The veepstakes have begun with a vengeance as nominee-in-waiting John McCain creeps ever closer to the inevitable 1,191 delegates that it takes to clinch the nomination. Pundits from across the conservative blogosphere are currently putting forth their two cents regarding just who Mr. McCain should select as his running mate. The problem is, as some have surmised, that there’s simply no perfect choice for the job. The ideal candidate would be someone who could excite both base and center while delivering a big swing state in the coming election, as well as someone who is prepared to lead this nation during a time of war should the presidency fall into his or her lap. To put it bluntly, if we had a candidate like that, he or she would be headed for the GOP presidential nomination right now, and would not be on anyone’s short list for veep. Truth be told, the GOP is in a very precarious situation this year. All of our base-pleasing candidates turn off the center, and all of our independent-friendly candidates irritate the base. Those who are acceptable to both are either too old (Thompson), too inexperienced (Palin, Jindal, Steele), or are candidates who would neither irritate nor excite anyone, and thus bring nothing to the ticket (Thune). What this means is that McCain’s veep selection will probably be a net drag on the ticket, or will have no impact on the ticket one way or the other. As such, McCain should select the running mate that he actually wants: someone schooled in national security, someone who appeals to swing voters, someone who, like the senator, is broadly conservative but pragmatic on the details, and someone who is actually qualified to be president.
Enter former Homeland Security Secretary and former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge.
In my view, Mr. Ridge, who was among the runners-up during President Bush’s veepstakes in 2000, best completes a McCain-led GOP ticket due to a) his pragmatic conservative governance that won him b) multiple elections in a large swing state, along with the fact that he is c) a Vietnam veteran and was schooled on national security during his time at Homeland, meaning that he is d) ready to hit the ground running and lead the country during a time of crisis.
On domestic issues, Ridge is best known for the one issue on which he parted from conservatives during his governance — abortion — which may have cost him a spot on the GOP ticket in 2000. But the simple reality is that vice presidents don’t appoint federal judges, nor do they sign or veto legislation. As long as Mr. Ridge agrees that abortion should be a state issue, not a national one, promises to support the McCain policy of appointing conservative judges to the federal bench, and pledges to continue that policy should he be required to complete McCain’s term, pro-life conservatives should have no qualms with a Vice President Ridge. This is especially true given that Ridge’s history on the issue is much more in line with that of Jim Gilmore than, say, Rudy Giuliani, who many pro-lifers were willing to embrace despite past support for even partial-birth abortion. Ridge’s record on abortion suggests support for waiting periods, parental notification measures, and an opposition to late-term abortions. Coupled with an express commitment to support and appoint (if necessary) judges like Roberts and Alito, the Ridge position on abortion becomes the Gilmore position, and if that position wasn’t a problem for Gilmore, it shouldn’t be a problem for Ridge.
Abortion aside, what many conservatives may not know about Mr. Ridge is that this wildly popular former two-term governor of Pennsylvania governed the Keystone State as a conservative, cutting taxes, enacting tight budgets, supporting school choice, and coming down hard on the side of law and order. Additionally, Ridge tried to inject competition into the public sector. Ridge coupled this conservative leadership by reaching out to independents and moderate Democrats by expanding access to health care and being attentive to environmental concerns. Like Mr. McCain, Mr. Ridge is a pragmatic conservative who holds red positions on the issues but knows how to attract purple voters.
Mr. Ridge will turn 63 this year, and thus is probably not the future of the party. But he isn’t meant to be. The last time the country elected three presidents of the same party consecutively was in the 1920s. If Mr. McCain wins this year’s election, he will almost certainly be followed by a Democrat. As such, he doesn’t need to balance the ticket with a young buck who can lead the party into the future. He needs a vice president who will be ready to assume the reins of the presidency from Day One due to Mr. McCain’s age and to the complicated times in which we live. Mr. Ridge, with his tenure at Homeland Security, is far more qualified to be Commander in Chief than younger, more interesting candidates like Gov. Jindal or Gov. Crist. Put more simply, if a tragedy were to strike in February of 2009 and the vice president was forced to assume the powers of the presidency, who would most set you at ease: Tim Pawlenty, Sarah Palin, or Tom Ridge?
Finally, Mr. Ridge hits all of the demographic notes that the GOP needs to hit this year. He’s Catholic, he hails from a Great Lakes state, he’s a veteran, and he knows how to win voters who aren’t Republicans. These are the very demographic groups that Mr. McCain so decisively won during this year’s Republican primaries, and these are voters who are not traditionally a part of the GOP base. By selecting Mr. Ridge, Mr. McCain will be doubling-down on his own form of Republicanism — heavy on defense, independent-friendly, conservative but pragmatic — only with a running mate who doesn’t have the complicated history with conservatives that Sen. McCain enjoys. It will be up to Mr. McCain and Mr. McCain alone to make peace with conservatives. Once he does so, Mr. Ridge would be a valuable asset to his run and to his presidency, acceptable to the base, appealing to swing voters, and immensely qualified to be president.
February 10th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
probably there are better picks than the creator of the Terror Color Wheel.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
DAVEG,
Your “pragmatic” VEEP is a boring liberal Bush shill.
Great way to win over conservatives, genius!
February 10th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Yeah, we should TOTALLY put a former Bush cabinet member on our ticket.
GREAT idea, DaveG.
And I am SO NOT being sarcastic, you know?
February 10th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
DaveG,
I’ve gotta agree with Jason. I would have been wildly enthusiastic about Ridge 7 or 8 years ago (I grew up in Pennsylvania - he was a good governor) but the liberals have demonized him. The “Rainbow of Terror” will make him look bad. Also, I’m not entirely sure, but didn’t Ridge have something to do with telling people to stock up on duct tape?
February 10th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
Not sure about the duct tape (LOL). My gut feeling is that he wasn’t associated with Bush long enough to be damaged irreparably, but I could be wrong.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Dave,
I think the person who best meets your criteria is Colin Powell, who is my #1 choice for the Veep slot.
Powell is perhaps the most admire and respected man in America, and there is no one that is more qualified to be POTUS than him.
The problem is that he doesn’t want the job, and McCain would have to appeal to their friendship to get him to jump on board.
Even though he’s 71, he appears far younger than his age. I just saw him on Wolf Blitzer this morning and I would not believe he was 71 if I didn’t know his true age already.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
He needs someone with credibility on the economy, not national security.
Also, I think you are a little too confident that McCain has the base locked up. If he picks a moderate who is directly tied to Washington and Bush it will kill independents and conservatives.
He needs someone who the GOP can be excited about as the future of the party and Ridge isn’t it. I don’t think moderates will care too much about who the VP is unless it is an extremist or someone tied to the current administration. Of course picking an old hand to go down with the ship in 2008 clears the way for Romney in 2012. Romney/Jindal 2012
He needs someone young, someone who excites the base, someone who has economic credentials, and someone who can raise money like crazy.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
The problem with Ridge and Colin Powell is that they’re pro-choice. Now, Ridge may be only moderately pro-choice as Dave G, points out, but McCain makes the pro-life section of the party queasy which is why mcCain needs to pick somebody who is solid on that issue.
“By selecting Mr. Ridge, Mr. McCain will be doubling-down on his own form of Republicanism”
It seems like a better idea to balance the ticket than to double down on your own form of conservatism
Also as far as Powell we absolutely do not want to run two seventy year olds, it doesn’t matter if Powell looks like he 60 the press will make it known that he’s 71.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
There are very, very few “gamechangers” that are a real possibility for the Veep slot unfortunately-and by “gamechanger” I mean someone who’s inclusion on the ticket would mean more net votes on election day.
-Powell is by far the biggest “gamechanger” out there. But he doesn’t want the job.
-Mitt Romney as Veep would likely re-energize his his supporters in the ‘08 race, but there is so much acrimony between McCain and him that it seems unlikely he’d be offered the spot and it seems unlikely he would accept if offered.
-Rudy Giuliani would combine with McCain to form an All-Star ticket, but it seems unlikely that McCain would go this route and risk reopening old debates about Rudy’s social views.
-Even if Condi Rice didn’t want to return to private life, I am not sure that she would add votes to the bottom line as she is so closely associated with Bush.
-Even though Fred is beloved by the base, he actually looks older than McCain. I’m pretty sure that age would become a factor if this was the ticket.
So that leaves us with the Pawlenty’s, the Thune’s, the Crist’s, the Brownback’s, etc… Folks that in a best case scenario would simply have a neutral impact on the ticket’s bottom line.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
I’d not mind Powell as VP. At this point I’d prefer Tim Pawlenty.
Republicans need to appeal to voters who can’t afford to go to Starbucks every morning.
Enter Tim Pawlenty, the wunderkind of Minnesota.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
EGS,
As a fellow T-Paw fan, I would worry that including him on the ticket would hurt his future presidential prospects, because I intend on winning in November.
Like Dave says, it will be nearly impossible to have three Republican Presidents elected in a row.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Vice Presidents are almost never game changers. Jack Kemp was touted as a game changer, and nothing happened. Edwards was supposed to be a game changer, and yuck. People just don’t vote for veep, and if they do, it is a real problem at the top of the ticket.
He needs someone who is young, reinforces his outsider credentials, and has executive experience. That brings us back to Pawlenty.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
The problem with the “young, neat, interesting, cool” VP pick is that there really isn’t anyone who won’t appear to be either an inexperienced token pick or who won’t piss off either the base or center. It’s telling that no one can name a single candidate who is young, experienced enough to be president, excites the base, and doesn’t turn off the center. That’s because there isn’t anyone like that. Which is why the VP pick will almost certainly not be a game changer, as Kavon noted, and McCain should pick someone who can get a few voters out here and there and who is ready to be president from day one.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Sean,
I admit that there are very few when you look at the history of Veep selections.
Powell is the exception. You cannot honestly equate selecting John Edwards with Colin Powell?
February 10th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Yes, i’ve been a volunteer here in Florida for about 5 or 6 months for John McCain. And at a round table discussion that i attended with him back in November, a friend and i asked him who he would want as his VP, and he said one name and one name only, and that name was Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, and i think that’s still true today. Pawlenty has a ton of National Security and Foreign Policy credentials, as well as being a popular Gov from a swing state. Now obviously i know that McCain could feel differently now then he did in November, but i still say that it will be Tim Pawlenty in the end, he is a great American.
McCain/Pawlenty 08′
February 10th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Kavon, I think McCain has about a 10% chance of being elected and serving two terms.
Pawlenty would likely either take over for McCain after his health deteriorates, would run in 2012 as VP heir apparent, or if the ticket lost he’d be next in line with dibs on an out-of-the-spot-light Romney.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
Was this post a joke? The way to way to unite the party is via a person that is against the most controversial/litmus test issue we have? We should care about experience when the front runner of the Democrats will have none (not matter who they are)?
As I stated before, the VP slot is there to unite the party and to attack the other other party’s presidential candidate. Jack Kemp would have been a good choice for Dole if he was articulate and if he would have ever attacked Clinton, but he didn’t. Net, Dole got killed.
I continue to believe that if Hillary is nominee, our VP needs to be a woman. That leaves us with either Governor Palin, or Senator Elizabeth Dole, as they are both very articulate and both pro-life. Both would do a great job attacking Hillary and would unite our party. If Obama is the nominee, than maybe Governor Jindal or someone else. Again, conservative and articulate. Either way, you don’t pick a candidate that will tear the party apart even more. And you don’t pick a nominee that does not give consideration to the other presidential candidate. Please, lets be smart about this…
February 10th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
I’ve certainly been a fan of the McCain/Pawlenty idea in the past, but every time it’s brought up, I hear angry Minnesota conservatives claiming that T-Paw makes them foam at the mouth far more than their daily Starbucks
So which is it? Is T-Paw broadly acceptable or does he also piss off the base?
February 10th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
EGS #16,
I would bet that many said the same thing about Reagan in 1980.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
T-Paw may anger a few extremely conservative voters but as this year shows those voters are a small fraction of the electorate (3.5 - 4.5%).
February 10th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Dave,
T-Paw is extremely popular among Minnesotan’s generally, as well as the Republican rank-in-file.
It’s the party activists that have a problem with him.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Kavon, McCain is older than Reagan and in worse health. His cancer problems and his lingering damage from Vietnam render him unlikely to survive 8 years of Presidential stress.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
EGS #22,
I would say that statement is absolutely ridiculous coming from anyone other than Sen. McCain’s physician.
Stick to economics, not practicing medicine.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
If Hillary wins on March 4 and looks like she will be the nom, taking Penn away from her will likley force her into picking someone from Ohio or FL as VP and not Obama.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
ESG,
McCain has two physicals a year and has been found to be in excellent health. Last year, he walked across the Grand Canyon (with his son, who’s now in Iraq). I doubt that even I could do that. He also had one of the most hectic campaigning schedules out of anyone in either party. He’s in good shape.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
That’s a bit vehement given that we’re dealing with speculation.
Look at how he generally has gotten slower in his speech in the last few years.
Then look at how much Bush, Clinton and Reagan aged while in office.
I’d peg the odds of McCain remaining healthy enough to serve 8 years as ~20%.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
Yes i agree with Kavon, i think McCain will serve all 8 years. And the Pawlenty will take over for another 8 years after him. McCain right now is in great shape and he will do a great job as President for 2 Terms, i strongly feel that he will be a 2 term president.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
Granted, I don’t know Minnesota well, but I heard T-Paw barely got elected both times, his approval rating sits at ~50%, under his administration a bridge collapsed (which the Dem nominees continue to bring up), and he couldn’t even deliver Minnesota for McCain in the Republican caucus as Romney killed him (despite T-Paw’s support). How the heck is he going to deliver the state in the general for McC?? Net, T-Paw is a no-go.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
Pawlenty was actually a great story when he got reelected in 2006 b/c if you were a Republican in that year as you know that most of them lost, and Pawlenty was one of the few survivors of that, so that bodes well for him. Also he is one of the Top 5 Republican Governors in the U.S. He is a very popular Gov. and has done great things for Minnesota.
As far as the Caucus’s go in Minnesota, it was a non-binding caucus and the McCain campaign said that they expected to finish 3rd there, and were happy with a 2nd, so i’m guessing that will have no impact. Also McCain sent Tim Pawlenty to give one of his speeches in Germany to a U.N conference they were having there, so that just goes to show how McCain feels strongly about Pawlenty, especially when it comes to Foreign Policy.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Also Pawlenty won in 2002 when he first become Gov. by 8%, so i wouldnt call that barely winning.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Kavon,
No, I agree with you. Colin Powell would probably be a game changer. But he would do so in the only way that Veeps tend to be game-changers: They reinforce the ticket.
For me, in a time when the party is on the outs with the voters, the Clinton-Gore ticket is a classic example of this. Gore didn’t add party balance, and he at the time was halfway on his journey from conservative to liberal. And what it gave was a reinforced message for Clinton of “I’m not beholden to the old Democratic special interests.”
Colin Powell would do the same thing for McCain. It’s the message of “the grownups are back in town after 8 years of incompetant governance.” I think it’d be a great ticket, especially against Obambi.
BTW, the whole thing about a GOP’er not succeeding McCain misses the mark. The last time that a party had three successive Presidents was in the 1920s, but it was because no one was ever running to succeed the incumbent (Well, Coolidge did, but Harding was not a Veep. The best thing we would have for us in 2012/16 is that Colin Powell wouldn’t be running for President, just like the best thing we have going for us now is that Cheney isn’t running.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
MN is more blue then purple and thus statewide GOP candidates do some things that generally tork off the staunch conservatives in the state. But, Pawlenty is unknown enough that I doubt you would get much push back from conservatives nationwide. They probably are not voting for McCain anyways if a Pawlenty veep is going to upset them that much. I think Pawlenty delivers MN and helps in WI also. Two states that voted for Kerry and would make up for the loss of OH.
I also like the Ridge choice. Solid conservative except for abortion and I agree that issue probably won’t generate as much push back for the veep and especially if he comes out strong on judges, parental consent, late term, etc… He probably swings PA. Obviously qualified to run the country. I would be happy with him for Veep.
This is fun to discuss and all but so much will depend on the McCain’s ability to placate the base, his ability to stay in the news the next few months, who the dems nominate, events in Iraq/iran/etc, … that I am not sure why I waste the time right now opining about V.Ps. Just procrastinating I guess as I should be doing my taxes!
February 10th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
Cap #28,
T-Paw’s approval rating is at about 58%. Minnesotans approve of the way that he has handled the bridge collapse by overwhelming margins.
It is a testament to T-Paw’s popularity that he won re-election in 2006 as the GOP candidate for Senate (Mark Kennedy) lost by over 20 points.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
Obama is winning Maine. If he can win in Maryland, Virginia and DC, then ha had 7 victories in a row. I can’t imagine him loosing under those circumstances.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Yes!! Exactly!
Personally, I believe that sitting Vice Presidents are the worst nominees a party can nominate. Unless your following a transcendent president like Reagan.
February 10th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
John Mark, yeah, MSM will take every opportunity to remind the people that McCain is old, as they have done with Mitt’s Mormonism.
February 10th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
DaveG, I am not sure I agree with you here. First, we have seen from the SuperTuesday exit polls and other polls since then that the economy is a top issue for 40+% of Americans. We definitely need someone who is an economy guru. And second, the conservative base may vote for McCain, but they won’t pour the same amount of energy and monies as in the past. We need someone who can get this base all excited about getting behind McCain. Otherwise, McCain will pretty much be doing all of the work by himself - not a good idea for someone as old as him!
February 10th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
SGS, let me guess. You’re going to say McCain should pick….
Mitt Romney
February 10th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
What was the Margins in Ridge Victory in Penn?
February 10th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
SGS I was actually talking about Kavon’s sugestion that McCain pick 71 year old Powell as his nominee, but yeah you’re right the media will point out that McCain is old, there will be no secrets.
February 10th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
It looks like a decent Margin in 94, and that had a strong Constitutional canidate.
February 10th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
And 1998 was a landside with once again a Constitutional Canidate running strong.
February 10th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
First Dave tries to tell everyone that the GOP is finished in 2008 - but then says we need to act like we are finished in 2012. Sorry Dave, but you are far too quick to write off the party for me to take - or support - any advice you hand out.
The VP needs to be a strong Conservative who can run in 2012 as the heir apparent - Romney, Pawlenty, Thune, Jindal, Ensign, DeMint, Sanford - all good choices.
Preferably the person is a past or current gov. with economic know-how and who will help bring the west and midwest.
That is Romney.
February 10th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
You can’t pick an old person to complement McCain, as it reinforces the Past vs Future election that Obama is gunning for.
You can’t pick someone inexperienced, as it undermines the Experienced vs Inexperienced message that McCain should be gunning for.
That means you need a youthful experienced candidate, who people would be happy as a President-in-waiting in case McCain’s health goes.
That would leave Tim Pawlenty & Mark Sanford. I don’t think Powell or Ridge fit the bill, and neither close the deal with the social conservative base - which is another consideration.
February 10th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
http://staffweb.wilkes.edu/harold.cox/gov/PaGov1998.html
Here is the info
February 10th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
The latest Pawlenty poll I saw was at 55% (with 39% disapproval). He may do well relative to most republicans there, and he may be the one that McCain actually picks. However, I am not certain that he will be enough to deliver the state for McCain and he would definitely not be the best candidate outside of the state of Minnesota.
I am simply a believer that the nominee needs to unite the base and be the attack dog vs. the other presidential nominee. So if Hillary is the nominee, you probably need another woman like Palin or Dole. If Obama is the nominee, it is a little more tricky, but maybe someone like Jindal. I will agree that Pawlenty is better than many of the names being floated around, but I definitely don’t think he is the BEST choice.
Regarding those who continue to bring up Powell, please stop. While he might make McCain even more electable and he would get even more independents, he would have 3 huge drawbacks. 1) He has no business expertise which McCain desperately needs, 2) McCain would be clearly showing that he is not going to become friends with the base of the party and there would be a war at the convention (yes a war…Bush may have been able to pull off Powell, but McCain can’t). 3) Powell would not attack the other nominee. In fact, he has praised Obama and Hillary on CNN Late Edition just today…
February 10th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
What do people think about Hutchison? She’s a Southern female pro-life who would help with the female vote, and probably lock down the south.
Trouble is, Texas has been rather over-represented in the Oval Office for the last 28 years. Might be time for them to take a break…
February 10th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
She is pro-choice…not pro-life
February 10th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
8, what john mark said. Ridge is pro-choice. that’s a problem
February 10th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Here is the link to Pawlenty’s latest approval rating…
http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=496427
February 10th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
I think Romney - McCain ticket has some real pluses. It puts real business on the ticket in an election that will be a lot about the ecconomy, it also puts executive experience onto the ticket. The talkshows have been forced into painting Romney as some great conservative in order to try and prevent John McCain, therefore, Romney can help bring in the conservative base especially the those who hate McCain based on what they hear from talk radio. Romney would also bring in alot of enthusiastic support, if we combined McCain’s good numbers and sucess with getting indys with Romney’s hardcore Rombots and ability to get the hardcore base on board we could have a winning ticket.
February 10th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Now the weakness with the Romney ticket would be weakness in the south as Romney doesn’t seem to play well down there, and his flipflops with abortion make the pro-life movement suspicious of him.
February 10th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
I like Romney, however…
1) McCain doesn’t like him
2) He was a CEO and ran Bain Capital, making him too easy of a target for the Dems and we rather him spend his time attacking then defending himself
3) He has a low popularity nationally right now as he never got the opportunity to run a national campaign in a general election. Like it or not, you should not have a VP candidate starting out with low popularity as the campaign is not about the VP, its about the President
Net, although I like him, he would be a bad choice.
February 10th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
Although I realize that many or most of you are anxious to get McCain over the finish line so we can figure out how to get him to win (or lose) against Clinton or Obama, but did anybody notice that the Huckabee campaign is challenging the Washington state GOP in calling the caucus for McCain with 87% of the vote counted and McCain leading by just over 200 votes after trailing most of the night?
Did you notice how long that sentance is?
Was this an attempt to avoid the “Huckabee sweeps McCain” headline? Why did the party shut down the vote count and hastily call it for JMac?
OK, now back to your regularly scheduled McCain lovefest/hatefest.
February 10th, 2008 at 7:31 pm
If the VP is pro-abortion, say hello to President Obama.
That ticket stinks.
February 10th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
ESG, to be honest, I am having a mixed feelings about Romney on McCain’s ticket. First, yes, Romney has earned the trust of the fiscal/def conservatives, but he is sorely lacking with the social conservatives, especially those from the southern states. And he has proved his understanding of the economy as well as a strong track of fixing the problems in all sectors. If it was not for the fact that he has been essentially locked out of the southern states, he would be a great VP.
Remember, I was talking about the base itself, and there is nowhere else that we have as strong of a base. I am not sure Mitt’s Mormonism and with his being from New England will excite those folks to the point that they will come out in doves - with commitments and money, which McCain will need against Obama.
I personally think McCain will tap into Brownback. He’s well receivable to the Southern folks, and he’s conservative enough. But unfortunately, he’s not an executive type, nor is he an economy guru. McCain was never a rational person, anyway. Brownback’s endorement may be what have helped him doing better than expected in Iowa, which resulted in his getting more media attention than he should, being fourth place.
February 10th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
John Mark, I am not just saying MSM will say McCain is old. I mean, they will mention it as often as they do with Mitt’s Mormonism, especially when it comes down to Obama. Imagine these opening lines: “McCain, who has served 30+ years in the Capitol…”, “McCain, who is many years senior to Obama…” and “McCain, having dedicated more than 50 years of his life to this country”. The MSM will make every effort to point out that he is old with every mention of McCain in their news. It may not have any effect overnight, but it definitely will have a long term effect, like they did with Mitt’s Mormonism (which caused the issue of trusting him to be sane for this job).
February 10th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
I think Brownback would NOT be a good choice.
I mean he’d make the 20 year older McCain appear charismatic and energetic by comparison.
February 10th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
Romney on the ticket would be the best ticket. Wasn’t it unbelievable that he still won the CPA straw poll even though 74% of it was after his announcement to withdraw? In the early voting, he had almost as many votes as everyone else put together. There is no one that can heal the wounds like Mitt Romney.
I noticed when they were reporting the numbers in Washington yesterday, the number not being reported on the screen was about 29%. Did Romney almost win that baby without even competing?
February 10th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
WHY IS IT A PROBLEM FOR JOHN MCCAIN’S RUNNING MATE TO BE PRO-CHOICE?
John McCain has a 100% pro-life voting record!!
February 10th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
I saw John McCain say on video that he does not believe that Roe vs Wade should be overturned. How pro life is that? I’d say PLINO ‘pro-life-INO.
February 10th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
57, I don’t think its right to blame Mitt’s defeat on his Mormonism, it’d probably had its effect in places, but it certainly wasn’t the determining factor. As to McCain and his age I do expect it to be made well known, it’ll be one of the challenges McCain faces no question about it.
BTW I’ve been looking through the governors of the different states and came across Matt Blunt of MO, the guy’s in his thirties so he could really balance out the McCain ticket as far as age goes -he also has a cool war record, but then he wouldn’t balance out McCain’s eccomic inexperience too well.
February 10th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
I like Ridge. He’s libertarian-leaning in a general sense: “Fiscally conservative yet Pro-Choice.”
He could win back skeptical libertarian Republicans to the McCain ticket.
Problem is he is a White Guy. And I’m convinced we need a Hispanic, Black of Female as Veep:
Michael Steele
JC Watts
Sarah Palin
Anne Northrup
Bonnie Garcia
February 10th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
61, He backpedaled on that statement, and has many much longer record and statements of being pro-life and anti-roe.
February 10th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
60, Because McCain isn’t seen as being strongly pro-life and perception is reality.
February 10th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Eric, we’re not the token minority party. The racial ‘balancing’ you suggest is just a step away from affirmative action.
Geraldine Ferraro didn’t do much for Mondale.
I doubt putting an under-qualified minority on the ticket helps us.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Powell was solid as a rock on CNN. And I loved it when, in response to Blitzer question a comment McCain made on Iraq, Powell said “McCain knows what he is talking about when it comes to the military.” It was powerful because it was stated so matter of factly. He also dismissed Clinton’s call for a specific date of troop withdrawal as nonsensical without being nasty about it. He is a man of character, class, and command and America would be hardpressed to find a better qualified VP.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
DaveG - another impressive performance. However, I don’t think that Ridge will be the nominee, for a variety of reasons:
1) The abortion issue.
2) His ties to the Bush administration.
3) The fact that he is not particularly exciting, is viewed as a Washington insider (prior to serving as governor of Pennsylvania, he spent time in the U.S. House representing Erie)…
I have a piece up on my own site where I take a detailed look at some of the Veep candidates…FWIW…
February 10th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Ridge is such a blah choice. Does anyone really remember the guy, especially outside of PA. And after Rudy crashing and burning, we don’t need another pro-choice candidate to weaken the party.
Media presence matters, just ask Obama. McCain/Ridge will be a ticket of two old white guys, though I love McCain. I still think Palin would be the best choice. Does it really matter if she can take over on day one. Just ask Obama. I can see the media fawning all over her. It’s telling that the people on wonkette are infatuated with her.
As for Pawlenty, he’s okay but nothing really exciting about him. He would’ve lost in 06 if it wasn’t for an IP candidate. And I don’t want him to leave. Governor Molnau should send shivers down the spine of any Minnesotan.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
Powell is good on paper, but do we really think a ticket with a combined age of 142 is the right way to go up against Obama? McCain needs a younger VP. Fair or not, McCain’s age will be a factor. His age won’t be attacked officially by Obama or Clinton, but it won’t have to be - the late night shows, Saturday Night Live, etc will gladly run with that line of jokes, and face-to-face debates will put McCain’s age on display for the world to see. McCain needs to show that, although he is healthy and strong, he is prepared for the worst case scenario should the unfortunate occur. Choosing a VP the same age as himself is not the way to go.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
Putting a token minority on the ticket won’t work. It smacks of patronization.
McCain/Romney would be a terrible idea. They don’t like each other. The most important thing in a good working POTUS/VP relationship is that they get on well (Clinton/Gore, Bush/Cheney). Kerry/Edwards showed what happens when you don’t like the other, they didn’t work well together at all.
Romney would just run to position himself for 2012 (like Edwards did) & McCain’s temper would make him frustrated with what Romney was doing.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
McCain may be pro-life, but he never struck me as someone who gave a $#%@ about social issues, it seemed more like he just voted the party line. In congress, that is fine, but as President, when you actually have to fight for those positions in judges, legislation, etc. - without a strong social Conservative on the bottom of the ticket, I’m not sure we could really rely on McCain to really “fight for the family”.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
71. . . Reagan/Bush, Kennedy/LBJ, Eisenhower/Nixon. . . History is full of party tickets who didn’t like each other. It’s all politics, and if success means learning to like each other, they will learn to kiss and make up.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:15 pm
Is Hutchison pro-choice? (48) An article in Washington Post today says:
“The first and only female Texan to serve in the U.S. Senate, Hutchison brings the kind of conservative credentials on taxes, defense and foreign policy that McCain’s Republican critics ought to love. Gun lovers adore her — as much as we District residents resent her attempts to kill our sensible gun-control laws. She votes consistently pro-life and has earned a 0 percent rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America, though she has said Roe v. Wade was correctly decided.”
Thats not pro-choice, but maybe the journalist is wrong…
February 10th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
Problem is he is a White Guy. And I’m convinced we need a Hispanic, Black of Female as Veep:
Michael Steele
JC Watts
Sarah Palin
Anne Northrup
Bonnie Garcia - Eric Dondero
Yeah, Michael Steele! McCain will totally be able to use the experience argument against Obama if we put that battle-tested warrior Michael Steele on the ticket!
February 10th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
If you have any sense whatsoever, you have to know the VP has to be pro-life!!! Jiminitly, what are you thinking? To get the conservative base back, you absolutely have to have a pro life, and why not the guy that just won CPAC, with 76% of the vote after he announced suspending his campaign? I honestly believe Mitt on the ticket brings back the conservative base much better than any one else, cause he brings back all three legs of the base, not one or two.
If you guys don’t realize that the VP has to be a three legged conservative to get support, you just don’t get it.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
Personally I think Romney would be a great addition for McCain. McCain’s biggest fault will be his lack of understanding of economic issues. It was used against him in the primaries, and the Dems already said they would use that line of attack. McCain doesn’t need help on national security and GWOT issues, but he is sorely lacking on the economic front. He could do a lot worse than choosing Romney to run with him.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
60, Because McCain isn’t seen as being strongly pro-life and perception is reality.
Apparently have you have to be the kind of person that eats fried squirrel in college and says that he “majored in miracles, not math” to be taken seriously as a pro-lifer.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
McCain/Romney is a great, extremely balanced ticket. McCain is stronger in the south and northeast, Romney does best in the midwest and west. Romney is good on economic and social issues, McCain is strong on defense. McCain is a moderate who can do well in a rough year for the GOP, and Romney can reassure Conservatives, since he will be the heir apparent, a McCain presidency wouldn’t mean a lasting, leftward-shift for the party. McCain is older and more experienced (or so people think), Romney is younger and more energetic.
You are right in saying that McCain and Romney don’t like each other, but I don’t think Bush and Reagan were the biggest fans of each other either.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
Edit: Don’t come back Chad.-KWN
February 10th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
Sen. Hutchison won’t work. Her record may be good, but Obama campaigns on change, and having two long-time GOP Senators on the same ticket is a recipe for disaster. Had Romney been the candidate, she would have made a great choice, but not with McCain.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Alaska (81) I agree with you. Its just some people think we need a gratuitous female or minority on the ticket. Hutchison is the most qualified “minority”.
Jindal has one year Governors experience, and Steele has 4 years Lt Gov experience. People are incredible the daft ideas they come up with.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
I like Jindal, in 2012. . . Romney/Jindal will be a tough team to beat. . .but he’s too inexperienced now and needs a couple more years to get his anti-corruption success going.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
Kavon,
Will you be editing the post with the false info about Ron Paul dropping out? I trust you will.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
Hutchison is pro-choice; that should be enough said.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Can people please provide some evidence on Hutchison being pro-choice?
Wikipedia says “In the past years NARAL has given her ratings of 0%, 7%, 20%, and 0%, indicating that her voting record mostly favored enacting proposed abortion restrictions.”
It seems her position is more naunced than Huckabee/Brownback, but I fail to see what makes her pro-choice (in the same bucket as Rudy, Ridge, Powell)
February 10th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
McCain/Romney is a great, extremely balanced ticket.
And one that people that ask for conservatives — that they can trust! — will never vote for!
Sorry, Mormons: Romney won’t be on the ticket! Everyone that hasn’t already had a swig of his Kool-Aid despises the man. I swear to God, I’ve heard seven or eight people (not just Democrats) describe him as a “phony” to me — before I spoke to them about him!
February 10th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
#80, I don’t know whether that’s sarcasm or hyperbola.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Okay, evidently it was spam.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Romney is not going to be the VP, McCain is a straight shooter and he’s not going to pick someone he dislikes. He’s going to pick someone he knows well and trusts.
I reckon he’d love to pick Bloomberg, but won’t (uproar, anti-gun & pro-choice who probably doesn’t swing NY). He probably wishes Schwartznigger is available, but he’s not.
So that leaves Pawlenty, who he definitely trusts. Maybe Huckabee, although the longer he runs the less likely he is do remain in McCain’s good books…
February 10th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
TLG,
Romney didn’t win this time, and I definitly don’t think he will/should be on the VP slot. But you would do better to just avoid the line that everyone hates him, because that just simply isn’t the case. A bit of hyperbole.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
TLG & Jason, Romney would entrench those fiscal conservative Rombots who supported Mitt thru the primary. But they’ll probably back McCain anyway.
Romney doesn’t add enough in the General. No state, no teamwork/cooperation.
He only provides economic clout, but there’s others out there who can do that (Sanford?)
February 10th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
Are you kidding me? Pawlenty couldn’t even deliver his home state to McCain, not even close. Obviously, he’s not that popular, and again guys, can you spell pro-choice, in other words, BABY KILLER!
February 10th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
92. . . Sanford has been my primary guess as well. Conservative, Southern, outside the beltway Governor, staunchly against pork barrel projects and rampant govt spending. . . not a bad resume.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
“and I definitly don’t think he will/should be on the VP slot”
Why the hell not? It would make him the instant frontrunner for 2012 - the heir apparent, the one who has the clear advantage from the start…win or not.
If you want Romney to run again (and I assume you do), I don’t understand why you oppose him as VP.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
Illinoisguy, stop spamming unfounded assertions & accusations. Although fortunately its hard to tell who you’re accusing of being pro-choice. Everyone, maybe.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
78, Hutchinson is pro-choice, although she is starting to run away from that position. In fact, she used to be an Advisor to “The Wish List” which is an organization set up to get pro-choice female republicans elected. Consequently, if we want a female (that does not piss off the base), only Senator Dole or Governor Palin will suffice. And in fact, both would be GREAT as they meet the criteria of what I said before of being conservative, articulate, and able to attack the presidential candidate of the other party.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
This would be a “disaster” choice and cause McCain to lose.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Jindal is the best choice for V.P. if you want to get the “Rush” crowd aka the credible Conservatives. Rush basically endorsed Jindal for V.P. on Feb. 8th.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
McCain/Pawlenty would lock up Michigan, and have a very good chance of picking up Minnsota & Wisconsin also. Worth a play to put a major swing region on the map.
McCain as an Arizona native should sweep the West, but I think he’s been in Washington so long that that might not be as easy as you’d assume.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Cap (97) she’s not been pro-choice for some time (that Wish List went against her in her 06 re-election I believe).
So one could argue she’s been pro-life longer than Romney, who on this website is a stunning pro-life exempler…
February 10th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
I was saying Pawlenty and Hutchison were because that’s what was reported on here many times. I’m not an expert, so if that’s not right I’d like to know that.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
If she’s not pro-choice, then that’s great. Romney governed pro-life for all four years. He never took any action as governor that was not pro-life. That’s longer than 06 guys.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
When I brought her up on here a few months ago as a VP with Mitt, I was bombarded with ’she’s pro-choice….and nobody countered it at that time.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
Pawlenty’s only action on Abortion that I can find was campaigning to have a 24 hour waiting period on abortions.
Hutchison has been pro-life since at least 2003 (refer those pro-choice scores of 0%, 7%, 20% & 0% in the last four years.)
Romney may have governed pro-life, but he sure didn’t run for governor as one. As has been recorded many times.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
You know how at the end of Scooby Doo, they’d unmask a character who’d say:
“And I could’ve gotten away with it too if it wasn’t for you meddling kids and your dog”
I always remember the bad guy being a character that was a background character who showed up early in the episode and then was lost in the attention paid to innocent but suspicious characters.
I think McCain’s VP will be a politician who showed up early in his campaign and hasn’t been prominent for a while.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
February 10th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
101, Romney got to campaign that he was pro-life for the Rep nomination and acted like it (at least somewhat) while in office as governor. Hutchinson has not been as clear (at least I have not seen a quote saying she supported the over-turn of RoevWade) and as such would not be acceptable to the base.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:02 pm
So who’s the Scooby Doo candidate?
Perhaps it’ll be Brownback, he might help make McCain look more charismatic & reasonable.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Never before in US history have we had two sitting Senators run against each other for president. McCain cannot and will not add another sitting Senator to the ticket, especially one who has been in office as long as Hutchison. He will most likely add a Governor.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
John McCain said: “The fundamental principle behind any selection of a running mate would be whether that person is fully prepared to take over and share your values, your principles, your philosophy, and your priorities. I think that’s the first and only real criteria for the selection of a running mate.”
For the sake of discussion, assume McCain has already chosen his running mate and this statement above is his hint as to who he has selected to be his vice president.
Who do you think McCain is describing? Who has he turned to, believing that individual is best prepared to take over immediately as Commander in Chief, and also shares his values, principles, philosophy and priorities?
Only eight names, in my estimation, qualify for this list based on the terms set forth by McCain. They are (alphabetically): Charlie Crist, Rudy Giuliani, Lindsey Graham, Phil Gramm, Joe Lieberman, Tim Pawlenty, Mark Sanford, Fred Thompson
Now, of these, whose presence on the ticket benefits McCain the most, electorally, in swing states in which he might otherwise not succeed?
1. Giuliani (NJ, PA, FL), 2. Lieberman (CT, NJ, FL), 3, Crist (FL), 4. Pawlenty (MN, WI, IA), 5. Thompson (TN), 6. Sanford (nowhere), 7. Gramm (nowhere), 8. Graham (nowhere)
February 10th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
Plus, Hutchinson is for stem-cell research and was part of the letter of 58 Senators to Bush showing that her Pro-Life tendencies are marginal at best.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
“Apparently have you have to be the kind of person that eats fried squirrel in college and says that he “majored in miracles, not mathâ€? to be taken seriously as a pro-lifer.”
No, but avoiding making any statements in favor of Roe V. Wade and making statements calling the religous right leaders agents of intolerance helps. I as a Pro-lifer have been okay with McCain’s stance on the issue, but alot of pro-lifers are uneasy. Also I wouldn’t really want a pro-choice candidate even if the top of the ticket was solidly pro-life, you want someone as VP that would be acceptable as president and life, just isn’t a good issue to comprimise on.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
111. . . Knock Lieberman off your list. He doesn’t meet any of the criteria you mention are important to McCain, save for national security. If the only person McCain can choose for VP is a socially liberal Democrat like Lieberman, we’re in a lot of trouble.
And Sanford doesn’t benefit McCain? As a popular conservative southern governor?
February 10th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
Aron,
You seem to have forgotten your own premise of a VP that “shares your values, your principles, your philosophy, and your priorities.” Lieberman and Giuliani don’t fit that bill if McCain is a social conservative. Fred Thompson doesn’t agree with McCain on global warming, which is a top issue for him. Frankly, I don’t know of any republicans who share McCain’s priorities of staying in Iraq, cap and trade, campaign finance reform, and no marriage or life amendments.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
Good spotting Aron.
I don’t think he’ll pick Lieberman. Not good for the base with the pro-choice thing.
Rudy & Pawlenty are the most likely from that list. Crist is only 2 years into his first term - its just not enough…
February 10th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
You know, I wouldn’t be surprised if McCain picks Lieberman. McCain does like to fight and this would cause a huge one. Plus, he would have a better chance with independents and this may be the only way he could beat Obama in the general election assuming that he is the other nominee. That being said, I think I would have to join another party…Maybe the Constitution Party??? Wow…did I just say that…
February 10th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
McCain would lose as many or more voters as he would gain by choosing Lieberman.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Jake,
What swing state in the south does Sanford help win for McCain that he can’t win against Hillary or Obama on his own?
February 10th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
If you put pictures of McCain & Lieberman together, the word you get it OLD. It just doesn’t cut it against the youth & vigor of Obama.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:17 pm
Powell would be a problem, since he will probably endorese Obama.
Seriously, choosing him would make it clear that the GOP is _nowhere_ when it comes to the economy.
Doubling down on military cred is not something that McCain will need to do.
And, as mentioned above, Powell should not be expected to be an attack dog vs. Obama, given his record of pulic statements of admiration for the guy.
The tokenism choices seem ludicrous to me. They would be seen for what they are - utter cynicism.
Say whatever you wish about them, but no one will seriously argue that Obama or Hillary will be on the ticket for any reason other than that they went out at earned it, on their merits. Choosing Dole or Palin - or Steele or Watts would be seen as blatant pandering. And, of course, against Obama they would amount to a complete undercutting of the experience argument.
I agree with those who seem to have wracked their brains over this and concluded that there is no perfect choice.
So y’all will need to try to fulfill secondary concerns. Ya gotta choose - either unite the party, set someone young hopeful up for the future, try to win a swing state - you will be lucky to do two out of those three, maybe you just choose one.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
BTW, what is the deal with McCain surrounding himself with either known or alleged homosexuals (Gramm, Graham, Crist) and Giuliani who might as well be?
February 10th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
Giuliani would increase conservative’s skepticism of McCain. Rudy’s pro-abortion stance is an unnecessary problem.
Lieberman is a typical Democrat on almost every issue except Iraq. Conservatives won’t tolerate him.
Graham and Crist are homosexual moderates. That’s a dangerous choice. They could be publicly outed at any moment.
Gramm and Thompson would just reinforce McCain’s age problem.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
119. . . Obama has the ability to sweep the deep south by getting the minority vote out to vote in record numbers. McCain cant afford to take the South for granted. Sanford is southern, and a staunch conservative (socially and fiscally), so he offers a lot to a ticket.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
Jindal is the only choice for V.P.!!!
February 10th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
“Choosing Dole or Palin - or Steele or Watts would be seen as blatant pandering. And, of course, against Obama they would amount to a complete undercutting of the experience argument.”
Who sugested Dole?
February 10th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
Tano,
I don’t think Powell’s lack of economic prowess is an issue since McCain’s only real econ message has been to make the tax cuts permanent and cut the corporate rate. He didn’t even vote on the stimulus package.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
121, To be clear, I wouldn’t choose Palin or Dole because we would get more women. I would do it because they would do a better job at attacking another woman without seeming “mean-spirited.” Palin does not have a lot of experience, but Dole does (although she is older). Both are incredibly articulate. I agree that Watts or Steele would be a bit crazy as niether have been a Governor, Senator, or General (almost required to be President).
February 10th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
Yeah, I’m thinking Sanford might be the best. As I stated earlier Romney would also be good in many ways, but I am worried he would be too weak in the south.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
John Mark (126) I think he’s referring to Cap in post 17…
February 10th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Sanford seems like the candidate nobody can come with any reasons why they really don’t want him.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
Yes, I would take ELIZABETH Dole in a heartbeat….Bob, no way…
February 10th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Cap, does Bob still have a heartbeat?
February 10th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
ha!!
February 10th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
130, Yeah I was thinking a Bob Dole at first and that didn’t seem like a real good way to balance the ticket.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
I don’t really think anybody’s going to seem mean spirited taking on Hillary, she’s not that kind of lady.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
#133
Insert Viagra Joke.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
I see Obama has won maine. That was one that Clinton was targetting to break up the Obama momentum. It adds to Obama’s inroads in the NE (including CT & DE)
If Obama wins Virginia this thing could well be over.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
Regarding Elizabeth Dole. . . Once again, adding a 71 year old sitting senator to the McCain ticket won’t be good strategy, even if she’s a woman.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
She looks younger than Hillary though (at least without the make-up)…
February 10th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
No wonder Obama wants to be president. The senate is full of old people. I bet the cloakroom smells like bengay.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
The senate is full of old people - an insightful observation if ever there was one. No wonder people like Brownback & Hutchison & Obama want to get out!
If age is good, then McCain/Dole can take on Obama/Byrd for the Presidency.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
What about former MI governor John Engler? Successful three-term governor, strong on tax cuts, privatization, and limited government, Washington outsider, and still under 60 I believe. I don’t know much about his positions on social issues, (he did run well against Geoffrey Feiger, the Kevorkian lawyer). He’d help carry Michigan and the midwest too.
February 10th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
I had thought about him too, I think he might be pretty good if he’s a Social Conservative. We could definitely not give up the experience card with him as he was I believe the longest serving governor when he left office. I think he also has the some business experience. The downside is, he still kind of looks like an old white guy.
February 10th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Its a suicide watch guys. Who really wants to run with McCain against Obama ? Like the charge of the light brigade. Obama will go with Richardson and pick off all 50 states. Better to let McCain run alone this time but I guess someone has to be along to drive the straight talk express over the cliff.
February 10th, 2008 at 10:04 pm
I saw McCain campaign for Crist in 2006. He looked HORRIBLE. He was so tired and sweating. His staff members kept telling the Crist staff to make it quick because he was not feeling well. Granted, it was hotter than hell but he looked TERRIBLE.
You guys will see this summer.
February 10th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
GUYS!!!!
Think of the people you are listing, do you really want them to be the heir apparent in 2012?
February 10th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
#145
Half a vote, Half a vote
Half a vote more
Into the election of death the Senator blundered
Forward the Moderate Brigade
Raise more funds he said
Into the election of death the Senator blundered
February 10th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
act. . . I’d be just fine with Sanford as heir apparent. Same with Romney. I don’t know as much about Pawlenty but from what I’ve heard he’d be ok too. I only just started thinking about John Engler today but I remember him to be a pretty good GOP governor too, so he’d be ok with me too.
February 10th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Having said that, I’ll say now what I did six months ago: McCain/Romney (either order) would have been my ideal ticket.
February 10th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
(cont.)
Forward the Moderate Brigade
Was there a pol dismayed?
Not though the voters knew
Some one had blundered
Theirs is not to make reply
Theirs is not to reason why
Theirs is but to fall in line
Into the election of death
The Senator blundered
Romney to the right of him,
Giuliani to the left of him,
Obama to the front of him,
Embalmed and cankered
Into the media Hell
Boldly he went as well
Into the election of Death
Worse than in the Hanoi cell
The Senator blundered
February 10th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
I said last week Romney was the best choice given that he has proven his ability on the stump and has some gotv infrastructure. He also has the executive experience people say McCain needs on the ticket. His mormonism and flip-flops will mean less as VP than they did as a prez candidate. I don’t think he expands the pie, however, but he doesn’t lose votes either.
February 10th, 2008 at 10:39 pm
This is the best I could come up with in 2 minutes:
McCain, McCain
It brings me pain
To see it come to this
As maverick
You’d only kick
The asses you should kiss
I long to trust you
– how I must!
If to the steps will walk
Of the White House,
A Clinton’s blouse
Or that guy named Barack
February 10th, 2008 at 11:09 pm
Engler would have been a good fit, but he has spent the past few years cashing in as the head of the National Assoc. of Manufacturers. A good GOP cred, no doubt, but just fodder for an anti-lobbyist opponent.
February 10th, 2008 at 11:29 pm
Has Larry Craig been floated? “If is to be an end, I would have us make such an end!”
February 11th, 2008 at 12:45 am
Tom Delay.
February 11th, 2008 at 12:49 am
Rob Portman of Ohio is on the list according to Novak and fred Barnes. Good pick we need ohio!
February 11th, 2008 at 1:43 am
Alan Keyes, Alan Keyes, Alan Keyes
February 11th, 2008 at 1:48 am
One name you guys havent mentioned is John Kasick.
Definately would be strong complement to McCain on the economic front, is a “Walmart” Republican(Father was a mailman)strong on social issues,from Ohio( appeal in the Mid West),articulate and genuine and an unquestionable Conservative record when in Congress.
However,we may have to go with a minority candidate to counter the Dems. If so, the only credible choice is Condi Rice.
Even though she is part of Bush’s administration,she still is widely respected by most Independents and is eminantly qualified to be VP. And, as a Black single woman, would have appeal in groups that are going heavely for Clinton and Obama.Plus, she was born in Alabama, so has roots in the South.
February 11th, 2008 at 7:08 am
How about Bill Miller ,again? Even embalmed he probably looks better than McCain. A little computer graphics and he could run the whole summer and fall and no one would guess he was dead.
February 11th, 2008 at 8:07 am
I may be biased, but I honestly believe Romney brings more to the ticket than anyone else. I honestly don’t think he’s weak in the South. Maybe not as strong as Huckabee in the primaries, but those Huckabee voters are going to vote for a democrat. For Mitt to have finished first in the CPAC straw polls with 76% of the vote coming after his announcement to withdraw should say a lot about his strengthing the ticket amongst conservatives. Huckabee only pulled 12%!. Before the announcement, Mitt was leading 44% to McCain’s 27%. How much more strength to the ticket can you get than this. Mitt was beaten by team tactics, and the MSM, otherwise we wouldn’t be talking about VP spot.
February 11th, 2008 at 8:13 am
Mitt was beaten by team tactics
Mitt was beaten because he decided to become conservative yesterday, and the voters called him on his deception. Huckabee voters won’t be voting democrat, he’s more conservative than Mitt on most issues. The only thing Mitt was close to being conservative on was the economy. Everything else Gun control, abortion, gay marriage, immigration and H1B visas, Mitt is as Liberal or moreso than any Democrat.
February 11th, 2008 at 8:52 am
A McCain- Giuliani ticket is the winning combination. Both men have the right chemistry
with each other, a tremendous benefit to our country! So everyone go for it!
February 11th, 2008 at 9:01 am
Ridge wouldn’t be an awful choice and he’s a plausible possibility if national security becomes more prominent and McCain puts in his time mollifying the base prior to, say, April. I think realistically, McCain needs to telegraph his VP choice before May. It’s likely that his choice will be someone who hasn’t campaigned in awhile, so they’ll need to be in peak stumping form by the time this thing begins in earnest. They’ll also be relatively unknown and with minor national support structures.
If I were McCain, I’d do something fairly bold with my VP; I’d try to raise his profile such that he’s almost as prominent as McCain himself. This would be useful for a few reasons. First, McCain’s going to have wrapped this thing up awfully early. And even now, no one is particularly excited about him. In 6 months, as the Democratic race is unwinding, McCain will be just about the most boring guy alive. He needs some way to generate enthusiasm. Typically, the VP isn’t considered a good outlet for this.
There’s the famous admonition about not letting VP overshadow you, but frankly I don’t think that applies to McCain. Whatever else McCain is, he’s a serious guy. He has gravitas. And I’m convinced that you only have a problem if voters have the sense that the VP is more prepared to be president (think Dukakis-Bentsen). I could be wrong, but I suspect that McCain will be helped tremendously by a more exciting, more likable VP. So he should telegraph his VP early and allow him to build up a national support structure and following; let him outshine you. As long as McCain avoids senior moments, he’ll be able to benefit from such a strategy.
February 11th, 2008 at 10:00 am
Ridge would be an excellent selection for all the reasons cited. With NV, CO, NM trending blue, it looks like the GOP might need a big state switch like PA to win. Ridge would be perfect. For all the mockery about
the color-warnings, it would be a reminder that we’ve had no domestic terrorist attacks in 7 years.
February 11th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
While I’d love Ridge as VP, I just don’t think he’s conservative enough to unify the party.
But since we’ve already mentioned just about every GOP Governor there is, how about Blunt of Missouri?
He’s young, conservative from a swing state and a naval officer which would underline McCains credentials.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
DaveG, you are way off the mark with Ridge.
Think back to what you said (or approvingly quoted someone as saying) about G.W. Bush all but destroying the Republican Party that Reagan had created.
In this regard, McCain’s age is an opportunity.
He may not have a second term, so in picking a VP, we may be picking a President. And if that is so, it ought to be someone whose outlook is geared to reversing the “compassionate” big government type of conservatism that two Bush presidencies have wrought.
So ask yourselves: Who do you want for President, not for Vice-President?
Forget any attempt at tokenism. After the Democrats had nominated two Catholics for President, there was no premium for Goldwater in nominating the selecting the first Catholic VICE-presidential candidate. Tokenism would only emphasize whichever of the two historic choices the Democrats make this year.
Suggestion: Look to see who scores high in CATO’s ranking of Governors (and be sure to read the full narrative report). Or see who has scored higher than McCain’s own percentile in the NTU ratings.
Among Governors, the obvious choice is Mark Sanford.
Like McCain, he will be able to show that he has fought against big spenderts and taxers in his own party. His strengths are the economic issues, which will complement McCain. He is not a Huckabee-style crypto-theocrat (he does not seem to care a whole lot about that stuff), yet the social conservatives will have little to complain about.
Pawlenty also deserves consideration, upon these same criteria. I doubt he will move Minnesota, but he might help in Wisconsin, which ought to be winnable this year. His weakness is possibly a John Kasich-like gravitas deficit (I think). You have to be able to imagine him becoming President — not to be morbid, but even on short notice.
Honorable mention to Sen. John E. Sunnunu — he would lock up NH, but his Senate seat would be lost. And he is a Senator, and, as others have observed, McCain needs a non-Senator.
And honorable mention to Christopher Cox. The smartest guy in the room until Sunnunu comes in.
And Giuliani would be wonderful, except that, as the race has shaped up, choosing him would be seen as a poke in the eye by the Huckabee-ites and the social conservatives. If the race had come down to a choice between McCain and Giuliani (as many people might have expected only 8 months or so ago), then McCain-Giuliani could have been seen as u