US presidential elections where the VP pick might have very well made the difference between victory and defeat

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,916
SoCal
Which US presidential elections were there where the VP pick might have very well made the difference between victory and defeat? So far, I could think of James Blaine's refusal to put a New Yorker on his ticket as VP in 1884 as very possibly costing him New York and thus the 1884 election. Blaine only lost New York by a little more than 1,000 votes (about 0.10%) and thus a different VP pick for Blaine might have very well made a difference for him. (Indeed, it's certainly interesting that Grover Cleveland only barely won New York in 1884 in spite of the fact that he was elected Governor there in a landslide just two years earlier.)

Have there ever been any other cases where the VP pick might have very well made the difference? I mean, I was thinking of JFK versus Nixon in 1960, but not picking LBJ would have had to cost JFK Texas, both Carolinas, and Missouri in order for Nixon to win the election--and frankly, I'm just not sure how realistic that was.

Anyway, any thoughts on this?
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,916
SoCal
Interestingly enough, the winning Republican presidential tickets in 1876, 1880, 1888, 1900, 1904, and 1908 all had a New Yorker on them. The only presidential election after 1872 and before 1920 that the GOP won without a New Yorker on the ticket was 1896.
 

Kotromanic

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
4,978
Iowa USA
Regarding the 2000 election: if George W. Bush had been a bit more confident of a nominee (some political experience outside of Austin as an office holder) he could have done much better with social conservatives had he chosen someone other than "Veep". The margin of defeat for Bush-Cheney was narrow in places like Wisconsin, New Mexico and maybe a few other locations that could have been winnable with an exciting number Two. On the flipside, Lieberman can very close to delivering Florida but didn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,916
SoCal
Regarding the 2000 election: if George W. Bush had been a bit more confident of a nominee (some political experience outside of Austin as an office holder) he could have done much better with social conservatives had he chosen someone other than "Veep". The margin of defeat for Bush-Cheney was narrow in places like Wisconsin, New Mexico and maybe a few other locations that could have been winnable with an exciting number Two. On the flipside, Lieberman can very close to delivering Florida but didn't.
We're not allowed to talk about post-1991 politics on this forum (yet, at least), but since you mentioned this, Bob Graham would have been a much better VP pick for Al Gore since he actually won five statewide elections in Florida (two for Florida Governor and three for US Senator from Florida) before 2000 in contrast to Joe Lieberman's zero. Joe Lieberman was only able to energize Florida's Jews whereas Bob Graham would have been able to energize Florida's entire electorate.

As for Cheney, he did provide necessary experience for the ticket. That said, though, if Bush wanted to nail down Florida, he might have been better pressed to pick someone such as Connie Mack.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kotromanic

Kotromanic

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
4,978
Iowa USA
"Necessary experience", yes, he had one more driving while intoxicated conviction than the top of the ticket, so good point there! :cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,916
SoCal
"Necessary experience", yes, he had one more driving while intoxicated conviction than the top of the ticket, so good point there! :cool:
Cheney had two DUI's? If so, I guess that he could add shooting a lawyer in the face to his trophy wall! :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kotromanic

Kotromanic

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
4,978
Iowa USA
Not sure whether a Wyoming sheriff had a feud with young Cheney or if he was just a terrible driver, but I didn't make that up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Naomasa298

Forum Staff
Apr 2010
35,245
T'Republic of Yorkshire
We're not allowed to talk about post-1991 politics on this forum (yet, at least), but since you mentioned this, Bob Graham would have been a much better VP pick for Al Gore since he actually won five statewide elections in Florida (two for Florida Governor and three for US Senator from Florida) before 2000 in contrast to Joe Lieberman's zero. Joe Lieberman was only able to energize Florida's Jews whereas Bob Graham would have been able to energize Florida's entire electorate.

As for Cheney, he did provide necessary experience for the ticket. That said, though, if Bush wanted to nail down Florida, he might have been better pressed to pick someone such as Connie Mack.
So you say "we're not allowed to discuss post-1991 politics" and then you proceed to do exactly that? Are you looking to get yourself suspended?
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,916
SoCal
So you say "we're not allowed to discuss post-1991 politics" and then you proceed to do exactly that? Are you looking to get yourself suspended?
No, I'm not. That said, though, if you're going to suspend people for this, shouldn't both I and Kotromanic be suspended?

FTR, I'm not actually advocating suspending anyone here. I'll stop talking about this now.