Every Presidential Candidate’s Running Mate Since WWII
Since the U.S. Constitution was first instituted, there have been 48 vice presidents. They’ve supported presidents in seeing the country through wars, economic expansions and contractions, a global pandemic—and much more.
A president’s success depends on the strength of their team, so it’s only natural that as second-in-command, the pick for a VP carries significant weight. In some cases, they can even make or break the race to secure a spot in the White House.
In this graphic, we take a look at the hand-picked running mates of presidential hopefuls since 1940, including the upcoming November 2020 elections.
Running More Than Once
The graphic highlights 33 running mates, out of which nine have ran for VP more than once. Here’s how their number of terms compare, and who continued on to become an eventual presidential candidate:
|Running Mate||Party||VP terms served||Presidential candidate?|
|Mike Pence||🔴 R||Won 1 term|
Currently running for second term
|Joe Biden||🔵 D||Won both terms||Currently running for president|
|Dick Cheney||🔴 R||Won both terms||No|
|Al Gore||🔵 D||Won both terms||Yes, but did not win first term|
|Dan Quayle||🔴 R||Won 1 out of 2 terms||No|
|George H. W. Bush||🔴 R||Won both terms||Yes, won one term|
|Spiro Agnew||🔴 R||Won both terms||Resigned during VP second term|
|Richard Nixon||🔴 R||Won both terms||Yes, won both terms|
|Walter Mondale||🔵 D||Won 1 out of 2 terms||Yes, but did not win first term|
Of the running mates since WWII, Republicans Richard Nixon and George H. W. Bush are the only two to have served as president after being vice presidents for two previous terms—unless Joe Biden wins in November 2020.
What career paths did aspiring VPs take before running on the big ticket?
Interestingly, 2 of 3 running mates profiled in today’s graphic had a prior background as a lawyer before choosing to enter politics.
A curious exception to the typical career path is that of former professional football player Jack Kemp, who was chosen as the running mate for Bob Dole’s unsuccessful presidential bid in 1996.
At the President’s Right Hand
The vice president is the first in line of succession for the Oval Office, in the event that the sitting president dies, resigns, or is removed from office. Throughout history, nine VPs have ascended to presidency this way, of which three occurred since 1940.
- After Franklin D. Roosevelt’s death in 1945, Harry S. Truman ascended to the presidency.
- Lyndon B. Johnson became the President upon John F. Kennedy’s assassination in 1963.
- Following evidence of political corruption, Spiro Agnew resigned in 1973. He was replaced by Gerald Ford, who then became President after Nixon’s post-Watergate resignation in 1974.
Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton, and Donald Trump are three Presidents who have been through the impeachment process, but were later acquitted by the Senate. Otherwise, the list of VPs ending up as the commander-in-chief might look much more different.
The Youngest and Oldest Running Mates
Based on the first time they ran on the ticket, the average running mate is 54 years old. In contrast, the average presidential candidate is 58 years old.
Comparing the age difference between presidential candidates and their running mates paints a unique picture. The biggest age gaps both occurred in 2008:
There was a 28-year difference between older candidate John McCain (72) and younger VP pick Sarah Palin (44) on the Republican ticket. On the Democratic side, younger candidate Barack Obama (47) and older VP pick Joe Biden (66) saw a 19-year gap.
Harry S. Truman’s historic win in 1948 was considered a surprising political longshot. His running mate, Alben W. Barkley was the oldest running mate ever picked, 71 years at the time.
Meanwhile, Richard Nixon was one of the youngest running mates to be chosen, 39 years in 1956—second only to John C. Breckinridge (36 years old in 1856). Finally, at age 92 years in 2020, Walter Mondale is the oldest living former VP.
Cracking the Glass Ceiling
Last but not least, there have only been three women selected as VP running mates to date.
- Geraldine Ferraro became the first woman VP nominee for the Democratic Party in 1984.
- Although she had only two years of political experience as governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin was the first female Republican VP nominee in 2008.
- Kamala Harris, a former prosecutor with almost four years of experience as a Senator, is the first woman of color to be nominated on any major party’s ticket in 2020.
Palin herself shared a few words of wisdom for Harris across the aisle:
Congrats to the democrat VP pick 🇺🇸 Climb upon Geraldine Ferraro’s and my shoulders, and from the most amazing view in your life consider lessons we learned…
—Sarah Palin (via Instagram)
Could Harris become the first ever right-hand woman? We’ll find out in a few months.
Mapped: The Countries With the Most Military Spending
Global military spending surpassed $1.9 trillion in 2019, but nearly 75% of this total can be traced to just 10 countries.
Mapped: The Countries With the Most Military Spending
Whether it’s fight or flight, there’s a natural tendency of humans to want to protect themselves.
In this day and age, this base instinct takes the form of a nation’s expenditures on armies and armaments, towards an end goal of global security and peacekeeping.
This graphic from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) delves into the top military spenders as of 2019.
Top 10 Biggest Military Spenders
Let’s first take a look at the overall growth trends. The world’s military spending grew by 3.6% year-over-year (YoY)—currently the highest rate this decade—to surpass $1.9 trillion in 2019.
While just 10 countries are responsible for nearly 75% of this amount, the U.S. alone made up the lion’s share with 38% of the global total. In fact, its YoY rise in spending alone of $49.2 billion rivals Germany’s entire spending for the same year.
Naturally, many questions rise about where this money goes, including the inevitable surplus of military equipment, from night vision goggles to armored vehicles, that trickles down to law enforcement around the nation.
Here’s how world’s top 10 military spenders compare against each other:
|Country||Military Spending ('19)||YoY % change||Military Spending as % of GDP ('19)|
|Saudi Arabia 🇸🇦||$61.2B||-16.0%||8.0%|
|South Korea 🇰🇷||$43.9B||+7.5%||2.7%|
China and India, currently embroiled in a border dispute, have upped the ante for military spending in Asia. India is also involved in clashes with its neighbor Pakistan for territorial claim over Kashmir—one of the most contested borders in the world.
India’s tensions and rivalry with both Pakistan and China are among the major drivers for its increased military spending.
—Siemon T. Wezeman, SIPRI Senior Researcher
Germany leads among the top spenders in terms of highest YoY military spending increases. According to SIPRI, this is a preemptive measure in the face of perceived growing Russian threats.
These concerns may not be unfounded, considering that Russia comes in fourth for defense expenditures on the global stage—and budgets more towards military spending than any country in Europe, at 3.9% of its total GDP.
Military Spending as a Share of GDP
Looking more closely at the numbers, it’s clear that some nations place a higher value on defense than others. A country’s military expenses as a share of GDP is the most straightforward expression of this.
How do the biggest spenders change when this measure is taken into consideration?
Eight of the 15 countries with the highest military spending as a percentage of GDP are concentrated in the Middle East, with an average allocation of 4.5% of a nation’s GDP.
It’s worth noting that data is missing for various countries in the Middle East, such as Yemen, which has been mired in a civil war since 2011. While SIPRI estimates that combined military spending in the region fell by 7.5% in 2019, these significant data gaps mean that such estimates may not in fact line up with the reality.
Explore the full data set of all available countries below.
|Country||2019 Spending, US$B||2019 Share of GDP|
|Republic of Congo||$0.30||2.7%|
|Trinidad & Tobago||$0.17||0.7%|
|Papua New Guinea||$0.08||0.4%|
|Central African Republic||$0.03||1.5%|
Basic Income Experiments Around the World
Amid the pandemic, the idea of Universal Basic Income has been gaining steam with policymakers. Where has it been tried, and has it worked?
Basic Income Experiments Around the World
What if everyone received monthly payments to make life easier and encourage greater economic activity? That’s the exact premise behind Universal Basic Income (UBI).
The idea of UBI as a means to both combat poverty and improve economic prospects has been around for decades. With the COVID-19 pandemic wreaking havoc on economies worldwide, momentum behind the idea has seen a resurgence among certain groups.
Of course, the money to fund basic income programs has to come from somewhere. UBI relies heavily on government budgets or direct funding to cover the regular payments.
As policymakers examine this trade-off between government spending and the potential benefits, there is a growing pool of data to draw inferences from. In fact, basic income has been piloted and experimented on all around the world—but with a mixed bag of results.
What Makes Basic Income Universal?
UBI operates by giving people the means to meet basic necessities with a regular stipend. In theory, this leaves them free to spend their money and resources on economic goods, or searching for better employment options.
Before examining the programs, it’s important to make a distinction between basic income and universal basic income.
With these parameters in mind, and thanks to data from the Stanford Basic Income Lab, we’ve mapped 48 basic income programs that demonstrate multiple features of UBI and are regularly cited in basic income policy.
Some mapped programs are past experiments used to evaluate basic income. Others are ongoing or new pilots, including recently launched programs in Germany and Spain.
Recently, Canada joined the list as countries considering UBI as a top policy priority in a post-COVID world. But as past experiments show, ideas around basic income can be implemented in many different ways.
Basic Income Programs Took Many Forms
Basic income pilots have seen many iterations across the globe. Many paid out in U.S. dollars, while others chose to stick with local currencies (marked by an asterisk for estimated USD value).
|Program||Location||Recipients||Payment Frequency||Amount ($US/yr)||Dates|
|Abundant Birth Project||San Francisco, U.S.||100||Monthly||$12,000-$18,000||TBD|
|Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend||Alaska, U.S.||667,047||Annually||$1,000-$2,000||1982-Present|
|Baby's First Years||New York, U.S.||1,000||Monthly||$240-$3,996||2017-2022|
|Baby's First Years||New Orleans, U.S.||1,000||Monthly||$240-$3,996||2017-2022|
|Baby's First Years||Omaha, U.S.||1,000||Monthly||$240-$3,996||2017-2022|
|Baby's First Years||Twin Cities, U.S.||1,000||Monthly||$240-$3,996||2017-2022|
|Basic Income for Farmers||Gyeonggi Province, South Korea||430,000||Annually||$509*||TBD|
|Basic Income Grant (BIG) Pilot||Omitara, Namibia||930||Monthly||$163*||2008-2009|
|Basic Income Project||Not Disclosed||3,000||Monthly||$600-$12,000||2019-Present|
|Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians Casino Revenue Fund||Jackson County and area, NC, U.S.||15,414||Biannually||$7,000-$12,000||1996-Present|
|Eight Pilot Project||Busibi, Uganda||150||Monthly||$110-$219*||2017-2019|
|Evaluation of the Citizens' Basic Income Program||Maricá, Brazil||42,000||Monthly||$360*||2019-Present|
|Finland Basic Income Experiment||Finland||2,000||Monthly||$7,793*||2017-2018|
|Gary Income Maintenance Experiments||Gary, U.S.||1,782||Monthly||$3,300-$4,300||1971-1974|
|Give Directly||Western Kenya||20,847||Monthly or Lump Sum||$274||2017-2030|
|Give Directly||Saiya County, Kenya||10,500||Lump Sum||$333||2014-2017|
|Give Directly||Rarieda District, Kenya||503||Monthly or Lump Sum||$405-$1,525||2011-2013|
|Human Development Fund||Mongolia||2,700,000||Monthly||$187||2010-2012|
|Ingreso Mínimo Vital||Spain||850,000||Monthly||$6,535-$14,358*||2020-Present|
|Iran Cash Transfer Programme||Iran||75,000,000||Monthly||$48||2010-Present|
|Madhya Pradesh Unconditional Cash Transfers Project||Madhya Pradesh, India||5,547||Monthly||$26-$77*||2011-2012|
|Magnolia Mother's Trust||Jackson, MS, U.S.||80||Monthly||$12,000||2019-Present|
|Manitoba Basic Annual Income Experiment||Winnipeg, Canada||1,677||Monthly||$3,842-$5,864*||1975-1978|
|Manitoba Basic Annual Income Experiment||Dauphin, Canada||586||Monthly||$3,842-$5,864*||1975-1978|
|My Basic Income||Germany||120||Monthly||$17,160*||2020-2023|
|New Jersey Income Maintenance Experiment||Jersey City, U.S.||1,357||Biweekly||Varied||1968-1972|
|New Jersey Income Maintenance Experiment||Paterson, NJ, U.S.||1,357||Biweekly||Varied||1968-1972|
|New Jersey Income Maintenance Experiment||Passaic, NJ, U.S.||1,357||Biweekly||Varied||1968-1972|
|New Jersey Income Maintenance Experiment||Trenton, NJ, U.S.||1,357||Biweekly||Varied||1968-1972|
|New Jersey Income Maintenance Experiment||Scranton, PA, U.S.||1,357||Biweekly||Varied||1968-1972|
|Ontario Basic Income Pilot||Hamilton and area, Canada||2,748||Monthly||$13,112-$18,930* (-50% income)||2017-2018|
|Ontario Basic Income Pilot||Thunder Bay and area, Canada||1,908||Monthly||$13,112-$18,930* (-50% income)||2017-2018|
|Ontario Basic Income Pilot||Lindsay, Canada||1,844||Monthly||$13,112-$18,930* (-50% income)||2017-2018|
|Preserving Our Diversity||Santa Monica, U.S.||250||Monthly||$7,836-$8,964||2017-Present|
|Quatinga Velho||Quatinga, Mogi das Cruces, Brazil||67||Monthly||$197*||2008-2014|
|Rural Income Maintenance Experiment||Duplin County, NC, U.S.||810||Monthly||Varied (NIT)||1970-1972|
|Rural Income Maintenance Experiment||Iowa, U.S.||810||Monthly||Varied (NIT)||1970-1972|
|Scheme $6,000||Hong Kong, China||4,000,000||Annually||$771*||2011-2012|
|Seattle-Denver Income Maintenance Experiment||Seattle, U.S.||2,042||Monthly||$3,800-$5,600||1971-1982|
|Seattle-Denver Income Maintenance Experiment||Denver, U.S.||2,758||Monthly||$3,800-$5,600||1971-1982|
|Stockton Economic Empowerment Demonstration||Stockton, U.S.||125||Monthly||$6,000||2019-Present|
|Transition-Age Youth Basic Income Pilot Program||Santa Clara, CA, U.S.||72||Monthly||$12,000||2020-2021|
|Wealth Partaking Scheme||Macau, China||700,600||Annually||$750-$1,150||2008-Present|
|Youth Basic Income Program||Gyeonggi Province, South Korea||125,000||Quarterly||$848*||2018-Present|
|Citizen's Basic Income Pilot||Scotland||TBD||Monthly||TBD||TBD|
|People's Prosperity Guaranteed Income Demonstration Pilot||St. Paul, U.S.||150||Monthly||$6,000||2020-2022|
Many of the programs meet the classical requirements of UBI. Of the 48 basic income programs tallied above, 75% paid out monthly, and 60% were paid out to individuals.
However, for various reasons, not all of these programs follow UBI requirements. For example, 38% of the basic income programs were paid out to households instead of individuals, and many programs have paid out in lump sums or over varying time frames.
Interestingly, the need for better understanding of basic income has resulted in many divergences between programs. Some programs were only targeted at specific groups like South Korea’s Basic Income for Farmers program, while others like the Baby’s First Years program in the U.S. have been experimenting with different dollar amounts in order to evaluate efficiency.
Other experiments based payments made off of the total income of recipients. For example, in the U.S., the Rural Income and New Jersey Income Maintenance Experiments paid out using a negative income tax (return) on earnings, while recipients of Canada’s Ontario Basic Income Pilot received fixed amounts minus 50% of their earned income.
Varying Programs with Varied Results
So is basic income the real deal or a pipe dream? The results are still unclear.
Some, like the initial pilots for Uganda’s Eight program, were found to result in significant multipliers on economic activity and well-being. Other programs, however, returned mixed results that made further experimentation difficult. Finland’s highly-touted pilot program decreased stress levels of recipients across the board, but didn’t positively impact work activity.
The biggest difficulty has been in keeping programs going and securing funding. Ontario’s three-year projects were prematurely cancelled in 2018 before they could be completed and assessed, and the next stages of Finland’s program are in limbo.
Likewise in the U.S., start-up incubator Y Combinator has been planning a $60M basic income study program, but can’t proceed until funding is secured.
A Post-COVID Future for UBI?
In light of COVID-19, basic income has once again taken center stage.
Many countries have already implemented payment schemes or boosted unemployment benefits in reaction to the pandemic. Others like Spain have used that momentum to launch fully-fledged basic income pilots.
It’s still too early to tell if UBI will live up to expectations or if the idea will fizzle out, but as new experiments and policy programs take shape, a growing amount of data will become available for policymakers to evaluate.
Technology2 months ago
The World’s Tech Giants, Ranked by Brand Value
Technology2 months ago
AIoT: When Artificial Intelligence Meets the Internet of Things
Maps2 months ago
Animated Map: The History of U.S. Counties
Technology1 month ago
Visualizing the Social Media Universe in 2020
Technology4 weeks ago
Ranked: The Most Popular Websites Since 1993
Demographics4 weeks ago
The World Population in 2100, by Country
Business2 months ago
From Bean to Brew: The Coffee Supply Chain
Technology2 weeks ago
Here’s What Happens Every Minute on the Internet in 2020