Does Gov. Martin O'Malley want to be Hillary Clinton's vice president?

Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) is making noises about running for president. There are two reasons to do that – even if Hillary Clinton runs, too. And maybe she won’t even run.

Charlie Neibergall/AP/File
Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley (D), seen here in Iowa last year, appears to be considering a run for president in 2016.

Martin O’Malley made it fairly obvious over the weekend that he’s running for president, or at least pretty darn close to deciding in favor.

Here’s what the Democratic governor of Maryland told reporters at the National Governors Association meeting in Milwaukee, according to The Washington Post: “By the end of this year, I think we’re on course to have a body of work that lays the framework of a candidacy for 2016.”

Governor O’Malley is youthful but not too young (now in his 50s), personable, and lauded for his executive skills, both as mayor of Baltimore and now a two-term governor. Still, his comment was a bit surprising. Most people hide their ambition a little more effectively this early in the cycle. But O’Malley is nothing if not ambitious. And the 2016 campaign is already well under way, especially on the Republican side.

And it may well be that O’Malley needs to be this open about his intentions to garner media attention and create buzz amid all the Hillary-mania. So what about that, anyway? If former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is going to run, and the betting inside the Beltway is that she will, then why should anyone else even bother?

Two reasons: First, O’Malley could wind up being her running mate. Presidential nominees often select someone who has been tested on the national stage during the primaries – especially the debates – as their No. 2. Barack Obama picked Joe Biden. John Kerry picked John Edwards. Ronald Reagan picked George H.W. Bush.

If Ms. Clinton is the Democratic nominee in 2016, then it would make sense for her to select a white guy as her running mate. The unofficial rule in putting together a ticket is that you break only one glass ceiling at a time. (That’s one possible reason President Obama didn’t put Clinton on the ticket with him in 2008, among many.) Clinton would be the first female nominee for a major party, so putting a fresh-faced white-male governor on the ticket makes sense.

Clinton would be on the older end as a nominee, so going for a youngish running mate also makes sense. It introduces a new generation of Democratic leadership to the country.

The second reason for O’Malley to run against Clinton is that she might stumble. There are no guarantees in politics, as she discovered when she ran the first time, in 2007-08. When she announced her first campaign, she was the odds-on favorite. Then upstart Obama came along and outdid her with his charisma and superior campaign strategy.

Nobody is perfect on the stump, and Clinton could make a campaign-ending mistake. Or something could come out about her tenure at the State Department – Benghazi, anyone? – or in the Senate or as first lady.

Clinton isn’t likely to let us know her intentions by the end of the year. Given her universal name recognition and fundraising power, she doesn’t need to. She can wait at least until the beginning of 2015. So under O’Malley’s timeline, he will effectively announce, or close to it, before he knows what Clinton is doing.

In announcing early, O’Malley could also be hedging his bets that Clinton might not run. And in that event, the field would be wide open. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.