1) regional or idealogical or photogenic or life-story appeal that compliments the POTUS candidates electability.
2) champion a pet cause or take on an organizational role.
3) serve as a ‘pit bull’ or ideological champion or spokesman of the party.
4) Fill in as a successor to the President, not just in case of death, but as the presumed standard bearer or at least the one to beat in the next election.
5) Constitutional role: Vote in the Senate in case of a tie, serve as successor to the President in case of death, impairment or removal from office.
Gov. Sarah Palin is 5 STAR! She increased electability. She WILL be a force to reckon with, and has already championed the cause of parents of children with special needs. She served up the meat hot and tasty at the convention and her ideology is right up my alley. She is ready to serve day one and will be a powerful candidate in four or eight years. And I trust her vote in case of a tie more than any serving Senator.
Cheney was a GREAT VP and he was only four out of five. He was not a standard bearer for the next election. He was taken on in a “mentor” role, not a successor.
I too, think Cheney was a great VP (perhaps the greatest), and not in the daft way the media presented him (that is, smirking Master of the Shadow World). Unfortunately, although he was probably more qualified for the office than Bush, he had the type of face that better fits a villain on 24 than a leader of the free world. I remember watching his debate with Lieberman and wondering why, oh why, can’t he be the top of the ticket?
Is the Vice President (and President of the Senate) entitled to speak in the Senate? I don’t recall a VP ever saying anything of consequence from the Senate. Would Sarah Palin change that?