Who will be the GOP VP candidate if Mitt wins the nomination?

[Inquartata]

It's far too early to call the nomination for Romney.

OK. Just remember when it happens that I called it.

( Actually, people a lot smarter and with a lot better information than I have called it. I have merely been convinced. )

...there is not *a* conservative wing, but rather *two* competing and somewhat hostile conservative wings within the G

At least two.

If the U.S. economy expands at the 1.2% consensus rate predicted by economists for 2012, I don't see any GOP ticket that could be assembled at this point beating Obama.

A largish "if". Expansions in the global economy---and especially that of the US---now carry a "poison pill": fuel prices. I am not sure that any boom can occur without the concomitant increase in demand for shrinking fossil fuel supplies choking it off. We may be stuck until a substitute for petroleum, coal and natural gas becomes widespread.

I hope for +1.2% with an Obama reelection over a -10% to get a GOP president.

I'm torn: A 1-year expansion in return for a long-term future hamstrung by another 4 years of Obama economic policies is not an outcome I contemplate with your optimism. OTOH another year of stagnation or even a relapse into recession is a high price for getting rid of the fellow...

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!


A harder question:

If you were in charge of VP vetting in the Gingrinch campaign, which running mate(s) would you suggest if Newt is on the verge of winning the nomination and the overriding criterion is that the selection should help your paymaster´s chances as much as possible in the general election?

Likewise for Santorum and Paul.

In the 2 first scenarios, I can see both conservative candidates asking Mitt to join, but a VP for Paul is a harder nut to crack. What kind of person is eleigble, has sufficient name recognition, is acceptable to the Paulites, and can win over independents?

I find it quite unlikely, but not preposterous, to assume that Paul will continue to the bitter end, all the time posting reasonable returns (15-30%) until the end of the primary season. Then, he decides to run as a 3rd party candidate, something that he has done before. If the economy is contracting 10% on a yearly basis, and Romney makes some unforced error, all bets are off.


Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[Inquartata]

If you were in charge of VP vetting in the Gingrinch campaign, which running mate(s) would you suggest if Newt is on the verge of winning the nomination and the overriding criterion is that the selection should help your paymaster´s chances as much as possible in the general election?

I dunno...I'd suggest Bloomberg, but he'd actually counteract any appeal Gingrich has to conservatives, I think.

But frankly I suspect that if he actually managed to get that close to winning the nomination his money problems would evaporate in the flood of superPAC money that would switch to the likely winner.

[dcmdale]

I'm torn: A 1-year expansion in return for a long-term future hamstrung by another 4 years of Obama economic policies is not an outcome I contemplate with your optimism. OTOH another year of stagnation or even a relapse into recession is a high price for getting rid of the fellow...

I wouldn't call it optimism so much as resignation. A +1.2% expansion in the overall economy is still a -.7% on a per capita basis--not exactly booming. Worse, the nature of unemployment is starting to become structural as skills atropy and become obsolete.

I think that "anybody but" campaigns are inherently weak whether it is Kerry in 2004 or the GOP today. You have to present actual positive reasons to change or it become the devil you know over the devil you don't.

[cathy a former fencer]

I think it will be Obama. but I voted for the Vietnam Viet; I just couldn't pull the lever for the other guy yet....the viet went through too much.

[Purple Fencer]

Lastly, who are the Republicans to be lecturing anyone on "family values" anyway?

Hell...I've been saying that for a LONG time!

[Purple Fencer]

the viet went through too much.

That is NOT a good reason to choose the occupant of the Oval Office.

[Inquartata]

No..."the first black President!" is, though, I suppose.

[Purple Fencer]

No..."the first black President!" is, though, I suppose.

Regardless of opinions of Obama's performance, that is still INFINITELY preferable to having Sarah Palin a heartbeat away from the Presidency.

[Inquartata]

No, it's not.

See how much a mere opinion is worth?

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!


Recently came across a new (to me) suggestion on what the GOP ticket should look like:

http://www.hatrack.com/osc/reviews/e...11-12-01.shtml

It starts out with a long discussion on movies, but the takeaway is in the end. The writer, a Mormon who wants the GOP to succeed in regaining the presidency, does not want Romney to win the nomination. He thinks that Romney´s very mormon-ness makes him unsaleable to a sufficiently large proportion of the voting public, and more unsaleable than Newt. Gingrich, he argues, has been in national spotlight since 1994, so whatever his personal failings are, we can be fairly sure that they have been found out by now - the DEM spinmeisters can not make Newt less liked to the DEM core and the those leaning DEM, since the hate him anyway.

Therefore, the author argues, it would be in the best interest for the GOP if Gingrich would head the ticket, while Romney should be running mate.

There is also some interesting stuff on identity voting.

I can not say that I am sure that this is the best combo for the GOP, but it sure is a novel take. What is your opinion on this?


Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[dcmdale]

He thinks that Romney´s very mormon-ness makes him unsaleable to a sufficiently large proportion of the voting public, and more unsaleable than Newt. Gingrich, he argues, has been in national spotlight since 1994, so whatever his personal failings are, we can be fairly sure that they have been found out by now - the DEM spinmeisters can not make Newt less liked to the DEM core and the those leaning DEM, since the hate him anyway.

Therefore, the author argues, it would be in the best interest for the GOP if Gingrich would head the ticket, while Romney should be running mate.

I agree that being a Mormon will significantly hurt Romney's chances, but I don't see either he or Gingrich standing a chance unless with have a "1930's moment" (IMF speak) or Obama really messes up with the middle ground voters.

Yes. Gingrich is already well hated, but I think that if he is the nominee that the liberals will be totally motivated to defeat him, less so for Romney.

For the Republican party, a Gingrich nomination might be best. If they put forth two moderates in a row and lose, in 2016 one can predict a "Republican wing of the Republican Party" candidate.

[OROD]

Yes. Gingrich is already well hated, but I think that if he is the nominee that the liberals will be totally motivated to defeat him, less so for Romney.

Well of course the liberals are going to love Romney. Didnt you hear, apparently Mitt is a Massachusetts liberal, according to Gingrich.

[dcmdale]

Well of course the liberals are going to love Romney. Didnt you hear, apparently Mitt is a Massachusetts liberal, according to Gingrich.

I hardly see them voting for Romney either, but I think there will be a different level of antipathy.

[erik_blank]

Just to bring out the semi-offensinve retoric here:

Romney can site his religious beliefs and have multiple VP's. Just think! He could have ALL of the 'also rans' as his VP's!!! this would allow the entire republican public to vote for him since ALL of their candidates would be onthe ticket!

In response, the closeted islamist in office could finally come out as a radical muslim and then put onto the ticket a number of flaming liberal/socialists to appease HIS political wing.

It would be a Win/Win for the entire country as we all get what we wanted in the election, and everyone would turn out to vote, since their own particular candidate would be running!

(*Now ducking from rotten fruit behind desk*)

[Guided by Wire]

From these, I would guess that Christie and Haley would be the most likely choices, but then again Mitt could completely blindside us and come up with someone unexpected.

What would be your guesses?

Haley or Rubio would be Romney's smartest choices. Probably can't persuade the latter, but NH already endorsed him prior to SC; plus she has executive experience. Christie is a good bet, too. Everyone else in the OP isn't too likely, IMO.

[jkormann]

Just to bring out the semi-offensinve retoric here ...

*slowgolfclap.gif*

That's beyond a 'Like'.