Biden’s Experience


BIDEN’S EXPERIENCE….Over at the mother blog — a genuinely apt name at this magazine — Jonathan Stein comments on today’s paean to Joe Biden from David Brooks:

So Biden is a liberal, not-evil Cheney. I’ll agree that’s a good thing. I’ll further agree that having people like David Brooks on-board with the Obama VP pick is a good thing for Obama. But I won’t agree that experience is the primary consideration when choosing a VP. Is Brooks not aware how that undercuts Obama’s entire case for the presidency? If we value experience, why settle for a ticket with a VP who has 25+ years of experience in Washington? Why not pick the ticket with the nominee who has 25+ years of experience in Washington?

I imagine I’m probably more sympathetic to Biden than Jonathan is in the first place, but even aside from that I don’t think this is right. By picking Biden, what Obama would show is that he’s not afraid of experienced colleagues. Think of JFK picking Johnson or Carter picking Mondale as their running mates. It’s basically a show of dominance.

And aside from that, there really is some value in Biden’s experience. Maybe. All four of the most recent Democratic presidents have chosen their VPs from the ranks of the Senate, and I’ll grant that the results have been fairly mixed. Still, the Senate is pretty clearly going to be ground zero for getting Obama’s program passed into actual legislation, and Biden has a pretty decent track record of working the legislative process. So on that score it might be genuinely helpful. (Ditto, of course, for Jack Reed.)

My Brooks-related concern would be a little different. Remember how conservatives were singing hosannahs to Obama back before he actually won the nomination? That, um, didn’t last long. So call me cynical, but I wonder if Brooks will continue to think so highly of Biden if he gets the nomination? Or will he suddenly discover a column or five’s worth of reasons that he’s actually a fatal albatross? I’m not saying he’d do that. I’m just saying.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate

Share your feedback: We’re planning to launch a new version of the comments section. Help us test it.