The headline on Bill Kristol’s NYT column today reads, “McCain-Jindal?” It suggests to the reader that the column is about John McCain considering Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal for the Republican presidential ticket, as has been rumored elsewhere. As it turns out, the first three-fourths of Kristol’s column was actually about Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama’s chances in November.
Eventually, at the end, Kristol gets around to the point.
[I]n separate conversations last week, no fewer than four McCain staffers and advisers mentioned as a possible vice-presidential pick the 36-year-old Louisiana governor, Bobby Jindal. They’re tempted by the idea of picking someone so young, with real accomplishments and a strong reformist streak.
It might also be a way to confront the issue of McCain’s age (71), which private polls and focus groups suggest could be a real problem. A Jindal pick would implicitly acknowledge the questions and raise the ante. The message would be: “You want generational change? You can get it with McCain-Jindal — without risking a liberal and inexperienced Obama as commander in chief.” I would add that it was after McCain spent considerable time with Jindal in New Orleans recently, and reportedly found him, as he has before, personally engaging and intellectually impressive, that the campaign’s informal name-dropping of Jindal began.
On the surface, I can appreciate why Republicans would be buzzing about Jindal. He’s almost ridiculously conservative on social and cultural issues, and a darling of the James Dobson and Rush Limbaugh crowds. He offers McCain regional and age balance — Jindal is only a couple of years older than me — and he’s the governor of what ostensibly might be a swing state in November.
But this scenario still strikes me as unlikely.
Kristol’s argument is that McCain could tell voters that Jindal represents the kind of generational change they crave, without taking a “risk” with Obama’s “inexperience.”
But Kristol conveniently brushes past the obvious flaw — Jindal makes Obama look like a seasoned veteran. Obama was first elected to public office 12 years ago. He served eight years at the state level, and four in the U.S. Senate. Jindal, in contrast, was first elected to public office four years ago. He served three years in the U.S. House, and one at the state level.
Given that McCain would be the oldest president ever elected, it seems odd to have a 36-year-old governor, with four years of service in public office and no military or foreign policy experience whatsoever, one heartbeat away from the Oval Office.
My friend dnA argues, “[T]he main reason for a Jindal pick, I’m guessing, would be his fanatical opposition to reproductive choice in all circumstances, including rape and incest, which might help McCain rile up the base.” I suspect that’s right. Indeed, my hunch is the McCain campaign is touting Jindal to friendly media personalities like Kristol under the assumption that the far-right base will be thrilled to hear that Jindal is even being considered.
But it still seems like a stretch. As Kevin Drum put it, "'Confront' the issue of McCain's age by picking a running mate who's barely old enough to run legally and has a grand total of four years of experience in elected office. Doesn't that, um, actually highlight the issue of McCain's age?"
I’d just add that Jindal is Indian-American. If the far-right is uncomfortable with Obama because he strikes them as “too different” — the color of his skin, his untraditional name, his finding Christianity as an adult — Jindal may also prove problematic in intolerant circles.
