Left In Missouri

The pundit consensus is that Obama should choose Biden because of his foreign policy expertise and because he shores up Obama’s perceived weaknesses in experience and foreign policy.

I am going to make a counterargument that Obama should not balance his perceived weaknesses but rather he should enhance his strengths and choose a new up and comer like himself.

I subscribe to the view that a consistent strengths ticket is stronger than a balanced strengths ticket. This is true both in terms of message consistencies and geographic strength consistencies.

Dukakis-Bentsen was a balanced ticket.

Clinton-Gore was a consistent ticket.

I would rather see Obama choose a running mate with the same perceived strengths and perceived weaknesses that he has.

Since the message is change, run with it and don’t choose an experienced career politician like Biden or Hillary Clinton. I like Kaine, Sebelius, and Schweitzer (although he probably won’t be chosen) on these grounds. They, like Obama, are fresh faces who have rocked the political establishment and brought hope and change in red states like Virginia, Kansas and Montana.

Choosing Biden will make people focus more on Obama’s perceived lack of foreign policy experience not less, and the Vice President need not have extensive foreign policy experience. That’s what the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense are for and Biden would be fine in either of those roles. Who Obama and McCain choose for their cabinet is far more important on this matter than who they choose for Vice President.

Evan Bayh would not be a message consistency choice for Obama and so I like him less than Kaine and Sebelius but being from Indiana he would provide geographic consistency and concentrated strength in the Midwest. This would shore up Michigan and Ohio and put Indiana into play. And this would be similarly geographically to Bill Clinton from Arkansas picking Al Gore from Tennessee to enhance his geographic strengths rather than opting for “geographic balance.”

Michael Dukakis choosing Lloyd Bentsen was the ultimate recent example of subscribing to a theory of “geographic balance” and “message balance.” Choosing a VP with the opposite strengths makes the Presidential candidates weaknesses come into greater focus. I like to see a candidate enhance their strengths further rather than shore up perceived weaknesses.

I admit on personality tests I come out as a “maximizer”–someone who ignores their weaknesses and tries to perfect their strengths to the 99.99 percentile so maybe its my own personality that makes me want to see a maximize your strengths Veep strategy rather than a focus on addressing your perceived weaknesses Veep strategy.

I think Obama should pick someone who further builds on his strengths as a candidate. The Missouri Tiger (Tim Kaine) and the Kansas Jayhawk (Kathleen Sebelius) would both be among several candidates who would do this.