Many Democratic bigwigs now think that Sen. Barack Obama would make little sense as the bottom half of a Clinton-led ticket, sayeth the Prince of Darkness. These Dems feel that Obama would do nothing to balance the ticket either regionally or demographically, as Hillary isn’t going to lose Illinois, nor the North, nor the African-American vote. To the contrary, the powers-that-be are now recommending that Hillary select a red-state Democrat as her running mate. Well, I could have told you that. In fact, I did. Mark Warner seems to be the fave, though I’d bet on Bayh.
In the wake of his leadership in the midst of the tragedy in Minneapolis, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty sports an approval rating of 59 percent, his highest ever. T-Paw remains the only Republican officeholder to win a gubernatorial or senatorial election last year in the swing states of the Great Lakes region. Pawlenty won by a single point in Minnesota while candidates like Mark Kennedy, Dick DeVos, Lynn Swann, Ken Blackwell, and Rick Santorum went down by double-digits. Given the importance of this region to all things ’08, and given the manner in which the Great Lakes states seem to have voted as a bloc ever since 2000, adding T-Paw to the GOP ticket in some manner seems a bit of a no-brainer. A Giuliani/Pawlenty ticket in particular would be one comprised of two Republican problem-solvers with a history of finding conservative solutions to public problems and with four successful blue-state elections between the two of them.
Meanwhile, some suggest that Giuliani is showing his veep cards in his praise of ’08 rival John McCain. Given that McCain’s campaign is nearing life-support status, Rudy could simply be buttering the senator up, hoping to win his endorsement once the Arizonan departs from the race. Still, if anyone knows how to reach out to disaffected independents, it’s McCain. Considering that the the center, and not the base, will decide the coming election, a Giuliani/McCain ticket, while once unthinkable, may become a reality. And conservatives will just have to man up and take their medicine, or allow the election of Hillary Rodham.
Sarah Palin, of course, is still hot.
Discuss.
August 18th, 2007 at 2:39 pm
[...] post by DaveG and software by Elliott [...]
August 18th, 2007 at 2:43 pm
NOPE,NOPE,NOPE
The GOP needs a Southerner, or, at the very least, a person from the west, on the ticket.
Romney/DeMint is my pick.
August 18th, 2007 at 2:45 pm
1) I don’t see the Sarah Palin thing. She’s got the yuppy look down but that’s not what I (a red blooded American) go for.
2) Pawlenty was early in his enthusiastic support of McCain. Giuliani doesn’t seem to be the kind that would reward someone he perceives as not on his side.
3) Pawlenty probably wouldn’t want to waste his political capital on a race Republicans are likely to lose. Better to wait and take the top slot in 4 years when the GOP is desperate.
In the event Rudy is nominated, he either picks a national security guy to bolster his credentials or he picks a social conservative to decrease the number of conservatives that go 3rd party or stay home. Preferably he picks a VP who does both.
August 18th, 2007 at 2:51 pm
We are now past the era when “regional ticket balancing” has any effect on the general election outcome. As DaveG correctly points out, the 08 election is going to be won or lost among the self-described Independents. Every election is about something–the 08 election is going to be about competent, effective leadership. If the GOP nominates a ticket with a track record of effectively addressing problems with market-oriented, limited government solutions–getting something done and done the right way–they stand a reasonable chance to win the election. This should drive the choice for VP. Pawlenty is an interesting idea. There may be others.
August 18th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
I agree that Obama would bring nothing to the Dem ticket. As if the radicals would not vote for Hillary? Blacks already vote 90% liberal anyway. His home state is almost as liberal as MA. Obama is too inexperienced and he brings very little to the ticket.
One other possibility is Bill Richardson.
-Hispanic American..
-Governor
-Former Member of the Clinton Administration that left on good terms.
I agree, it won’t be Obama and it won’t be Edwards for the Dem Veep.
August 18th, 2007 at 3:09 pm
Not sure about this, but it’s a thought:
http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/articles/ron-paul-vice-president.html
August 18th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
Rudy’s Veepstakes Rankings
1. Fred Thompson
2. John McCain
3. Newt Gingrich
4. Mark Sanford
5. Mike Huckabee
6. Tim Pawlenty
7. Mitt Romney
8. Kay Bailey Hutchison
9. Haley Barbour
10. Charlie Crist
As for the Dems, I still say the selection of Richardson would help Hillary turn New Mexico, Nevada and Colorado from red to blue. And, California would be taken off the table as a state for which Rudy could feasibly compete.
August 18th, 2007 at 3:19 pm
I don’t know much about Pawlenty, so allow me to say that much.
However, elections are actually won or lost on two things: independents, and how well you can move the base.
The base of the GOP is in the South, among Evangelical Conservatives. To get them to turn out, you have to give them a stake in the ticket. Why would Conservative Southerners be motivated to go out an vote for a ticket consisting of two northerners, with the top of the ticket being a moderate?
August 18th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
ACT, Romney/DeMint is my prediction too but its not because of where he is from. DeMint was Romney’s earliest supporter, a successful business man in his own right, and one of the few conservative leaders in DC.
Hilary will pick a quiet, empty suit that she can play dominatrix with. Obama and Edwards are too ambitious for that game. Richardson, Bayh, and Vilsack would all be in the short list I think but It still would not shock me if she picked another woman.
August 18th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
Aron: my only tweek to the list is ABC (anybody but Crist)
August 18th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
DaveG has a point, maybe we should elect one of the most liberal Republican candidates ever, in order to stop one of the most unelectable Democrats every. Makes sense?
August 18th, 2007 at 3:40 pm
[...] are suggesting we might be seeing hints of a possible Giuliani/McCain ticket: Meanwhile, some suggest that Giuliani is showing his veep cards in his praise of ‘08 rival John [...]
August 18th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
Romney/Demint would get slaughtered.
August 18th, 2007 at 4:16 pm
Why Grant? Please explain.
August 18th, 2007 at 4:24 pm
Romney/Demint would indeed get slaughtered. That is so patently absurd. “Romney/Demint!” — Translation — “Hillary ’08!”
Mark Sanford is the most obvious choice for Giuliani — a southern pro-lifer with solid budget hawk credentials.
August 18th, 2007 at 4:26 pm
There is no explanation for that statement. Romney has shown that he is most able to raise funds out of all the candidates. He has the strongest grass roots organization, he has the strongest online presence behind Ron Paul and soon his online presence will eclipse Ron Paul’s.
August 18th, 2007 at 4:34 pm
Grant, TLG, you guys need to provide facts to back up you “Romney/DeMint will get slaughtered” nonsense.
Romney is an experienced, conservative, successful leader, who is respected by both the political community and the business community. As a business executive he personally transformed companies, saving both money and jobs. As Governor of MASS., he made promises, and kept them. He transformed a huge deficit into a surplus, and maintained it for his entire term. He rescued the Olympics, and oversaw the implementation of major security-related changes to the games. He has a model family, and has no major scandals or baggage attatched to his name.
As for DeMint, he is a rising Conservative star, who is not worried about hurting feelings or ruffling feathers. He is a conservative on all fronts, and is southern.
The Iraq War is improving, and the economy is still strong (despite a few problems this month). Americans are unhappy with the Democratic Congress, and 45% of American will not vote for Hillary – no matter who the GOP nominee is.
like I said, you need to provide some evidence to support your claim – and current head-to-head polls between Romeny and Clinton don’t count.
August 18th, 2007 at 4:34 pm
comparing yout candidate to Ron Paul is not a good way to boost up your candidate
August 18th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
What makes you think that Romney’s online presence soon will eclipse Ron Paul’s?
Any data to support it?
From what I see he just places videos on YouTube, but only miniscule number of people watches it.
August 18th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
More and more independent youtubers are supporting Romney, also there is a fast growing group at Ultimitt.org. Besides, a lot of people watch Romney’s youtube videos, though some are more popular than others. I have a Romney video myself with over 4000 views though. Ron Paul has limited appeal, his support isn’t going to grow much whereas Romney people are signing up online every day at ultimitt.org
August 18th, 2007 at 4:43 pm
To bjalder26 (comment #11): Assuming you are refering to Rudy in your comment (“one of the most liberal Republicans ever”)…you must have a short memory, or more likely, you and I have a VERY DIFFERENT concept of “liberal” vice “conservative.” Rudy Giuliani’s governing record as Mayor of NYC and his position on most issues of the day are quite conservative. In fact, I would argue that Rudy is significantly more conservative than George W. Bush or any nominee of the GOP since RR. I would also wager that he is more consservative than was Ford or Nixon. So, more liberal than Goldwater or Reagan–perhaps so. But I will challenge you on all the others.
To ACT Blog (comment # 8), why do you assert that THE “base” is Southern Evangelical Conservatives? In recent years that has been an ELEMENT of the GOP base, but by no means the sole element. Are you saying that these folks have no “stake” in a ticket or an election unless one of their own is on the ticket and thus won’t turn out? Do they not care about national security, freedom of choice, a strong economy based on free market principles? While we’re on the subject of the South, I grew up in Texas (so guess I’m part Southern and part Western) and lived for a while in the Rocky Mountain west before moving to the DC area. I don’t believe that there is anything magic about any part of the country. I am more interested in what principles a candidate holds than what region he/she is from. Since 1964 we have had four Southern presidents [no, I don't consider H.W. to be 'Southern'---he's Connecticut with an acquired Texas twang] none of whom were/are outstanding, so I don’t believe that the South ought to have any special claim on the GOP ticket. Personally, I’ll take the politics of the West—which WAS the base of the GOP through the ’70s and well into the ’80s.
August 18th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
Kay Bailey Hutchinson is an interesting choice for either Romney or Giuliani. Good balance geographically speaking, and cuts into the gender gap problem as well. Plus she’s reliably conservative but still attractive to moderates and independents (as seen in her very successful Texas Senate elections). She could help shore up the Conservatives vote, plus add female and southern votes that may be lost with Giuliani and/or Clinton at the top of their respective tickets.
Palin will not run for VP. I expect to see her run for president in ’12 or ’16. And I will vote for her.
August 18th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
Agree with Alaska Jake on Kay Bailey, but one thing—she’s not very popular with the Evangelicals which some have just argued are THE base. Also agree with the suggestion of Mark Sanford of S.C. for VP. Anybody got any suggestions for a Western possibility?
August 18th, 2007 at 4:57 pm
I think the GOP needs to do more to appeal to minorities and women. I don’t mean this in a demeaning affirmative action way. I mean it in respect to the need to expand the party to groups that normally pass on us simply because of our history towards these groups. Rudy and Romney (and all the other candidates) are, for the most part, rich white guys. While there’s nothing wrong with that, it presents a credibility problem when rich white Republicans stand up year after year telling minorities and women why they should vote for the GOP, and yet we never do much to promote women and minorities in the party. Surely there are qualified people in our party beyond Michael Steele and Condi Rice; if not we have a serious problem. We need to show Americans of all backgrounds that with all things being equal, we give women and minorities the same opportunities to rise to important and powerful leadership positions as we do for rich white guys. Sen. Hutchison, Gov. Lingle of Hawaii, and several congresswomen and state leaders fit this bill, as well as qualified businesswomen outside of government. They should all be given serious consideration.
August 18th, 2007 at 5:03 pm
“I have a Romney video myself with over 4000 views though.”
And you call this good viewership performance?
Have you ever check the viewership of Ron Paul’s videos?
Have you ever check google trends for all the candidates?
I know you don’t like Ron Paul, but just google or you tube him. You don’t have to watch the videos.
Hopefully then you will see how your internet prediction is with no base.
August 18th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
Chris: I agree that Southern Evangelical Christians are a part of the party, and I believe that at the end of the day they would rather have a Rudy or Romney in the WH instead of a Clinton or Obama, I think we Republicans need to appeal to Rust Belt voters who are more socially libertarian than socons, and Pawlenty is the one to do that, with either Giuliani (preferably) or Romney or whoever. However regardless of who is the VP or even Prez nominee, we need to unite as a party, no matter how many independants we have on our side, the GOP nominee will need the support of the entire party to win
August 18th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
Romney/DeMint is ok with me, but I would prefer Jeb Bush or Condi. Bill Owens would work, and so would Crist, but only if he endorses Mitt first. It’s pretty pathetic that we still have people declaring that Romney can’t win when that’s pretty much the only thing he’s ever done in life. The only thing he’s ever gone afterthat he hasn’t won was the ’94 Senate race. If you recall, he took on Ted Kennedy, who had to mortgage his mansion and go super negative (dirty) to pull it out at the end.
Rudy started out with big margins in Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada. What happened to them? How did the guy who can’t get elected sneak up on him and put together dowble digit leads in the first 3 states? Was Rudy trying to spot Mitt the first 3 states to make things more interesting? Or did Mitt simply out-campaign him?
August 18th, 2007 at 5:05 pm
Chris, I live in Seattle and I can’t think of a Western Republican who would be on a VP short list. I don’t think Washington State is as Blue as most people think it is. The right Republican would have crossover appeal here and in Oregon too. If Mitt and Rudy is good enough for the Northeast, then they may be good enough for the Northwest.
August 18th, 2007 at 5:15 pm
Jonathan, are you suggesting that we abandon Social Conservatism?
August 18th, 2007 at 5:15 pm
Randy (or anyone): Would Sen. John Ensign of Nev. be possibility?
August 18th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
“Romney/DeMint is ok with me, but I would prefer Jeb Bush or Condi.”
This is the mindset of the Romney voter. They think that what the American public is really clamoring for is an opportunity to vote for another Bush, or George Bush’s Secretary of State.
Come on, people! Think!
August 18th, 2007 at 5:21 pm
My answer to the erudite and eloquent comments above is…
Pawlenty in 2012!
After 4 years of Hillary, Americans will be ready for Pawlenty of change.
August 18th, 2007 at 5:21 pm
TLG – don’t generalize. I don’t think America is Jeb at this point, and I really don’t see Condi as VP material.
August 18th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
4000 views in one week is pretty good for somebody who just started making videos. Ron Paul videos do get a lot of clicks but a lot of that is the same people viewing it over and over again. I’ve noticed that the same Ron Paulers make comments over and over again all over youtube. The whole Ron Paul campaign seems to be based on over stating their support, which might have been a good strategy except for the fact that so many of his supporters offend everybody else. Their campaign slogan could be “screw you, you’re an idiot, please support my candidateâ€.
August 18th, 2007 at 5:26 pm
ACT Blog (#29): I don’t advocate abandoning SoCons, but speaking as a limited government (somewhat libertarian leaning) Con, some of the SoCons abandoned us.
August 18th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
you are going to have to expalin more.
If you are talking about abortion, its not that they abandoned you us, its that there are people who do not believe that abortion can be solved at the state level. I happen to be one of those people. While, in the sort term, sending abortion back to the states might work, there are going to be states who continue to allow abortions. Many women will travel (alone or with help), to get abortions. In the end, sending abortion back to the states would probably have minimal impact.
August 18th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
Sarah Palin isn’t just “hot”…she’s getting a lot of press as a veep pick….
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/08/17/235529.php
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57157
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/newsreader/story/9225470p-9141415c.htmlv
Guess what, people…it’s time to start taking a potential Palin candiacy seriously.
econ grad stud…
Palin is most “red-blooded american” person being mentioned….lifetime NRA member, likes to hunt and fish, says her favorite food is either mooseburgers or moose stew, married to a blue collar oil field worker, owns a float plane, and her whole family (including the Gov.) spends a little time every year fishing commercially for salmon. When she went to Iraq, she tried out an army rifle and popped of a solid round of on-target shots.
How much more “red-blooded” can a person be?
August 18th, 2007 at 5:37 pm
Chris, Ensign is the chairman of the Republican Senate Election Committee or whatever its called. Its not raising a lot of money just like the RNC isn’t raising any money. I think he is guilty of (rino) association.
August 18th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
Self-correction, Palin’s try with the Army rifle was in Kuwait, not Iraq…and her visti was last month.
August 18th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
I dont see how Evan Bayh brings anything. Dems are not going to win Indiana, and probably wont need much help in the rest of the midwest. Nor does Bayh bring any excitement or buzz at all. He is a snoozer.
Warner might be good, but he may well be other occupied at that time.
Richardson is a natural choice. Combine that choice, with all the RW noise on immigration, and it sets the Dems up for a couple of generations with the Latino vote.
I dont see how Pawlenty is going to help the GOP. I doubt he would bring MN along. Swallowing Rudy as the nominee would lead to a real demand from the socon base for a hard-right VP. DeMint could never be sold as a president-in-waiting, Barbour is s way too much of a good ol’ boy / lobbyist to have any real appeal. Maybe Huck could do it if he manages to establish some cred as a major-leaguer over the next few months.
Anyone who thinks that a close associate of this administration, or a reminder thereof (Condi, or Jeb) on the ticket would be anything other than a disaster is living in a different universe from me.
August 18th, 2007 at 6:16 pm
ACT Blog: Let me be more specific, GW Bush is a SoCon but that’s about it. A lot of the hard core Evangelical/Socons (Family Research Council, et.al.) seem to me to be more than willing to use government to almost any end in order to implement their objectives. This grates on me because I just don’t like the concept of a theocracy or having some politician trying to supervise my personal life and my relationship to God or to use government and/or poltiical power to try to “incentivize” me to live according to their preferences. I’m what you call a “leave me alone” conservative. As to abortion, I hear you, but as you probably know there really is not a consensus national view, so until there is it seems to me that the State level is most appropriate.
Randy: Yeah, agree. Ensign is not making any waves in the Senate or with the NRSC.
August 18th, 2007 at 6:25 pm
TLG,
I think that what the American people want is competent leadership. Jeb was the best governor in the history of Florida. He has extremely high favorables in that state, which Hillary is ahead in at the moment. The importance of holding Florida is also the reason that Crist would be a good choice. The rationale for Condi is multifaceted. She’s a woman, black, a foreign policy expert with a lot of intrinsic gravitas, who has managed to maintain far higher favorables than the president. What Jeb and Condi have in common is the ability to persuade the electorate that a sharp left turn for America right about now would be a disaster.
August 18th, 2007 at 6:41 pm
“Ron Paul videos do get a lot of clicks but a lot of that is the same people viewing it over and over again”
How did you determine this? Who would see video 200,000 times?
And if you think some small group of people can do this, how do you know that your 4000 times was not done
by one or two Mitt Romney freaks?
” many of his supporters offend everybody else. Their campaign slogan could be “screw you, you’re an idiot, please support my candidateâ€.”
Here, you are just ridiculous.
And, if you accuse Ron Paul supporters of such a thing, look what Illinois State Senator and supporter of
Mitt Romney did at Illinois Straw Poll last week.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fl-JCyiBNao&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Elewrockwell%2Ecom%2Fblog%2F
That video is very telling about the quality of people supporting Romney in compares to Ron Paul supporters.
It is over 6 minutes long and the scene I am talking about is the last one, so you can rewind, if you dont want
to watch a whole thing.
By the way it was posted August 17 and in one day, over 2400 people watched it already.
August 18th, 2007 at 6:48 pm
Ron Paul is a libertarian. He’s running in the wrong party. The Republican Party is the (partially) conservative party, not the (pacifist) libertarian one.
August 18th, 2007 at 7:04 pm
I hate to say this but I agree with Tano, at least as far as Jeb and Condi are concerned. I like both of them, and would be happy to vote for either. But Tano’s correct to say the last thing we need is a reminder of the GWB administration. Giuliani and Romney both have the outsider aspect going for them. Neither one can be associated with GWB in any way, so that moderates and independents who could never stomach voting for a GWB associate could still happily vote for either Romney or Giuliani (politics aside – I’m just speaking towards VP acceptance). In an election that will surely be close to 50-50, anything taht may turn away the independent vote should generally be avoided. There are plenty of acceptable conservatives out there who could appease the right and still be accpetable to the moderates. Hutchison, as I mentioned earlier, is one, as is, I think, Mike Huckabee. One name not mentioned yet is Tommy Thompson. He didn’t get much traction in the pres. race, and he’s not the most attractive guy out there, but he’s still hugely popular in swing state Wisconsin, could help in the midwest, is very strong on the all-important topic of health care issues.
August 18th, 2007 at 7:15 pm
econ!
I don’t think this is your decision.
And just listen to him for a second and you will understand the reasons why he is doing it.
What you refer to as Republican is actually necon.
RP is representing real Republican values, which were represented by many Great of GOP,
including Ronald Reagan, which had known Ron Paul very well and respected him greatly.
If Ron Paul is not representing Reps values, tell me why RP was one of the first and just one of few
Congressmen who supported Ronald Reagan from the begining. Unless, Ronald Reagan didn’t
represented Republican values.
August 18th, 2007 at 7:24 pm
Well Ron Paul could run in the Democratic Party. He could represent real Democratic values that Democrats held in.. oh the 1820′s.
If he wants to run in parties that have moved on that’s his call but it looks pathetic when there’s a Libertarian Party for his people already.
August 18th, 2007 at 7:30 pm
Yea, the party have move on … in wrong direction. And that is where Ron Paul comes in.
August 18th, 2007 at 7:32 pm
ACT: I’m not saying we abandon socons, but socons need to understand that there are many different groups of conservatives within the Republican party. Us neocons, paleocons, fiscal cons, socons, and libertarians, with a sprinkling of moderates. I say socons are an division in the GOP army, but not the whole army itself, sometimes you need the whole army to win the battle.
August 18th, 2007 at 7:32 pm
Ron Paul is kickin’ it old school!
August 18th, 2007 at 7:33 pm
So-cons are the odd faction out in the GOP. It’s the only faction in favor of proactive government.
August 18th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
proactive gov on a domestic level. Neocons want gov action in foreign affairs
August 18th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
So, you are for kicking SoCons out of the GOP, TLG?
August 18th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
Disclosure: I know zero-zip about any of the present and recent politicans, so have a go at it at my expenses, so I could learn some.
Mitt/Jim Talent, anyone?
As for the western states, we are pretty limited: Idaho and Utah are out, since there are too much Mormon influence there (Democrats will have day with Mormon Conspiracy!) Oh wait, how about this guy from my state, Idaho (he’s not LDS) who received a lot of attention in the media recently: Bill T Sali? Nah, he’s too freshman…
Then we have Wymong and Montana, pretty much isolated, no one outside of those states know anyone there.
Oregon and Washington, too blue to counter Mitt’s Massachusetts or Rudy’s New York City blueness.
We have California, where nobody trust – period!
That leaves us with Arizona, New Mexico, and Colorado. Some of us may consider Texas as a western state, so I will throw it in. Really, we do not have that much of options when we want to consider someone from western states. I think we need someone from the midwestern states or southern states.
August 18th, 2007 at 7:47 pm
If only Dino Rossi hadn’t been cheated out of the governor’s mansion in 04 in WA. Jim Talent is not a viable choice since he lost reelection in 06.
August 18th, 2007 at 7:50 pm
“#Jonathan Says:
proactive gov on a domestic level. Neocons want gov action in foreign affairs
# marK Says:
August 18th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
So, you are for kicking SoCons out of the GOP, TLG?”
1. Mainstream neo-cons are for reactive government, but some of the radical ones were proposing invading the Middle East before 9/11, which is rather scary. I consider myself aligned with the neo-cons on foreign policy — but on a defensive, reactive level.
2. Not sure. If we embraced a moderate tone, we’d win far more elections. People love moderate Republicans. “Moderate” being slight-of-hand, of course, we’d be to the right on defense and economics. Oh, if only…
August 18th, 2007 at 7:51 pm
SGS — Jim Talent!?!??!
August 18th, 2007 at 8:08 pm
TLG,
Talent is fantastic. An absolute workhorse policy wonk, who quietly goes about his job of representing and working for the people. Jim Talent was my ideal senator, and got far too little credit for being consistently conservative, committed, smart, and a wonderful man to boot. He’s not “exciting”, but he’s valuable (note that he nearly held off the popular McCaskill in a wave of a Democratic year, in a swing state). Plus, he makes some geographical sense. Missouri is certainly in danger of flipping in 08 (Missouri has gone to the winning side in presidential elections something like 8 consecutive times).
August 18th, 2007 at 8:11 pm
Jonathon, Giuliani doesn’t fit paleoconservatism. Giuliani is a re-run of Bush on foreign policy (with the lack of foreign policy experience to boot). On domestic policy it’s a matter of whether we believe what he’s saying when he wants our vote now or what he said a few years ago.
That’s also my main qualm with Romney. When politicians become mercenaries it makes politics an unprincipled game for power where the nation comes last.
I’d prefer someone who’s been principled. I don’t trust sneaky politicians like Rudy or Romney. The best a Romney supporter can say is “He stays bought”. The best a Rudy support can say is “He’s not as liberal as Hillary”.
August 18th, 2007 at 9:02 pm
I like Jim Talent but the MSM would have too much fun with a Mormon picking a guy from Missouri.
Jonathan, you are right about Dino Rossi. I voted for him. You want to talk about a stolen election?! How does a box of ballots suddenly appear in Seattle after two recounts? I don’t think he’s going to try again. I know he just bought the Mariners Single A team in Everett, WA with former player Jay Buhner.
August 18th, 2007 at 9:30 pm
The most likely Veep candidates for either party would be popular national office holders in swing states (conventional wisdom). Bill Owens from Colorado would make a nice Republican Veep. The Democrats would not carry CO if Owens was tapped for the Republican Veep. It would be great to see that happen prior to the DNC convention here in Denver next year.
August 18th, 2007 at 10:26 pm
Gov. Owens managed to turn Colorado bluish purple. Not to mention he declined to run for the Senate in 1004 (how much would one seat more be worth today? how about during the nuclear option fight?).
Let’s get back to people we might actually want to see become president someday.
And yes, Gov. Palin is hot…in an 80s sort of way.
August 18th, 2007 at 10:28 pm
Stupid typo.
August 18th, 2007 at 10:45 pm
Romney is smart when it comes to picking running mates. Just look at who he chose for his running mate as Gov of MA. He picked a woman because he needed the women’s votes. You can expect him to do the same if he gets the GOP nom. My guess is he’ll pick a Southern evangelical or a minority when centrist appeal. Can anyone say Condi, DeMint or Huckabee!
August 18th, 2007 at 11:52 pm
I like Sen. DeMint a lot, but we need that man in the Senate!
August 19th, 2007 at 1:29 am
Right on, Thomas, right on.
August 19th, 2007 at 10:23 am
TLG, I did declare I don’t know the present and recent politicans. It is just that I have seen Jim’s name popped up often in various conservative discussions. I was wondering about him. I don’t even know he was from Missouri!
August 19th, 2007 at 10:49 am
I’m just trying to push us to think out of the box. Is there any non-politican we should consider, for instance Bo who is working on ending the world’s hungry? I think he’s not an American, but the point here is, do we have someone like him on our side we could tap into? Any celebrity? Hugh of Townhall, perhaps? Anyone else?
August 19th, 2007 at 11:43 am
I’ve long thought Senator Cornyn may be near the top of the list for Rudy VP’s.
August 19th, 2007 at 1:31 pm
SGS, how about Ann Coulter? She plays a VP on TV.
All kidding aside, I think we can find a good VP without having to consider columnists and bloggers.
I guess that leaves out Fred too.
August 19th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
Randy,
Hugh was on radio long before he came on a blog site. And besides, his radio show, as I understand, is still one of most popular. I am just throwing out a name to help you getting on the roll. I supposed it didn’t work with you individually.
August 19th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
ACT Blog and all you other psycho moonie Romney supporters: ROMNEY WILL NEVER, EVER, become the president OR the nominee……the man is a phony, a fake and an opportunist. GET THAT THROUGH YOUR SHALLOW HEADS!!
August 19th, 2007 at 3:29 pm
Actually SGS I think the possibilities would be fun to consider. Bill Bennett?
August 20th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
SGS,
You want ‘outside the box’?
Here are four names (incidentally, all with ties to FNC):
1. Tony Snow
2. Dr. Charles Krauthammer
3. Bill Kristol
4. Brit Hume