to what extent does VP selection affect a candidate's electability?

it would seem to me that discussions about candidate's electability are pointless until a VP is added to the ticket, since one of the primary functions of a VP (for election purposes) is to balance out the ticket.

for example, in the case of Dean, who many say is unelectable because he's a North Easterner (among other reasons), to what degree would the addition of a Southerner (e.g., Clark, Graham, Edwards) to the ticket make that point moot?

Unless he picked someone who is a terrific campaigner in the South (that means you, Gov. Mark Warner), I don't know how much a Southerner will help.

I think that if Dean wins, he should choose someone from the Midwest and who is seen as more moderate:

Dean/Gephardt
Dean/Feingold
Dean/Harkin
Dean/Vilsack

and of course
Dean/Mark Warner

I was only using that as example.

what I'm trying to get at is how much impact the choice of VP has on a nominee's electability in general.

have been VERY disappointed in how he has sold out to corporate interests in trying to force a publicly financed baseball stadium and more highway building into a community that these actions would seriously disrupt and which opposes both (and which is one of the few large Democratic strongholds in the state!). There are principles here that Democrats should be much more respectful of. I am disappointed that he has not advocated strongly for higher tobacco taxes. Yes, yes, I know this is a tobacco state, but Virginia has the lowest tobacco taxes in the nation and there are far more of us harmed by tobacco than profiting from it, and the state desperately needs this FAIR source of revenue. A gifted and seasoned Dem politician would not have handled any of these issues as he has. He has a difficult job, but with all due respect to you and him, I do not think he has a record that will inspire and attract most democratic Virginians, let alone those outside the state. Better to go with a known quantity.

And King George the last balanced a Texas oil millionare/lifelong political insider with a Texas oil millionare/lifelong political insider.

VP don't mean beans

The VP choice doesn't make much difference but in a close election it could make a difference. To show that it does make some difference, in 1972 McGovern lost his own home state, but did win his only state, MA, because it was the state his VP, S. Shriver, (Arnold's father-in-law.) was from.

... says that VP candidate is only a small factor.

It used to be considered smart camaign strategy to put a "favorite son" from a big swing state on the ticket to pull in those electoral votes. It was also smart strategy to pick a VP from another part of the country. Hence, JFK of Massachusetts put LBJ of Texas on his ticket, even though JFK and LBJ didn't like each other all that much.

But I'm not sure that's still true. I think it's less true than it used to be. The veep candidates probably don't make much difference as long as they don't pick their noses on camera.