, but the fact remains it didn't get done.

On #2--What demographic does Condi bring to the ticket? Blacks? Please, her name is most often referred to in conjunction with a certain Nabisco snack product so, no, I don't think that will be the case. Women? Maybe, but most of the people who are going to vote for someone just because they're a woman probably aren't voting GOP anyway. At best, a push. Regional? Once again, not going to solidify any purple states, not going to flip any blues. If anything, "Was a chief architect of the Iraq Invasion" will lead to having to fight in states otherwise wouldn't have to.

#4--Finally, I've seen nothing that makes me think that, should John McCain go to his eternal reward, Condi is ready to take over. Maybe I'm wrong, but maybe it also goes back to #1 and the current status of State. I just don't have the warm and fuzzy that an advisor bursting in and telling her, "Madame _President_, Washington D.C. has just been vaporized. President McCain is confirmed dead. What are your orders?" would be followed by dynamic response. Nor do I think she could build the necessary political coalitions to get anything done should that advisor instead be bursting in with a message, "Vice President Rice, President McCain has just suffered a heart attack. Doctors are working on him now but it's not looking good...". Especially if that happens 2 months into the term.

Too high a bar? Enh, I think McCain could clear it. I think Lieberman could clear it. There are a few governors who could probably clear it. Any which way you slice it, however, it's something that needs to be considered.

[Angrier and Angrier]

RICE: It was not a particular threat report. And there was historical information in there about various aspects of al Qaeda's operations.

Dick Clarke had told me, I think in a memorandum -- I remember it as being only a line or two -- that there were al Qaeda cells in the United States.

EN-VENISTE: Isn't it a fact, Dr. Rice, that the August 6 PDB warned against possible attacks in this country? And I ask you whether you recall the title of that PDB?

RICE: I believe the title was, "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States."

[Brendan Loy]

"and I don't see how McCain can really get himself out of that corner"

Two words: Saint Joe

Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, Angrier, but in any event, I actually don't think picking Lieberman would help all that much in establishing McCain as some sort of anti-Bush, at least on the issue of the war. If he's trying to sew up the coveted Brendan Loy Demographic, then sure. :) But if anything, Lieberman is almost more intimately associated with the war than Rice at this point.

I suppose the McCain-Lieberman ticket would have a lot of initial appeal to cushy low-information moderate/centrist voters, but once the campaign really gets going (post-Labor Day), assuming the Democrats run a reasonably effective campaign (always a tenuous assumption, I admit), they'll plaster the airwaves with the accusation that McCain-Lieberman is basically Bush-Cheney Lite, and in the end, only the hawkish moderate/centrists (i.e., the aforementioned "coveted Brendan Loy Demographic") will remain impressed with the "bipartisan" ticket. The rest will probably go the way of Connecticut independents, who now say they would vote for Lamont over Lieberman if they had it to do over again.

None of which changes the fact that I think Lieberman would be a great pick substantively -- but, politically, I don't think he has the effect of instantly and permanently freeing McCain from the shackles of those "Bush's third term" accusations.

[Angrier and Angrier]

Sarcastic? MOI??

[Brendan Loy]

Heh.

[David K.]

Youngblai, exactly what type of experience are you expecting? As Joe has mentioned there is just about no job in this country that can train you to be President. You can look for general qualities, decision making, how they handle preassure, etc, but really being President is a wholly unique job. Does millitary service demonstrate good leadership? Grant and Carter both served and were less than stellar presidents, Kennedy and Teddy Roosevelt served and were great Presidents, not to mention General George Washington. Lincoln didn't serve, neither did FDR. Being a Senator? Some of our most forgettable presidents were Senators (Harrison, Buchannon, Tyler) and yet we had both Kennedy and Nixon too. Being a Governor? Being VP? Examples of both again. The candidates can talk about experience (and if its hillary talk and talk and TALK) but really, its not a job you have "experience" for. I hardly think its a "lowest common denominator" problem, hell thats what we had for the last eight years, it really can't get much worse (well ok, President Cheney, sure...)

[Condor]

Hey, Matt Drudge has an 80% record on these things.

[Youngblai]

David,

As I said--there are 4 criteria. By executive experience, I mean examples such as you listed above. Yes, there have been mixed reviews--however, I think if we went through all 43 Presidents, there'd be more "good" Presidents who had executive (either civilian, military, or both) experience than "bad" ones. Grant's prior experience, for example, should have indicated there was a problem with the man--he failed at every business he tried before he ended up having success in war. Even his success in the Civil War could be, arguably, as much a result of his subordinates as his own actions. Carter did pretty good as GA's governor but his leadership style was poorly suited at the national level.

FDR didn't serve, but he was Secretary of the Navy--and did a really good job at it. Lincoln was thrust into a terrible situation and, yeah, the United States was incredibly lucky that he was the man at the time.

Kennedy and Nixon? I hope those weren't examples of good Presidents. The former gets a curve due to one Mr. Oswald, but I think the latter's body of work is pretty well known.

In Condi's case, she has held two prominent jobs at the national level. Both of those jobs have had poor to fair results. Maybe that's not totally fair to her, but call it the "Kimmel Rule"--if you're in charge when it gets broken, you get the blame. While I think Clarke's testimony is a bit overwrought and questionable, the fact remains that the person who is National Security Advisor should err on the side of paranoia, not caution.

(On the other hand, pre-9/11--things were so broken that even if Condi had said, "By Jove, you're right Dick! We need to immediately figure out what these terrorists are up to! To the Bat Cave!" she would've found that the "Batmobile" was up on blocks, out of fuel, and missing a steering wheel. But this isn't a 9/11 post.)

Next up is State, and I get into that above.

So, given that Condi has fumbled at both of the last positions, why should she be promoted to VP? That's what I mean by least common denominator--you don't decide to hire someone on because they'll take away an identity politic angle on the other side if they're not qualified for the job.

[Alasdair]

Youngblai - find a way to watch "House of Cards", "to Play The King", and "Final Cut" - the trilogy about Francis Urqhart as a practising UK politician ... it will give you an entirely new respect for the term "Macchiavellian" - the version practised over here in the US is at kindergarten levels by comparison - in *most* places - the exception being the State Department which seems to attract the more warped practitioners of bureaucracy ...

Secretary Rice was courageous in accepting titular control over that particular snake-pit - and I say "titular control" since, as with being a parent, one quickly learns that Control is an Illusion ...

I do have a question for you - is Senator Clinton responsible for the incredible success of "HillaryCare", in your opinion ?

Personally, I would happily see a McCain/Rice ticket ... and not just for the entertainment value of seeing the Al Sharptons and the NOW folk having to be *really* creative in how current-Secretary Rice isn't *really* African-American and isn't *really* a woman ...

When I compare Rice with the prior female VP candidate - Ferraro - Rice looks positively Presidential *already* !

[Alasdair]

(bigger grin) Secretary Rice can also tap into the young adult male demographic with that Emma Peel/Honor Blackmann vibe she can pull off so easily ... and that balances Senator McCain elder statesman presence nicely ...

[Truthwillsetyoufree]

You all sound like idiots. You would question the sexual preference and qualifications of this highly educated African-American female. John McCain doesn't have a prayer of winning in November even if Schartnegger could run as V.P. The everyday majority of American people are ready for a change and no more right wing/left wing name calling or cynical thinking. Go Obama!

[Youngblai]

Uh, where did I question her sexuality? Credentials, yes, sexuality no.

[Youngblai]

Alasdair,

Yes, Senator Clinton is responsible for the debacle of '93 and, no, I would NOT vote for her if my only other option was Lucifer himself. ("Hmm, evil and incompetent versus evil and a body of work that is impeccable. I'll go with the latter.")

While normally I would love to see the usual suspects you mentioned squirming, I'm afraid that schadenfraude is not worth the country either of the Dem candidates at this juncture.