dent thus had been made by a few political operatives in private deliberations. They merely informed the presidential nominee of their choice and won his acquiescence, subject to a meeting of party leaders that was mere window dressing (Witcover 113).
In modern times, the choice of a running mate is usually made on the basis of what part of the country the presidential nominee needs to carry and fears he will not. If he is weak in the South, he may nominate a Southerner. If he needs New York, he may nominate a New York politician. He is unlikely ever to choose a candidate from his own state or part of the country because presumably he is already popular there if he has any chance of winning at all. Paul C. Light calls this "geographical balance," noting that this comes first "and ideological balance second" (Light 136). Before the 1950s, most presidents left the selection of their running mates to nominating conventions. Barbara Hinckley says that the fact that the presidential candidate chooses the vice president is a product of the 1960s, and the change gave Presidents more say in the selection for better and worse (Light 137-138).
The 1960s saw the end of brokered party conventions, and now primaries give grassroots party members a chance to pick potential presidential nominees. More presidential candidates chose their own running mates, though they may have consulted with party leaders. One exception was in 1956, when Adlai Stevenson let the Democratic convention choose for him. "By making their own choices, presidential nominees could ensure that they had vice presidents who would benefit the ticket, who were politically compatible, and whom they could trust" (Feinberg 45). In addition to ticket balancing, presidential candidates also sought running mates with previous political experience. If the presidential candidate campaigns as an "outsider," he chooses a running mate more familiar with Washington, D.C.. F...