Plus this...what highpowered politician would even accept a job that's only guaranteed for one year? It would be political suicide.
I was reading about previous Vice Presidents yesterday. President McKinley's Veep died one year before his term was up. They didn't even bother to replace him. The nation was without a Veep for a year, and the people hardly noticed it.
Of course, that was way back when the Offce of the Vice Presidency held little power or influence.
If Cheney has done nothing else as Veep, he has at least raised the status of the office.
Peggy Noonan ought to educate herself and read a little history before she sits down at her keyboard again.
Rough Riding
At the dawn of the twentieth century there was no Vice-President of the United States. This fact did not seem to bother anyone. Alone of all the major offices in the Federal Government, the vice-presidency could be left vacant until the next presidential election provided a new incumbent. When Vice-President Garret Augustus Hobart died in November 1899, the only problem presented was that the McKinley administration would have to find a new running-mate for the 1900 campaign. Even had he lived, that might have been done anyway, for the practice was to deny a Vice-President renomination for a second term. However, as Hobart was particularly close to the President and enjoyed great popularity with the Senate and important sections of his party, an effort might have been made to defy this tradition.
Not necessarily.
Suppose there is a new VP in 2007, even a second rate hack. Then suppose that in 2008 Bin Ladin's head is on display, the Dow is at 18000, the Islamics have surrendered, Iraq is peaceful and exporting oil which causes gas to be under a $1 a gallon.
That VP wins in 2008.
If those things don't occur that VP loses badly.