GOP Nominee
Former Candidates
The Congressional publication, The Hill, asked Senators if they would consider accepting the Vice Presidency.
Senators John Thune, Joe Lieberman, Lindsay Graham, Jim Webb, and Kit Bond all said “No!”
Lieberman said:
“Once is enough, I already have the T-shirt and I’m proud of it.”
Senators Sam Brownback and Evan Bayh left themselves open to VP pick.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
Heh. I remember John Edwards ruling himself out on national television before accepting the veep spot on the Kerry ticket.
It’s considered poor form to run for veep, but if McCain asks Lieberman or if Obama asks Webb, I doubt either would say no.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
John Edwards has/had no moral center.
I think they remove those during law school.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:31 pm
So Lieberman, Yale Law ‘67, shouldn’t be taken at his word either.
Lieberman, like carcieri is 66. I think two old white guys is a losing proposition this year.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
No one says they want the vice-presidency.
Well, except Romney. But no one cares about him anymore.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Why shouldn’t Obama pick Bayh?
May 16th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
jim, I’ve met an honest lawyer once. I think an honest lawyer is slightly like a virgin prostitute.
You may find one but they’re probably not good at what they’re doing.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
All I want for my birthday is McCain/Lieberman t-shirts/bumperstickers and the corrsponding 400 electoral votes!
May 16th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
Webb is going to be all over TV next week, I guess shopping his book. He will be on MTP Sunday and you know Tim will ask about VP.
Kit Bond? He’s got to be older than McCain! Why not just ask Byrd and have the inaugaration at the cemetary.
May 16th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
Kavon you do realize that TRUE CONSERVATIVES could not support McCain/Lieberman! I mean for goodness sake if you want to win your boy better pick a conservative running mate.
May 16th, 2008 at 11:50 pm
Also if Brownback is on the ticket I may vote 3rd party as well. Having one guy support amnesty is bad enough but two? I don’t think so.
May 17th, 2008 at 12:27 am
Alex,
For the record, Romney has never asked for the VP nod…..he’s merely stated that he would accept if it was offered, while making it clear to sentient beings that he didn’t expect it to be offered. No offense, but you’re a little slow on the uptake. We’ve been over this before.
May 17th, 2008 at 12:38 am
The Groveler
Mitt Romney’s shameless quest for V.P.
http://www.tnr.com/story_print.html?id=a1a0ff43-8ed4-4849-8602-0aaacda8e524
May 17th, 2008 at 2:10 am
Wow Aron. Your anti-Mitt obsession has outlasted act-blog’s pimping of him for the Veep slot. You’ve got some issues.
May 17th, 2008 at 3:36 am
Mittens would be the best pick for VP.
Obviously as Michigan is probably the most important state (with Florida/Ohio/Pennslyvania).
He probably won’t be picked, but deal with the above fact.
May 17th, 2008 at 5:29 am
Michigan is NOT the MOST IMPORTANT state. Okay? Michigan is a few points to the left of pennsylvania and several points to the left of Ohio and Florida. If McCain wins Michigan he’s already won OH, PA and FL. That is esepcially true this year. Blacks have been bloc voting for Obama and Michigan has a 15 % black population and a more leftwing performance history in the past several elections. It’s going to be much easier to hold Ohio and Florida than to go after Michigan and it’s going to be at least somewhat easier to pick of Pennsylvania than it is to pick off Michigan.
Mitt won’t help in OH or PA. So going after Michigan at the expense of losing PA and ESPECIALLY at the expense of losing OH is not smart strategy.
May 17th, 2008 at 5:45 am
Ventura wants in for the MN senate race?
http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=510978
It would be interesting to see some polling there. I have no clue whether that hurts Coleman or Franken more. And if Ventura wins does he caucus with Dems or the GOP?
May 17th, 2008 at 6:05 am
“I can unequivocally say I will not be running for national office in four years.”
May 17th, 2008 at 7:53 am
John McCain Plays the Sucker
Early this morning I received a phone call (related to our regular poker game) from a friend who is on the staff of a republican senator whose re-election is in peril. He told me that he and his boss are furious at Bush because the senator’s numbers nose-dived this week among indepedents. Here is how he described what happened this week.
Obama doesn’t think Bush was talking about him. Bush was aiming at Carter and Pelosi (who went to Syria). Obama, however, gambled that with a over-the-top response McCain would have to answer. McCain (my friend here said “the dumbass”) took the bait and supported Bush 100%. Voters weren’t listening to the details - what they heard was that McCain was going to follow Bush’s policies.
My friend then put it in poker terms. “Obama made a bet hoping to get McCain to put all of his chips in the pot. McCain played the sucker to Obama’s Johnny Chan.”
May 17th, 2008 at 8:22 am
Pablo,
This is not a winning argument for Obama. Obama did say he would meet with the Iranian leader without preconditions. It highlights his weakness in this area. No one outside of the kooky left really believes that McCain = Bush. It just isn’t the case. If it were then McCain wouldn’t have a prayer.
For those of us that aren’t left wing partisans, Obama came across as a little cry baby that whines about every little real or imagined dig. He can try to tie McCain to Bush all he likes but McCain’s position wins the argument.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:31 am
And I would also point out that just because the majority of people disagree with Bush they don’t disagree with every single one of his policies. Most Americans Like Alito and Roberts. Most Americans support the Patriot Act.
McCain is different from Bush on Global Warming, DOMA, Interrogation techniques, strategy on the Iraq war (and McCain has been right, Rumsfeld being one example).
McCain has reached across the aisle to get legislation signed into law. Obama has not. He always kowtows to the liberal line and even in 2008, moderates and conservatives greatly outnumber liberals.
Why doesn’t Obama reach across the aisle to get legislation passed for the good of the American people? How is it that Obama has been able to mobilize 40 percent of the country to hate his guts in six months when it took Hillary a decade to do that? Why is Obama a divider instead of a uniter?
May 17th, 2008 at 8:38 am
Adam,
The media and most pundits disagree with you. Last night on Hardball they were describing it as a triple play. On Fox Charles Krauthammer said that in a debate over Bush’s policies toward Iran, Obama wins. It was reported on PBS that even McCain’s campaign found the episode “unhelpful.” And its never good when a candidate’s name and “hypocrite” are used in the same sentence.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:38 am
Michigan is NOT to the left of Pennsylvania - at least not this year. The Unions are losing influence, and the Democratic Governor has driven the state into the ground.
Just look at the polls, McCain is running better in MI than in PA. MI is to the left of OH and FL - but even with those two states, we’ve still been having trouble securing 270.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:44 am
Adam:
While Michigan can be unpredictable, I have to agree with you that especially in a race with Mr. Obama, once we win Michigan, we probably have already won PA and Ohio, not to mention Florida and MO.
As an aside, we do not need CT, and probably will not get it against Mr. Obama, so putting Mr. Lieberman on the ticket is a little nutty to say the least.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:47 am
Pablo,
I don’t buy it. Obama is dangerously underqualified and the public is not going to accept a sitdown with ol’ Mahmoud as a sign of progress. To whatever extent this might be “unhelpful” in the short term it is helpful in the long term. When Obama is forced to talk about his radical ideas instead of generic “hope” and “change” he is going to be seen more and more as out of sync with the public. Obama is just too liberal and too different from too many people to resonate with a vast majority. If he wins it’s going to be by the skin of his teeth. Frankly I like our chances.
As for Hardball that show is completely irrelevant. Matthews is in the tank for Obama. And no one watches him anyway.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:48 am
ACT, Michigan may not be to the left of PA on everything, it is to the left of PA with regards to National Security, but then again, most swing states are.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:50 am
ACT,
The Democrat governor didn’t help DeVos in 2006. Polls are all over the place. A month ago a poll showed McCain up 10 in PA. I’d much rather look at the actual numbers. Obama is going to have just about every black man and woman at the polls on Election Day. Michigan is 15 percent black. Pennsylvania is only 11 percent. Obama is doing horribly among Catholics. Pennsylvania is chock full of Catholics.
I’ll make you a friendly bet right now that whatever the outcome of the Fall election, McCain will do better in PA than in MI.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:53 am
McCain reached across the aisle to get McCain-Feingold and an amnesty bill, neither of which I am in favor of. I am also not sold on his environmental policies that will cost a trillion dollars. And, yes, I am also among the more than 34% that think he is too old. The mind fades and I think it puts us at risk to have a man in the white house who could wake up one morning and not remember who he is.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:54 am
McCain’s age is a lot less of a problem than Obama’s radical liberalism and (sadly) his skin color for many people.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:55 am
But the point is that there is no way that Obama can out-”reach across the aisle” McCain.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:57 am
“The Democrat governor didn’t help DeVos in 2006.”
DeVos was an extremely weak candidate - he sucked in the Debate, and had a relatively unimpressive personality.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:58 am
And you have a problem with McCain’s immigration position? What about barry’s support of drivers licenses for illegals? If you think McCain is too far LEFT on immigration then Berry isn’t going to put a smile on your face.
And McCain-Feingold I don’t like either. But not too many of the regular folks really care about it. McCain tried to get the money out of politics. If he wasn’t successful at least he had good intentions.
May 17th, 2008 at 9:00 am
Also, DeVos got tagged with a mini-scandal in which his company was accused of sending jobs to China.
May 17th, 2008 at 9:00 am
I understand the politics of saying liberal a thousand times, but its just not showing any potency. Its hard to call talking to roque nations as radical liberalism when you see Nixon meeting Mao and Kennedy with Kruschev. Indeed, it looks like strength.
There is no doubt racism is alive but so is ageism. The difference is Obama is half white, but McCain isn’t half 72.
May 17th, 2008 at 9:01 am
ACT,
True. I still doubt he would have won. It wasn’t even close. He lost by 14 points.
May 17th, 2008 at 9:01 am
The path to hell is paved with good intentions.
May 17th, 2008 at 9:05 am
Pablo,
Let me tell you something. I grew up in rural PA. I know plenty of racists. I never liked it. I always thought that it was a simple-minded worldview. I guarantee you that anyone not willing to vote for the black man is also not willing to vote for the half-black man. And Obama has certainly given those types plenty of ammo to hate his guts.
On ageism, older people vote. Younger ones don’t - not in anywhere near the numbers of seniors. McCain’s being 72 is a lot less of a problem than Obama’s skin color - in terms of ability to win nationwide. It has to be (part of it is that McCain is a strong candidate but it doesn’t explain it all). Otherwise the two wouldn’t be tied while a generic Democrat is up by 20.
May 17th, 2008 at 9:09 am
PabloZed,
Re: Kennedy and Khrushchev
Don’t Know Much About History
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/05/dont_know_much_about_history.asp
May 17th, 2008 at 9:12 am
CNN Reports: Jamie Rubin lied when he said McCain “was ready to do business with a Hamas-led government.”
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/05/cnn_reports_jamie_rubin_lied.asp
May 17th, 2008 at 9:13 am
Yeah Obama tried to pain Reagan’s meeting with Gorbachev in the same light. There’s only one small problem. Reagan was siting Pershing II missiles in Eastern Europe. It wasn’t as if he just decided to have some sort of mediation with Gorbachev. he was negotiating from a position of strength.
I seriously don’t believe that America will find Can’t I Just Eat My Waffle Obama to posess more “strength” than McCain on this issue.
May 17th, 2008 at 9:15 am
Aron,
You’re on your game. I was just going to point that out too. McCain never said he would meet without preconditions. Obama desperately decided to “cling” to that idea yesterday because he KNEW he looked weak. He wanted to say “See…see McCain said the same thing”.
It’s going to be easy to tag Obama as a pansy. Hopefully the GOP brand isn’t so far in the toilet that it won’t matter.
May 17th, 2008 at 9:18 am
You are right about PA and about the fact that you cannot be half 72, but PA is also one of the older states in the union.
May 17th, 2008 at 9:18 am
Adam,
I really don’t want to engage in a debate about who knows more racists. It would depress me and I don’t believe the voters at issue are racist as much as simply “concerned.”
Yes, older people vote and its the older voters who are most concerned about McCain’s age. At 40ish, I know what it feels like to wake up a little achy. A full day of walking around and activities requires a day of recovery. So I can somewhat imagine what 70 feels like, but its the mental capacity that is at issue. The mind deteriorates over time and a 70 year old mind is not as sharp as a 60 year old one. Its a medical certainty.
May 17th, 2008 at 9:24 am
Pablo,
I don’t like talking about such things either. It doesn’t make me proud that so many from where I grew up hold such views. But the point is that I guarantee in terms of what is going to sway voters in the Fall, race is a more potent issue than age. That was the point.
Still, I am just going to have to disagree that some of these voters are simply “concerned”. I’m of the opinion that Obama could have campaigned in WV for a year and held town hall meetings every day and spent $50M on advertising and still would have lost. It wouldn’t have been by 40 - but he still would have lost
May 17th, 2008 at 9:24 am
Aron,
The point is they met and tensions were high then as they were throughout his term in office. On the CBS morning program when they were talking about this they should pictures of Nixon with Mao, Kennedy with Kruschev, and Reagan with Gorbie and they were very powerful images. And in each case US interests were advanced. I am certain we will be seeing those images quite a bit.
May 17th, 2008 at 9:26 am
should=showed
May 17th, 2008 at 11:40 am
It seems to me that Obama’s associations with Wright and Farakhan have caused people who normally are not rascist to repond in polls that race is an issue. Wright and Farakhan are rascist of the highest order, and Obama is seen as such because of these long associations. My belief is that a very high number of them that are indicating that race is an issue would not have done so had it not been for Obama’s past affiliations and friends. I’m not naive! I realize that there are still rascist, but I don’t think a whole lot of it has to do with skin color. Much of it comes from the perception (correct or not) that too many blacks are lazy, drain the money out of the economy, do not marry and take care of their own families, and commit crimes in much higher percentages. They have also watched affirmative action keep them out of colleges, stop their promotions, and decreased their pay raises for the last 40 years, and naturally they are not thrilled about that. Its my belief that it is these perception that keep a certain amount of rascism alive and well in this country. I would invite response to what I’ve just said. Just be clear, these are not my views, by my perception of how others view race in these days.
May 17th, 2008 at 11:47 am
IL Guy,
You’re probably right. Obama didn’t have piss poor showings among white Democrats until After Wright and BitterCling.
May 17th, 2008 at 11:56 am
Many better educated, wealthier whites view poor whites much the same way you describe how people view some blacks. I don’t even know any poor whites, although I suspect a lot of people online with backwards views are probably poor and undereducated.