I hope this is right.
Because it sounds like McCain wanted to tell the world himself, and if this gets leaked, it could piss him off so bad that he chooses someone else just for spite.
*picks jaw up off floor, pours a glass of scotch to down the two pills of why-is-this-happening-to-me-ive-been-so-adamantly-against-this-for-over-a-year*
If Romney is indeed the nominee (and we will find out soon enough if that is the case) great and kudos to you and Kavon for the scoop. But I am getting very contradictory reports from my sources close to the campaign. Take this with the proverbial grain of salt, but I am hearing that the field has narrowed to three contenders: Tim Pawlenty, Tom Ridge and Sam Brownback. I understand that in the end it will come down to McCain’s gut but this is the message I’m getting right now. My understanding is that all of the talk about Rudy, Romney, Jindal…etc. is sort of a “runners-up” tour of sorts.
#31, I don’t understand why 80% of the USA isn’t already at that conclusion!! If they just did a little digging on Obama and stopped listening to the MSM McCain would win this in a land slide! I live in RI (which is very LEFT) and I know so many people that are not voting for Barack, weather they vote for McCain or not is a different story, probably not enough to swing RI or MA RED, With Mitt on the ticket MA should now be in play??
Brownback? Are you kidding? Let’s just pass out sleeping pills and hope that people still show up and vote… I thought it would be hard to find someone as ‘energetic’ as McCain, but Brownback just might do it.
Virtually EVERY surveyusa poll showed Romney hurts McCain. You don’t fend off the candidate of change (Obama) by putting your own candidate of change on the ticket.
Well for what it’s worth, the Romney family went on a big vacation before he announced his presidential aspirations. Let’s see what happens when Mitt comes back from the Great White North.
“I expect Mitt’s critics will either whine for a while or leave.”
You’re right. I’m here because I’m excited for the GOP to win another White House. This move makes no sense to me. To me it signals one of two things; either the GOP will get killed in this election, or that the GOP is going to cling to a mold that is increasingly rejected by mainstream America.
Before this announcement is tied too much to me (I am not backing down from it) I should note I am posting this at Kavon’s request who is in a meeting. I am willing to put my name on it though.
#47- I personally think Brownback would be a great choice. Solid Conservative. Someone McCain can trust. Can McCain actually trust Romney??? I don’t know about that.
If McCain did pick Romney, he’s going for the “attack dog” pick. Romney can articulate positions and rip apart contrary positions all with a smile on his face.
What is all this talk about McCain needing to wait until Obama picks? McCain HAS to pick before Obama or he’s bascially conceeding
that Obama is leading the narrative and McCain is simply reacting to it. McCain’s whole platform is that he’s a leader, not a
follower! McCain needs to remind the public that he secured the nomination long before the Democrats ever settled on Obama. Picking his VP before Obama will drive home that fact.
Bob Novak on Fox News earlier today said that the inside word was that the pick would be Romney, but he didn’t indicate that it was official yet. No other pick would make much sense, so I hope this is true….it would mean that we will probably win in November, and that if anything were to happen to McCain following his election, that we would have a first rate and highly competent president. Good news all around.
Jeff-
You seem to still be a little angry at brownback. Let me guess is it because he was the only candidate to stand up to him? Maybe brownback has the exact amount of testicular fortitude that we need in a vp. Or maybe he would supply too much testosterone to our ticket.
I should also say that Deval Patrick won before Romney turned away from the positions that had allowed him to gain some favor among MA voters. They also have Romneycare on them now, and it’s already threatening to drain the state’s accounts. There’s no way Romney delivers Massachusetts.
“A Romney pick would be enough to make many moderates (myself included) stay home in the fall.”
…and anything short of a strong conservative on the ticket would be enough to convince many conservatives – who are just as important, probably more, to a win, to stay home. Picking a moderate would show that McCain wanted to move the GOP to the left – something that is just simply unacceptable.
I think that Brownback would make the best veep choice. His only flaw is money or lack thereof. He would solidify the base, and McCain can trust him to look out for McCain and McCain only. McCain would know that Brownback wasn’t just setting himself up for a future presidential run.
Big S – you’re hilarious. “Moderates” like you will stay home if it’s Romney? Yeah? Mate – Romney IS a moderate. For better or for worse. Don’t be fooled by his badly executed dance with the social right in the primary. Dude got elected in Mass because he’s a moderate. That’s the only reason. Very few people leave Harvard with two degrees (both near the top of his class) without absorbing a bit of moderation.
But “moderate” is the wrong word – he’s a non-ideological pragmatist. And he’s the best choice McCain has got. So why not set aside your little anti-Mormon bias.
“and it’s already threatening to drain the state’s accounts.”
…as a result of liberal mis-management, not only of the healthcare program, but the budget in general.
And to blame Romney for the loss in MA without also pointing out the fact that the GOP did poorly last year in even red and purple states is simply dishonest.
#59 – maybe according to your opinion, not according to the polls.
I’ve posted the 18th July Zogby poll on about 3 threads already and Romney was a huge positive factor. Republicans more likely to vote for McCain 41% less likely 8%
Independents more likely a net spread of +17%
McCain is now within about 3 points of Obama in national polls with these conservative brethren of yours already expecting a move to the left by McCain. You overstate the political power of such voters. As always, moderates will decide this election. This is not a year in which Republicans can play defense with a “safe” pick like Romney. McCain-Romney gets 43-45% of the vote, tops.
Cat – great summary of Romney as a progmatist… too many have misunderstood him. He and McCain would be a great team for each other, and McCain needs someone who can attack Obama and knock him out at the knees
Haha! You expect me to fall for that one? Do you work for Mitt?
Anyway, even if that was true, good luck breaking through in Mass. with Patrick, the Kennedys, and Obama controlling the narrative on it. It’s called “Romneycare” for a reason.
McCain is setting us up for a “surprise”. In 1980 everyone kept asking when reagan was going to annouce Ford, but he did not, and he shocked the party and media.
81- That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. There was no anti-Mormon bias in what Big S said at ALL. Romney’s not a moderate, at least he doesn’t claim to be. He’s about as far to the right fiscally as one can be, short of the fair-taxers, and he “changed his positions” on social issues to be everything the right wanted him to be. He said he wanted to double Guantanamo- show me a moderate that says crap like that. So there’s one of two problems- either he is indeed no moderate, which I’m going to go with, or he doesn’t have the stones to tell the party where to go. Either way, he will never get my vote for President. Never. If it weren’t John McCain at the top of the ticket, my Facebook picture would be me holding an Obama ‘08 sign today.
This won’t get announced until next week. They want to milk this for all they can get and letting out a little bit each day, stringing the media along is the best way to do it.
Hmmm … this blog seems to have followed a common pattern of the MSM — a bold headline that is not supported by the story (to say nothing of being apparently false).
> Doug Forrester #38: “I’m lukewarm about Romney. He’s not a horrible pick but he’s certainly not the best we could do.”
Pretty much my reaction, Doug. I won’t slit my wrists if Romney is chosen, but he does little for McCain’s chances, in my opinion.
98 — because of his past stances on abortion and gay marriage. And because he’s mormom. I don’t discount him for that but a lot of hardcore evangelicals do.
30% of voters believe McCain is too old to be President. Romney is closing in on retirement age, so how does this work? McCain has already admitted that age is an issue, that he must address with the VP selection.
Well, if it is still open for debate, Huckabee is finishing up a trip to Rwanda with Cindy McCain, John Kaisch, Bill Frist, and others today – He will be back in the states tomorrow for his Vertical Day. Vertical day would be an interesting launch pad for VP.
Jack K – Its not true that evangelicals do not like Mitt. Many of their top leaders endorsed him, and many others supported him without endorsing. The rank and file liked him, but in some states they voted for Huckabee more with MItt as their second choice. In other states, like Michigan, Mitt even beat Huckabee, so don’t make stupid blanket statements like that. Dobson’s own words were that he liked Mitt and Huckabee equally. Land liked Mitt. Grueden endorsed him. Jones endorsed him. Osteen called him a Christian and said he would support him.
#94 – My mom is a evangelical fundamentalist who initially had reservations about Mitt Romney during the primaries.
She told me recently that she would be so happy if Mitt Romney was the V.P. nominee for McCain.
She also told me today that when she worked at the precinct during the primaries she talked to several of the Democrats who also worked there that they would NOT vote for Obama.
107- Moreso. In fact, so much that those who weren’t completely committed to McCain but liked him because he represented a new, more reasonable Republicanism may not like the idea. If you wanted to placate “real conservatives,” fine, but it should have been done in a way that didn’t give the middle a big middle finger.
Romney said it best on tv the other day. “We aren’t voting for a Vice President, we’re voting for a President.” Was the main reason most of you voted for Bush the last two elections because he had Cheney as his V.P. choice? I doubt it.
Social conservatives do not like Mitt Romney because his record has not shown an unwavering conviction on the issue of life, but rather an unsettling accumulation of flip-flops.
Also, don’t you know that Democrats can use all of Mitt’s primary ads against John McCain? This is a terrible, terrible political move.
“Big S – you’re hilarious. “Moderates” like you will stay home if it’s Romney? Yeah? Mate – Romney IS a moderate. For better or for worse. Don’t be fooled by his badly executed dance with the social right in the primary. Dude got elected in Mass because he’s a moderate. That’s the only reason. Very few people leave Harvard with two degrees (both near the top of his class) without absorbing a bit of moderation.
But “moderate” is the wrong word – he’s a non-ideological pragmatist. And he’s the best choice McCain has got. So why not set aside your little anti-Mormon bias.”
As much as Big S is wrong for being an all-or-nothing whiner, you have fallen for the lie that Romney is a moderate, flip-flopping, opportunist. We’ve gone over this argument so many times on this site that I can’t believe people are still bringing it up.
http://www.politico.com/pdf/wmr_1994_senate_flier_side_1.pdf – that is a flier from Romney’s 1994 Senate Campaign, and it shows that he has been remarkably consistant in his positions. On what is really the lone issue he can honestly be accused of “fliping” on, abortion, he has changed positions once, from pro-choice to pro-life, and he has been completely open about that issue – which is a lot more than can be said for our nominee or other candidates.
Romney is no more a flip-flopper than Ronald Reagan or George Bush I was, and certainly no more a moderate than Reagan – who, its worth pointing out, was a Democrat for much of his life.
I would reluctantly support a Romney VP pick, but there are better options. Romney’s going to turn off independents. At least he’s attractive to economic conservatives, but it looks like the social conservatives are being left high and dry in this election. I guess it’s someone else’s turn now.
Let’s all be clear here that just because he isn’t going to announce tomorrow or the next day doesn’t mean that he hasn’t already chosen the VP.
I really think that Romney is the best guy for the job because he compliments McCain so well. They were rivals so it unifies the major factions of the party, Romney shores up McCain’s domestic weaknesses while McCain’s reputation for being politically principled overshadows and blunts Romney’s reputation of being an opportunist.
124 – Eric, do you bother reading postings or following links, or just insert your opinion? I just posted 15 minutes ago that nationwide Mitt Romney causes independents to more likely vote for McCain by a net +15%.
That is a poll from the 18th of July.
“Social conservatives do not like Mitt Romney because his record has not shown an unwavering conviction on the issue of life, but rather an unsettling accumulation of flip-flops.”
No, he hasn’t. He was pro-choice until sometime after 1994, after which he became pro-life. In 2002, he was opposed to abortion, but said that he would not support any change in the law – a technically pro-choice position, though he probably stopped more pro-choice bills than pro-life ones.
Romney remains pro-life, supports the overturn of Roe v. Wade, etc., etc.
#108 – not only is he trying to push away so-cons but also disaffected Democrats, independents, moderate Republicans, people who care about sincerity, military voters, people who respect the military and anyone with a dog.
Romney has the chance to help in NV, NH, MI, CO and NM which along with OH, VA, and MO are probably the key swing states in this election. I think McCain wins each of those three states on his own, which means we would only need 10 of the 40 electoral votes in the states Romney potentially helps in.
I am an evangelical pastor who did not support Romney earlier (he was like my 4th choice), am strongly opposed to Mormon beliefs (let’s leave it at that), but would be content with Romney on the ticket. He brings a lot to the table, I cannot doubt that.
I still want Palin on there!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
Act Blog, you must be dizzy after all your spinning. Pro-lifers don’t like Romney. Evangelicals don’t like Romney. Church-going Catholics don’t like Romney.
If Romney is selected, I expect him to spend almost all his time in MI, and NH while at the same time making sure his supporters in NV, CO and NM are as organized as can be helping with GOTV efforts.
Some of you are saying that there is no substantiation. Did you follow the Novak link? He stated that he had gotten this from a senior McCain advisor, and that he had since had others ask him to back off, trying to get him to stifle it. We all know that’s impossible once the cat is out of the bag.
What pro-lifers often misunderstand is that very very few pro-choicers are NOT personally opposed to abortion to some degree, but believe that others should make the choice. You know, kinda like Romney did in Massachussetts…
It’s not true that church-going Catholics don’t support Romney. All members of my family who are are church-going, very conservative Roman Catholics enthusiastically support Romney.
With all due respect to Kavon and Jason, whose writings and persons I respect, I’m going to call bull on this report, or at least some of the expectations associated with it. I think this is just a political ploy cooked up somewhere (perhaps smartly) to take attention away from Obama.
I’m going to make these predictions:
1) There will be no July announcement from McCain
2) It could be Romney, but it still won’t be announced in the next 2 weeks. (which Kavon and Jason may actually agree with, timetable-wise)
Disclaimer: I have no hard evidence to refute this claim being made. I just suspect it is not going to pan out the way we’re expecting.
“I still believe that the best position for Romney is as RNC Chairman because you get almost all of Romney’s positives without any of his negatives.”
Amen.
Also I think we should note that futures markets have Romney at 31%. That’s high and by far the “most likely” person. But it’s also not 60-80% as I would expect if a good number of insiders have this information. I’m quite skeptical.
Jack K,
There were several states in which Mitt won the Evangelical vote and Huckabee came in 2nd. There were several states in which he won the Catholic vote….in fact, Massachusetts is one of the most heavily Catholic states in the nation….a state that elected him as Governor and a state that he won in the Primary. He also won the pro-life vote in more states than he lost it. This isn’t spin….it’s fact. You’re the one who’s spinning.
#153: I’ll note that IF the choice is Romney, sooner is better. His main appeal is his ability to fundraise. But that is only useful until the convention. After that, it’s public financing.
So every day that passes makes it less likely that the choice is Romney IMHO.
If Romney is selected, Obama would most likely go ahead and pick Evan Bayh.
Now who is more credible to suburban and rural voters, Massachusetts Mitt or Indiana-bred Bayh?? Who would appeal to religious Catholics and evangelicals? Evan Bayh would be able to sway Ohio and Indiana (if we lose those two states, we are most likely done), and possibly Pennsylvania. Would Mitt Romney help or hurt in these states, considering that there are many cultural conservatives there?
“Act Blog, you must be dizzy after all your spinning. Pro-lifers don’t like Romney. Evangelicals don’t like Romney. Church-going Catholics don’t like Romney.”
Actually Jack, I think it is you that does not like Romney.
…and he would help in Michigan, where he not only has family ties, but where he is something the state might be looking for – a Republican who cares about the manufacturing sector.
Add that to his appeal in states like CO and NV, and his local connections to NH, and he could very well put us over the top.
No matter whether this is true or not, we have to all ban together and stay with McCain, because we simply can not afford to allow this nation to elect a Socialist. We’ve been the best nation in the world for too long to allow that to happen. So, let’s stay together and help McCain, even if you’re not crazy about him, or his VP, because Obabma is very bad news for America.
Interesting bit about Romney’s “primary” campaign: Only three of his wins were in actual primaries – Massachusetts, Michigan, and Utah, his “home” states. All of the rest of them were in caucuses, which are questionable as far as predicting actual popular support goes.
I think I heard something about a “Millionaire loophole” which would advantage a McCain/Romney announcement earlier than later as it would allow Romney to stuff the coffers with his own funds, but I didn’t follow the story too closely and haven’t pursued the details… Does anyone else recall anything along these lines, or know the details?
In comparrison to who, Huckabee? The Evangelical Minister? Romney led, at various times, in both Iowa and South Carolina, so, while he may not be their first choice, they certainly don’t have a problem supporting him.
Romney would be the best Vice President for McCain Hands down! McCain has the National security locked up (2nd most important issue) and Romney has the Economy locked up (1st most important issue. They are an upbeatable team. Go McCain/Romney! and Romney in 2012/2016!!!
Although I doubt McCain is ready to select his VP, if it is Romney, then McCain must have internal polling showing Romney bringing ECV’s, or maybe they have become friends and McCain trusts his judgement?
Either way, let us all support who ever is the VP nominee (especially Governor Palin).
Illinoisguy has been behind McCain since Romney dropped out.
“Interesting bit about Romney’s “primary” campaign: Only three of his wins were in actual primaries – Massachusetts, Michigan, and Utah, his “home” states. All of the rest of them were in caucuses, which are questionable as far as predicting actual popular support goes.”
…although they are also more Conservative, and generally more representative of the base than primaries.
Adam,
This isn’t ancient history: it came down earier this year. Mitt won the Evangelical vote in Michigan, Colorado, and Alaska….all of which were primaries. He also won it in caucus states like Nevada and Minnesota, but what do you have against caucuses? The votes cast in caucuses are not only real people, they’re more likely to be knowledgeable than primary voters.
He is more conservative, but if you mean that he is a VP pick who unites the party and goes on to win the Presidency himself, that is fine with me. Though I suppose you would be happier with the populist?
—
As for why now – its because Romney is going to out of the country at the start of August for the Olympics, and because Obama is in the middle of his most press-attractive event short of the convention.
McCain should announce his VP the second BHO finishes his photo op world tour. It would hit every Sunday talking fest and lessen the chit chat everyone will be having at how photogenic a president BHO might be.
Romney is it. McCain knows it. Both men have proven their leadership and their ability to tackle tough situations. McCain in the war and Romney in business and the Olympics.
Plus Romney is going to the Olympics. It would be great timing to have a VP candidate on the world stage.
“…and less representative of the general electorate. You realize that this is no longer just about “the base”, don’t you?”
Yes, I do – putting together a ticket is about appealing to as many sides as possible, and McCain already has the center covered. His VP has to give the base a reason to actually go out and vote in large numbers.
Not to mention the fact that these same people stating that caucuses are not reliable would also claim that Mike Huckabee’s beating of Mitt in IA caucuses shows that evangelicals hate Mitt. You can’t have it both ways- either count caucuses or not. If you don’t you’re throwing Huck out right away because his biggest and most important win was IA. Frankly, I’m a christian conservative, and yet I would have huge qualms about Huck or Brownback on the ticket. Mitt Romney is an excellent choice, as is Sarah Palin.
How does everyone not understand that the reported head-fake is about the timing of the announcement not who the VP will be.
Don’t you see how it is entirely possible that Romney has been chosen just like Jason and Kavon are reporting, but that the announcement will not be this week or tomorrow at the additional campaign event.
So caucuses are “more representative of the base than primaries.” I agree. But that means they are less representative of the general election. And thus they are bad predictors of who will do better in a general election.
I would like to note that very, very few people consider a VP in their decision of who to vote for. The idea that this is a game winner or loser is just the lack of a bigger story right now.
177 – AK and CO were caucuses. In CO Romney won 60+% in the caucus. So MI is the one state where Romney won evangelicals in a primary. And there he did worse among evangelicals (36%) than he did among all voters (39%).
I don’t agree with people who say “evangelicals hate Romney” but he is not in the top 5 choices if the goal is to please evangelicals. I don’t think that is the main goal of the VP choice but Romney doesn’t fit that bill.
Yeah I’m not sure what’s gonna happen, but I think you have to be foolish not to think he helps in MI, CO, and NV. I also think he would energize a ton of people, including me. I would immediately start donating money again.
Kristofer, as much of a Palin fan as and as much as I think she’d be a good choice, this recent business with the trooper probably ended whatever small chance she had. It seems to be that this will end up being much ado about nothing, but the way the media is and the way things go, McCain can’t really have a VP who is in that situation. Whether this was some dirty trick by some dems to sandbag her and take her out of contention, who knows? But the reality is that it likely ended her chances.
I still think a woman as VP is a good move, and I think a Marsha Blackburn, a Meg Whitman, and a couple others would all be worthwhile choices.
That said, Romney is probably the best of the guy choices and the safe choices.
And look at it this way, if they win we’re all happy. If they lose, Romney is finished for 2012, so that’s good, too.
McCain does already have the center covered. Please read the recent Rasmussen National and OH State polls posted on this site. Both show McCain leaning with unaffiliated voters. That is particularly true in OH.
Big S,
Mitt won the Evangelical vote in California and Utah, which were definitely primaries, but why would that matter? Caucuses are intrinsically superior to Primaries because they are relatively immune to mass-media manipulation. Quality trumps quantity in every respect. But in this case, Evangelicals who participate in caucuses are even more dispositive in that they would be more likely to be anti-Mormon than Evangelicals who didn’t bother to show up.
I would just say that caucus support heavily favors those with strong organizations and extremely dedicated supporters. The general electorate will be many times larger than the total number of supporters in the caucuses, and closer to the middle of the political spectrum. For instance, Romney got 30,000 more votes than McCain in the Colorado caucus. More than two million people voted in CO in the 2004 general election. Given Romney’s strength in organizing and highly dedicated (often Mormon) followers, can you say with any certainty that he is stronger among the general electorate in that state than McCain is?
Which polls? The only ones that I can find with Mitt in the lead are of “likely caucus goers”. This just gets back to my point about who is likely to go to a caucus in the first place.
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) is “very much a contender” to be Sen. John McCain’s running mate, according to one of McCain’s closest allies on Capitol Hill.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who earlier this year told The Hill that McCain’s vice presidential pick should be someone the Arizona senator “feels comfortable with,” said Romney fits that description.
“I think he’s very much a contender for the job,” Graham said. “They have a good relationship. That’s all I’ll say.”
Dave, please provide links. I’m not going to go check every assertion you made. But since you thought AK and CO were primaries, I’m not going to take your word on CA. UT I presume you are correct on.
“Caucuses are intrinsically superior to Primaries because they are relatively immune to mass-media manipulation. Quality trumps quantity in every respect.”
I thoroughly disagree. I don’t know what “intrinsically superior” is supposed to mean. First, it depends on the goal of the primary. If the goal is to nominate the candidate most likely to win, then caucuses stink because they empower activisits without any input from less active (and more likely to swing) voters. Second, the 1-5% turnout means they are very bad predictors of general election outcomes. Third, they small scale is not a good replication of what the general election will be like. “Mass media manipulation” is just a pejorative way to say “general election.” Fourth, they are manipulatable by having more money or one core group of active supporters.
I don’t mind some caucuses as a way to give activists greater say. But they have many, many drawbacks. And they aren’t “intrinsically” anything.
As I stated in my post earlier, I am hearing very conflicting info on the Veep choice (top three current candidates: Pawlenty, Ridge, Brownback). But if Jason’s and Kavon’s reporting is correct (I remain skeptical). I think that the choice of Romney has its parallels in the Dole/Kemp archetype – safe pick, former rival, economic cred. I wouldn’t really see this choice (if accurate) as a game changer as much as I see it as a defensive, don’t rock the boat choice.
Sorry this is off topic, but I need your expert advice. How do we exploit Obama’s gaffe from his
press conference? I’m referring to the fact that he is obviously clueless that as
Commander of CENTCOM, Gen. Petraeus is responsible not only for Iraq but Afganistan as well! BOH
said as (prospective) CinC he would have to think more broadly than the military situation in Iraq.
He gave the need for more troops in Afganistan as an example. He doesn’t even understand the scope
of Petraeus’s role! As an aside, Petraeus was confirmed by the U.S. Senate as Commander of CENTCOM
on July 10,2008. I wonder is BOH voted for him? If so, he clearly didn’t understand what he was
voting for!!
For the record, I believe this is part of a feint on the part of Team McCain regarding an early VP pick, and that this means Romney is not the pick, but was just fodder for the feint.
I’m referring to the fact that he is obviously clueless that as
Commander of CENTCOM, Gen. Petraeus is responsible not only for Iraq but Afganistan as well!
Maybe McCain should point out that if Obama had held any hearings on Afghanistan as allowed by his Senate position (McCain already pointed out that he hasn’t), he would know who is in charge of military operations in Afghanistan.
A minor factoid to add to the buzz of Mitt-as-veep talk: One of the benefits of picking Romney was the possibility of his personal fortune being added to the resources of the ticket during the campaign. But upon becoming the nominee, McCain gets $84.1 million in public funds at the convention, and then has to abide by that spending limit. So if you’re going to pick Mitt, it makes sense to do so sooner rather than later
Adam,
We go back more than a year, and you know that I’ve never provided a link in my life. I’m not that organized. Besides, I don’t know how to do it. The point that Mitt had a lot of Evangelical support is valid, and the point that Mitt beat Huckabee among Evangelicals in multiple states is a historical fact. Big S was making a blanket statement that pro-lifers, Evangelicals, and church-going Catholics hated Mitt…..and there is no evidence for that. Even in the Iowa caucuses, pollsters established that more Evangelicals voting for Huckabee had Mitt as a 2nd choice than anybody else.
Todd I say yes mccain should do it real soon before Obama gets back I think I heard he gets back into chicago so might be good idea to to announce befor he gets back just saying … so he can get tv coverage plus I think once VP is announced mccain have a partner to come out swing!
“Big S was making a blanket statement that pro-lifers, Evangelicals, and church-going Catholics hated Mitt”
I know someone said that and they were wrong. But that doesn’t mean that Romney did well among evangelicals or would help bring in more in the general election. So far, I see your evidence that Romney won evangelicals in MI (36%) while winning the state (39%). Perhaps he did in CA and UT as well. I don’t see how this helps an argument that he would help win the eelction.
I think his selling points are: Money, well-vetted, squeaky clean, economics background, attack dog ability, ability to morph position to match his superior, and loyalty.
I think his drawbacks are: high unfavs (especially among Indies), personality conflicts with Presidential nominee, corporate shark when Wall Street is not popular, Mormon, he won’t become the heir apparent because he doesn’t have the support and those who are excited about him are already voting GOP.
I think he’d be better than average as a pick. But there are better choices too: Sanford, Pawlenty, Palin, Jindal.
Then again I think the VP choice matters very little to this election but matters for who is the standard bearer after McCain.
“he won’t become the heir apparent because he doesn’t have the support ”
Wrong. He will be the heir apparent if he is choosen. He came in second – and it was probably the closest second since ‘76 when Reagan was #2. The only reason that Romney isn’t the nominee right now is because Huckabee won IA, and you have to admit that he was a perfect fit for the state.
Romney would unquestionably be the heir apparent if he is choosen.
Big S,
I apologize. I’m obviously not thinking as clearly today as I should. Jack K made the blanket statement I referred to in #220 in his post #147. You’re obviously correct that some moderates have a problem with Romney. Aside from the mis-attribution, though, I stand by #220.
McCain/Romney—That ticket will lose. They just lost my vote.
BAD IDEA: The social conservatives will stay home. They are the ones that propelled Bush to victory TWICE!!! They made phone calls and knocked door to door handing out fliers. Don’t Beleive me?–Just look at how Mike Huckabee won. He raised 15 million durring the whole campaign. How did he win with little money? The social conservatives had a grassroots network that did his campaigning for him so he did not have to hire and spend money on staff. Romney spent 10 million just in Iowa. Romney left with 45 million in debt. Mike left with 30,000 in the bank.
Anne: Romney brings conservatives who are wary about McCain on board. Romney brings the 3 legged conservatives, passionate supporters, energy,and the ability to raise funds.
Anne – sorry, I can’t take your post seriously for obvious reasons regarding how Huckabee ran his campaign. That’s a nice revisionist version of the primary.
Romney won’t be heir apparent to anything if they lose to Obama.
Once you’re a loser, it’s very difficult to come back from that. If Reagan had been Ford’s VP and lost in 76 it would have been much more difficult for him.
Even if it is Romney, I don’t see what announcing so early does. It wreaks of deperation to me. Now, Obama will be able to pick his VP to counteract whatever Romney brings. The whole point of being the in party and having the later convention is that you have the advantage and can pick a VP 2nd, and McCain just threw all of that away.
Adam,
I wouldn’t argue that Mitt has no drawbacks because he does. My perception is that Mitt and McCain have healed the rift between them and would be compatible. McCain has modified a number of his positions, and has come closer to Mitt’s positions by doing so. This has been most obvious in the energy arena. Mitt hasn’t changed any of his positions in his supporting role for McCain….he’s merely emphasized those points on which they agree or pointed out why Obama is a bad choice in various respects: So I take issue with the notion that he’s morphing his own positions into McCain’s positions. His main positive is his ability to sell the ticket.
Anne (#231), as a fellow Huckabee voter; please, please, please, please, please, please, PLEASE don’t sit at home on election day! This is WAY too important!
Imagine with me. When the next President is inaugurated, I think 4 of the 7 SCOTUS Justices will be over 70. One will be over 80. If any of them retire, who we elect as President WILL decide the future for gun rights, the life of unborn children, marriage, and a host of other vital issues.
Obama will appoint the most liberal justices imaginable. McCain will appoint conservatives (for sure ten times more conservative than Obama will). The current court splits 5-4 on everything. One appointee will tip the balance.
Plug your nose, and vote for McCain, even if he chooses a bad VP. We cannot afford Obama appointing the makeup of the Supreme Court for the next 30 years!
Anne, I kind of agree with you here. I’m not big on the Huckster, but the silver lining in a McCain-Romney loss is that it opens the door for the GOP to actually attempt in the future to bring in new voters instead of leaning on demographics that are less and less relevant every year.
Romney won CPAC twice – once after dropping out. He, eventually, won the support of the Conservative leaders in the media, and he routinely took the Conservative vote.
A ticket with Huckabee on the ticket would do even worse than Romney – perhaps not among southern evangelicals, but deffinately among fiscal conservatives and independents who might agree with Conservative views, even socially, but who are turned off by the appearance of religious fanaticism.
No, I will not “plug my nose” and vote. For many years social conservatives have “plugged their noses” and are told to put up with the nominee. Then, when a social conservative get close to winning the nomination, all the republican talk show hosts bashed our candidate and made sure he didn’t win. Sean Hannity said he like the Fair Tax plan (After Mike lost the nomination). All they did was bash Huck on fiscal issues. Where was the bashing of Romney on social issues by these talk show hosts?!!! NO, The GOP needs to know that they can’t put us under the bus anymore. Obama has won anyway. Start focusing on 2012.
Don’t be so confident about McCain nominating conservative justices, if elected. McCain voted for Sandra Day O’Connor, David Souter, Ruth Bader-Ginsberg, and Stephen Breyer.
Anne umm hello have you forgotten about George W. Bush? The man who rode on the back of so-cons twice, how about lets get someone on the ticket who covers all the bases(Romney)?
#243 Metro — voters like me will turn on the GOP if they nominate Romney. That’s a foolish statement, be
because you can use it against any controversial candidate. And whether you want to admit
it or not, Romney is a controversial candidate.
McCain/Romney—That ticket will lose. They just lost my vote.
They just lost mine too. Now I’m not worried about whether McCain will lose. Now I’m worried about whether McCain might actually *win*, because for a shape-shifting flip-flopping corporate take-over office to ascend to the office of vice president would be a disaster for this country, and it does not speak well of Sen. McCain’s judgment.
Thats because he’s a tax and spend populist who doesn’t fit the GOPs policy of fiscal conservatism.
—-
“Where was the bashing of Romney on social issues”
..comming from the mouths of the liberals who knew that he would do exactly what he had done on every other promise he made – keep it.
—
You could have had a social Conservative in Romney, and gotten support for the FMA, conservative justices, and what not, and even better than Huck, you would have also had a candidate who was a Conservative on military and fiscal issues as well.
But, you fell for Huck’s quick talk and landed us with McCain as the nominee.
242,
Alito, Roberts and Thomas are the only ones that had more than 9 senators vote for them. The Stephens, Scalia and Kennedy were unanimous votes. I’m sure that there are conservative senators who regret voting for some of those other justices, and the same for the libs.
I did say that McCain’s picks would be more conservative than Obama’s.
Romney allowed $50.00 abortions and supported gay/lesbian marriages.
He flip-flopped on all the social issues. If he was so social conservative why didn’t the Right to Life endorse other candidates instead of Romney? Whey didn’t the Mass. Right to Life endorse Romney?!!!!
“because for a shape-shifting flip-flopping corporate take-over office to ascend to the office of vice president would be a disaster for this country,”
Oh please the guy is a turnaround specialist and his economic cred is something the country needs.
Romney was never my choice, and I’ll admit if he’s the VP I’m not thrilled. But I would never go so far as to say I won’t for McCain because of him.
Lets face it, in the big scheme of things the VP is largely irrelevant. Do I really care if Romney is going off to various funerals or foreign trips, casting tiebreaker votes every now and then? No.
Actually, I see it the other way around. Romney spent the most in SC and got 4th place. He lost 2 primaries in a row and don’t blame it on Iowa, because he lost his “2nd home state” of NH to John McCain. How come after the media and Romney called it a “2-way race” that Huck won 8 states on Super Tuesday? He lost Missouri by less than 1%. If Romney went past Super Tuesday he wouldn’t have won another state. The only states Romney won were caucuses where he was organized and one contested primary (Mich.) where he was born and his father was gov. I think the person who we should all blame is Thompson. He stayed in SC even though everyone knew he would lose to take votes from Mike Huckabee ensuring his pal McCain a victory. Fred only campaigned in Huck friendly areas.
Because Romney only lost NH because the media labeled him as a damaged candidate after his IA loss – caused by Huckabee. If Romney had won IA, he would have gotten a bounce going into NH, won there, knocked out McCain, etc.
Oh, Stop all this crap. If you all think McCain and ANYBODY, is worse than Obama ( the Maadi, the chosen one), then stay home or vote for Barry. But don’t delude yourself that it’s a wait for 2012. Give Obama the White House and the Dems a big majority in Congress and you will have 8-12 years, at least. Yes, there will be an election in 2012, but don’t be persuaded that you will outspend an entrenched Obama and elect anybody else. Your last chance is this year….. for quite a while.
Thats because he’s a tax and spend populist who doesn’t fit the GOPs policy of fiscal conservatism.
Must we go over this again? *sigh*
Huck had (at the best point) a 75% Democrat Legislature, and at worst, a 90% Democrat Legislature! They could over-ride faster than you could say Mitt Romney.
Voters approved a tax increase. One was a temporary (less than a year, I believe) tax increase to keep the jails operating, the road crews out, and state employees with jobs. The population grew, as did the tax base, yet the state spending that Huckabee could control over was a miniscule 0.6% per year. Compare that to Mitt Romney-Care-was-a-huge-bust Romney, or any other Republican governor or legislature.
wondering if it is best for mccain to hold off and announce vp as soon as obama get back in the USA cause the tv IS SURE AS HECK REPORTING ON THIS TRIP MORE THEN J MC?
How come Romney and his 10 million in Iowa and early front-runner status couldn’t win? Hmmm…The slick hair–maybe that was it. His “the economy is great”–yeah maybe…what about the “negative ads” or ticking off WHO host for “using Secret Cameras”–actually Mitt, they were right in front of your face (WHO is Ronald Reagan’s former station and it didn’t go well that Mitt said that on Good Morning America–the Iowa audience got to hear Jan diss Romeny for a week calling him a lier)…or it could be that Iowans were common people making less than 50,000 a year and didn’t believe that a CEO millionaire could connect with them…BUT I think it is because they saw through Mitt’s mask. Mitt tried to mold himself into something he was not. The number one response of Iowans exiting the caucus was they voted for Mike Huckabee because he was authentic and understood their values and could connect with them.
Anne,
thank you for your sincere posts – but trust me, Mike has moved on. He is going to do great things, he just wont be president. Not now at least. He is young, he will have other opportunities – help us keep Obama out.
F3
Do we really want McCain to be forced to respond to reporters who ask why Romney’s top donor does these types of things:
Students were forced to eat their own vomit, clean toilets with a toothbrush and brush their teeth afterward, were chained or locked in dog cages, kicked, beaten, thrown and slammed to the ground and forced into sexual acts.
I had no idea you said that 24 hrs ago, nor is it necessarily relevant here. I’m merely mentioning what’s happening on TV now. No need to be sarcastic.
It most likely take 10 days obama 10-15 days once he gets back from this trip i am thinking so I would announce mccain’s VP as soon as obama touches down BACK IN USA.
Anne: Huckabee also had the help of church leaders who told their congreations to vote for Huckabee which violates their terms for being tax free organizations.
This is why Romney or Huckabee shouldn’t be VP. The primary wounds have not healed. McCain should pick Pawlenty, Palin, Thune, or Jindal. Besides Romney or Huck, what are your VP picks?
The Nation Enquirer is a Tabloid. It is not fact. I think Obama would pick Edwards. He gets the rural white male vote that Obama lacks, but I can see how rumors can fly with tabloids.
Yeah it’s a tabloid but they have a pretty good track record. They were right about Jesse Jackson, for example.
Also, this isn’t a rumor they’re reporting. 2 of their top reporters caught Edwards red handed at a hotel at 3 in the morning. He ran away and hid in the bathroom. There are witnesses and presumably photos.
“Mitt hasn’t changed any of his positions in his supporting role for McCain….he’s merely emphasized those points on which they agree or pointed out why Obama is a bad choice in various respects: So I take issue with the notion that he’s morphing his own positions into McCain’s positions.”
I didn’t say he was morphing his views. I said he would be able to. He has shown a great ability to change his views on issues and persuade some people that he believes his new positions. Most notably on abortion but on other things as well. As a VP candidate, he will have to defend McCain’s views whether he holds them or not. He has shown an ability to do such a thing. That’s a positive for a VP candidate (although I think it hurt his Presidential run).
That news (if true) is sad. I liked Elizabeth Edwards. She allowed her husband to run even when she was going through cancer. She was my favorite candidate’s wife (exlude Bill of course).
Y’know, really, who gives a flyin’one whether ROmney drives away libs and independents – lots of ‘em are dropping from this site as we speak, that’s great. Those guys have choices in this election – conservatives haven’t – UNTIL NOW!! I am hardcore social and economic conservative and Mitt ROMNEY has the skill set. Bonham is tight with the fam, aren’tcha Jason??? And I’ll bet he knows….I love politics and was sad that it was so one-sided this cycle but now conservatives once again have a dog in the fight – a very COMPETENT, QUALIFIED one at that.
I can’t agree with your VP choice (Romney) but I can agree that everyone is so focused on whether or not the Independents will be offended in this election cycle. The Independent vote is getting so much attention that the base of both the Republican and Democratic parties are getting ignored.
Anne, wow, of all people I didn’t think you would agree with me but I thank you for being so agreeable, at least on that issue. Like you, I was sitting this whole cycle out. All I wanted was competence, someone who clearly understood family values, and an indication that McCain was still sane. Romney fits here for me and I think most conservatives can find lots of common ground with his stands on issues. Granted, he’s only VP and typically they don’t do a whole lot. But at least someone who understands economics 101 will have McCain’s ear once a week.
Wait, I’m hearing voices too, let me light the candle…..starts with C….Crist is still a possibility…..arghh the spirit faded. Please don’t interrupt now…
As for why Romney lost Iowa, its because of two things: Huckabee, aided by his Minister friends, played the “who can be the most christian” card, and because the media, who were against Romney, refused to give Huckabee the vetting he should have gotten.
Based on all of the info I am getting, if I had to bet, I would say that this is the order of likelyhood to be selected VP:
1. Tom Ridge
2. Rob Portman
3. Tim Pawlenty
4. Sam Brownback
(But as always things are very fluid and we all know from past experience that you should sometimes expect the unexpected – very unpredictable).
Rudy said this morning that he is not on the list and doesn’t want to be on the list (2012 run anyone?)
Huh? Rudy is one of the best executives out there. He goes toe to toe with Mitt. I don’t understand why he was dropped? Yeah, I know abortion…blah..blah…but he promised pro-life judges!!!! Geez!!!!
Anyway, if its Ridge, I am dropping my support for McCain – no way do I want to see this party go even further to the left. Already part of GOP nominee who comes after McCain’s job is going to be getting the party back to the right.
And I highly doubt Brownback gets in the top four – not only was he a vocal opponent of the surge, but he was only JUST above the 50% popularity mark in Kansas. He brings nothing to the table.
#304 nowandlater
I don’t know if Rudy goes toe to toe with Mitt on executive experience (the whole package) but I do think he would be a good pick and does have gravitas. I would support that choice.
Common sense says McCain needs to pick a Conservative with both economic and executive experience who is well known and good at fundraising, and who could either take over mid-term or win in four years.
Common sense says McCain needs to pick a Conservative with both economic and executive experience who is well known and good at fundraising, and who could either take over mid-term or win in four years.
All of those things point to Romney.
Yeah, clearly what McCain needs right now is to reaffirm his Republican Establishment cred!
He’ll lose if he doesn’t assure the public that he’s the biggest Republican Party Guy of all time.
I just got word from a secret source who knows… the Dobson warming is part of the plan to pick Mike Huckabee for VP. The Romney fade left was just to get in the news cycles. (But keep it to yourself, OK?)
#315, Common sense also says that McCain needs to pick someone he can trust, who is young with executive experience. That points to T-Paw. There is any number of ways of spinning common sense.
It true! I just got word from a friend who works as an assistant to… let’s just say a powerful evangelical leader… that the McCain campaign is very quietly getting the word out to key evangelical leaders that Huckabee is going to be the pick. I guess so they can get started organizing churches for the big victory push. (But don’t tell anyone else.)
“the Dobson warming is part of the plan to pick Mike Huckabee for VP”
Didn’t Dobson say he could also support Romney? Yeah, like everyone on here has a secret source who is letting loose all sorts of info.
—
“Yeah, clearly what McCain needs right now is to reaffirm his Republican Establishment cred!
He’ll lose if he doesn’t assure the public that he’s the biggest Republican Party Guy of all time.”
The majority of McCain’s support, win or lose, will come from the base. The vast majority of his money, volunteers, etc, will come from the base…without independents, McCain has little hope, without the base, he has none.
What does McCain want?
someone he can totally trust = Lindsay Graham
a fundraiser = Mitt Romney
a young executive = T-Paw
a wow pick = Bobby Jindal
a woman = Sarah Palin
someone to lock in the evangelical vote = Mike Huckabee
someone to make a play for PA/NJ = Rudy
someone to lock in OH = Portman
someone to lock in FL = Crist
someone to win the bored vote = Brownback
Mr. McCain, 71, told Mr. Imus “I’m aware of enhanced importance of this issue given my age.’’
McCain cannot pick Romney, as Romney is closing in on retirement age. Since 30% of the country feels McCain is too old to be President, McCain is hinting at someone young like Governor Sarah Palin.
Let me add a couple of things from CO on Romney
1-today me inbox had 3 references to Romney. 2 from candidates for the Tom Tancredo seat and 1 from Romney himself
2- The two candidates were announcing the endorsement of Romney by one and the endorsement of Romney supporters by the other.
3-Romney was an email thanking me for the support and asking for donations to Mccains campaign.
For those who dont think Romney is an impact person in CO you arent paying attention here. Romney would be a HUGE positive for CO and help McCain here.
With that said I dont know whether McCain does pick Romney but at least here he is a plus, and it isnt just the Mormon types either that voted for him to get 60% in CO. His support is broad and deep.
Jason, when you receive an email from an intern at the McCain Delaware office, it does not qualify as a real “source”.
#332, McCain has a 96 year old mother and aunt, but it is the age printed in the newspaper that counts to the youth vote that see a combined age of 133 years on the GOP ticket. In fact, McCain will probably outlive Obama and Romney.
Can I ask a serious question you all could some one explain why in the heck is it so had for mccain campaign to decide when to do the vp announcement I truly don’t get it?
Its not Huckabee – if Huckabee was really in the running, he would have waited to sign the contract with Fox. He is currently in talks for his own TV show.
Big S – when you refer to “social conservatives who misunderstand economic conservatism”, you seem to be talking about yourself?
I’m an economic conservative. I’m not a social conservative. I live around other economic conservatives in the heart of Manhattan. I don’t know a single econ conservative social moderate who ISN’T hoping Romney is the VP. He’s the only one that makes sense. He’s the only guy who’s shown that he’s got the tools to work his way out of the crises we are likely to face in the next five years.
And to answer your question – no, I don’t work for Romney. I just have (a) enough sense to see he’s the smartest most economically grounded player on the field and (b) no anti-Mormon agenda (which I’m guessing might be your underlying problem).
I just talked to the 41 staffer, he wouldn’t IM me any more information. He said that Romney is definitely not the pick, McCain told Bush it’s not Romney. The conversation was private, but Bush told my friend that much AND that he hoped it was not the bible guy.
I am also getting word that Governor Palin is NOT on the shortlist – sorry to her fans, but as I said earlier, all of this info is flying fast and furious and all of it has to be, at least partially, considered suspect for possible head fakes. So take it for what its worth, grain of salt…etc.
I really doubt that a Bush 41 staffer is in the loop. First of all, it doesn’t look like the McCain staffers are in the loop, because, if they were, his campaign would be springing leaks like an old rowboat.
Maybe McCain DID tell Bush something, but he obviously expected it to be kept secret – hence GHWB’s elusive reply to a question on Romney. Do we really think he would be walking about telling all his staff “it ain’t Mitt”??
1) He is in Rawanda with Cindy McCain and the ONE Campaign.
2) On his blog Mike stated that he was doing a lot of thinking and reflecting
3) He dropped his contract with Fox
4) The McCain camp is dropping Mitt’s name and others, but Huck’s name has been distant since mid-May.
5) They say that a campaign puts out vibes to the media on candidantes they are not considering.
6) Heck, it’s Mike…He gives a great speech.
If it is Huckabee I’ll look forward to casting an historic vote for Barack Obama. That’s one VP candidate I absolutely could not stomach on so many levels.
Two absolute economic neophytes on one ticket? Ridiculous. The term “train wreck” comes to mind.
Hard to say Greg. I was always of the mind that it was smarter to wait until closer to the convention but I don’t know what the thinking is on that. I think that we can agree that with all of his picks there is some possibility of offending some faction of the Party, so maybe the thinking is that if they announce earlier rather than later that everyone can get all of their kevetching over with and go into St. Paul more united. I don’t know, but we shall see.
McCain would be very foolish to drop Romney’s name, not try to put down the media rumors, and pick Huckabee. Romney still commands the biggest following after McCain (hence his second-place finish), and many, if not most of them, are only reluctantly supporting McCain, and many still don’t like him. To engage in that kind of deception and using of Romney, particularly in favor of Huckabee, would turn off many of them – and they are people McCain can’t afford to lose.
In any case, Huckabee would alienate economic Conservatives – the group with the most reason to distrust McCain already.
I am not qualified to be a “front page poster”. Clearly you need to be friends with the President (JPL), spoeak with Mark Salter (Jason B), or have many, many sources with the RNC/McCain camp (JA Pruce) to volunteer at R408.
I need you to think this out rationally. We are dealing with the MSM and absent minded voters. If you do not think that another 60+ year old male will not discourage talk of McCain’s age/abilities, then you are wrong.
The age factor in polling for McCain is a larger negative than Obama’s race.
It’s quite interesting how many more posts a Romney topic ends up with than any other. Also to those saying it’s not Romney I bet you’ll be saying that until McCain actually does come out and say it.
It’s quite interesting how many more posts a Romney topic ends up with than any other. Also to those saying it’s not Romney I bet you’ll be saying that until McCain actually does come out and say it.
Well, duh. I don’t think it’s him. Of course I’ll be saying it until he actually comes out and says it, because that would be the only way that I’d be convinced that he has a chance.
Hey, this is a very senior staffer with 41, more like a personal aid… it wasn’t like he walked into his kitchen and told the waiters. Perhaps telling me was a mistake, but he was happy that it was not Romney. I can’t say I’m disappointed either.
You can’t be serious about the age thing. Older voters are the ones who turnout. Obama will win a large majority of the 10-15% that make up the youth vote, while McCain will win a significant majority of the 25-30% that make up the Senior citizen vote.
As long as McCain doesn’t have any health concerns from now until November age will be an asset for him.
yes I am serious. McCain is in very poor shape on polling with the under 35 voters. I have had more people tell me they are not voting for McCain because of his age, then on any other issue.
The only issue that may prevent McCain from getting elected is his age. Sad to say, but true. And if someone can actually show me a poll that shows this is not an issue, I will reverse my statement.
Romney helps win Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Michigan, and New Hampshire with McCain. 50 million in fundraising from donors in 60 days from Conservatives.
Catholics identify with Romney’s plight (I went to the Iowa Caucus, and they voted for Romney) and Evangelicals aren’t dumb, so they’ll still vote McCain like South Carolina did. The Supreme Court and Iraq are too important to lose.
JPL
Let me see if I get this. 41, who was head of the CIA and is a master at disinformation, meets with McCain and then tells someone, your friend, one of the biggest secrets of the moment, with orders to tell no one. But, he tells you right away. Interesting. Does he know something about Area 51 ? Would he tell you ?
Jack K (94) You need to try again. Just because Romney doing almost as well as Huckabee in every primary/caucus, but way better than McCain, does not mean Evangelicals won’t vote for McCain/Romney ticket. Go and study those exit polls!
Wiseguy (#120) You have been around on this site a long time! Many of us already have the discussion with you about Romney’s flip-flops. Going from one stance to another DOES NOT constitute as flip-flop, but, rather, a flip! Show us when Romney ever went from pro-choicer to pro-lifer, and then back to pro-choicer, or whatever, then we would accept your claim that Romney has flip-flopped. Remember, flip-flop first sticks with Kerry because he changed his positions many times, even WITHIN A DAY! Show us, or shut up!
[...] 4 2008 is breaking, un-sourced, that Romney is the VP pick for John McCain. addthis_url = ‘http%3A%2F%2Fbearingdrift.com%2F2008%2F07%2F22%2Fromney-is-the-pick-or-is-he%2F’; [...]
Question for the Evangelicals out there, especially the Romney-haters:
Would you honestly vote for Obama (spent 20 years listening to Jeremiah Wright and tried to pass legislation in Illinois to kill babies who had miraculously survived abortions) over a McCain/Romney ticket?
Is it even possible for anyone to hate members of another religion more than a guy who is the antithesis of everything you stand for?
I’m not trying to be a smart aleck…I just listen to all the socons complain about Romney and really want to understand.
#388 — I will honestly note vote for McCain. No religious nonsense, no fanatical hatred — but Romney epitomizes everything I am learning to despise about the Republican Party. Please do not ask me to expand any further, yuo wanted an honest answer and I have given them to you. In addition — and I know you are all going to jump on me — I have really given Obama a chance. He just doesn’t seem to me as terrible as he used to. I think he is really trying to come to the middle and I maybe, just maybe, I can meet him there. I am not saving I will vote for Obama — haven’t made that decision yet — but I absolutely will not vote for McCain/Romney. It will be the first presidential election I have missed in 40 years (and I always voted republican), but I simply am learning to loathe the fiscal conservative, capitalistic single-centered individual which nowadays seems to represent the republican establishment. But that’s just me.
Romney would bring more than squeaky clean qualifications and youthful good looks to the ticket. New polling in Michigan by Ayres, McHenry & Associates shows that Romney gives McCain a significant jump — “off the charts,” as someone familiar with the still-unreleased poll described it — and makes him competitive in a state that hasn’t voted Republican since 1988. Mike Huckabee had little effect on the survey results and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s name was of negligible value
Brett, I’m not sure this is the same ‘voter’. I remember the other voter not more than two days ago indicating that he would reluctantly support a McCain/Romney ticket.
#390 — don’t throw words around. Firstly, I’m a “she” not a “he”. Secondly, I voted for McCain in the NY primaries. I have contributed to him three times already — as I did for Bush in 2004, as well as the swift boats — and on and on. I respected McCain. I honored him for being a man of virtue and beliefs — and perhaps he will not let me down. I have never said I would support a McCain/Romney ticket, reluctantly or otherwise; I have admitted that I am in the growing majority that Romney will be selected. I hope not. I will vote for any other VP but not for Romney. At that point, I will lose all my respect for McCain.
So we are entitled to our thoughts. I answered a question as honestly as I could — too bad it wasn’t received with a returned virtue.
I think McCain will wait to announce his selection. It was smart to start the rumor…… it has given him some press! It is to McCain advantage to wait….. keep all those possilbe VP s working hard for him as long as possible.
Odds: Pretty strong. Portman meets each of the usual requirements for a McCain running mate and excels in a couple of categories where few (if any) other candidates can compete. At 52, he’s younger than the 71-year-old McCain–perhaps the key prerequisite for a fellow who’d be the oldest first-termer ever inaugurated–without being young enough or green enough to undercut the GOP’s “Obama is too inexperienced to lead” line of attack (like, say, Bobby Jindal, who’s 37). He’s the only feasible Republican pick from McCain’s No. 1 must-win swing state (it will be nearly impossible for the senator to reach 270 electoral votes if Obama swipes Ohio). He boasts 89 percent lifetime American Conservative Union rating that should satisfy skittish right-wingers and help solidify McCain’s shaky conservative support. Meanwhile, his mild Midwestern temperament and (McCainian) reluctance to throw bombs on social issues will likely prevent moderate swing voters from running in the other direction. On the “more idiosyncratic” side of the ledger, Portman served as the stand-in for Joe Lieberman and John Edwards in Dick Cheney’s 2000 and 2004 debate practice sessions–and apparently performed “just brilliant(ly), according to GOP strategist Mary Matalin. “He has a very fun theatrical capacity,” she told Salon. “He can get into the character.” Given that the vice-presidential debates provide a No. 2 with his or her only opportunity to really effect the election–remember Lloyd Bentsen obliterating Dan Quayle?–McCain might be well-served by tapping the only veep contender with a proven track record on the debate stage.
July 22nd, 2008 at 2:58 pm
MCCAIN/ROMNEY 2008!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Jason,
Can we get some insight into where these sources are coming from? How reliable is this?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:00 pm
I’m okay with it. Of course I’ll believe it when I see it.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:00 pm
*bangs head against wall*
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:02 pm
So, is this announced today or when?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:03 pm
*Heads explode* in 3…2…1…
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:03 pm
2. Not yet, but I think It’s pretty solid.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Jason, I hope your right! GO “McRomney 08″
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Where’d you get this story? My Man Mitt?
In any case, if it is Romney, prepare for a negative bounce in the polls.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Some other prominent sites should have it up here soon from what I understand.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:05 pm
I hope this is right.
Because it sounds like McCain wanted to tell the world himself, and if this gets leaked, it could piss him off so bad that he chooses someone else just for spite.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Big S,
I own My Man Mitt.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Nope prepare biggest bounce in the history.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:06 pm
#12
I know.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Jason I know you have had this posted on your site for 24 hours, but it is not true.
Not going to happen!
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:07 pm
#11 Brett,
I wouldn’t put it past McCain to do something like that!!..but I doubt it.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:07 pm
I find it interesting that two of your “sources” appear to be from yesterday’s thread.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:07 pm
I didn’t really want to win anyway.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Didn’t want to win? America’s very life depends on this election.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Kristopher,
It waa put up a little earlier not 24 hours ago.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:09 pm
#19…Amen to that, this is the most important election in my life time.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:09 pm
So is this confirmation with an exclamation point or with a question mark?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Obama’s lead in CO has been cut to within the margin of error.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:09 pm
17. ??
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:11 pm
#23, Great!! With Romney on the ticket we might just be able to color Colorado RED
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:11 pm
I was kidding. My guess is that this (if true) seals McCain’s fate. Generic 1980’s republican doesn’t seem to be the answer for 2+ decades later.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Not sure how this can be backed up, but I hope it’s true.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:12 pm
I heard the same thing but didn’t consider it reliable enough.
I hope your info is further up the ladder than mine was.
If not, we may be remembering this as “just another false alarm” instead of “who broke the story.”
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:12 pm
If McCain picks a running mate at this time it will be a mistake. He needs to wait until after Obama has picked his running mate.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Oh well, it could be much worse, I just hope that the powers that be know what they are doing and have polls that we do not.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:12 pm
#25, 50% of Colorado voters think Obama is too inexperienced to serve in the White House.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:12 pm
WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GOOOOOOOOO MITT!!! You too McCain!!
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Jason, This thread will probably generate the maximum responses (600 or so)….watch.LOL
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:13 pm
*picks jaw up off floor, pours a glass of scotch to down the two pills of why-is-this-happening-to-me-ive-been-so-adamantly-against-this-for-over-a-year*
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:15 pm
not to be mean but do we know if it’s true? Why is cnn and them folks not have it to tv ?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Romney should be worth, at least, NV and MI – CO and NH are also extremely possible.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Since when did McCain leak stories via Jason Bonham?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Well, if McCain does pick Mitt, his supporters on here will be very excited. I expect Mitt’s critics will either whine for a while or leave.
I’m lukewarm about Romney. He’s not a horrible pick but he’s certainly not the best we could do.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Are they announcing this tonight?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Jason,
If Romney is indeed the nominee (and we will find out soon enough if that is the case) great and kudos to you and Kavon for the scoop. But I am getting very contradictory reports from my sources close to the campaign. Take this with the proverbial grain of salt, but I am hearing that the field has narrowed to three contenders: Tim Pawlenty, Tom Ridge and Sam Brownback. I understand that in the end it will come down to McCain’s gut but this is the message I’m getting right now. My understanding is that all of the talk about Rudy, Romney, Jindal…etc. is sort of a “runners-up” tour of sorts.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:18 pm
#31, I don’t understand why 80% of the USA isn’t already at that conclusion!! If they just did a little digging on Obama and stopped listening to the MSM McCain would win this in a land slide! I live in RI (which is very LEFT) and I know so many people that are not voting for Barack, weather they vote for McCain or not is a different story, probably not enough to swing RI or MA RED, With Mitt on the ticket MA should now be in play??
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:19 pm
Intrade has Romney going DOWN a point today.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:19 pm
#41, MA in play?
http://www.politickerma.com/jeremyjacobs/441/beatty-if-mccain-picked-romney-vp-he-d-win-mass
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:19 pm
#38
A Romney pick would be enough to make many moderates (myself included) stay home in the fall. Romney’s a terrible choice.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:19 pm
#35. Probably for the same reasons they won’t touch the “Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery” blogs.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:20 pm
#43:
Not a chance.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Brownback? Are you kidding? Let’s just pass out sleeping pills and hope that people still show up and vote… I thought it would be hard to find someone as ‘energetic’ as McCain, but Brownback just might do it.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Virtually EVERY surveyusa poll showed Romney hurts McCain. You don’t fend off the candidate of change (Obama) by putting your own candidate of change on the ticket.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Look we need a religious guy(Romney) and a moderate guy(McCain): Balance is the key here.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Well for what it’s worth, the Romney family went on a big vacation before he announced his presidential aspirations. Let’s see what happens when Mitt comes back from the Great White North.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:22 pm
IS THIS TRUE? WHY ISn’t the TV news announcing this?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:22 pm
#40 – Intrade
Brownback – not even a bid
Ridge 4.0
Pawlenty 11.0
Scrap your sources!
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:23 pm
“I expect Mitt’s critics will either whine for a while or leave.”
You’re right. I’m here because I’m excited for the GOP to win another White House. This move makes no sense to me. To me it signals one of two things; either the GOP will get killed in this election, or that the GOP is going to cling to a mold that is increasingly rejected by mainstream America.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:23 pm
#48
Romney was a huge drag on the last Republican gubernatorial nominee’s campaign in MA. The winner of that race: Democrat Deval Patrick.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Before this announcement is tied too much to me (I am not backing down from it) I should note I am posting this at Kavon’s request who is in a meeting. I am willing to put my name on it though.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:23 pm
#47- I personally think Brownback would be a great choice. Solid Conservative. Someone McCain can trust. Can McCain actually trust Romney??? I don’t know about that.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:23 pm
If McCain did pick Romney, he’s going for the “attack dog” pick. Romney can articulate positions and rip apart contrary positions all with a smile on his face.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:24 pm
What is all this talk about McCain needing to wait until Obama picks? McCain HAS to pick before Obama or he’s bascially conceeding
that Obama is leading the narrative and McCain is simply reacting to it. McCain’s whole platform is that he’s a leader, not a
follower! McCain needs to remind the public that he secured the nomination long before the Democrats ever settled on Obama. Picking his VP before Obama will drive home that fact.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Brownback can bring in Catholics and Evangelicals. Romney keeps those groups away from the polls.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:24 pm
WHY isn’t this news braking news on the tv news?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:24 pm
I will also add, that I am not a Mitt for VP proponent.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:25 pm
55, I smell a little backtracking.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Jeff-
Maybe we should just choose mike huckabee? Because he is sooo interesting.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Also Novak is saying he thinks he got used by the campaign to create headlines to keep the news off of Obama in terms of McCain announcing his veep.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:26 pm
How do you explain the fact that Novak is now backing off his earlier story leak?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:26 pm
Taylor,
Wrong. Common sense says you pick last if you can. It keeps the story aimed in your direction and gives you something to change the narrative with.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:26 pm
This is just stupid politics if it’s true. Whether or not Romney is the nominee isn’t the point. It’s just stupid to announce it now.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Bob Novak on Fox News earlier today said that the inside word was that the pick would be Romney, but he didn’t indicate that it was official yet. No other pick would make much sense, so I hope this is true….it would mean that we will probably win in November, and that if anything were to happen to McCain following his election, that we would have a first rate and highly competent president. Good news all around.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Jeff-
You seem to still be a little angry at brownback. Let me guess is it because he was the only candidate to stand up to him? Maybe brownback has the exact amount of testicular fortitude that we need in a vp. Or maybe he would supply too much testosterone to our ticket.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:27 pm
I should also say that Deval Patrick won before Romney turned away from the positions that had allowed him to gain some favor among MA voters. They also have Romneycare on them now, and it’s already threatening to drain the state’s accounts. There’s no way Romney delivers Massachusetts.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:27 pm
T – I’m all in favor of Huckabee being the pick for court jester… not VP
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Him being romney.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:28 pm
WONDER IF THEY ARE ANNOUNCING IT tonight ?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:29 pm
62. Nope. just explaining.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:29 pm
“A Romney pick would be enough to make many moderates (myself included) stay home in the fall.”
…and anything short of a strong conservative on the ticket would be enough to convince many conservatives – who are just as important, probably more, to a win, to stay home. Picking a moderate would show that McCain wanted to move the GOP to the left – something that is just simply unacceptable.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:30 pm
T – Brownback standing up to who? I’m not following…
Brownback just doesn’t strike me as a balance to the ticket… what’s better than 1 long serving Senator? Two? I don’t think so…
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:30 pm
“WONDER IF THEY ARE ANNOUNCING IT tonight ?”
My guess is Tmrw. or Thur.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:30 pm
I think that Brownback would make the best veep choice. His only flaw is money or lack thereof. He would solidify the base, and McCain can trust him to look out for McCain and McCain only. McCain would know that Brownback wasn’t just setting himself up for a future presidential run.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:31 pm
A McCain/Romney ticket gives me very bad heartburn.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Sorry I meant how he stood up to Romney.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Big S – you’re hilarious. “Moderates” like you will stay home if it’s Romney? Yeah? Mate – Romney IS a moderate. For better or for worse. Don’t be fooled by his badly executed dance with the social right in the primary. Dude got elected in Mass because he’s a moderate. That’s the only reason. Very few people leave Harvard with two degrees (both near the top of his class) without absorbing a bit of moderation.
But “moderate” is the wrong word – he’s a non-ideological pragmatist. And he’s the best choice McCain has got. So why not set aside your little anti-Mormon bias.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:31 pm
[...] Bonham says yes. Lindsay Graham refuses to discount the possibility and the National Review runs down the financial [...]
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:32 pm
“and it’s already threatening to drain the state’s accounts.”
…as a result of liberal mis-management, not only of the healthcare program, but the budget in general.
And to blame Romney for the loss in MA without also pointing out the fact that the GOP did poorly last year in even red and purple states is simply dishonest.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:32 pm
#59 – maybe according to your opinion, not according to the polls.
I’ve posted the 18th July Zogby poll on about 3 threads already and Romney was a huge positive factor. Republicans more likely to vote for McCain 41% less likely 8%
Independents more likely a net spread of +17%
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Katie – you think BROWNBACK would be an excellent choice? And excellent choice for …what? The extinction of the Republican Party? An Obama landslide?
McCain-Brownback = unelectable.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:33 pm
#75
McCain is now within about 3 points of Obama in national polls with these conservative brethren of yours already expecting a move to the left by McCain. You overstate the political power of such voters. As always, moderates will decide this election. This is not a year in which Republicans can play defense with a “safe” pick like Romney. McCain-Romney gets 43-45% of the vote, tops.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Cat – great summary of Romney as a progmatist… too many have misunderstood him. He and McCain would be a great team for each other, and McCain needs someone who can attack Obama and knock him out at the knees
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:35 pm
#83
Haha! You expect me to fall for that one? Do you work for Mitt?
Anyway, even if that was true, good luck breaking through in Mass. with Patrick, the Kennedys, and Obama controlling the narrative on it. It’s called “Romneycare” for a reason.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:36 pm
This whole “Romney WILL be VP” thread, is just a way for Kavon to get two 300+ threads in less than 24 hrs I say.
Very clever.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:36 pm
#70 – a recent Massachusetts poll show 75% of the citizens are happy they have the plan implemented.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Romney’s currently out of the country — so if it is really him, they’re not going to officially announce this for a couple of days at least…
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:36 pm
any boy think this will be breaking news to night on cnn fox news tonight?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:37 pm
any boy think this will be breaking news to night on cnn fox news tonight? I do know Mccain is going to be on hannitty and combs tommrow night
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Evangelicals do not like Romney. This is disastrous if true.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:38 pm
I know what this is.
Can’t you see it?
McCain is setting us up for a “surprise”. In 1980 everyone kept asking when reagan was going to annouce Ford, but he did not, and he shocked the party and media.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:38 pm
81- That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. There was no anti-Mormon bias in what Big S said at ALL. Romney’s not a moderate, at least he doesn’t claim to be. He’s about as far to the right fiscally as one can be, short of the fair-taxers, and he “changed his positions” on social issues to be everything the right wanted him to be. He said he wanted to double Guantanamo- show me a moderate that says crap like that. So there’s one of two problems- either he is indeed no moderate, which I’m going to go with, or he doesn’t have the stones to tell the party where to go. Either way, he will never get my vote for President. Never. If it weren’t John McCain at the top of the ticket, my Facebook picture would be me holding an Obama ‘08 sign today.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:39 pm
This won’t get announced until next week. They want to milk this for all they can get and letting out a little bit each day, stringing the media along is the best way to do it.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Jack K. why don’t evangelicals like Romney?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:40 pm
I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Romney had the biggest negatives and unfavorables in polling… this doesn’t make sense.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:40 pm
All I’m saying is that Brownback is trustworthy and is already one of McCain’s closest confidants.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Hmmm … this blog seems to have followed a common pattern of the MSM — a bold headline that is not supported by the story (to say nothing of being apparently false).
> Doug Forrester #38: “I’m lukewarm about Romney. He’s not a horrible pick but he’s certainly not the best we could do.”
Pretty much my reaction, Doug. I won’t slit my wrists if Romney is chosen, but he does little for McCain’s chances, in my opinion.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:41 pm
98 — because of his past stances on abortion and gay marriage. And because he’s mormom. I don’t discount him for that but a lot of hardcore evangelicals do.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:41 pm
This is STUPID!
30% of voters believe McCain is too old to be President. Romney is closing in on retirement age, so how does this work? McCain has already admitted that age is an issue, that he must address with the VP selection.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:41 pm
88. I’m warming up to Romney as VP as I’ll have great fun yanking Illinoisguy’s chains for the next few month.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:41 pm
I think it will be Jindal.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:42 pm
I wonder if the Romney haters are as depressed as the two thirds of the party were when McCain became our nominee?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:42 pm
NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
Jindal, Sanford, Pawlenty are all better than Romney!
Is McCain trying to push away social conservatives?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:43 pm
I’d appreciate hearing from Kavon……anyone else?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Well, if it is still open for debate, Huckabee is finishing up a trip to Rwanda with Cindy McCain, John Kaisch, Bill Frist, and others today – He will be back in the states tomorrow for his Vertical Day. Vertical day would be an interesting launch pad for VP.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:44 pm
#106 Well of course you do Jack; it’s not Romney.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Jack K – Its not true that evangelicals do not like Mitt. Many of their top leaders endorsed him, and many others supported him without endorsing. The rank and file liked him, but in some states they voted for Huckabee more with MItt as their second choice. In other states, like Michigan, Mitt even beat Huckabee, so don’t make stupid blanket statements like that. Dobson’s own words were that he liked Mitt and Huckabee equally. Land liked Mitt. Grueden endorsed him. Jones endorsed him. Osteen called him a Christian and said he would support him.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:44 pm
#107:
If Romney represented 2/3rds of the GOP, he would have been the Party nominee. He doesn’t. So he’s not. And Romney
will NEVER be Vice President.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Taylor #107 – ROTFL – best assessment of the situation on the thread so far!!
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:45 pm
#94 – My mom is a evangelical fundamentalist who initially had reservations about Mitt Romney during the primaries.
She told me recently that she would be so happy if Mitt Romney was the V.P. nominee for McCain.
She also told me today that when she worked at the precinct during the primaries she talked to several of the Democrats who also worked there that they would NOT vote for Obama.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:46 pm
107- Moreso. In fact, so much that those who weren’t completely committed to McCain but liked him because he represented a new, more reasonable Republicanism may not like the idea. If you wanted to placate “real conservatives,” fine, but it should have been done in a way that didn’t give the middle a big middle finger.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Correction – my mom is AN evangelical fundamentalist.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Not going to happen.
http://thepage.time.com/2008/07/22/novak-i-just-put-something-on-the-internet/
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Romney said it best on tv the other day. “We aren’t voting for a Vice President, we’re voting for a President.” Was the main reason most of you voted for Bush the last two elections because he had Cheney as his V.P. choice? I doubt it.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Social conservatives do not like Mitt Romney because his record has not shown an unwavering conviction on the issue of life, but rather an unsettling accumulation of flip-flops.
Also, don’t you know that Democrats can use all of Mitt’s primary ads against John McCain? This is a terrible, terrible political move.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:51 pm
117 – If I went back and corrected all my fat fingered mistakes, I’d triple my postings!
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:51 pm
As much as Big S is wrong for being an all-or-nothing whiner, you have fallen for the lie that Romney is a moderate, flip-flopping, opportunist. We’ve gone over this argument so many times on this site that I can’t believe people are still bringing it up.
http://www.politico.com/pdf/wmr_1994_senate_flier_side_1.pdf – that is a flier from Romney’s 1994 Senate Campaign, and it shows that he has been remarkably consistant in his positions. On what is really the lone issue he can honestly be accused of “fliping” on, abortion, he has changed positions once, from pro-choice to pro-life, and he has been completely open about that issue – which is a lot more than can be said for our nominee or other candidates.
Romney is no more a flip-flopper than Ronald Reagan or George Bush I was, and certainly no more a moderate than Reagan – who, its worth pointing out, was a Democrat for much of his life.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Osteen called him a Christian and said he would support him.
Osteen? The “prosperity theology” guy? What a jerk.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:51 pm
I would reluctantly support a Romney VP pick, but there are better options. Romney’s going to turn off independents. At least he’s attractive to economic conservatives, but it looks like the social conservatives are being left high and dry in this election. I guess it’s someone else’s turn now.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:51 pm
WiseGuy,
They’s have a field day with “Miracles Not Math” too. Admit it.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:52 pm
I haven’t read this anywhere else so huge kudos to you guys if the scoop is true.
Not all that excited about Romney, but it could be alot worse.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:52 pm
Here is more polling news:
McCain is up 2 points on Obama (it is ARG) but here is the link:
http://americanresearchgroup.com/
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:53 pm
with this breaking new think we will find out this week?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:53 pm
*In Florida I should say. The last ARG poll had McCain down by 5.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:54 pm
At least he’s attractive to economic conservatives, but it looks like the social conservatives are being left high and dry in this election.
He’s NOT attractive to “economic conservatives.” He’s attractive to social conservatives who misunderstand economic conservatism.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:54 pm
Jason B and Kavon, you guys are being used. I would be very skeptical about your sources.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:55 pm
#123 – we’re not arguing theology here; he has a lot of followers who consider themselves evangelical, whether you od or not.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:55 pm
> #107: “I wonder if the Romney haters are as depressed …”
Perhaps — but only if they’re dumb enough to believe a totally unsubstantiated rumor.
But not if they’re waiting for something of substance.
Nonetheless: congratulations, Kavon and Jason, you got 117 posts (as I write this) in less than two hours.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Let’s all be clear here that just because he isn’t going to announce tomorrow or the next day doesn’t mean that he hasn’t already chosen the VP.
I really think that Romney is the best guy for the job because he compliments McCain so well. They were rivals so it unifies the major factions of the party, Romney shores up McCain’s domestic weaknesses while McCain’s reputation for being politically principled overshadows and blunts Romney’s reputation of being an opportunist.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:57 pm
124 – Eric, do you bother reading postings or following links, or just insert your opinion? I just posted 15 minutes ago that nationwide Mitt Romney causes independents to more likely vote for McCain by a net +15%.
That is a poll from the 18th of July.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:58 pm
“Social conservatives do not like Mitt Romney because his record has not shown an unwavering conviction on the issue of life, but rather an unsettling accumulation of flip-flops.”
No, he hasn’t. He was pro-choice until sometime after 1994, after which he became pro-life. In 2002, he was opposed to abortion, but said that he would not support any change in the law – a technically pro-choice position, though he probably stopped more pro-choice bills than pro-life ones.
Romney remains pro-life, supports the overturn of Roe v. Wade, etc., etc.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:58 pm
#108 – not only is he trying to push away so-cons but also disaffected Democrats, independents, moderate Republicans, people who care about sincerity, military voters, people who respect the military and anyone with a dog.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Found this interesting:
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/washington-whispers/2008/07/22/its-all-we-hear-romney-romney-romney-for-mccains-running-mate.html
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Was there some arrangement months ago that Romney would bow out in exhange for the VP slot?
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Romney has the chance to help in NV, NH, MI, CO and NM which along with OH, VA, and MO are probably the key swing states in this election. I think McCain wins each of those three states on his own, which means we would only need 10 of the 40 electoral votes in the states Romney potentially helps in.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:59 pm
I am an evangelical pastor who did not support Romney earlier (he was like my 4th choice), am strongly opposed to Mormon beliefs (let’s leave it at that), but would be content with Romney on the ticket. He brings a lot to the table, I cannot doubt that.
I still want Palin on there!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:01 pm
In 2002, he was opposed to abortion, but said that he would not support any change in the law – a technically pro-choice position.
“technically pro-choice” = “pro-choice”!!!! Even Bill Clinton is personally opposed to abortion.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:01 pm
#141
Me too!
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:02 pm
#142
Good point.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:03 pm
Romney obviously has potential negatives, but his positives far outweigh his negatives.
I still believe that the best position for Romney is as RNC Chairman because you get almost all of Romney’s positives without any of his negatives.
McCain/Kasich with Romney as RNC Chairman would be a great situation, but the odds of that are very small.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:03 pm
#129, McCain is on the move in polls in NH, OH, MI, CO, and FL. This is great.
No matter who McCain picks as VP, I will always support John McCain. Even if he picks the vermint hunter.
An empty suit that goes to funerals and plays golf.
- Ross Perot
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Act Blog, you must be dizzy after all your spinning. Pro-lifers don’t like Romney. Evangelicals don’t like Romney. Church-going Catholics don’t like Romney.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:05 pm
If Romney is selected, I expect him to spend almost all his time in MI, and NH while at the same time making sure his supporters in NV, CO and NM are as organized as can be helping with GOTV efforts.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:06 pm
Some of you are saying that there is no substantiation. Did you follow the Novak link? He stated that he had gotten this from a senior McCain advisor, and that he had since had others ask him to back off, trying to get him to stifle it. We all know that’s impossible once the cat is out of the bag.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:06 pm
What pro-lifers often misunderstand is that very very few pro-choicers are NOT personally opposed to abortion to some degree, but believe that others should make the choice. You know, kinda like Romney did in Massachussetts…
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Jack K,
Why did so many prominent Pro-lifers, Evangelicals and Catholics endorse Romney?
In a very divided field he got more endorsements from those constituencies than any other candidate.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:09 pm
#147.
It’s not true that church-going Catholics don’t support Romney. All members of my family who are are church-going, very conservative Roman Catholics enthusiastically support Romney.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:09 pm
With all due respect to Kavon and Jason, whose writings and persons I respect, I’m going to call bull on this report, or at least some of the expectations associated with it. I think this is just a political ploy cooked up somewhere (perhaps smartly) to take attention away from Obama.
I’m going to make these predictions:
1) There will be no July announcement from McCain
2) It could be Romney, but it still won’t be announced in the next 2 weeks. (which Kavon and Jason may actually agree with, timetable-wise)
Disclaimer: I have no hard evidence to refute this claim being made. I just suspect it is not going to pan out the way we’re expecting.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:09 pm
“I still believe that the best position for Romney is as RNC Chairman because you get almost all of Romney’s positives without any of his negatives.”
Amen.
Also I think we should note that futures markets have Romney at 31%. That’s high and by far the “most likely” person. But it’s also not 60-80% as I would expect if a good number of insiders have this information. I’m quite skeptical.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:09 pm
Think it is announceed this week if ture?
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:10 pm
#152 – very true, in fact until Mitt dropped out hardly anyone endorsed anyone else, except Robertson.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:10 pm
NOOOO!!
GO VOTE FOR HUCK AT THIS LINK, (OR AT LEAST NOT ROMNEY):
http://jasontcpa.blogspot.com/
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Jack K,
There were several states in which Mitt won the Evangelical vote and Huckabee came in 2nd. There were several states in which he won the Catholic vote….in fact, Massachusetts is one of the most heavily Catholic states in the nation….a state that elected him as Governor and a state that he won in the Primary. He also won the pro-life vote in more states than he lost it. This isn’t spin….it’s fact. You’re the one who’s spinning.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Colorado Rasmussen:
However, when leaners are included, McCain is more competitive and pulls to within three points, 50% to 47%.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:12 pm
I doubt Kavon & Jason would make a post stating that Romney will be the VP without having a fairly reliable source.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:12 pm
#153: I’ll note that IF the choice is Romney, sooner is better. His main appeal is his ability to fundraise. But that is only useful until the convention. After that, it’s public financing.
So every day that passes makes it less likely that the choice is Romney IMHO.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:12 pm
If Romney is selected, Obama would most likely go ahead and pick Evan Bayh.
Now who is more credible to suburban and rural voters, Massachusetts Mitt or Indiana-bred Bayh?? Who would appeal to religious Catholics and evangelicals? Evan Bayh would be able to sway Ohio and Indiana (if we lose those two states, we are most likely done), and possibly Pennsylvania. Would Mitt Romney help or hurt in these states, considering that there are many cultural conservatives there?
Mitt Romney would hurt.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Jack K.
“Act Blog, you must be dizzy after all your spinning. Pro-lifers don’t like Romney. Evangelicals don’t like Romney. Church-going Catholics don’t like Romney.”
Actually Jack, I think it is you that does not like Romney.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:14 pm
cwpete,
Actually we do. Remember the time I trailed Mitt in IA on his plane? That was a studio we made up in Kavon’s apartment
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:15 pm
…and he would help in Michigan, where he not only has family ties, but where he is something the state might be looking for – a Republican who cares about the manufacturing sector.
Add that to his appeal in states like CO and NV, and his local connections to NH, and he could very well put us over the top.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:15 pm
No matter whether this is true or not, we have to all ban together and stay with McCain, because we simply can not afford to allow this nation to elect a Socialist. We’ve been the best nation in the world for too long to allow that to happen. So, let’s stay together and help McCain, even if you’re not crazy about him, or his VP, because Obabma is very bad news for America.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:16 pm
“There were several states in which Mitt won the Evangelical vote and Huckabee came in 2nd.”
Where? Link please. Specifically, any primary states (as opposed to caucuses)?
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:17 pm
166 – -YEP
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Interesting bit about Romney’s “primary” campaign: Only three of his wins were in actual primaries – Massachusetts, Michigan, and Utah, his “home” states. All of the rest of them were in caucuses, which are questionable as far as predicting actual popular support goes.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:18 pm
I think I heard something about a “Millionaire loophole” which would advantage a McCain/Romney announcement earlier than later as it would allow Romney to stuff the coffers with his own funds, but I didn’t follow the story too closely and haven’t pursued the details… Does anyone else recall anything along these lines, or know the details?
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:19 pm
“Pro-lifers don’t like Romney”
evidence?
–
“Evangelicals don’t like Romney”
In comparrison to who, Huckabee? The Evangelical Minister? Romney led, at various times, in both Iowa and South Carolina, so, while he may not be their first choice, they certainly don’t have a problem supporting him.
—
“Church-going Catholics don’t like Romney”
ditto your first statement.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Romney would be another GHWB (perhaps worse)… I will not support (no money, no calls, no precincts, no email blasts, no blogs) McCain/Romney.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Romney would be the best Vice President for McCain Hands down! McCain has the National security locked up (2nd most important issue) and Romney has the Economy locked up (1st most important issue. They are an upbeatable team. Go McCain/Romney! and Romney in 2012/2016!!!
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Although I doubt McCain is ready to select his VP, if it is Romney, then McCain must have internal polling showing Romney bringing ECV’s, or maybe they have become friends and McCain trusts his judgement?
Either way, let us all support who ever is the VP nominee (especially Governor Palin).
Illinoisguy has been behind McCain since Romney dropped out.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:23 pm
“Interesting bit about Romney’s “primary” campaign: Only three of his wins were in actual primaries – Massachusetts, Michigan, and Utah, his “home” states. All of the rest of them were in caucuses, which are questionable as far as predicting actual popular support goes.”
…although they are also more Conservative, and generally more representative of the base than primaries.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:24 pm
They are an upbeatable team.
If you mean that they would be beaten up by Obama-Whoever, I agree.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Adam,
This isn’t ancient history: it came down earier this year. Mitt won the Evangelical vote in Michigan, Colorado, and Alaska….all of which were primaries. He also won it in caucus states like Nevada and Minnesota, but what do you have against caucuses? The votes cast in caucuses are not only real people, they’re more likely to be knowledgeable than primary voters.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:25 pm
…although they are also more Conservative, and generally more representative of the base than primaries.
…and less representative of the general electorate. You realize that this is no longer just about “the base”, don’t you?
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Mitt won the Evangelical vote in Michigan, Colorado, and Alaska….all of which were primaries.
Colorado and Alaska held caucuses.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:27 pm
“Romney would be another GHWB”
He is more conservative, but if you mean that he is a VP pick who unites the party and goes on to win the Presidency himself, that is fine with me. Though I suppose you would be happier with the populist?
—
As for why now – its because Romney is going to out of the country at the start of August for the Olympics, and because Obama is in the middle of his most press-attractive event short of the convention.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:29 pm
BARF.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:29 pm
McCain should announce his VP the second BHO finishes his photo op world tour. It would hit every Sunday talking fest and lessen the chit chat everyone will be having at how photogenic a president BHO might be.
Romney is it. McCain knows it. Both men have proven their leadership and their ability to tackle tough situations. McCain in the war and Romney in business and the Olympics.
Plus Romney is going to the Olympics. It would be great timing to have a VP candidate on the world stage.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:29 pm
“…and less representative of the general electorate. You realize that this is no longer just about “the base”, don’t you?”
Yes, I do – putting together a ticket is about appealing to as many sides as possible, and McCain already has the center covered. His VP has to give the base a reason to actually go out and vote in large numbers.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Gentleman, it is starting to be reported that this was a “head-fake”. Sorry, we have several weeks of sparing before we see the VP selection.
Sorry Jason, nice post, but you are dead wrong.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Not to mention the fact that these same people stating that caucuses are not reliable would also claim that Mike Huckabee’s beating of Mitt in IA caucuses shows that evangelicals hate Mitt. You can’t have it both ways- either count caucuses or not. If you don’t you’re throwing Huck out right away because his biggest and most important win was IA. Frankly, I’m a christian conservative, and yet I would have huge qualms about Huck or Brownback on the ticket. Mitt Romney is an excellent choice, as is Sarah Palin.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:33 pm
McCain already has the center covered
No, he doesn’t. Maybe the centrist part of the Republican party, but not the center of the whole electorate.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:33 pm
#138, and recent polls only show Mitt strengthening the independents by a lot and republican by a huge amount.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:33 pm
#185 Excellent point about the IA caucus.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:33 pm
I THINK Think it should be announced before Saturday be cause I just heard his HINASS will be arriving back at in chicago airport saturday!
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Pawlenty “changes his tune”. Apparently Pawlenty will now not say if he is being vetted or not. Interesting……
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2008/07/pawlenty_refuse.shtml
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:34 pm
How does everyone not understand that the reported head-fake is about the timing of the announcement not who the VP will be.
Don’t you see how it is entirely possible that Romney has been chosen just like Jason and Kavon are reporting, but that the announcement will not be this week or tomorrow at the additional campaign event.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:34 pm
So caucuses are “more representative of the base than primaries.” I agree. But that means they are less representative of the general election. And thus they are bad predictors of who will do better in a general election.
I would like to note that very, very few people consider a VP in their decision of who to vote for. The idea that this is a game winner or loser is just the lack of a bigger story right now.
177 – AK and CO were caucuses. In CO Romney won 60+% in the caucus. So MI is the one state where Romney won evangelicals in a primary. And there he did worse among evangelicals (36%) than he did among all voters (39%).
I don’t agree with people who say “evangelicals hate Romney” but he is not in the top 5 choices if the goal is to please evangelicals. I don’t think that is the main goal of the VP choice but Romney doesn’t fit that bill.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/#MIREP
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Yeah I’m not sure what’s gonna happen, but I think you have to be foolish not to think he helps in MI, CO, and NV. I also think he would energize a ton of people, including me. I would immediately start donating money again.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Hotair:
Har Har Har. Actually, now that Novak is backing away from this story, I think it gets a little more credibility.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Kristofer, as much of a Palin fan as and as much as I think she’d be a good choice, this recent business with the trooper probably ended whatever small chance she had. It seems to be that this will end up being much ado about nothing, but the way the media is and the way things go, McCain can’t really have a VP who is in that situation. Whether this was some dirty trick by some dems to sandbag her and take her out of contention, who knows? But the reality is that it likely ended her chances.
I still think a woman as VP is a good move, and I think a Marsha Blackburn, a Meg Whitman, and a couple others would all be worthwhile choices.
That said, Romney is probably the best of the guy choices and the safe choices.
And look at it this way, if they win we’re all happy. If they lose, Romney is finished for 2012, so that’s good, too.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:36 pm
regarding 187 oops, not 138 – forget it!
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Big S:
McCain does already have the center covered. Please read the recent Rasmussen National and OH State polls posted on this site. Both show McCain leaning with unaffiliated voters. That is particularly true in OH.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:36 pm
#191, you stated that “Kavon” is reporting that Romney will be VP (do you mean this thread?).
Kavon, do you stand by this? Will it definately be Romney?
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:37 pm
Oops leaning = leading.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:37 pm
Big S,
Mitt won the Evangelical vote in California and Utah, which were definitely primaries, but why would that matter? Caucuses are intrinsically superior to Primaries because they are relatively immune to mass-media manipulation. Quality trumps quantity in every respect. But in this case, Evangelicals who participate in caucuses are even more dispositive in that they would be more likely to be anti-Mormon than Evangelicals who didn’t bother to show up.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:37 pm
jim, what biz about a trooper?
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:38 pm
#198:
Jason said he posted this on Kavon’s behalf
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:38 pm
#185
I would just say that caucus support heavily favors those with strong organizations and extremely dedicated supporters. The general electorate will be many times larger than the total number of supporters in the caucuses, and closer to the middle of the political spectrum. For instance, Romney got 30,000 more votes than McCain in the Colorado caucus. More than two million people voted in CO in the 2004 general election. Given Romney’s strength in organizing and highly dedicated (often Mormon) followers, can you say with any certainty that he is stronger among the general electorate in that state than McCain is?
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:40 pm
SAY WHAT???, Grover Norquist; “McCain wouldn’t need a conservative veep to get them (Conservatives) to vote.”
http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/07/norquist-on-mcc.html
This is an interesting statement.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:40 pm
Could we get links to these reports; i.e. saying it’s Romney, OR saying it’s fake?
I certainly hope it’s not Mitt… he just doesn’t appeal to working people, he seems so plastered and fake. :-/
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Big S,
Re: #203: The polls in Colorado prior to the caucus had Mitt leading big time. So the answer to your question is yes.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:49 pm
#206
Which polls? The only ones that I can find with Mitt in the lead are of “likely caucus goers”. This just gets back to my point about who is likely to go to a caucus in the first place.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:49 pm
#205.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/22/novak-mccain-camp-may-hav_n_114376.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/22/novak-mccain-camp-may-hav_n_114376.html
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:52 pm
#205, also go to “The Fix” on the washington post site.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) is “very much a contender” to be Sen. John McCain’s running mate, according to one of McCain’s closest allies on Capitol Hill.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who earlier this year told The Hill that McCain’s vice presidential pick should be someone the Arizona senator “feels comfortable with,” said Romney fits that description.
“I think he’s very much a contender for the job,” Graham said. “They have a good relationship. That’s all I’ll say.”
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Dave, please provide links. I’m not going to go check every assertion you made. But since you thought AK and CO were primaries, I’m not going to take your word on CA. UT I presume you are correct on.
“Caucuses are intrinsically superior to Primaries because they are relatively immune to mass-media manipulation. Quality trumps quantity in every respect.”
I thoroughly disagree. I don’t know what “intrinsically superior” is supposed to mean. First, it depends on the goal of the primary. If the goal is to nominate the candidate most likely to win, then caucuses stink because they empower activisits without any input from less active (and more likely to swing) voters. Second, the 1-5% turnout means they are very bad predictors of general election outcomes. Third, they small scale is not a good replication of what the general election will be like. “Mass media manipulation” is just a pejorative way to say “general election.” Fourth, they are manipulatable by having more money or one core group of active supporters.
I don’t mind some caucuses as a way to give activists greater say. But they have many, many drawbacks. And they aren’t “intrinsically” anything.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:53 pm
*sighs*
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:54 pm
As I stated in my post earlier, I am hearing very conflicting info on the Veep choice (top three current candidates: Pawlenty, Ridge, Brownback). But if Jason’s and Kavon’s reporting is correct (I remain skeptical). I think that the choice of Romney has its parallels in the Dole/Kemp archetype – safe pick, former rival, economic cred. I wouldn’t really see this choice (if accurate) as a game changer as much as I see it as a defensive, don’t rock the boat choice.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:55 pm
201 JB If you want to know trooper story, go to Palin for vp amd access the youtube video by elephantman.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Sorry this is off topic, but I need your expert advice. How do we exploit Obama’s gaffe from his
press conference? I’m referring to the fact that he is obviously clueless that as
Commander of CENTCOM, Gen. Petraeus is responsible not only for Iraq but Afganistan as well! BOH
said as (prospective) CinC he would have to think more broadly than the military situation in Iraq.
He gave the need for more troops in Afganistan as an example. He doesn’t even understand the scope
of Petraeus’s role! As an aside, Petraeus was confirmed by the U.S. Senate as Commander of CENTCOM
on July 10,2008. I wonder is BOH voted for him? If so, he clearly didn’t understand what he was
voting for!!
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:58 pm
For the record, I believe this is part of a feint on the part of Team McCain regarding an early VP pick, and that this means Romney is not the pick, but was just fodder for the feint.
July 22nd, 2008 at 4:58 pm
#214
I’m referring to the fact that he is obviously clueless that as
Commander of CENTCOM, Gen. Petraeus is responsible not only for Iraq but Afganistan as well!
Maybe McCain should point out that if Obama had held any hearings on Afghanistan as allowed by his Senate position (McCain already pointed out that he hasn’t), he would know who is in charge of military operations in Afghanistan.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Brownback? Are you kidding? The guy’s as inspiring as a tree stump!
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:01 pm
If You’re Gonna Pick Mitt, Best Do It Soon
A minor factoid to add to the buzz of Mitt-as-veep talk: One of the benefits of picking Romney was the possibility of his personal fortune being added to the resources of the ticket during the campaign. But upon becoming the nominee, McCain gets $84.1 million in public funds at the convention, and then has to abide by that spending limit. So if you’re going to pick Mitt, it makes sense to do so sooner rather than later
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Adam,
We go back more than a year, and you know that I’ve never provided a link in my life. I’m not that organized. Besides, I don’t know how to do it. The point that Mitt had a lot of Evangelical support is valid, and the point that Mitt beat Huckabee among Evangelicals in multiple states is a historical fact. Big S was making a blanket statement that pro-lifers, Evangelicals, and church-going Catholics hated Mitt…..and there is no evidence for that. Even in the Iowa caucuses, pollsters established that more Evangelicals voting for Huckabee had Mitt as a 2nd choice than anybody else.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Big S was making a blanket statement that pro-lifers, Evangelicals, and church-going Catholics hated Mitt…..and there is no evidence for that.
Did I say that? My argument is that moderates have an issue with Mitt.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:07 pm
Hey, Jason and Kavon: how much is the McCain camp paying you boys for this stunt??!
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:10 pm
Dang it. That is thoroughly underwhelming.
Here’s hoping this isn’t true.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Todd I say yes mccain should do it real soon before Obama gets back I think I heard he gets back into chicago so might be good idea to to announce befor he gets back just saying … so he can get tv coverage plus I think once VP is announced mccain have a partner to come out swing!
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Nothing on Drudge yet … Jay Severin – a huge Romney supporter and semi-insider, said today he would expect an announcement w/in 48 hours from today.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:13 pm
“Big S was making a blanket statement that pro-lifers, Evangelicals, and church-going Catholics hated Mitt”
I know someone said that and they were wrong. But that doesn’t mean that Romney did well among evangelicals or would help bring in more in the general election. So far, I see your evidence that Romney won evangelicals in MI (36%) while winning the state (39%). Perhaps he did in CA and UT as well. I don’t see how this helps an argument that he would help win the eelction.
I think his selling points are: Money, well-vetted, squeaky clean, economics background, attack dog ability, ability to morph position to match his superior, and loyalty.
I think his drawbacks are: high unfavs (especially among Indies), personality conflicts with Presidential nominee, corporate shark when Wall Street is not popular, Mormon, he won’t become the heir apparent because he doesn’t have the support and those who are excited about him are already voting GOP.
I think he’d be better than average as a pick. But there are better choices too: Sanford, Pawlenty, Palin, Jindal.
Then again I think the VP choice matters very little to this election but matters for who is the standard bearer after McCain.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Nothing on Drudge yet … Jay Severin – a huge Romney supporter and semi-insider, said today he would expect an announcement w/in 48 hours from today.
Jimmy “Master’s Degree in Journalism” Severino?
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:21 pm
McCain/Romney 08!
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:22 pm
“he won’t become the heir apparent because he doesn’t have the support ”
Wrong. He will be the heir apparent if he is choosen. He came in second – and it was probably the closest second since ‘76 when Reagan was #2. The only reason that Romney isn’t the nominee right now is because Huckabee won IA, and you have to admit that he was a perfect fit for the state.
Romney would unquestionably be the heir apparent if he is choosen.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Big S,
I apologize. I’m obviously not thinking as clearly today as I should. Jack K made the blanket statement I referred to in #220 in his post #147. You’re obviously correct that some moderates have a problem with Romney. Aside from the mis-attribution, though, I stand by #220.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:23 pm
McCain/Romney—That ticket will lose. They just lost my vote.
BAD IDEA: The social conservatives will stay home. They are the ones that propelled Bush to victory TWICE!!! They made phone calls and knocked door to door handing out fliers. Don’t Beleive me?–Just look at how Mike Huckabee won. He raised 15 million durring the whole campaign. How did he win with little money? The social conservatives had a grassroots network that did his campaigning for him so he did not have to hire and spend money on staff. Romney spent 10 million just in Iowa. Romney left with 45 million in debt. Mike left with 30,000 in the bank.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:27 pm
Anne: Romney brings conservatives who are wary about McCain on board. Romney brings the 3 legged conservatives, passionate supporters, energy,and the ability to raise funds.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Anne – sorry, I can’t take your post seriously for obvious reasons regarding how Huckabee ran his campaign. That’s a nice revisionist version of the primary.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:30 pm
ACT,
Romney won’t be heir apparent to anything if they lose to Obama.
Once you’re a loser, it’s very difficult to come back from that. If Reagan had been Ford’s VP and lost in 76 it would have been much more difficult for him.
Even if it is Romney, I don’t see what announcing so early does. It wreaks of deperation to me. Now, Obama will be able to pick his VP to counteract whatever Romney brings. The whole point of being the in party and having the later convention is that you have the advantage and can pick a VP 2nd, and McCain just threw all of that away.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Trial balloon alert.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Adam,
I wouldn’t argue that Mitt has no drawbacks because he does. My perception is that Mitt and McCain have healed the rift between them and would be compatible. McCain has modified a number of his positions, and has come closer to Mitt’s positions by doing so. This has been most obvious in the energy arena. Mitt hasn’t changed any of his positions in his supporting role for McCain….he’s merely emphasized those points on which they agree or pointed out why Obama is a bad choice in various respects: So I take issue with the notion that he’s morphing his own positions into McCain’s positions. His main positive is his ability to sell the ticket.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Now that I think about it….
McCain/Romney—a great ticket so they can lose in ‘08 making room for Huckabee, Jindal or Palin in 2012.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Anne (#231), as a fellow Huckabee voter; please, please, please, please, please, please, PLEASE don’t sit at home on election day! This is WAY too important!
Imagine with me. When the next President is inaugurated, I think 4 of the 7 SCOTUS Justices will be over 70. One will be over 80. If any of them retire, who we elect as President WILL decide the future for gun rights, the life of unborn children, marriage, and a host of other vital issues.
Obama will appoint the most liberal justices imaginable. McCain will appoint conservatives (for sure ten times more conservative than Obama will). The current court splits 5-4 on everything. One appointee will tip the balance.
Plug your nose, and vote for McCain, even if he chooses a bad VP. We cannot afford Obama appointing the makeup of the Supreme Court for the next 30 years!
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Anne, I kind of agree with you here. I’m not big on the Huckster, but the silver lining in a McCain-Romney loss is that it opens the door for the GOP to actually attempt in the future to bring in new voters instead of leaning on demographics that are less and less relevant every year.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Romney won CPAC twice – once after dropping out. He, eventually, won the support of the Conservative leaders in the media, and he routinely took the Conservative vote.
A ticket with Huckabee on the ticket would do even worse than Romney – perhaps not among southern evangelicals, but deffinately among fiscal conservatives and independents who might agree with Conservative views, even socially, but who are turned off by the appearance of religious fanaticism.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:39 pm
No, I will not “plug my nose” and vote. For many years social conservatives have “plugged their noses” and are told to put up with the nominee. Then, when a social conservative get close to winning the nomination, all the republican talk show hosts bashed our candidate and made sure he didn’t win. Sean Hannity said he like the Fair Tax plan (After Mike lost the nomination). All they did was bash Huck on fiscal issues. Where was the bashing of Romney on social issues by these talk show hosts?!!! NO, The GOP needs to know that they can’t put us under the bus anymore. Obama has won anyway. Start focusing on 2012.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:39 pm
Jamison,
Don’t be so confident about McCain nominating conservative justices, if elected. McCain voted for Sandra Day O’Connor, David Souter, Ruth Bader-Ginsberg, and Stephen Breyer.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:44 pm
Anne, voters like me will turn on the GOP if you nominate Huckabee, ever. Never gonna happen.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:44 pm
act-blog,
Actually Survey USA finds that a McCain/Huckabee ticket fares better than McCain/Romney ticket. Get your facts right!!! http://www.jedreport.com/2008/06/veepstakes-by-t.html
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Anne umm hello have you forgotten about George W. Bush? The man who rode on the back of so-cons twice, how about lets get someone on the ticket who covers all the bases(Romney)?
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:46 pm
#243 Metro — voters like me will turn on the GOP if they nominate Romney. That’s a foolish statement, be
because you can use it against any controversial candidate. And whether you want to admit
it or not, Romney is a controversial candidate.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:48 pm
They just lost mine too. Now I’m not worried about whether McCain will lose. Now I’m worried about whether McCain might actually *win*, because for a shape-shifting flip-flopping corporate take-over office to ascend to the office of vice president would be a disaster for this country, and it does not speak well of Sen. McCain’s judgment.
Who are the libertarians running? Barr? Hmmm.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:49 pm
“All they did was bash Huck on fiscal issues”
Thats because he’s a tax and spend populist who doesn’t fit the GOPs policy of fiscal conservatism.
—-
“Where was the bashing of Romney on social issues”
..comming from the mouths of the liberals who knew that he would do exactly what he had done on every other promise he made – keep it.
—
You could have had a social Conservative in Romney, and gotten support for the FMA, conservative justices, and what not, and even better than Huck, you would have also had a candidate who was a Conservative on military and fiscal issues as well.
But, you fell for Huck’s quick talk and landed us with McCain as the nominee.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:49 pm
242,
Alito, Roberts and Thomas are the only ones that had more than 9 senators vote for them. The Stephens, Scalia and Kennedy were unanimous votes. I’m sure that there are conservative senators who regret voting for some of those other justices, and the same for the libs.
I did say that McCain’s picks would be more conservative than Obama’s.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:49 pm
Oops. 247 should read: because for a shape-shifting flip-flopping corporate take-over ARTIST to ascend etc. etc.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:49 pm
Sean M,
Yeah like Romney covers “All the bases”?
Romney allowed $50.00 abortions and supported gay/lesbian marriages.
He flip-flopped on all the social issues. If he was so social conservative why didn’t the Right to Life endorse other candidates instead of Romney? Whey didn’t the Mass. Right to Life endorse Romney?!!!!
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:50 pm
“because for a shape-shifting flip-flopping corporate take-over office to ascend to the office of vice president would be a disaster for this country,”
Oh please the guy is a turnaround specialist and his economic cred is something the country needs.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:51 pm
I hope you’re right.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Romney was never my choice, and I’ll admit if he’s the VP I’m not thrilled. But I would never go so far as to say I won’t for McCain because of him.
Lets face it, in the big scheme of things the VP is largely irrelevant. Do I really care if Romney is going off to various funerals or foreign trips, casting tiebreaker votes every now and then? No.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Anne the $50.00 abortion was a court order, learn something about governing before typing.Also henever supported gay/lesbian marriage.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:53 pm
“Romney allowed $50.00 abortions”
no, the MASS supreme court ruled that you couldn’t charge more for an abortion than any other out-patient procedure.
—
“and supported gay/lesbian marriages.”
…wrong. Romney did, and does, oppose discrimination based on orientation. He didn’t support Gay marraige, in fact he led the charge against it.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Anne: Is Ronald Reagan a flip-flopper on abortion? How about George HW Bush? or Henry Hyde?
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:55 pm
act-blog,
Why are you blaming Huck for Romney’s loss????
Actually, I see it the other way around. Romney spent the most in SC and got 4th place. He lost 2 primaries in a row and don’t blame it on Iowa, because he lost his “2nd home state” of NH to John McCain. How come after the media and Romney called it a “2-way race” that Huck won 8 states on Super Tuesday? He lost Missouri by less than 1%. If Romney went past Super Tuesday he wouldn’t have won another state. The only states Romney won were caucuses where he was organized and one contested primary (Mich.) where he was born and his father was gov. I think the person who we should all blame is Thompson. He stayed in SC even though everyone knew he would lose to take votes from Mike Huckabee ensuring his pal McCain a victory. Fred only campaigned in Huck friendly areas.
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:58 pm
Hey Romney Supporters!!
I think you might get a kick out of the top 10 Romney flip-flops and yes act-blog it lists his abortion one as numero uno.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/04/AR2008020402805.html
July 22nd, 2008 at 5:59 pm
“Why are you blaming Huck for Romney’s loss????”
Because Romney only lost NH because the media labeled him as a damaged candidate after his IA loss – caused by Huckabee. If Romney had won IA, he would have gotten a bounce going into NH, won there, knocked out McCain, etc.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Btw is anyone else sick of Novak putting out all these “newsalerts” then back-tracking. Of course was used. But he knew it.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Jay Severin – the voice of libertarian-minded conservatives throughout the Northeast – yeah, that guy.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:02 pm
You want to list Romney’s position changes. Hmmmm… ok.
Next we’ll talk about Huckabee letting murderers run loose and his tax-and-spend policies.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:04 pm
Oh, Stop all this crap. If you all think McCain and ANYBODY, is worse than Obama ( the Maadi, the chosen one), then stay home or vote for Barry. But don’t delude yourself that it’s a wait for 2012. Give Obama the White House and the Dems a big majority in Congress and you will have 8-12 years, at least. Yes, there will be an election in 2012, but don’t be persuaded that you will outspend an entrenched Obama and elect anybody else. Your last chance is this year….. for quite a while.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:05 pm
Must we go over this again? *sigh*
Huck had (at the best point) a 75% Democrat Legislature, and at worst, a 90% Democrat Legislature! They could over-ride faster than you could say Mitt Romney.
Voters approved a tax increase. One was a temporary (less than a year, I believe) tax increase to keep the jails operating, the road crews out, and state employees with jobs. The population grew, as did the tax base, yet the state spending that Huckabee could control over was a miniscule 0.6% per year. Compare that to Mitt Romney-Care-was-a-huge-bust Romney, or any other Republican governor or legislature.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:05 pm
#261, and Huck lost SC because of Thompson – should we then blame Fred for not having Huck at the top?
woulda coulda shoulda. get over it!
We need to support the GOP ticket. period. i will be disappointed with a mitt pick – but I’m not gonna nit pick -
Obama is that bad.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:05 pm
wondering if it is best for mccain to hold off and announce vp as soon as obama get back in the USA cause the tv IS SURE AS HECK REPORTING ON THIS TRIP MORE THEN J MC?
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:06 pm
act-blog,
How come Romney and his 10 million in Iowa and early front-runner status couldn’t win? Hmmm…The slick hair–maybe that was it. His “the economy is great”–yeah maybe…what about the “negative ads” or ticking off WHO host for “using Secret Cameras”–actually Mitt, they were right in front of your face (WHO is Ronald Reagan’s former station and it didn’t go well that Mitt said that on Good Morning America–the Iowa audience got to hear Jan diss Romeny for a week calling him a lier)…or it could be that Iowans were common people making less than 50,000 a year and didn’t believe that a CEO millionaire could connect with them…BUT I think it is because they saw through Mitt’s mask. Mitt tried to mold himself into something he was not. The number one response of Iowans exiting the caucus was they voted for Mike Huckabee because he was authentic and understood their values and could connect with them.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Guys: Fox is reporting that Novak was deliberately misled by McCain aids to get people talking about VP speculation to steal Obama’s thunder.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:08 pm
270 – YOU DON’T SAY!
I said that 24 hours ago – so obvious!
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:08 pm
Anne,
thank you for your sincere posts – but trust me, Mike has moved on. He is going to do great things, he just wont be president. Not now at least. He is young, he will have other opportunities – help us keep Obama out.
F3
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:08 pm
Well, I guess McCain is going for the Andrew Sullivan vote after reading that last comment
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:08 pm
Sorry Brett, you’re right. I’m done ranting.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:09 pm
“But don’t delude yourself that it’s a wait for 2012.”
The rate of Presidents serving eight years is only like 50% in the last fifty years.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:10 pm
Do we really want McCain to be forced to respond to reporters who ask why Romney’s top donor does these types of things:
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:10 pm
Heath 271:
I had no idea you said that 24 hrs ago, nor is it necessarily relevant here. I’m merely mentioning what’s happening on TV now. No need to be sarcastic.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:11 pm
It most likely take 10 days obama 10-15 days once he gets back from this trip i am thinking so I would announce mccain’s VP as soon as obama touches down BACK IN USA.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:11 pm
Anne: Huckabee also had the help of church leaders who told their congreations to vote for Huckabee which violates their terms for being tax free organizations.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:11 pm
Bonham you DOG I have always been a fan, you now replace DRUDGE as the cutting edge in news….is it true?
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:12 pm
279 – Sean M – lets move on. (althought I dont agree with your statement)
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:13 pm
This is why Romney or Huckabee shouldn’t be VP. The primary wounds have not healed. McCain should pick Pawlenty, Palin, Thune, or Jindal. Besides Romney or Huck, what are your VP picks?
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:14 pm
looks like Edwards is out of the VP running:
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/sen_john_edwards_caught_with_mistress_and_love_child_in_la_hotel/celebrity/65193
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Jim,
The Nation Enquirer is a Tabloid. It is not fact. I think Obama would pick Edwards. He gets the rural white male vote that Obama lacks, but I can see how rumors can fly with tabloids.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:17 pm
282,
I agree.
Palin for Veep!
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:19 pm
Jamison,
McCain/Palin–I could vote for that too.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:20 pm
Palin,Jindal,Thune,Sanford will all be good choices for Romney in 4 years : )
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:23 pm
Anne,
Yeah it’s a tabloid but they have a pretty good track record. They were right about Jesse Jackson, for example.
Also, this isn’t a rumor they’re reporting. 2 of their top reporters caught Edwards red handed at a hotel at 3 in the morning. He ran away and hid in the bathroom. There are witnesses and presumably photos.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:23 pm
Palin or Jindal
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:25 pm
288 – this is really sad for the edwards – I can only imagine the greif his wife is going through right now.
Why must people do this stuff…..
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:27 pm
Dave,
“Mitt hasn’t changed any of his positions in his supporting role for McCain….he’s merely emphasized those points on which they agree or pointed out why Obama is a bad choice in various respects: So I take issue with the notion that he’s morphing his own positions into McCain’s positions.”
I didn’t say he was morphing his views. I said he would be able to. He has shown a great ability to change his views on issues and persuade some people that he believes his new positions. Most notably on abortion but on other things as well. As a VP candidate, he will have to defend McCain’s views whether he holds them or not. He has shown an ability to do such a thing. That’s a positive for a VP candidate (although I think it hurt his Presidential run).
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:27 pm
Jim,
That news (if true) is sad. I liked Elizabeth Edwards. She allowed her husband to run even when she was going through cancer. She was my favorite candidate’s wife (exlude Bill of course).
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:29 pm
Romney 37.6
Palin 13
TPaw 11
Jindal 9.6
Ridge 9.9
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:32 pm
No matter who your choice in VP is…Do you think McCain or Obama will win this November?
My Pick: Obama (Just because the media is in the tank for him and it is a bad year to be a republican).
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Y’know, really, who gives a flyin’one whether ROmney drives away libs and independents – lots of ‘em are dropping from this site as we speak, that’s great. Those guys have choices in this election – conservatives haven’t – UNTIL NOW!! I am hardcore social and economic conservative and Mitt ROMNEY has the skill set. Bonham is tight with the fam, aren’tcha Jason??? And I’ll bet he knows….I love politics and was sad that it was so one-sided this cycle but now conservatives once again have a dog in the fight – a very COMPETENT, QUALIFIED one at that.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:36 pm
Maya,
I can’t agree with your VP choice (Romney) but I can agree that everyone is so focused on whether or not the Independents will be offended in this election cycle. The Independent vote is getting so much attention that the base of both the Republican and Democratic parties are getting ignored.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:40 pm
It’s not Romney.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:41 pm
I am getting word that Portman is still in the running.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Anne, wow, of all people I didn’t think you would agree with me but I thank you for being so agreeable, at least on that issue. Like you, I was sitting this whole cycle out. All I wanted was competence, someone who clearly understood family values, and an indication that McCain was still sane. Romney fits here for me and I think most conservatives can find lots of common ground with his stands on issues. Granted, he’s only VP and typically they don’t do a whole lot. But at least someone who understands economics 101 will have McCain’s ear once a week.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Wait, I’m hearing voices too, let me light the candle…..starts with C….Crist is still a possibility…..arghh the spirit faded. Please don’t interrupt now…
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:44 pm
“It’s not Romney.”
What are you basing that on?
—-
As for why Romney lost Iowa, its because of two things: Huckabee, aided by his Minister friends, played the “who can be the most christian” card, and because the media, who were against Romney, refused to give Huckabee the vetting he should have gotten.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:46 pm
I’d further suggest Huckabee is done with politics. He’s headed for Hol-LEE-wood!
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:56 pm
Based on all of the info I am getting, if I had to bet, I would say that this is the order of likelyhood to be selected VP:
1. Tom Ridge
2. Rob Portman
3. Tim Pawlenty
4. Sam Brownback
(But as always things are very fluid and we all know from past experience that you should sometimes expect the unexpected – very unpredictable).
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Rudy said this morning that he is not on the list and doesn’t want to be on the list (2012 run anyone?)
Huh? Rudy is one of the best executives out there. He goes toe to toe with Mitt. I don’t understand why he was dropped? Yeah, I know abortion…blah..blah…but he promised pro-life judges!!!! Geez!!!!
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:59 pm
And where is your info coming from?
Anyway, if its Ridge, I am dropping my support for McCain – no way do I want to see this party go even further to the left. Already part of GOP nominee who comes after McCain’s job is going to be getting the party back to the right.
And I highly doubt Brownback gets in the top four – not only was he a vocal opponent of the surge, but he was only JUST above the 50% popularity mark in Kansas. He brings nothing to the table.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Ugh. I’d be devastated if that really is the case. IMO, that’d be an assurance Obama would win the election.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:01 pm
#304 nowandlater
I don’t know if Rudy goes toe to toe with Mitt on executive experience (the whole package) but I do think he would be a good pick and does have gravitas. I would support that choice.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:01 pm
What are you basing that on?
Common sense.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:03 pm
#303
“Based on all of the info I am getting”
???? by the looks of your list we might not know who is giving you the info but we can sure where it is coming from
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:03 pm
“but he promised pro-life judges!!!!”
No he didn’t – he promised strict constitutionalists, but also stated that said judges could easily uphold Roe, and that Roe was correctly decided.
and even if he gave us judges, that is not enough – we still need someone who would sign legislation.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:03 pm
I just confirmed this news with my source too… it will simmer around for another day and be announced Thursday…
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Jeff this true? when likely will we know what time / location of announcement will be then?
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:09 pm
so we can watch it on TV
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:09 pm
This is hilarious. Are we going to get a number of posts saying “X is the VP nominee” between now and whenever McCain puts us out of our misery?
I can’t believe Brownback is in the running. He ran an even worse campaign than Giuliani.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Common sense says McCain needs to pick a Conservative with both economic and executive experience who is well known and good at fundraising, and who could either take over mid-term or win in four years.
All of those things point to Romney.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Common sense says McCain needs to pick a Conservative with both economic and executive experience who is well known and good at fundraising, and who could either take over mid-term or win in four years.
All of those things point to Romney.
Yeah, clearly what McCain needs right now is to reaffirm his Republican Establishment cred!
He’ll lose if he doesn’t assure the public that he’s the biggest Republican Party Guy of all time.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:14 pm
I just got word from a secret source who knows… the Dobson warming is part of the plan to pick Mike Huckabee for VP. The Romney fade left was just to get in the news cycles. (But keep it to yourself, OK?)
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:16 pm
#315, Common sense also says that McCain needs to pick someone he can trust, who is young with executive experience. That points to T-Paw. There is any number of ways of spinning common sense.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:16 pm
317 – i call BS.
i told them yesterday, but they didnt listen. lets sit back and watch.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:23 pm
#290. “Why must people do this stuff?”
Because you’re men.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:23 pm
It true! I just got word from a friend who works as an assistant to… let’s just say a powerful evangelical leader… that the McCain campaign is very quietly getting the word out to key evangelical leaders that Huckabee is going to be the pick. I guess so they can get started organizing churches for the big victory push. (But don’t tell anyone else.)
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:26 pm
“the Dobson warming is part of the plan to pick Mike Huckabee for VP”
Didn’t Dobson say he could also support Romney? Yeah, like everyone on here has a secret source who is letting loose all sorts of info.
—
“Yeah, clearly what McCain needs right now is to reaffirm his Republican Establishment cred!
He’ll lose if he doesn’t assure the public that he’s the biggest Republican Party Guy of all time.”
The majority of McCain’s support, win or lose, will come from the base. The vast majority of his money, volunteers, etc, will come from the base…without independents, McCain has little hope, without the base, he has none.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:26 pm
What does McCain want?
someone he can totally trust = Lindsay Graham
a fundraiser = Mitt Romney
a young executive = T-Paw
a wow pick = Bobby Jindal
a woman = Sarah Palin
someone to lock in the evangelical vote = Mike Huckabee
someone to make a play for PA/NJ = Rudy
someone to lock in OH = Portman
someone to lock in FL = Crist
someone to win the bored vote = Brownback
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:28 pm
Mr. McCain, 71, told Mr. Imus “I’m aware of enhanced importance of this issue given my age.’’
McCain cannot pick Romney, as Romney is closing in on retirement age. Since 30% of the country feels McCain is too old to be President, McCain is hinting at someone young like Governor Sarah Palin.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:28 pm
While we’re continuing the secret sources, I’ve heard from someone that McCain will pick Larry Craig. He’s making a play for the gay & Idaho vote.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:28 pm
“It true! I just got word from a friend who works as an assistant to… let’s just say a powerful evangelical leader”
how about you give me a name, so I don’t continue to assume that you are a 17 year old who is trying to look important and well-connected?
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Let me add a couple of things from CO on Romney
1-today me inbox had 3 references to Romney. 2 from candidates for the Tom Tancredo seat and 1 from Romney himself
2- The two candidates were announcing the endorsement of Romney by one and the endorsement of Romney supporters by the other.
3-Romney was an email thanking me for the support and asking for donations to Mccains campaign.
For those who dont think Romney is an impact person in CO you arent paying attention here. Romney would be a HUGE positive for CO and help McCain here.
With that said I dont know whether McCain does pick Romney but at least here he is a plus, and it isnt just the Mormon types either that voted for him to get 60% in CO. His support is broad and deep.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:29 pm
so jason Bonham you think it is this week?
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:30 pm
#324, Jason I did not realize Mark Salter and Charlie Black trusted you so much?
I guess I’ll catch you on 60 minutes on Sunday?
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:31 pm
327 – No names here – unable to post – we can sit back and watch.
we got time.
let the jetlag clear
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:31 pm
Jason – any word if Mitt is making a return to the U.S.? Apparently he is out of the country.
Kristofer – Romney is 61, and he looks about 51. He runs, water-skis, etc.
McCain doesn’t so much need a young person as he needs a healthy and energetic person – Romney fits the bill.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:32 pm
Kristopher, Jaype,
Sorry to make you mad. I hope you can get over it, eh?
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:32 pm
#326, Larry Craig is not Gay, he is just “experimenting”. Have you not seen the movie, “My own Private Idaho”?
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:34 pm
I’m not mad Jason, I find the VP speculation quite entertaining.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:35 pm
HearMeRoar –
#290. “Why must people do this stuff?” Because you’re men.
Now why are you allowed to say that?
If I said “because you’re a woman” about something terrible, you’d call me sexist.
So you’re sexist, right?
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Jason, when you receive an email from an intern at the McCain Delaware office, it does not qualify as a real “source”.
#332, McCain has a 96 year old mother and aunt, but it is the age printed in the newspaper that counts to the youth vote that see a combined age of 133 years on the GOP ticket. In fact, McCain will probably outlive Obama and Romney.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Rumor from a Bush Sr. staffer… McCain told him that it was NOT Romney, but that he was not ready to tell who he picked.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Can I ask a serious question you all could some one explain why in the heck is it so had for mccain campaign to decide when to do the vp announcement I truly don’t get it?
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:37 pm
Amazing that age is even a factor. If you can get through a primary campaign still looking in good health, you’re fit enough to be President.
This looking for youth is just superficial. JFK was less healthy than Nixon.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:38 pm
#338, please post the link!
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Guys,
Its not Romney. I told you yesterday. Its Huckabee. Just wait for the announcement. Chill out, take a big breath.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:41 pm
#340, I know you are young, but it was also an issue for Reagan. That is why he went for someone under 60.
The polls do not lie. McCain needs to look at someone like Sanford, Palin, Pawlenty, Cantor or Cox.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:42 pm
Its not Huckabee – if Huckabee was really in the running, he would have waited to sign the contract with Fox. He is currently in talks for his own TV show.
Its not Mike
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Act, that deal is not signed. In fact it got dropped exactly 7 days ago today.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:45 pm
Bush Sr. and Lindsey Graham have both had “I’m not saying anything moments” about Romney recently – that suggests they know something.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:47 pm
Huckabee is taking over Jerry Springer’s show. He wouldn’t take a pay cut at this point.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:47 pm
#346, The only group McCain is playing to are the fiscal/economic conservatives. It will not be Huckabee. It will be a pro-growth VP.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:48 pm
347 – Come on Maya – dont be cruel.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:48 pm
Big S – when you refer to “social conservatives who misunderstand economic conservatism”, you seem to be talking about yourself?
I’m an economic conservative. I’m not a social conservative. I live around other economic conservatives in the heart of Manhattan. I don’t know a single econ conservative social moderate who ISN’T hoping Romney is the VP. He’s the only one that makes sense. He’s the only guy who’s shown that he’s got the tools to work his way out of the crises we are likely to face in the next five years.
And to answer your question – no, I don’t work for Romney. I just have (a) enough sense to see he’s the smartest most economically grounded player on the field and (b) no anti-Mormon agenda (which I’m guessing might be your underlying problem).
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:49 pm
(sorry Brett. I like you. I don’t like Huckabee. Rudeness stops now)
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:50 pm
#346, why does it suggest they know something? That could mean anything.
Furthermore, what do they know? THat he is the pick, or that he isnt?
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Thanks Maya – And I was just kidding you guys anyways – ill back off as well.
have a great night!
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:50 pm
I just talked to the 41 staffer, he wouldn’t IM me any more information. He said that Romney is definitely not the pick, McCain told Bush it’s not Romney. The conversation was private, but Bush told my friend that much AND that he hoped it was not the bible guy.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:52 pm
JPL is loopy. Staffers wouldn’t be in the loopy loop on this one. WhatEVER
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:53 pm
I’m going to continue to predict that it’s Ridge until it’s not.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:54 pm
JPL, who are you?
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Kristopher,
Great substantive counter arguments. Kavon, van you add this guy as a front page poster?
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:55 pm
Ridge tanks the ticket.
I need to go find my ducktape and plastic. What color is it today?
just kidding -but seriously – a moderate top of ticket and a prochoice VP – please. i cant see it happening.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:56 pm
Like I said, it was a private conversation between McCain and 41… Bush told him it was not Romney and implied he didn’t know, taking the cut a Huck.
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:56 pm
Last chance to back out, Bonham, before I go to the MSM with this. Well??
July 22nd, 2008 at 7:56 pm
That’s taking a cut at Huck.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:04 pm
I am also getting word that Governor Palin is NOT on the shortlist – sorry to her fans, but as I said earlier, all of this info is flying fast and furious and all of it has to be, at least partially, considered suspect for possible head fakes. So take it for what its worth, grain of salt…etc.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:06 pm
I really doubt that a Bush 41 staffer is in the loop. First of all, it doesn’t look like the McCain staffers are in the loop, because, if they were, his campaign would be springing leaks like an old rowboat.
Maybe McCain DID tell Bush something, but he obviously expected it to be kept secret – hence GHWB’s elusive reply to a question on Romney. Do we really think he would be walking about telling all his staff “it ain’t Mitt”??
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:07 pm
I agree with Brett…It is Huckabee.
1) He is in Rawanda with Cindy McCain and the ONE Campaign.
2) On his blog Mike stated that he was doing a lot of thinking and reflecting
3) He dropped his contract with Fox
4) The McCain camp is dropping Mitt’s name and others, but Huck’s name has been distant since mid-May.
5) They say that a campaign puts out vibes to the media on candidantes they are not considering.
6) Heck, it’s Mike…He gives a great speech.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:07 pm
Hey JA PRUCE
I these rumors are flying this fast do you think we are closer to a vp them we think?
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:12 pm
If it is Huckabee I’ll look forward to casting an historic vote for Barack Obama. That’s one VP candidate I absolutely could not stomach on so many levels.
Two absolute economic neophytes on one ticket? Ridiculous. The term “train wreck” comes to mind.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Cute. SO Huck brings what to the table? He’ll have to fess up on the bariatric bypass….this isn’t rude, it’s factual. Right?
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Hard to say Greg. I was always of the mind that it was smarter to wait until closer to the convention but I don’t know what the thinking is on that. I think that we can agree that with all of his picks there is some possibility of offending some faction of the Party, so maybe the thinking is that if they announce earlier rather than later that everyone can get all of their kevetching over with and go into St. Paul more united. I don’t know, but we shall see.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:13 pm
No kidding, open the prison doors Huck, Global Warming McCain, my home security system and my pocket book can’t handle the strain
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:13 pm
McCain would be very foolish to drop Romney’s name, not try to put down the media rumors, and pick Huckabee. Romney still commands the biggest following after McCain (hence his second-place finish), and many, if not most of them, are only reluctantly supporting McCain, and many still don’t like him. To engage in that kind of deception and using of Romney, particularly in favor of Huckabee, would turn off many of them – and they are people McCain can’t afford to lose.
In any case, Huckabee would alienate economic Conservatives – the group with the most reason to distrust McCain already.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:14 pm
[...] post “BREAKING: Romney VP Pick” has generated quite a bit of excitement, discussion, and (as expected) controversy. I wanted [...]
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:17 pm
#358 Jason,
I am not qualified to be a “front page poster”. Clearly you need to be friends with the President (JPL), spoeak with Mark Salter (Jason B), or have many, many sources with the RNC/McCain camp (JA Pruce) to volunteer at R408.
I need you to think this out rationally. We are dealing with the MSM and absent minded voters. If you do not think that another 60+ year old male will not discourage talk of McCain’s age/abilities, then you are wrong.
The age factor in polling for McCain is a larger negative than Obama’s race.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:17 pm
If it is ANYONE, but Romney, my money would be on Portman – McCain has an event in OH on Thursday
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:17 pm
It’s quite interesting how many more posts a Romney topic ends up with than any other. Also to those saying it’s not Romney I bet you’ll be saying that until McCain actually does come out and say it.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Sorry Jason, I thought you were taking a shot at me, because I suggested Sanford. Sorry
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:20 pm
How would the Fair Tax offend FiCons?
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:20 pm
It’s quite interesting how many more posts a Romney topic ends up with than any other. Also to those saying it’s not Romney I bet you’ll be saying that until McCain actually does come out and say it.
Well, duh. I don’t think it’s him. Of course I’ll be saying it until he actually comes out and says it, because that would be the only way that I’d be convinced that he has a chance.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:22 pm
If it’s Huck, good bye Colorado, Nevada and Utah.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Hey, this is a very senior staffer with 41, more like a personal aid… it wasn’t like he walked into his kitchen and told the waiters. Perhaps telling me was a mistake, but he was happy that it was not Romney. I can’t say I’m disappointed either.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:23 pm
bob,
You can’t be serious about the age thing. Older voters are the ones who turnout. Obama will win a large majority of the 10-15% that make up the youth vote, while McCain will win a significant majority of the 25-30% that make up the Senior citizen vote.
As long as McCain doesn’t have any health concerns from now until November age will be an asset for him.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:27 pm
yes I am serious. McCain is in very poor shape on polling with the under 35 voters. I have had more people tell me they are not voting for McCain because of his age, then on any other issue.
The only issue that may prevent McCain from getting elected is his age. Sad to say, but true. And if someone can actually show me a poll that shows this is not an issue, I will reverse my statement.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Romney helps win Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Michigan, and New Hampshire with McCain. 50 million in fundraising from donors in 60 days from Conservatives.
Catholics identify with Romney’s plight (I went to the Iowa Caucus, and they voted for Romney) and Evangelicals aren’t dumb, so they’ll still vote McCain like South Carolina did. The Supreme Court and Iraq are too important to lose.
Romney is the only way McCain wins this thing.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:59 pm
JPL
Let me see if I get this. 41, who was head of the CIA and is a master at disinformation, meets with McCain and then tells someone, your friend, one of the biggest secrets of the moment, with orders to tell no one. But, he tells you right away. Interesting. Does he know something about Area 51 ? Would he tell you ?
July 22nd, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Jack K (94) You need to try again. Just because Romney doing almost as well as Huckabee in every primary/caucus, but way better than McCain, does not mean Evangelicals won’t vote for McCain/Romney ticket. Go and study those exit polls!
July 22nd, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Wiseguy (#120) You have been around on this site a long time! Many of us already have the discussion with you about Romney’s flip-flops. Going from one stance to another DOES NOT constitute as flip-flop, but, rather, a flip! Show us when Romney ever went from pro-choicer to pro-lifer, and then back to pro-choicer, or whatever, then we would accept your claim that Romney has flip-flopped. Remember, flip-flop first sticks with Kerry because he changed his positions many times, even WITHIN A DAY! Show us, or shut up!
July 22nd, 2008 at 9:21 pm
[...] 4 2008 is breaking, un-sourced, that Romney is the VP pick for John McCain. addthis_url = ‘http%3A%2F%2Fbearingdrift.com%2F2008%2F07%2F22%2Fromney-is-the-pick-or-is-he%2F’; [...]
July 22nd, 2008 at 9:22 pm
craig #383:
Spaceships, interplanetary travel? Romney is the Area 51 pick.
July 22nd, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Question for the Evangelicals out there, especially the Romney-haters:
Would you honestly vote for Obama (spent 20 years listening to Jeremiah Wright and tried to pass legislation in Illinois to kill babies who had miraculously survived abortions) over a McCain/Romney ticket?
Is it even possible for anyone to hate members of another religion more than a guy who is the antithesis of everything you stand for?
I’m not trying to be a smart aleck…I just listen to all the socons complain about Romney and really want to understand.
July 22nd, 2008 at 10:22 pm
#388 — I will honestly note vote for McCain. No religious nonsense, no fanatical hatred — but Romney epitomizes everything I am learning to despise about the Republican Party. Please do not ask me to expand any further, yuo wanted an honest answer and I have given them to you. In addition — and I know you are all going to jump on me — I have really given Obama a chance. He just doesn’t seem to me as terrible as he used to. I think he is really trying to come to the middle and I maybe, just maybe, I can meet him there. I am not saving I will vote for Obama — haven’t made that decision yet — but I absolutely will not vote for McCain/Romney. It will be the first presidential election I have missed in 40 years (and I always voted republican), but I simply am learning to loathe the fiscal conservative, capitalistic single-centered individual which nowadays seems to represent the republican establishment. But that’s just me.
July 22nd, 2008 at 10:32 pm
voter – you make a compelling argument. Too bad you are just a troll
July 22nd, 2008 at 10:48 pm
Romney would bring more than squeaky clean qualifications and youthful good looks to the ticket. New polling in Michigan by Ayres, McHenry & Associates shows that Romney gives McCain a significant jump — “off the charts,” as someone familiar with the still-unreleased poll described it — and makes him competitive in a state that hasn’t voted Republican since 1988. Mike Huckabee had little effect on the survey results and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s name was of negligible value
July 22nd, 2008 at 10:57 pm
Jeff,
i have seen voter around before – im not sure he is a troll
July 22nd, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Brett, I’m not sure this is the same ‘voter’. I remember the other voter not more than two days ago indicating that he would reluctantly support a McCain/Romney ticket.
July 22nd, 2008 at 11:38 pm
#390 — don’t throw words around. Firstly, I’m a “she” not a “he”. Secondly, I voted for McCain in the NY primaries. I have contributed to him three times already — as I did for Bush in 2004, as well as the swift boats — and on and on. I respected McCain. I honored him for being a man of virtue and beliefs — and perhaps he will not let me down. I have never said I would support a McCain/Romney ticket, reluctantly or otherwise; I have admitted that I am in the growing majority that Romney will be selected. I hope not. I will vote for any other VP but not for Romney. At that point, I will lose all my respect for McCain.
So we are entitled to our thoughts. I answered a question as honestly as I could — too bad it wasn’t received with a returned virtue.
July 23rd, 2008 at 2:45 am
I think McCain will wait to announce his selection. It was smart to start the rumor…… it has given him some press! It is to McCain advantage to wait….. keep all those possilbe VP s working hard for him as long as possible.
July 23rd, 2008 at 7:07 am
McCain to pick Rush Limbaugh as VP according to the Obama campaign!!!!!!
July 23rd, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Well, I’d probably have mixed feeling about Romney. But I’d least I’d have some use for that foam Mitt mitt that I got in Iowa.
July 23rd, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Odds: Pretty strong. Portman meets each of the usual requirements for a McCain running mate and excels in a couple of categories where few (if any) other candidates can compete. At 52, he’s younger than the 71-year-old McCain–perhaps the key prerequisite for a fellow who’d be the oldest first-termer ever inaugurated–without being young enough or green enough to undercut the GOP’s “Obama is too inexperienced to lead” line of attack (like, say, Bobby Jindal, who’s 37). He’s the only feasible Republican pick from McCain’s No. 1 must-win swing state (it will be nearly impossible for the senator to reach 270 electoral votes if Obama swipes Ohio). He boasts 89 percent lifetime American Conservative Union rating that should satisfy skittish right-wingers and help solidify McCain’s shaky conservative support. Meanwhile, his mild Midwestern temperament and (McCainian) reluctance to throw bombs on social issues will likely prevent moderate swing voters from running in the other direction. On the “more idiosyncratic” side of the ledger, Portman served as the stand-in for Joe Lieberman and John Edwards in Dick Cheney’s 2000 and 2004 debate practice sessions–and apparently performed “just brilliant(ly), according to GOP strategist Mary Matalin. “He has a very fun theatrical capacity,” she told Salon. “He can get into the character.” Given that the vice-presidential debates provide a No. 2 with his or her only opportunity to really effect the election–remember Lloyd Bentsen obliterating Dan Quayle?–McCain might be well-served by tapping the only veep contender with a proven track record on the debate stage.