R Cheney has changed the meaning of what it is to be Vice President. Obama is virtually now the Democratic Presidential nominee, so it will be interesting to see who is selected in the VP role. The same interest will be in McCain’s selection.The role of the VP is to complement, not overshadow, the presidential candidate, yet be somebody who might credibly assume the office of President. This year the interest will be age, gender and “race”, as well as the more conventional need to balance the ticket by recognizing people from different regions, with an eye to the electoral votes they may be able to swing.

So ideally Obama could be looking from someone from Texas or Florida to increase the appeal of his ticket. Texas with 34 Electoral College votes would be a good option since it is both southern and western. While Pennsylvania and Ohio, with 41 electoral votes between them, might be the critical states again, I suspect they are too close to Obama’s home base in Illinois. This is a problem that McCain does not have, and reasonable to expect his VP nominee to come from these parts.

I doubt that Obama will have Clinton as his VP, since she carries some baggage, not least her husband, although it would be a good gender-age match and go some way to re-unite the traditional Democratic Party supporters. The problem that Senator McCain has that he does not have the Reagan charm and cannot get away with outrageous statements about age and experience. He might be tempted to have a Latino running mate, but probably will not.

I hear there are plenty of potential candidates. I suspect that Bill Richardson might be considered by Obama, but Obama has to connect with the white, working class. In these matters it is not just a matter of personalities but also policies.

In the meantime, Clinton still is persisting with her dream, and her supporters are braving the street corners on her behalf. Obama has been busted. He is a politician. Imagine that!

ELSEWHERE:

You know what democracy is the problem, since Robert Novak at Human Events (via Possibly relate posts ) observes:

If all caucuses were eliminated and only primaries used in picking nominees, Obama’s lead of 130 in delegates would become an advantage for Clinton of 45 delegates. The bigger problem is proportional representation replacing the winner-take-all system that enabled Republicans to get their nominee on Feb. 5 Super Tuesday. Without the “reforms” enacted by Democrats during the decade following the party’s 1968 fiasco, Clinton might have clinched the nomination by now.

This argument is a bit like the cricketer who can play well on some pitches not on others. I think the answer should be to increase the opportunity for choice, not constrain it, but any electoral system have different requirements.