That is the question considered by Bill Keller in yesterday’s the NYT OpEd page.
Keller uses his real estate to make the case for ditching Joe Biden as VP and making Hillary Clinton President Obama’s running mate. It is an interesting argument, multiple versions of which has been bouncing around for more than a year. The gist:
I know the arguments against this scenario, and we’ll get to those. But the arguments in favor are as simple as one-two-three. One: it does more to guarantee Obama’s re-election than anything else the Democrats can do. Two: it improves the chances that, come next January, he will not be a lame duck with a gridlocked Congress but a rejuvenated president with a mandate and a Congress that may be a little less forbidding. Three: it makes Hillary the party’s heir apparent in 2016. If she sits out politics for the next four years, other Democrats (yes, Governor Cuomo, we see your hand up) will fill the void.
HRC has been spectacularly successful as Secretary of State — IMO, more successful than her two predecessors AND without the PR machines that her predecessors were boosted by. But her success is emblematic of the kinds of successes the Obama Administration has — when they don’t need Congress for much, they are competent and successful (the DOJ would be the exception here, I think). Certainly HRC would be a great VP — but given that the VP is largely the manager of Congressional interactions, it is hard to see what she would bring to that job that is different than Biden’s skills. And progressives who think that she would not do the kind of wheeling and dealing the Biden did — specifically accommodating to get a deal — are delusional. So while I get the electoral calculations of HRC on the ticket, I don’t see her as being any more effective — effective meaning achieving more progressive outcomes — than Biden was. Because getting more progressive outcomes is going to mean a more progressive Congress. Just because HRC shows up as the presiding officer of the Senate won’t mean that the Rs will stop obstructing everything coming down the pike.
Besides, I think changing horses now (notwithstanding the draft scenario Keller details) is a sign of weakness. Queuing up that change should have started this time last year for any credibility or success. HRC (especially given her work at State these past three years) would be a great VP candidate. But choosing her is certainly not about better governing.
What do you think? Should Obama replace Biden as is VP running mate now?