Quick thoughts on Joe Biden

A few more (final?) thoughts on the Democratic veepstakes and Joe Biden. As we pointed out here, Joe Biden was, at the start of the process, one of the best possibilities for Barack Obama, just below Jim Webb, Mark Warner, and Ted Strickland. A few weeks ago, when it became apparent that John McCain was going to conduct a largely negative race, and with that troika long-since out of the running, we saw Biden as arguably the best possibility (along with Hillary Clinton), largely because Obama would need an attack dog to go after McCain.

Despite our late insistence that Obama should have tapped Clinton, this was by no means an attack on Biden. While he was not the best of possible choices, he is certainly a good choice and likely won't hurt Obama in his quest for the White House.

With all of that in mind, let's go over a couple general points on the all-new Obama-Biden ticket in fast, quick-hit fashion.

(1) In the end, this pick will not determine the election outcome -- Barack Obama and John McCain will. We love politics, so do most of the pundits, and probably anyone who reads this blog regularly. As a result, we tend to overstate and over-analyze minor political issues and events. The veepstakes is easily Exhibit A of this syndrome, with the 24/7 media covering this whole ordeal so much because there was nothing better to do.

Let's be totally honest: when it is all said and done, the Biden choice -- and McCain's pick as well -- will very likely have little impact on the ultimate outcome of this race. In the end, voters will cast their ballots on the main candidates, Obama and McCain. At most, Biden will have a big negative effect, were he to make a big mistake, or something bad came out about him going forward. But neither Biden, nor almost any others, would likely turn a vital state, or the race itself.

(2) Picking Biden is an extension of Obama's "big game" electoral strategy. Had Obama picked either Tim Kaine or Evan Bayh, either pick would have been with the implicit recognition that both men were on the ticket in large part because of how they would have been able to help carry Virginia or Indiana's electoral votes. By picking Biden, Obama continued to avoid this small-ball strategy, and focus on a broader outlook, as Biden will likely not have a huge influence in helping to carry any big toss-up state. While the pick and this strategy are open to some criticism, we continue to support it given the national anti-GOP environment and the advantages Obama's enormous financial war chest will bring.

(3) Joe Biden will not help much in Ohio or Pennsylvania. A lot of early reports on Biden have zeroed in on his blue collar background in Scranton, and have argued that this upbringing will help the ticket attract lower middle whites and perhaps turn Ohio and bolster Obama's standing in Pennsylvania. For the most part, I disagree. While Biden's life story can only help, it won't help much. Biden has lived in Delaware for decades, and he has no tangible connection to the Buckeye State that would help win over skeptical voters in southeast Ohio (the state's key swing region for Obama). I think this argument is largely wishful thinking.

(4) Joe Biden's best asset will be his ability to tear down John McCain. As we noted a couple of weeks ago, Joe Biden will be a very good attack dog for the ticket, and I believe this was one of the key reasons he was tapped. Biden is a skilled speaker, and because he is so strong on policy matters and politics, he will be an effective weapon to blister Republicans in ways that Obama cannot himself say out loud. As a longtime political pro who has chaired two major Senate committees and has appeared on countless Sunday morning talk shows, Biden will be able to slide into the national stage with ease.

What's more important, because of his knowledge of foreign affairs and his control of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he has the credibility to lodge attacks that individuals like Kaine, Bayh, and Kate Sebelius would have had a harder time pulling off. Credibility is key, and is a major reason that we believed Hillary Clinton would have been a good fit for the ticket at this stage. As the race gets more and more nasty, Biden's value as an attack dog surrogate will quickly become apparent. I have strong personal confidence that Biden will flourish in this role.

(5) The Obama team played out the process extremely well in two respects. Both the Obama campaign's conduct of the veep search, as well as its precise execution, were done quite well, and this reflects strongly on both the candidate and his inner circle. First, that there were basically zero substantive leaks throughout the process is pretty impressive. Sure, these things generally remain in the dark until the announcement, but never before has a veepstakes been subjected to level of intense scrutiny analysis as that present during this campaign. The campaign's skilled tight-lippedness reflects well on Obama's campaign's focus and loyalty.

Second, by ducking the conventional wisdom -- and past history -- and making the selection so late in the game, Team Obama showed restraint and foresight. More importantly, the roll-out was executed well, and the campaign played the insatiable CNN/Fox/MSNBC media beast to perfection. The campaign was able to maximize coverage of the choice, and Obama generally with how it announced the decision. When I first heard about the whole text message business, I scoofed, but the Obama plan exceeded my expectations.

One caveat is that I would not have dumped the story on Saturday. No one was paying attention at that point, particularly on a summer Saturday in August. They should have done it Monday or Thursday/Friday. But this does not take away from how well the overall process was conducted.

(6) The search was executed with regards to the Hillary situation. One exception to the campaign's professionalism was with its treatment of the Hillary quagmire. Immediately before and after the Biden pick came to light, stories were released saying that Obama never formally vetted Clinton, and his veep team never requested a single document from Clinton. These stories served merely to open up old wounds from the primary.

Personally, I believe that a lot of the bad stuff was leaked from the hardcore bitter Clintonistas in her inner circle, nothing more. I also feel that Obama really did meet with Clinton on the veep search, albeit probably informally. But Team Obama did screw up by not formally requesting some background stuff from the Clintons, if for nothing else than for show. By not doing so, they left themselves open to criticism, even if they never had any intention of picking HRC, which I believe they did not. For Obama's sake, I hope the matter blows over.

(7) By not picking Clinton, Obama makes himself more vulnerable with women. Already, Team McCain is trying to really exploit this opening, and is surprisingly using HIllary Clinton herself as the vehicle. A commercial just created by McCain criticizes Obama for not picking Clinton -- apparently using some stories circulating out there that Obama did not even formally vet his former rival. This ad is geared towards opening newer and wider wounds with the female electorate.

While it is entirely unclear if this is a wise strategy, and whether many former Clinton supporters and women generally will vote Republican this November, McCain is smart to push the issue. If it doesn't work or move poll numbers, he can always move on. But if McCain is truly committed to winning a big slice of the female electorate, he should follow the course we outlined here last month and look seriously at tapping a woman as his running mate -- specifically Sarah Palin. If McCain were to take that bold course, the Biden pick could really backfire for the Democrats.