The Candidates
Featured Archives
Does Obama’s poke to the eyes with a sharp stick of Hillary Clinton and her supporters give John McCain the opening he needs to select someone like Carly Fiorina or Meg Whitman?
Think about it… How do you think the predictable Obama/Biden attacks on Whitman or Fiorina as “unqualified to be President of the United States” will fly with these voters and women in general?
August 23rd, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Go Meg!
Sadly, Carly’s out. A CEO who is fired and gets an 8-figure parachute just won’t fly with middle America.
August 23rd, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Oh brother. Neither have ever run for office. They cannon possibly have the necessary command of the issues. This is just more ABR wishful thinking.
August 23rd, 2008 at 12:51 pm
I’m hoping for an unpredictable pick from McCain, however I’m sure it will be a safe one…Pawlenty or Romney…
August 23rd, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Martha,
I sincerely believe that Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina are each more qualified on the economy than Barack Obama and Joe Biden put together times five.
August 23rd, 2008 at 12:56 pm
To be frank, all this shameless sucking up to Hillary Clinton by calling her a “DLC centrist” and someone with “foundational American beliefs” and subtly playing the Obama-is-a-sexist card on the part of McCain supporters is kind of sickening. It’s nice to know though that mainstream Republicans will pimp themselves out to even Hillary Clinton if it means a few extra votes. Yuck.
August 23rd, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Two words encapsulate the Obama campaign:
canine arthritis
August 23rd, 2008 at 12:59 pm
I think this has to bring Palin back into the mix as well.
Carly is more aesthetically pleasing than Meg, but Whitman is probably the safer bet politically.
The more I think about it, the more McCain’s 11th hour leak of Romney makes it seem as if McCain was trying really hard to prevent Obama from picking Hillary (the thinking being that Hillary wouldn’t be needed against McCain/Romney). That may mean that McCain was trying to bait Obama into picking a man so that McCain could pick a woman.
I think a female veep pick is much, much more likely today than it was a week ago.
August 23rd, 2008 at 12:59 pm
If McCain is arguing he’s ready to be Prez but Obama sure isn’t, shouldn’t he have another experienced hand to further emphasize that Obama isn’t ready to be POTUS? Unlike Obama, he shouldn’t compensate through his pick.
And a candidate without political experience under their might be a riskier, looser cannon than Biden.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Josiah,
How did Ronald Reagan win landslide victories in 1980 & 1984? He came within 3,700 votes in Minnesota of a 50 state sweep.
He did this because he reached out to Centrist DLC-style Democrats, and emphasized the large areas of agreement in which we agree. There are still huge swaths of Harry Truman/Scoop Jackson Dems out there that still reflexively vote Democratic. Maybe this is the time for them to finally become Republicans for good.
Passing on a very real opportunity to revive the Reagan Coalition is beyond foolish.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:00 pm
DaveG,
Again, Meg Whitman is pro-choice.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Kavon #9,
Your remarks are under the assumption that Hillary is a “centrist DLC-style Democrat.”
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Josiah #11,
It doesn’t matter if she is. What matters is the the vast majority of her supporters are.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Kavon, Meg is pro-choice. That effectively ends her possibility. There was a USNEWS blog post that said that the pro-choice trial balloon was probably for her. That makes sense b/c McCain mentioned her at Saddleback. Meg does have an outstanding management record. She would make a lot of sense if she were pro-life, but that means that she will probably make a very good Governor of California. Her social moderation will go over there. Carly is dead; the HP stuff will be never ending.
I just wish there was a solid female choice, but there doesn’t seem to be any.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Matthew and IR-MN,
Probably. It depends on how definitive/explicit her statements on Abortion are.
Sarah Palin. Just do it.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:05 pm
#13, do you have that link?
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Kavon #12,
Then why not suck up to Hillary supporters instead of disingenuously sucking up to Hillary herself?
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:09 pm
It was explicit in a LA Times article, which ends her candidacy. It was in the last long thread yesterday. I agree with you on Palin. But you have to think about the scandal. It’s not over yet; though the prosecutor said Palin was complying so well that he didn’t have to issue subpoenas. You know the MSM will play up her scandal. She’s Nixon, says AC360. Look at what they are doing with McCain’s housing statement.
Adam has made a valiant defense of Sarah. But MSNBC and CNN will be going for her jugular and will say that she’s not “seasoned” enough for the presidency. I hope McCain looks at John Breaux. I think I read about him in realclearpolitics or the WSJ.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:10 pm
bob, here ya go, http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/24/nation/na-whitman24
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Josiah #16,
I find it rather ludicrous that you feel I’m “sucking up to Hillary herself.”
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Kavon,
Given your initial post it seems like you are asking if a woman VP choice will sucker Obama and Biden to make attacks on McCain and his female running mate to do a bona fide rope-a-dope strategy knowing the attacks will go too far.
Is that what you want to know our thoughts on?
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Here’s a wild card pick:
Brigadier General Angela Salinas
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Josiah, it is not about “sicking up” to Hillary supporters, it is about exploiting your opponents weakness.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Evil Conservative #20,
Yes. Basically…
I feel that Whitman and Fiorina are qualified to be VPOTUS. So if McCain goes with either of them, he puts Obama/Biden in a box.
The natural line of attack would be to attack either of them as “unqualified” for the position. However, this line of attack will further piss off women who already feel that a less qualified male stole the nomination from a more qualified woman.
So what does that leave them? In the case of Meg Whitman, hardly anything. In the case of Carly Fiorina, it is a bunch of faux-scandals about her time at HP that voters will lose interest in after like 5 seconds.
So does Obama snubbing Hillary and women voters in general with his Veep choice free John McCain to go ahead and make an unconventional selection like Whitman or Fiorina?
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Angela Salinas is:
Marine (check)
General (check)
Hispanic (check)
female (double check)
If we’re going with an affirmative action pick let’s go all the way…
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:23 pm
I think at this point that a female VP gives McCain the keys to the kingdom, so to speak. The trooper scandal in Alaska makes me extremely nervous, but Palin has enough of that Reagan ability to appeal to centrist Dems to make her extremely electorally valuable. There’s something about the woman that makes you want to like her. And, just like Reagan, she can articulate pretty conservative principles in a reassuring, nonthreatening way. She softens the edges, so to speak. And I’ve never heard her make a rash or hasty statement. Think of what would ensue if McCain picked her.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:26 pm
#24 – That’s a great idea, but do we have any evidence that she’s even a Republican?
I think McCain should learn from Obama’s ho-hum pick and avoid the “safe” picks of Romney and Pawlenty. Creating some excitement is an invaluable thing, and either of those picks would be a kind of anti-event. I just think that going in either of those directions would be squandering a great opportunity.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:28 pm
EGS, wrong Angela.
A truly tested female pick would be Angela Merkel.
She rains on Barry’s Europhile parade to boot. =)
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Carly Fiorina is an idiot. When I was 18, I watched a press conference she held shortly after being named CEO of HP. I said “Well, it is clear they just wanted a woman, because that lady does not know anything about HP’s business.” I was completely unsurprised that she led the company down the tubes.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:29 pm
I think McCain should go with a woman but someone who has political experience. Palin or even Hutchinson (can’t argue experience there).
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Oh shoot, let’s just play identity politics, shall we? Throw real qualifications out the window, we need a woman!!!
Good luck with that strategy, it will work for about 10 minutes. After that, any of the women mentioned will be dead meat because THEY ARE NOT QUALIFIED.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Biden is a major mistake on Obama’s part. It has been very difficult for the right to attack Obama because of his lack of history and his unwilling ness to engage with the media.
Now, Obama gives the right someone with a long, quotable history, and a candidate who is not afraid to speak his mind.
Yes, John McCain should pick a women,
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Whitman and Fiornia don’t work
the move is:
Kay Bailey Hutchison or
John Breaux
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Both women candidates , who are mentioned, just because of trying to get the Hillary
core of voters Ithink is not wise just to counter Obama’s recent VP pick. The voters
angst, and I’ve heard this from everyday comments from ordinary folks, is McCain’s age
as well as his melanoma. What they worry about as they are about to push the lever, is
what if something happens to Mccain, who is best qualified to step in and lead? It is Rudy
who has been tested and proven great leadership when things go wrong. Somebody has yet to
show that both these women have the guts and experience that they are up to the task.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:34 pm
Glo #33,
The sitting Governor of a state is qualified to be VPOTUS.
Vice President Sarah Palin. Just do it Senator!
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:34 pm
Clinton supporters furious.
http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=3046134&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,409225,00.html
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:37 pm
#26, I had a friend of mine that saw her speak at some sort of Hispanic event. She certainly came off as a conservative.
She’s also a very good speaker.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Whatever happened to Heather Wilson? I always liked her. She’s military as far as I know, and she’s from NM, which borders CO, two swing states.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:41 pm
#25. “The trooper scandal in Alaska makes me extremely nervous, but Palin has enough of that Reagan ability to appeal to centrist Dems to make her extremely electorally valuable. There’s something about the woman that makes you want to like her. And, just like Reagan, she can articulate pretty conservative principles in a reassuring, nonthreatening way. She softens the edges, so to speak. And I’ve never heard her make a rash or hasty statement. Think of what would ensue if McCain picked her.”
Spot on. Her “likability” factor and her ability to connect with so many different types of people far exceeds that of other possible VP candidates. And her Wow factor makes her a rock star. I’m less nervous about the Trooper scandal, especially when Obama chose a plagiarizer as his VP.
Just do it, McCain. Choose Palin. You’re going to win no matter who you choose, but this a great opportunity for the Republicans to re-brand themselves. Just say no to the same old same old!
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:43 pm
FNC’s Brett Baier interviewed McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds about an hour and a half ago to get the campaign’s reaction to Obama’s selection of Biden. Here’s the transcript:
BAIER: What’s your take?
BOUNDS: Well, you know, our take is, it’s an interesting choice, and I think the timing is actually pretty revealing. If you look at the way they rolled this out in the middle of the night last night, moving into a weekend, which is generally sort of a slower news cycle, it’s like this is sort of a disguise move. I think if you’re really looking to analyze this, I think the Obama campaign recognizes that this election underscores their inexperience. Barack Obama is going to be, probably, actually, most certainly, the most inexperienced presidential candidate in the modern era, and by bringing on someone with a little more experience, what you do is expose Barack Obama’s inexperience. So, as we move through the campaign, you’re going to see Joe Biden talk more and more about his experience, but there will be a subtle contrast with the candidate he’s actually running with. There’s only one Commander in Chief. Barack Obama has shown he’s very inexperienced, and he’s shown poor judgment on the issues that matter.
BAIER: You’ve already come out with a campaign ad, referring back to some of the things Senator Biden has said in his campaign this year about Barack Obama. Will this choice affect John McCain’s pick?
BOUNDS: No, I don’t think so, Brett. John McCain is going to make a very principled choice about who he will stand with. It will be somebody that is ready to lead, that shares his vision to change Washington, and begin to deliver the things that the American people expect. They want their tax dollars to go further in Washington. They want wasteful spending to go down. They want food prices to come down, gas prices to come down, and someone that has a steady hand with foreign policy. It’s a dangerous world. This is not the time for a rookie in the White House, and I think that’s going to make the real difference in November.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Isn’t it fairly obvious that the VP’s are next in line to the Presidency? Doesn’t it seem that a Joe Biden pick, regardless of what you or I may think of Biden, meets that next in line criteria. Don’t you guys get it that the Vice-President has to have some depth of relevant experience ? Palin doesn’t YET cut it. In 4 years , maybe, but not now. Jindal doesn’t YET cut it. Fiorina and Whitman don’t cut it either, aside from the Pro- Choice issue. We are talking about an election that is 70 + days away guys, not next year.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:52 pm
No, Kavon, the sitting Governor of a state is NOT always ready to be VPOTUS and CERTAINLY not always President. Anybody say SPIRO AGNEW all together now.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:53 pm
# 38
How do you get to be a ” Rock Star” if you have never sold a record?
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:53 pm
# 38
How do you get to be a ” Rock Star” if you have never sold a record?
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:53 pm
I’m really getting psyched up about the possibility of Palin being on the ticket. And whichever poster said she’s not qualified is full of crap. She’s running a state, for pete’s sake, and doing a great job of it. And, aside from her qualifications and capabilities, she’d be a great spokesperson for American greatness. She’s just an inspiring person who appeals to the best in people. Even on talk shows, I’ve never heard her make a flippant or rude statement about the opposition. Maybe I’m getting carried away, but she connects with me, and, I’d wager, plenty of other Americans. I respond quite a bit to personality, and just find her completely winning.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Bounds’ comments seem to point away from both Romney and Pawlenty. In what sense could either be said to have a “steady hand” in foreign policy? Romney’s plausibly a credible commander in chief, but that’s just not a description that fits him. Are we looking at a shocker of a pick? And no…not Liebs.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:58 pm
craig,
Governors are more ready to be President than Senators.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Gee,
Agnew was VP on 2 victorious GOP tickets, including a huge landslide.
If Palin ends up replicating Agnew’s success I’d be happier than a pig in slop.
Give me a 2 term GOP President any day of the week. Especially in this cycle.
And if she ends up having to resign in 5 years because of a tax scandal, who cares?
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Not to me: Biden’s resume only shows a life-long politician who has never run anything more significant than a Senate committee meeting. The two Dem candidates on the ticket together have never had to lead, and I’ve never seen any indication that either can.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Win M.
I like Palin, but she has far too thin a resume. She has only been gov for a short time of a very small state (800,000). Before that she was a mayor of a city of 8000. She has no experience in national politics – which would quickly eat her alive. She is under investiagion for abuse of power. She imposed a large tax on the oil companies in Alaska who claim she has made it more difficult for them to drill and refine oil – thus making prices higher.
She’s beautiful, smart and seems very capable. but she is not prepared to campaign effectively, and she is definitely NOT prepared to be CIC or pres. if necessary. There is no reason to take a completely unnecessary risk just to put a woman on the ticket.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Jim,
Agnew was a convicted felon sentenced to jail for crimes under investigation in Baltimore County, before he went to Washington. He resigned in disgrace. You would be happy as a pig in slop? He was a pig in slop….his own.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Kristofer
Perhaps, but I don’t know why. Remember Governor Bill Clinton ? Remember Governor Jimmy Carter ? Remember Senator John Kennedy? Remember Governor Spiro Agnew ?
If you have a great deal of management experience before you get to the Senate, you are far better prepared for the Presidency than you would be with a law degree and a couple of years on the bench, before you take over the statehouse.
Just my opinion, but I don’t see a causal relationship.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Fiorina is a complete disaster. She can’t handle Meet the Press or any of the press, let alone the Presidency. A terrible spokesperson.
I don’t know a lot about Whitman, but I think Palin is a better pick if you’re going to go that route. Similar to how I don’t mind Lieberman as the VP, but I do mind that Ridge and Rudy are much better picks for what a Lieberman pick is trying to accomplish.
McCain should probably just pick Pawlenty: a competent spokesman that Mac is completely comfortable with and someone who doesn’t make a splash since Mac doesn’t really need one now.
Remember, a lot of the talk about a Palin or Lieberman or even Rudy as VP and highest polling Presidential candidate for all of 2007 was because we all thought generic Republican would be down 20 points in August of 2008. Well, we’re down 2-3 points and we have our guy “Truman-ing along” as a sharp commenter here aptly put it. Biden won ‘t take the limelight from Obama, so McCain shouldn’t pick someone who takes the limelight from him or the race. Get the focus back on McCain vs. Obama and we should win in a year we have no business of winning.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Palin’s dead on arrival. Trooper scandal is not something a VP contender is going to recover from.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:15 pm
The only republican woman ready to be President of The United State, read again, President of the USA, is Condoleeza Rice. I know many of you has some kind of bushphobia but suggest that a 2 years governor from a little state is experience enough to be President is silly. Sarah Palin is part of the future of the GOP but she isn’t ready now.
Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina doesn’t have experience, never been elect to public office. That would be stupid.
If McCain pick a woman it should be Rice, if not then someone who can be President and can debate with Biden and that person is Mitt Romney.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:16 pm
It’ll be Romney.
As I saw on another site, “In the debate, Romney will eat Biden for lunch and hand him the check.”
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Just in case anybody should believe craig (extremely unlikely) — Agnew was not a convicted felon “before he went to Washington.”
It’s possible (tough to tell because of the incoherence of his comments), that he means the crimes were committed before Agnew went to Washington.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:18 pm
McCain can pick up a nice percentage of Hillary’s supporters if he is wise in is VP pick. McCain is pro choice and will be making all the important decision. To rule out possible candidates for VP because they are not as pro choice as the religious groups want is foolish. Someone will always be unhappy because a lot of factions make up the Republican party. Let’s stop picking our leaders on the basis of religious tenets. Just because a leader in order to get elected has said they will let women choose does not mean they necessarily support abortion. I’m glad that Rudy was mayor of NYC because he did wonderful things. If he had been 100% against abortion he would have never been elected. Abortion is not the only basis for picking a candidate unless you want a weak candidate. JMHO
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:22 pm
#57, McCain is Pro-life.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:23 pm
If McCain picks Sarah Palin or Kay Bailey Hutchinson, that would seal the deal for me.
For now I’m watching and waiting.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Correct! After years of hearing about alleged Bush administration abuse of power like the Plame affair and the US Attorney firings, does anyone think that the Obama campaign would not shine a bright light on Palin’s alleged transgressions in order to enhance the McSame theme?
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:37 pm
If you are watching Joe Biden speak, you will see what the game plan for the Dems is….Biden is coming right at John McCain. He is coming right at the economic policies that the country deal with . Obama will take the ” High Road ” and Biden will stay on McCain day and night as long as the GOP does not have an effective block. Who can run an effective interference for McCain against Biden? Who can turn defense into offense? Most of the people discussed on this blog would be run over like a VW by a Mack Truck
This will be a war folks, not a parlor exercise by academics.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:41 pm
#61
Perhaps an extraordinarily successful former prosecutor would be available for the job?
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Big S, 62, the same that lost all the debates and all the primaries?.
August 23rd, 2008 at 3:05 pm
BobH
I don’t even know you, but you appear to be a bit of a dolt .( Look it up. It’s a real word). I have no idea why you choose to be personally offensive. Perhaps this is not a good day for you. Or, perhaps you are an overly sensitive young man. Perhaps you had a fence around your house when you were a young child. Whatever, I certainly don’t want to cross you and be subject to such sarcastic rhetoric. Skewered on the sword of your verbosity, so to speak.
Agnew was forced to resign because of crimes he committed ( bribery for one ) while he was County Executive of Baltimore County in 1966-68 before he became VP. Nixon thoroughly vetted him for VP. ( Ha Ha ). But I go too fast for your limited reading skills.
You may think this is ” incoherent.” if I race ahead too quickly.
Try this,
It’s not important if anybody believes me. It’s not important if you believe me. Its really not important if you can read this. It is just the facts. Only ticket in history where both parts of the ticket were criminals who were politically pardoned. And, hey, I voted for
Nixon, twice, no THREE times counting 1960. I worked hard for Nixon three times. I met Ted Agnew at the Inauguration in 1968. But the truth is, he was convicted of bribery, resigned and then was pardoned ( for something, obviously )
August 23rd, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Where we’re at:
Obama is the Messiah (no explanation needed)
Biden thinks he’s god (Anyone remember his ‘He’s got the whole world in his hands’ ad?)
The only question is who’s gonna complete the Obama Trinity?
August 23rd, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Metro – to answer your question from the other post the answer is: Romney.
August 23rd, 2008 at 3:55 pm
biden will tear romney a new one on foreign policy in a veep debate. end of story. mccain-powell bring it on!
August 23rd, 2008 at 3:56 pm
I agree that picking a woman would be the best choice for McCain. It’s definitely the best strategic choice, it would make McCain stand out, there are some strong and articulate women to choose from, there is definitely the appeal to Hillary supporters, the choice would be non-traditional and I’m not sure there are any other choices besides some of the women mentioned: Fiorina, Whitman, Palin that combine the strengths needed in a VP candidate. For example, I like Pawlenty, but will he be a sharp enough attacker or a strong enough personality? Also, Romney can attack, but he’s too grating in some ways — not an appealing enough ticket. I definitely vote for a woman.
It would also break the complete dominance of senate experience the executive candidates. Mix it up a little.
August 23rd, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Falz Says: Big S, 62, the same that lost all the debates and all the primaries?
While Rudy never ended up winning his firewall state of Florida, he most certainly was considered the consensus winner in three, arguably four of the debates.
Here are results from a SurveyUSA poll that found Rudy won the Presidential Debate in California last May:
Here are comments from just one debate last June in which Giuliani shined:
National Review’s Rich Lowry: “‘I turned around New York City, I can turn around Washington’ That’s the Rudy message and it’s a powerful one (and Romney seemed tinny immediately afterward talking about “our products and services”).”
National Review’s Rich Lowry On Giuliani: “Does anyone doubt that this guy is ready to be President of the United States? Makes almost everyone else on the stage look small by comparison.”
National Review’s John Podhoretz On Giuliani: “He is doing a brilliant job tonight.”
The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza: “Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani was more forceful on the question. ‘It was absolutely the right thing to do,’ said Giuliani. He pivoted to assert that the ‘Democrats were in denial’ by trying to separate Iraq from the broader global war on terror.”
National Review’s Rich Lowry On Mayor Giuliani’s Answer To Immigration Question: “‘No unifying purpose,’ ‘typical Washington mess’—right on the substance and right on the politics.”
National Review’s Rich Lowry: “The Underlying Thematic Argument between Rudy and McCain on the immigration bill is anti-Washington v. pro-Washington, with Rudy attacking the way Washington worked on this thing and McCain defending it. Politically, that’s a big winner for Rudy.”
The New York Times’ Katharine Seelye: “Rudolph W. Giuliani is criticizing the Democrats too. (Hmmm.) He was typically direct – yes, he said, he would not rule out the nuclear option against Iran if Iran developed nuclear weapons – but he got in a dig at the Democrats. He said that during their debate, they sounded like they were ‘back in the 1990’s.’ Those were the Clinton years, lest anyone has forgotten.”
National Review’s Rich Lowry “Rudy’s Straight-forward answer to the Iraq question – not a mistake – made Romney seem wishy-washy.”
National Review’s John Derbyshire: “Forty Minutes In: Rudy looking good – lucid, good-humored, pushing the ‘executive prowess’ image …”
National Review’s Rich Lowry: “Rudy on Gays in the Military: Artful.”
National Review’s Kathryn Jean Lopez: “Rudy’s Libby answer was excellent — including when he scolded Wolf for playing throwing the clock at him when we’re talking about ‘a man’s life.’”
National Review’s Rich Lowry: “Rudy: man, he’s in command of these debates lately.”
National Review’s John Podhoretz: “’The sentence was wildly excessive.’ Straightforward and powerful, and gave Rudy a chance to point out he recommended 5,000 pardons to Ronald Reagan. In this debate you can see how good Rudy can be on his feet when he’s focused.”
National Review’s John Derbyshire: “[Giuliani] jumps right into health insurance issue. Clear, concise. He’s looking really good tonight.”
American Spectator’s James Poulos: “Rudy finally clear, commanding, and crisp on socialized health care. Standing up from his chair looks professional and respectful, a dare I say Clintonian assertiveness.” 6/5/07
August 23rd, 2008 at 4:13 pm
John Breaux – I’d never heard this mentioned before today, but recall thinking years ago when he announced he was retiring that he was one of the last reasonable dems left. If McCain wants a transformational pick of a centrist dem that can help corral independent votes this could be a good dark horse pick.
- Weight to counter biden
- Calm \ Folksy \ Common ground type of speaker
- Pro-life;Relatively pro-gun
- Supports tax cuts (including bush’s), especially estate and capital gains.
- Supported many items of GOP reforms, balanced budgets, welfare, Medicare, Social Security.
- Healthcare and Finance and energy interests
- Left office very popular
- Rumored to have been interested in recent years in getting back into the game
Downsides:
- If you want a 90-100% attack dog he’s not the guy. Would he even agree to run with McCain?
- Has been doing lobbying the last couple years
- Doesn’t help any particular state that’s in play.
- Doesn’t help setup anything for 2012, may not hurt too much either.
I’m curious what others think about this if say Romney is not the pick, sure beats the hell out of lieberman and can be billed as the transformational choice McCain’s camp has mentioned. I could live with it – far more then lieberman that’s for sure.
August 23rd, 2008 at 4:39 pm
What about the Democratic Gov of Oregan? He appear @ an event with Senator McCain and is not attending the convention next week.
August 23rd, 2008 at 4:44 pm
#70, he’s too liberal (but he’s a maverick like the Gov of NH), but Knighthawk is right, John Breaux would make an excellent pick. I think he’d go over well with the voters in PA/OH that McCain needs to win over.
August 23rd, 2008 at 4:51 pm
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/23/vp-ball-now-in-mccains-court/
The 10th paragraph is interesting.
August 23rd, 2008 at 4:57 pm
Downside of McCain-Romney:
Ticket would be derided as “Methuselah-Croesus ‘08″.
August 23rd, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Enough of the desparate response picks. McCain has been down to his short short list for a week. He has assessed their strengths and weaknesses. He has evaluated them in terms of what kind of campaign he wants to run and what kind of campaign he thinks Obama will run, against what he thinks the landscape looks like.
Look at how much the landscape has changed since March. Weak dollar. $150 a barrel oil, Dem weakness on drilling and nuclear, Georgia, Iraq timetable, Afghanistan surge, Usain Bolt and Michael Phelps. (All right those last two don’t figure, but if the opening ceremonies didn’t strike fear of a Chinese hegemon, you weren’t paying attention.)
Now, Obama has provided the last piece. He has shown McCain his entire arsenal. He has revealed the postion of all his troops.
The question for McCain is, “did this choice change any of the calculus?” Did it expose him to any new threat from Obama?
NO! They chose a traditional, Eastern, Liberal Democrat, 36 years in DC. No Energy cred, no economy cred, no executive experience. And his foreign policy exposure only exposes Obama’s inperience more.
That leaves McCain to go head to head with Obama on experience and CinC. If his VP is going to go on attack on Obama’s lack of experience as well, he will have to be experienced in his own right. The VP going on the offensive will be necessary to keep Biden off McCain’s back.
(The head fakes have worked. They kept the MSM guessing. Like artillery, they kept the Dem’s heads down and pushed them into a kill zone by making a VP choice that UNDERMINES Obama’s core message of change. McCain’s tactics delivered exactly what they wanted, an exposed and indefensible position.)
The choice will be extremely traditional. It will REINFORCE McCain’s core message – Ready to Lead! Ready for Iraq and Islamic extremists, but also for resurgent Russia and aspirant China. Ready to control government spending. Ready to kick start the economy, rebuild the strength of the dollar and our markets overseas. Ready to tackle our dependance on foreign energy sources. Ready to restore prosperity to the American middle income family.
He will ask the American electorate two questions:
Between me and Obama, do you think you will be safer??
Between me and Obama, do you think you will be better off?
His VP choice will reinforce that commitment to America and it will inspire confidence that he can accomplish the mission. The choice won’t be window dressing or some frilly lacey thing to show how cute he can be.
His choice will inform America about John McCain, just as Obama’s did.
And most of the names offered here are absurd and childish. But then, most of you won’t be making the choice.
August 23rd, 2008 at 5:12 pm
#67 – Yeah, I agree, unfortunately. Romney was never at his best when he was discussing foreign policy and never quite convinced me he fully knew what he was talking about. His Iraq talk always seemed like pretty thin pandering. I just think Biden would clean up in a Romney-Biden debate, at least on Iraq. I would pay good money to see Biden have to deal with Powell.
August 23rd, 2008 at 5:13 pm
#74 – “His VP choice will reinforce that commitment to America and it will inspire confidence that he can accomplish the mission. The choice won’t be window dressing or some frilly lacey thing to show how cute he can be.”
I can’t be the only one that finds that “frilly lacey thing” comment to be pretty odiously sexist.
August 23rd, 2008 at 5:27 pm
Sorry 76, no sexism intended. Didn’t think of it as a gender thing at all. More had a picture of a victorian house in mind, lots of gingerbread.
If it offended, and with that explanation, I apologize.
August 23rd, 2008 at 5:31 pm
But the Biden pick does make the idle speculation fun again. Party pooper.
Now, where was I? Oh, yeah: Newt would take the ideological and rhetorical fight back to the enemy. Heh heh heh. KABOOM!!
August 23rd, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Just how incredibly stupid do you think women are? How insulting. Let me illuminate you guys — women are not interchangeable. IF I was a Hillary supporter — which I have never been — I am not going to hop onto the McCain bandwagon because he has taken Meg, or Carly or Sarah on board. Furthermore, I am not going to get insulted if the DNC starts ripping into any of these females simply because they are women.
By the way, this is not to suggest at all that any of these individuals would be bad choices on their individual merit. But to suggest that women would blindly vote for another woman on gender only is frankly insulting.
And, by the way, Obama made a smart move. Biden goes a long, long way to soothing Hillary supporters — not all all of them, but enough. And he is certainly going to grab many blue collar workers.
August 23rd, 2008 at 6:16 pm
Hopefully this means nothing (From Politico)
Tea-leaf time: McCain camp plans September veep funder in Minneapolis
John McCain is planning a late-September luncheon fundraiser in Minneapolis featuring his running mate, according to an invitation sent to Minnesota Republicans today.
The email invite touts the “Special Guest” as “The Vice Presidential Nominee.”
The event is to be held Sept. 22 at the Hilton Minneapolis.
Major cautionary note/”To Be Sure” line: There is no reason to think that Mitt Romney or somebody else couldn’t help raise money for the party — and, with McCain taking public funds, that’s where the proceeds will go — in the Twin Cities.
But nobody would be a draw among Minnesota Republicans more than the Gopher State’s own Gov. Tim Pawlenty.
August 23rd, 2008 at 6:18 pm
How is Biden blue collar? He’s worked in the senate for the last 36 yrs. Did you see that estate of his on tv today? Blue collar? Hardly.
August 23rd, 2008 at 6:21 pm
#80 – I don’t think anyone’s suggesting that women are stupid or that they blindly vote for one another. I think what we’re recognizing is that people are human. Clearly many female voters were energized by Hillary’s candidacy because they felt – rightly so – that in addition to being qualified for the job, there is inherent value in shattering the glass ceiling and electing a female POTUS. Obama’s primary results suggest that many African-Americans feel the same way about electing a black president. I fully understand this impulse and don’t begrudge it one bit. I think it would be terrific for our country to elect a non-white-male president. I don’t think anyone’s asserting that women would vote for McCain based on a Palin/Fiorina/Whitman VP without a care as to their qualifications, but rather that there are quite a few women out there that would be receptive to putting a qualified, intelligent, accomplished woman in the White House. No one’s talking about elevating an unqualified female candidate to the ticket simply because of her gender; there’s been plenty of debate on this site about the qualifications of those three women.
August 23rd, 2008 at 7:26 pm
I think a mistake you that some are making here is treating women as a monolithic voting bloc: that Hillary voters will automatically be swayed to vote for anti-choice McCain if he selects Sarah Palin or (insert other female name here) as a running mate. That’s pretty condescending. McCain comes off as a bit of a skirt chaser and gigolo – choosing a female running mate (especially one who has never held office) seems to be pandering.
August 23rd, 2008 at 8:35 pm
There are 2 Martha’s apparently, because I didn’t post that.
August 23rd, 2008 at 8:40 pm
Gery – not necessarily. Romney won in MN even though Pawlenty endorsed McCain. A poll showed Pawlenty makes MN voters less likely to vote for McCain.
August 25th, 2008 at 2:31 am
I just looked at Angela Salina’s military record.
She is perfect! A woman with flag rank military experience and a Hispanic to boot.