Let the veepstakes begin

I'm generally loathe to throw my lot in with Tim Russert et al., but I think I've made clear in my recent postings that I, too, am of the impression that Hillary Clinton's campaign is effectively over. This despite the fact that she will more than likely win West Virginia by a healthy margin tomorrow (my prediction: blow-out margin of victory between 25 and 35 points). The tide of superdelegate endorsements has decisively turned in Obama's direction (with the AP claiming that he has now surpassed her in superdelegates by their count) and although her existing superdelegate endorsements have been slow to change horses, that should also increase in the next few weeks.

So - now that everyone is sick up to their eyeballs with hearing about the Democratic nominee, it's just about time to start talking about another horse race altogether - the race for the Democratic number two spot. As I see it, Obama faces a minefield in choosing his running mate for three reasons that I'll try to distill here:

The experience factor - For all Obama's charisma, it's hard to deny that he is fundamentally lacking in the kind of executive experience and foreign policy expertise that Americans usually expect from their commander in chief, especially during times of war. The impulse when picking a running mate, then, will probably be to choose someone who gives the ticket the foreign policy gravitas that Obama so lacks. The campaign will be walking a fine line here, however; choose someone with significant foreign policy or executive experience and you risk leaving the ticket bottom-heavy and further highlighting Obama's I've-got-nothing-but-audacious-hope policy weaknesses. Choose someone with less foreign policy/executive experience in order to mitigate this discrepancy, and you end up with a ticket that looks hopelessly weak and ineffectual next to John McCain and company.

The novelty factor - To white man or not to white man? This is the question. The campaign's other big choice is whether or not continue the diversity at the top of the ticket through the choice of VP. Do you pick the traditional white male to appease rural voters scared of diversity in office, or do you continue the history-making ride of Obama's campaign and try for a twofer first? Bill Richardson would seem an interesting choice. I found it odd that the long-time Clinton friend threw his support behind Obama early this year. Could Obama have offered him the vice presidency as a quid pro quo? There is danger here, of course; if we assume that the Republican ticket will be a picture of lilly-whiteness, the contrast between the two tickets on election day might be a little too much for some voters to swallow. As for a white woman on the ticket (sorry ethnic American political ladies - that is definitely more diversity than this country can handle), I think it would be nigh on impossible for Obama to consider a female running mate without first giving serious consideration to...

...The Senator Clinton factor - To the extent that much of the women's vote has crystallized behind Senator Clinton during the primary season, I think it would be bedlam for Obama to consider anyone other than Senator Clinton if he wants to choose a woman for VP. Although New York is a state Obama would more than likely win anyway, she has a proven record of bringing in demographics that Obama is historically weak with and a host of donor names to pad the war chest. And as anyone who studies fictional representations of female presidents can tell you, ladies are always welcome in the number two position.