Since 1953, we’ve had 13 Vice Presidents.

9 of them completed their terms without inheriting the presidency due to death or resignation.

7 of those 9 sought their party’s presidential nomination at some point.

All but 1 (Quayle vs. GWB in 2000) won the nomination.
It wasn’t always this way.

Pre-1953, of the 20 VPs who completed their terms without inheriting the presidency:

- 11 never ran for president
- 5 ran and were not nominated
- 4 were nominated (all pre-Civil War)
We’ve basically moved to a system where many of our presidential nominees are chosen 4, 8, even 12 years in advance with no input from voters at the time.

No challenger to those pre-selected nominees has been successful, except the son of a former president.
My guess is this has a lot to do with modern mass media, which makes VPs much better known that they’d been in the past, especially compared to senators, governors, etc.

Regardless, it’s a notable shift in the way we choose presidents and we might want to reflect on it.
The pre-democracy PRI in Mexico chose future presidents by a similar system. The outgoing president simply chose the new one.

We’re obviously not that extreme. Sometimes the other party wins. Sometimes the sitting or former VP or doesn’t run.

But it still seems not great.
If we’re going to keep going down this road, then I insist that we at least start referring to the selection of running mates as “El Dedazo.”
You can follow @joeledman.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: