This is pretty astute.
“I’m thinking of a Republican primary. It starts with a candidate (John McCain/Mitt Romney) who ran once before, came in second place, and won over the party’s elite class without winning over its base. Other candidates, understandably unwilling to accept this, line up: An under-funded social conservative (Mike Huckabee/Rick Santorum), an elder statesman who’s walked to the altar three times (Rudy Giuliani/Newt Gingrich), a libertarian who wants to bring back the gold standard (Ron Paul/Ron Paul). The conservative base is displeased. In the year before the primary, it pines for a perfect candidate. At the end of summer, on (September 5/August 13), it gets him: (Fred Thompson/Rick Perry). The dream candidate immediately rises to the top of national polls, but collapses after lazy, distaff debate performances… The Republican base looks at the wreckage and shudders. It can never allow this to happen ever again.”
The rest of it continues with the same eerie sense of déjà vu. Which means that Mitt Romney will be looking for a running mate that can create the same kind of excitement as Sarah Palin without all the downsides.
He’ll want someone who is adored by the Tea Party but not someone with barely any experience. He’ll want someone charismatic but not with a checkered ethical past. Both of those considerations speak for and against Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida.
The problem with trying to appeal to the Tea Party is that anyone with much experience is going to have done things the Tea Party hates, like voting for TARP or Medicare Part D.
Another thing to consider is that McCain still lost even if Palin gave him a brief lead in the polls. Romney may feel the same need to shore up his base, but why would he want to repeat a strategy that didn’t work? Also, perhaps his primary weakness isn’t the same as John McCain’s. Perhaps he’s a bit of a lightweight in foreign affairs. He’s not a complete novice like George W. Bush, but he also lacks Bush’s swagger or McCain’s temper. He seems a bit soft, even when he’s talking tough. Maybe Romney’s biggest weakness is that he projects weakness. Should his running mate be a veteran with a rough and gruff exterior? Or would that only serve to highlight Romney’s lack of machismo?
Maybe Romney’s greatest weakness is that he’s the son of a governor who made a fortune as a vulture capitalist. Should he pick someone who can balance that out? Someone with a humble upbringing who succeeded against all the odds. Someone like a Mike Huckabee?
I don’t know how Romney will go, but he can’t do worse than Palin. Can he?
I’ve been joking with people today about a Romney/Rand Paul ticket, but it might be a reality if those rumours about the “understanding” between the 2 campaigns are true. It might give Romney the Paul fanatics, but Rand doesn’t have the same sex appeal of Palin. He could be as divisive though.
That will only happen if it become absolutely necessary (i.e., at a brokered convention).
Off topic but here is the link for the movie
When Mitt Romney came to town http://www.kingofbain.com/
“…he can’t do worse than Palin. Can he?”
Hahahahahaahahahahaha…Must.Stop.Laughing….ha.oh..mmm
My, but you are an optimist today.
Joe the Plumber? Christ.O’Dumbbell? Doughy Pantload? Spawn of Cheney? Pam Geller? Sherriff Joe Arpaio? Really, when it comes to the GOP, there is no lower bound to “stupid”. And no upper bound to “evil”.
Sure, some are more plausible than others, but if McCain could pluck Palin from arctic obscurity, then really there are few constraints on Mitt. Mitt would pick Jerry Sandusky, if he thought it would win the election for him, and the Repugnitard echo chamber would cheer him every step of the way.
I thought it was Barbour, but he just pardoned 4 murderers. Mitt needs someone who can debate Biden as a repeat of a Biden/Palin show will not fly with the tea baggers.
“Bob’s for Jobs” McDonnell is available and doesn’t care who the nominee is. How about another governor like the charming Scott Walker or Mitch Daniels? Despite Huckabee’s humble upbringing, I can’t see him on the ticket–so much focus on religion.
Rubio doesn’t actually make any sense from his perspective. Why get tarred as a token on a losing ticket, as he clearly isn’t going to be able to move the Hispanic needle nationwide? His party needs to face up to its bigotry in 2012 when they get obliterated by every nonwhite voting group. Then he can run as a “reconciliation candidate” in 2016. His people should advise him to stay the fuck away.
But perhaps I give him too much credit. Beyond that, I have no idea what the VP situation will be. I’ll admit it, I don’t understand how the GOP picks its vice presidents in the first place. I don’t understand their values. Only two nominees in the last fifty years make any sense: Rockefeller and H.W. Bush.
Agnew? Quayle? Palin? These are the picks of nihilists. Dumping Rockefeller for youngster Dole? Why pair Kemp with Dole in ’96? Cheney made sense in theory, but not when he selected himself for the job (gee, who could have foreseen that he would be a power-hungry, backroom manipulator?).
Romney could pick the San Diego Chicken for all I know.
Robert Reich thinks it’ll be Rubio. But he also predicts Obama/Hilary… And I also it has to be someone from the south that the tea partiers like so Rubio’s a good choice. What about Nikki Haley? Is she too much like Palin? She’s a first term governor and a woman.
Here’s the Reich URL for Romney/Rubio, sorry.
http://robertreich.org/post/15197337805
Which means it definitely won’t be Rubio. Reich is about as reliable as Bill Kristol when it comes to political prognostication.
Three governors come to mind: Chris Christie (NJ), Susana Martinez (NM), and Nikki Haley (SC).
Christie is an interesting suggestion. The RWNJs were practically begging him to run after it became obvious that their boyfriend Perry was a clamoring idiot.
NFW. Christie is the same kind of piece-o-crap technocratic operator. Neither him nor Romney excites the morons in the Repukeliscum base.
Really? Christie is a technocrat? Can we get some confirmation of this by our Jersey/mid-Atlantic contributors?
From afar, Christie has always struck me as the formerly-working-class-now-upper-middle-class tough guy type of pol. Like Giuliani in New York. Or Capuano in Massachusetts.
He’s just a Jersey boy. It’s an attitude. I don’t think it sells well elsewhere. At least, that’s been my personal experience.
Look for how Chris Christie reacts to the gay marriage stuff in NJ. Do you think it’ll be a woman with Nikki Haley? I doubt either of them.
Haley adds nothing to the ticket other than the fact that she was adorned by Palin and she’s an attractive woman — it’s sad that I have to point these two things out as it appears I’m not looking at anything positive she brings because she’s a woman, but them’s the facts.
Christie’s political career is already over. This oafish idiot only attracts wingers because he yells at liberals and is a fan of confrontation. He has the same appeal as Newt. But he’s a shitty pol, no matter how much the Village tries to pimp him. He only won because Corzine was hated — with good reason, judging by his current situation. He couldn’t get a majority, and he barely even won. He’s done.
Who else is there? Jim DeMint? He’s too important in the Senate.
I’m going with Bob McDonnell for the same reasons as before: popular, low unemployment in Virginia (thanks to its closeness to DC, really), Webb’s seat, Virginia is a must-win for Republicans.
Maybe Thune, but I doubt it. Nothing in his geography. Is he well-known? I barely know anything about him other than the fact that he gets GOP Insiders hard.
With McDonnell the GOP will double down on hating the gays/immigrants and that Va low unemployment….Va has got to be in the top 5 states when it comes to those overpaid government employees.
Nah I doubt you’ll see much gay hating in the GE. I think we’re at a nexus. It’s not electorally advantageous in a presidential election to support gay marriage because popular vote doesn’t elect the president, the electoral college does. However, it’s also no longer electorally advantageous to hate the gays either — in fact, it might even harm you. Once the primary is over, Romney will backpedal any gay hatred he’s had.
Immigrants, though? Oh for sure. That’s definitely on the list. Depends what you mean by “government employees”. If you mean government contractors who are paid by Raytheon and Lockheed but not the government itself, sure. If I were to work for Raytheon — could happen, but it’s unlikely — I’d probably be paid around $60,000 to start right out of college, and be up to $110,000 or so within 10 years. Thus, the low unemployment (thanks, Quantico and proximity to DC!)
Also about McDonnell specifically: he has the wink and nod to neoconfederates and tea partiers, but also has this weird appeal in his personality with independents and moderates.
Perhaps Jindal. Not exciting but he might draw some folks in.
Ah, nevermind, he is a naturalized citizen.
No he’s not. He was born in Baton Rouge.
Yikes. I misread the wikipedia article. You’re right. I gotta get more sleep.
History shows Republicans can always do worse.
Of the candidates mentioned, McDonnell sounds like their best choice to me.
I keep thinking he’ll go with a CHRISTIAN-pillar-of-the-community-rich-businessman-non-politician-type.
An interesting question in speculating about possible running mates for Mitt is who can best act as his attack dog? Understanding the racial and ethnic politics that could backfire from attacks from the wrong person or playing too directly to some elements of the GOP base. Sarah Palin failed miserably in that role in the 2008 campaign although she did try hard.
Who would be an obscure backbench GOP member of Congress who could be plucked from obscurity to fulfill this role? Someone who could be disagreeable in the nicest way.
Is there anyone who fits that bill, or is Mitt faced with grasping after a more well-known red-meat slinger.
No to another governor.
Someone with foreign policy experience.
Someone who can negate the far-right base because they will vote Republican anyhow with the right choice (other than Evangelical).
My thought: Petraeus.
That might be awkward considering Petraeus is currently Director of Central Intelligence.
Bet on it.
He’ll be the red meat and Romney the above-it-all “presidential” type.
Romney needs some heat. The rock-solid Ratpubs will vote for him in any two-party race against a DemRat, but that won’t win an election. Roughly 30% of the likely voters are hard-core Rats and about the same percentage is hard-core Dems. (That’s the lowest approval ratings of presidents in the last decade or so no matter how impossibly badly they fucked up. 28%, 30%…somewhere in there.) That leaves about 40% of the electorate that will decide who wins…barring vote theft and the idiocy of the whole electoral college system of course. Romney needs to attract 20+% of the undecideds and perhaps also lure some people into the voting booth who normally don’t vote. Christie is a hell-raiser. He will make headlines while kicking asses and taking names while Romney stays above the fray. Nobody else will do. Watch.
AG
Actually, the birther part of the tea party have already said Rubio can’t be VP/POTUS because his parents weren’t citizens when he was born — though born in the USA. So he is not natural born.
What bullshit. The repugnicans are just going to have to fight it out amongst themselves. That should be fun to watch.
A continuation of the circular firing squad and know nothing, unthinking, rote constitutionalists.
They do them no favors and do nothing to show their relevance when they debate obscure and unknowable corners of the constitutional intent at the expense of what is really the need right now.
I think that the constitutional fundamentalists, like the biblical fundamentalists, pride themselves on NOT being concerned about actual circumstances. What they refuse to recognize is that reality, i.e. developing problems that didn’t exist before, gives the impetus and shows the way towards revisiting the unchanging PRINCIPLES of the constitution, to develop NEW applications.
i’d hate to give romney any (good) ideas but …
john bolton.
the international version of shurf joe.
an experienced pol without a voting record to haunt him.
loves kicking hippies and furriners.
not overtly religious, but the fundajelicals will hop on board for “israel, now or never”.
only cheney does the base loves more.
well, that was quick:
john just gave himself the kiss o’ death and prematurely bankrupted his value on any gop ticket. an unforced error on his part.
Anyone have any thoughts about Brownback??
I’d really rather not, thankyouverymuch.
Pawlenty. He’s boring as hell, but boring isn’t bad when it comes to a VP.