I generally ignore the New York Daily News but their piece on Mitt Romney’s vice-presidential announcement merits a little discussion. First, there’s the bottom line. Romney will not make an announcement until after the London Olympics conclude on August 12th, but he will make an announcement prior to the commencement of the Republican National Convention on August 27th.
Why isn’t Romney making the announcement before the Olympics? According to the article, this is partly because they feel it would look like a desperate attempt to change the subject from his tax woes, and partly because it takes a month or so to set up the staff for a running mate once one has been selected.. To me, that’s shoddy reporting. The second explanation obviates the need for the first.
The article also states that the two frontrunners are Rob Portman of Ohio and Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota. I think those are both solid picks in the sense that neither of them is certifiably insane, but they are hardly going to cause any excitement to the Republican base, the media, or anyone else not related to the candidate.
One observation about announcing the pick before the convention is that it takes away a lot of the suspense and interest in the convention. The American people may be curious to see Pawlenty or Portman speak, but the media already knows them well and won’t much care. Picking someone who is not known to the press, like McCain did in 2008, can help sustain interest and build suspense for the convention. However, the list of qualified candidates who are unknown to the press is pretty small. I also have not heard any leaks about any real wildcards (excepting Condi Rice). I think John Thune is in the mix, but the DC press corp knows him well. He looks the part, but he’s a pretty bland candidate who doesn’t bring much to the table.
Another thing to contemplate is what the Republican convention is going to look like. Will either Bush give a speech? How about Jeb? Cheney? Palin?
Can Romney even fill the primetime slots for all three nights?
Should have picked NM Governor Susana Martinez, assuming she passed the vetting process.
Oh well.
But then they would not have a totally bland white bread ticket.
Seriously, that would be a better choice than Marco Rubio. Rubio is based on the thesis that all Hispanics are alike. In reality Mexican-Americans can tell themselves from Cubans.
But picking a first term female governor of a small state who’s never been “vetted” in national politics…probably not a good idea after what happened in 2008.
Even if it were a good idea it’d be a bad idea.
Martinez is in a mimi-scandal over using private emails to conduct public business. Here in NM, this is a big deal because there is a really strong open records law and the press actually polices it pretty well.
Also, she has a sketchy contract for a racino (tied into the email scandal). She’s not squeaky clean, and I doubt she or the Romney campaign would risk national attention.
Re the featured speakers, it’s interesting to see this article:http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/18/12812752-christie-tapped-as-keynote-speaker-for-repu
blican-convention?lite that says Christie will keynote. It’ll help fire up the base, I guess, but I can’t imagine his style of jerkism will resonate with voters watching who aren’t already familiar with him.
FWIW, I disagree. Most people don’t know Christie and are only going to see this one speech. If he hits the right mix of belligerence and self-deprecation, he could be a very good speaker for the undecided Midwestern voters they need to win.
Still, he’s only the keynoter. I don’t think keynotes turn the tide on things. They’re usually forgotten within a week.
Well, if he has a massive coronary in mid-peroration — and given his massive obesity and the massive excitement of such a speech, that’s not impossible — the keynote surely won’t be forgotten in a week.
Can’t wait to hear the inspiring peroration from The Donald!
It doesn’t make political sense, but I think the convention will turn into a wingnut fest. The Reps don’t really believe the polls, and the so-called strategists don’t seem to have much say vs the Norquist/Christianist fanatics. I could see Palin as a featured speaker, Rick Warren, and of course Ron Paul will have to get his slice of facetime as the only other primary candidate who still has delegates.
Or more briefly, I think they’re gonna blow it with the general electorate because they just can’t believe most folks just can’t see the rightness of their “truth”.
Not a lick of national security experience on the Republican ticket.
That will be fine, right up until something happens.
Ah, c’mon, Mitt negotiated the Salt Lake City Olympics. (Ducks)
And Portman was US Trade Representative!
So, if al Qaeda blows up the LA Lakers in mid-October, everyone will say, “Thank goodness the Republican VP nominee used to be US Trade Representative. And that Olympic thing – it makes me feel safe.”
Will any Kardashians be court side at the time of the explosion? If so, I might have a hard time feeling angry.
Too bad Powell endorsed Obama and Petraeus is locked down at the CIA.
I never understood why people have this image of David Patraeus as a political figure. This is the guy who answered the question “Is the Iraq War making us safer?” with “I don’t know.”
The wingnut bloggers’ hero-worship of him tells us a lot about them, but doesn’t really tell us anything about him.
On the other hand, he would have to have some political skills to have risen to general in the Army’s power structure.
Skills, yes. No question.
But interest, or adherence to a political movement?
lots of foreign bank experience, however. He’s on friendly terms with the Swiss.
MSNBC has been having exclusives for last couple of hours on the Bain connection offshore and it’s getting so ugly I’ve been laughing. The man and his Party are in deep shit if this stuff grows any more; Green at Bloomberg and Grimm at HuffPo along with a guy from Phoenix are getting some real dirt.
So, the Party may be looking for more than just a Veep spot to fill. Oh and how entertaining that would be for the Convention.
Regrettably don’t have MSNBC, but there are some amazing stories over at GOS involving complex scavenging of companies in conjunction with Olympic sponsorships (Sealy and Mattel).
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/17/1110926/-Mittens-Crony-Capitalism-and-Political-Machination
s-at-the-2002-Olympics
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/18/1111452/-Romney-98-000-000-stake-in-Mattel-in-1999-He-Annou
nces-Olympic-sponsorship-as-stock-crashes
Also an insurance company set up in the Bahamas to “provide insurance after/ profiteer from Sept 11.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/18/1111504/-Bain-Bermuda-Business-Profiteered-off-9-11
I have no idea who is going to be the VEEP.
But I’ll bet a 100,000 CheoDollas (don’t ask, isn’t pretty) that we haven’t yet heard the name in the National Media.