Bobby Jindal has been a bill-signing machine. He inked 39 yesterday which brings his total for the 2012 Legislative Session to 150.
Jindal has also been getting VP buzz for a number of conservatives, lately, ranging from David Frum to Grover Norquist to Philip Klein.
If you notice, each argument is heavy on his policy smarts and executive chops, and are written almost like the VP should go to the most qualified and accomplished politician.
But even though, theoretically, a VP pick should be about that, it never is. Biden was picked to balance out Obama's inexperience on foreign policy. Ditto Cheney for Bush and so on.
The fact is: Jindal still has some glaring weaknesses.
1. He looks really young and is easily stereotyped as the junior apprentice in training. He's like Marco Rubio without the killer smile, important state, or vital last name.
2. He looks too eager and serious; and talks too wonky. Again, I think a lot of cons like his record so much that they want to forget about the way a vice presidential pick should look and act.
Americans aren't voting for the VP for president. They're voting, first, for the guy at the top, and second, for the overall mystique the ticket presents.
I think the Jindal for Veep buzz is kind of like the Barbour for President chatter last year. A lot of people respected Barbour so much that they respectfully put him in the first tier of presidential candidates even though he had fatal flaws as a candidate.
Jindal's future is bright, and his flaws can be addressed by time, but the demands of a VP (look mature, speak well, reflect positively on the guy at the top of the ticket) just aren't in his wheelhouse.