But won’t putting Jindal on the ticket defang the GOP’s argument about Obama’s inexperience, you (and I) say? Who cares, replies Newt? That argument’s a loser anyway, per the Democratic primary and assorted polls. Instead of looking at number two as an opportunity to put the screws to Obama on experience, we should be looking at it as an opportunity to leverage some of the buzz on change, secure in the knowledge that the left won’t dare attack Jindal for his youth when Obama’s record is even thinner than his is. I don’t buy it, partly because I don’t think Jindal has enough of a fan base even within the party yet to bring much to the ticket and partly because experience does in fact play into the “big decisions” point Newt makes near the end here. But even more basic than that is age: On inauguration day next year, he’ll still be fully five years younger than the youngest man ever to become president (and his extreme precocity only makes McCain’s age that much more striking by contrast). Rationally speaking, it’s silly to distinguish between the capabilities of a 47-year-old and a 37-year-old, but not everyone’s going to vote rationally. If you think it’s worth the risk, explain to me what he brings to the ticket at this point that no one else does.
Still a better suggestion, though, than David Frum’s, who per his conclusion seems to think McCain’s top priority in choosing a VP shouldn’t be winning the election so much as “securing his vision” by naming the one Republican out there more likely to antagonize the Christian base than McCain himself. Smart.