With the release of a shocking NY Times/CBS Poll showing the race for the White House now tied at 40 percent for each candidate, who Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump choose for VP just became a lot more significant. So, with just hours before Trump's potential VP announcement, and less than a week before Clinton's, these are the five things to look for over the coming days that will help decide which campaign has the advantage, and whether Clinton's and Trump's VP choices are political "winners" or "losers."
For Hillary Clinton, it's fair to assume that her "VP message" will stress experience, competence, and unity. No need to be uber-bold, so don't expect a progressive liberal, like a Sen. Bernie Sanders from Vermont or Sen. Elizabeth Warren from Massachusetts, as VP. Message-wise, she can afford to play it safer – she's ahead. But what does Donald Trump do? For Trump, the stakes of getting this "message" wrong are very high. Does he double-down on his brashness, or does he try to unify his party with a more conservative choice (think Indiana Gov. Mike Pence)? If Trump chooses brashness, former House speaker Newt Gingrich is the choice, and if Clinton focuses on unity or competence, expect Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julian Castro or Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack.
Advantage: Clinton.
For candidates who have never been exposed to the national spotlight, it's not the kick-off the speech that will define them, it's the first series of national interviews. The VP will not only have to display competence, but must effectively defend everything their running mate has ever done or said. For candidates like a Gov. Chris Christie from New Jersey or a Vilsack, they may have the background to handle this pressure. But if the candidate is fairly new to the coming political maelstrom, such as a Castro or retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, one wrong answer can quickly overtake a campaign. And, if anyone doesn't think that matters they should just ask Sarah Palin.
Advantage: Trump, but could be a tie: If Trump chooses Gingrich or Christie, they're more spotlight ready on paper than if Clinton chooses Castro or Perez. Less so if she goes with Kaine or Warner.
Now, historically, this really doesn't matter. It's not as if Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, or George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were charismatic dynamic duos. But this is a different media age. Voters' preferences are influenced and shaped by the social media and earned media they consume. If your ticket doesn't look or feel right, tweeted social memes will expose every awkward handshake, hug, and smile in a millisecond. While earned media is all but guaranteed, voters will watch, for good and bad, a ticket that attracts more earned media attention. Which leads to the question – which ticket will garner more media attention? Well, if you haven't been watching the last year, it will be Trump, and that suggests he picks Gingrich or Christie, not Pence. For Hillary, it's not as clear. If the idea is to generate more excitement, via a new face, Castro seems a more likely choice, or maybe there is a dark horse no one sees coming.