Campaign Diaries

Old media prevailed over new technology, and the Obama campaign may come to regret hyping up its text messages as we all waited for nothing. No one’s phone is buzzing, but the news has now been broken by CNN: Joe Biden will be the Democrats’ 2008 vice-presidential nominee.

This is a strong choice on paper; and given Biden’s campaigning abilities it should prove a very real boost to Obama’s candidacy in the weeks ahead. A moderate Democrat, Biden is nonetheless more acceptable to the liberal base than choices like Nunn and Bayh; a former presidential contender, he did not endorse in the primaries, thus perhaps seeming less of a diss to Clinton supporters than people like Kaine and Sebelius; and as a foreign policy expert with blue-collar credentials, he palliates many of Obama’s weaknesses. At the same time, it is risky for Obama the change agent to associate himself with Biden’s 35 years in Washington, his support for the war and his questionable links to credit card companies.

The first day of Biden’s 2008 run began just as disastrously as his 1988 campaign ended, as the Delaware Senator drew fire for a comment he made about Obama: “You got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.” Later, Biden said, in what was meant as a direct shot to Obama, that the presidency is “not something that lends itself to on-the-job training.”

No one could have guessed in those days that the Democratic ticket would be Obama-Biden. But when Biden was asked about a series of racially insensitive comments at an Iowa debate in December, Obama jumped to his defense, offering a “testimony” (video here). And over the past few weeks, Biden emerged as a top contender, one that did awake any major opposition from Democratic constituencies (unlike, say, Evan Bayh) and whose biggest liability (his tendency to put his foot in his mouth) was less worrisome than those of other VP candidates.

Obama had clear strategy choices to make: Would he seek to double up on his strengths (bi-partisanship, change, youth, outsider status) or would he address his weaknesses? Tim Kaine and Kathleen Sebelius were in the former category; Evan Bayh was closer to the latter, but hovered somewhere in the middle.

With Joe Biden, Obama has chosen someone in the second category: Biden brings extensive experience and solid national security credentials. He is the Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, a 6th term Senator and an expert in foreign affairs, with a relationship with many world leaders. During the Democratic debates, he showed he could sound like an expert when talking about Iraq or other foreign policy issues, while also coming across as someone who is acting, doing something (just last week-end, Biden traveled to Georgia because he was invited by the country’s president) and passing legislation - that is not an easy thing to show for a Senator, let alone for one who has been in the body for 6 terms.

But Biden can also help Obama talk about the economy, as he has strong credentials on domestic issues, making him as all-around a VP contender as Obama could have picked from. On a more personal level, Biden could address Obama’s weakness among blue-collar whites, union workers. He is a Catholic - a swing constituency. He is one of the least rich Senators - 99th in terms of assets and income - and he commutes by train every single work day from his Delaware home to Capitol Hill. And Obama could be hoping that voters could to identify with Biden’s relatively awkward relationship with racial conversations, an awkwardness exemplified by his “clean, articulate” comment. And while Biden is not a Webb-like populist, his selection could serve to appeal to conservative Democrats in Midwestern states and the Appalachian region.

In particular, if there is one region in which Obama could be boosted by the Biden pick, it is Pennsylvania. Not only do parts of the state share their media market with Delaware, but Biden himself is from Scranton, in the Northeastern part of the state. Holding on to downscale white voters in Pennsylvania will be key to Obama’s success, and Biden could help him shore up his support there enough to solidify the state in the blue column. (Do note, however, that the Biden pick was not done for geographic considerations and that he is intended to bolster Obama’s message, biography and experience rather than boost his numbers in a particular state. There is of course nothing wrong with that; Al Gore came from Bill Clinton’s region, and Edwards did nothing for Kerry in North Carolina.)

There are, of course, risks that come with the Biden choice. For one, and as I noted above, the Delaware Senator was critical of Obama during the primaries and he used arguments that could fit perfectly well with McCain’s attacks on Obama’s inexperience. The GOP has already come out with a statement using Biden’s quotes: “There has been no harsher critic of Barack Obama’s lack of experience than Joe Biden.” I doubt this can play a big role. Kerry managed fine with Edwards, and some of the most successful tickets in recent presidential politics (Kennedy-Johnson, Reagan-Bush) did not involve the best of friends. If McCain picks Romney next week, it would be Democrats’ turn to have a field day with past quotes.

Second, Biden is an establishment Democrat, one that has been in the Senate for a long time: He got there at 30, he is now 65 - that’s much more than half of his life. That could undermine Obama’s message of change, as well as the clear generational contrast that the election is being shaped around. If Obama’s candidacy is meant to convey a new type of politics, how does Joe Biden fit with that? In particular, Biden’s ties to credit card companies (he is, after all, from Delaware) and his vote for the bankruptcy bill could be difficult to explain away.

Three, there is Iraq. Biden voted in favor of the war back in 2002, and while he has become a strong opponent since then, Obama barely differentiated between Hillary (who refused to apologize) and Edwards (who did) when using the issue of the war vote. And this has been something that has featured at the center of Obama’s campaign, as he often argues that it exemplifies the fact that he has the right judgment. Also, how will Obama deal with Biden’s Iraq plan, which calls for the country’s division in three zones? Biden talked about that often on the campaign trial in Iowa; will Obama ask him to no longer mention it?

Third, Biden’s experience will now be contrasted to Obama’s lack of background on national security affairs, and the extent of the discrepancy could reflect badly on the Illinois Senator. In particular, the electorate might be weary of falling back in the 2000 situation: George Bush’s choice of Dick Cheney was seen as giving the Texas Governor a knowledgeable figure to fall back on, but Bush is now viewed as relying too much on Cheney and having given him too much control. At the same time, is it not better for Obama to take this risk than be opened to the criticism that his ticket has no national security credentials at all?

Fourth, Biden has the reputation of putting his foot in his mouth and being very verbose. This is the flip of his wit and sharp responses. Biden will certainly have to be careful in the coming months, and as all caricatures this one is probably overstated.

There are a few other considerations relating to Biden. First, the line of succession: Bayh and Kaine would both have given their seats to a Republican. Biden is running for re-election right now, and odds are he will remain on the ballot. If he wins both elections, he would resign from the Senate and the Governor would name his replacement. Now, there is a gubernatorial election this year, and it is an open one. However, Democrats are heavily favored to carry it and thus Biden’s Senate seat should remain in Democratic hands.

Second, future presidential elections: Biden is 65. If his ticket wins in November, Obama would run again in 2012. By 2016, Biden will be 73, putting him in a Cheney-esque position of not being in a position to run. That means that, in case of an Obama victory, his succession will be open. Biden was one of the only VP contenders to be in such a position: Kaine, Bayh and Sebelius would have been the immediate favorites to being the presidential nominee in 2016.

Finally, let’s get back to the text message: What is the Obama campaign thinking? The Obama campaign had repeatedly promised that this phone number collecting effort was serious and that people who had signed up would be the first to know; they insisted on this, and the text messaging hype of the past few days was based on that. It has now been more than 90 minutes since CNN, followed by all the networks, wires and papers, reported that Biden was the pick. Yet, there is still no news from Obama - neither an e-mail nor a text message. [Update at 3am: Well, Biden has just been added to the website. Still no text though, and if Obama is worried about waking us up he could at least send an e-mail.]

I am at a loss to explain how the Obama campaign could allow this to happen, as they certainly lost credibility in the process and opened themselves up to criticism. After all, this scheme was part of Obama’s promise to make this a different sort of campaign, one closer to people without intermediary mediums, But as soon as the campaign started to tell VP contenders they were and were not picked, the news was bound to get leaked, and they must have known that. So why plan to send a text message hours after? Why allow yourself be scooped on news that you yourself are creating?