Of course it matters....if the top dog wants it to matter.
In the case of GHW Bush, Quayle could have been replaced by the WH dog Millie and it wouldnt have mattered.
The Clinton/Gore team was probably the best recent model.....the Pres gives the VP a narrowly defined role and specific policy objectives and lets him run with it.
We've seen the other extreme for the last seven years....GW Bush either wanted his VP to be actively involved in most policy decisions and to help implement an ideological agenda (perhaps because of his own insecurities in his ability) or was bullied into by Cheney (who, if you recall, was asked by Bush to come up with a pool of potential running mates and recommend one for VP...and recommended himself).
Where it doesnt really matter much and where its more perception than reality is in the notion that a VP is selected to "balance the ticket" either demographically or to cover a weakness in the Pres candidate's resume in order to appeal to more voters. People dont vote for VP.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire
Last edited by dc_dux; 01-25-2008 at 02:49 PM..
|