Republican Vice Presidential Nomination
- Mitt Romney 30.0
- Tim Pawlenty 30.0
- Tom Ridge 15.0
- Sarah Palin 13.1
- Charlie Crist 13.0
Democratic Vice Presidential Nomination
- Tim Kaine 36.6
- Evan Bayh 25.1
- Kathleen Sebelius 15.0
- Joe Biden 12.4
- Dick Gephardt 8.5
July 30th, 2008 at 9:22 am
Pawlenty cant deliver Minnesota and Romney may
give that extra 1%-2% that is needed to carry
Michigan or Colorado.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:23 am
-It would be great if it wasn’t either of them. Someone that would be draw dropping
July 30th, 2008 at 9:37 am
I was really looking forward to Fred Smith – does anyone know his social credentials? if any?
July 30th, 2008 at 9:38 am
And what on earth does this mean? Bid market for Pawlenty is 1 unit. WOW!! Rasmussen is close too. CNN shows big spread for Romney, but these markets are meaningless and reflect absolutely nothing unless measured over a week or so for trends, etc.
Gery, If your jaw drops, the next step would be to pass out. Don’t need that kind of a pick
Question? Where really is Romney physically? Last week on vacation in Ontario ? Really? Who knows? This week, on vacation in N.H. ? Who knows ? For a guy who has been in the limelight so much for McCain, I think he dropped off the radar screen. Romney is too energetic and motivated to just disappear. I have a suspicion that a lot more is going on than we know. Just a hunch as its is very unusual for a guy in the limelight to just vanish for 2 weeks.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:40 am
It wont be Romney or Huckabee. Please get on with other speculation.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:42 am
Brett,
Let me reveal the obvious. It won’t be Fred Smith.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:43 am
In fact, if McCain doesn’t get off his duff and wake his campaign up, it won’t be him either.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:45 am
Can we take a straw poll and see who here thinks that McCain is going to pull a “Harriet Myers” VP pick?
July 30th, 2008 at 9:46 am
Romney is, as far as we know, at his vaction home in New Hampshire, where he held a fundraiser for McCain/the GOP with President Bush.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:48 am
Why do people keep saying that Romney will help in Colorado? There are a lot of evangelical Christians in Colorado (Colorado Springs comes to mind) that don’t like Romney and might sit out the election or even vote for Obama if Romney is on the ticket. He’ll also hurt McCain in Virginia, southern Ohio, and all across the southern states. We need a VP candidate that doesn’t offend the base of the Republican Party who also happens to turn off independents. I know a lot of you love Romney, but he’s a poor VP pick. I supported Huckabee in the primaries, but I also believe that Huckabee is a poor pick as well (slightly better than Romney), but he also offends a large part of the Republican Party. So, he’s a poor pick for that reason. I’m hoping that Palin is the pick.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:51 am
I will support Palin – that is a good pick.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:52 am
Only ten comments on a VP thread?? Wow. We evangelical really Romney need Huckabee to Mormon kick this up.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:53 am
#9, I thibk he is at his second vacation home in Utah.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:53 am
Romney is sitting at 35 on both of the intrade.com, and it was just 15 minutes ago too when I looked.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:53 am
#12 – we are tired of the bickering….
July 30th, 2008 at 9:56 am
Brett,
I second that. Maybe people are starting to realize that McCain is just going to be McCain and none of us has the anility to sway his decision.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:56 am
#10 Evangelicals don’t like Romney? You mean a few of them do not. He got nearly as many votes from them as Huckabee, one of their own SB ministers for crying out loud!
July 30th, 2008 at 9:56 am
As far as we know, I don’t think there was a fundraiser with President Bush in N.H this week. There was a Nashua headquarters opening on Monday which he was not at, even though his vacation home is in Wolfeboro, N.H., a couple of hours by car. There was a fundraiser at Romney’s home in Park City , Utah earlier with President Bush, but not this week. That’s my point, as far as we know, we don’t know. Pretty strange for any politician to go off radar for two weeks.
As far as a “Harriet Myers” pick, my gut tells me McCain could do this, just like W. Reality hopes his advisors would tell him the significant risk, potentially, of splitting a splintered party further apart BEFORE his own convention. Unity is not just strength this year, it is survival as a party, but McCain is a maverick and really marches to his own drum,band chorus and orchestra. We’ll see. I would say I hope not.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:56 am
make that *ability
July 30th, 2008 at 10:01 am
My gut feel is Romney is catching a breather, and will be ready to hit the campaign trail long and hard as soon as the announcement is made. This last week has been for the leaks to allow everyone and their candidate to feel as if they were also considered, then Mac will announce Mitt as his running mate, and appease them all. Obviously a few will be disappointed, but not as many as the 50% Rasmussen showed last week that chose Romney as their first choice.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:02 am
Eric B
Perhaps I am confused, but Zogby’s religious poll of July 13, says that Romney is the second most popular VP candidate among born again evangelicals, next to Huckabee. Only Romney and Huckabee actually ADD evangelicals to McCain’s support. Everybody else, including Pawlanty, Crist, Jindal and Lieberman cost McCain votes. And Romney , at + 25, wasn’t far behind Huckabee at +39. What is this crap all the time about Romney and the Evangelicals. He got a lot of support from Evangelicals here in Georgia. As you know , he lost to Huckabee by 3 % statewide and ran 15 % ahead of Huckabee here in Atlanta where, I should point out, there are a LOT of evangelicals. Lets put this ” myth” to bed for good
July 30th, 2008 at 10:04 am
Illinoisguy is spot on in his analysis.
McCain will make the announcement on Sunday, August 3rd or Monday, August 4th.
It’s Romney.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:04 am
Of all the time McCain has spent wanting to be president, I have to think he has also thought about who he would run with. That was years before Mitt showed up on the scene. To me, it would be pretty amazing if McCain chose Mitt for that reason because it would show that Mitt was able to get his confidence in a really short amount of time. Somehow I think McCain has probably pondered his pick for a long time and it probably isn’t Mitt, but hey, you never know.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:06 am
The Dem-leaning polling outfit PPP just released a poll for Michigan showing McCain losing to Obama by a 46 to 43 margin. The interesting part is that their last poll had Barry ahead by 9. Bottom line is that Obama’s weakness in the state is real and has not improved. There is no reason a Democrat should be this weak in this state given the economy and the president’s approval numbers.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:06 am
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jul/29/evangelicals-warn-against-mccain-romney-ticket/
July 30th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Today – FRED BARNES: ” mean, if McCain’s picking, I think it’s clear Mitt Romney would be the best vice president. He may not be the best vice presidential candidate, however.
And usually you pick the guy or the woman who you think will be the best vice presidential candidate.”
Another pro-Romney editor backs away from Romney. Take a hint?
July 30th, 2008 at 10:09 am
I read that Washington Times article yesterday. I don’t know if the sentiments explored therein are representative of evangelicals as a whole (I certainly hope not). But that article sure made the evangelicals that were interviewed come across as a bunch of self-important assholes.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:10 am
#27 – althought Im am not as emphatic as you are, I do agree that shooting oneself in the foot is a bad idea.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:11 am
24/Adam -
Michigan is ripe for the picking. And Colorado is teetering on becoming Red.
This is why Romney is the choice.
If Romney can bring Michigan, and keep CO…. Even with NM, Obama would need 2 out of FL, OH, and VA to win.
I don’t know if that’s possible.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:11 am
And don’t forget the Zogby poll of July 18th that showed with Mitt as VP, Republicans were +39% more likely to vote for McCain, and with Mitt, +17% more likely to vote for McCain amongst Independents. He was +15% amongst likely voters. Nobody else was even in the ball park with Republicans and Independents. Obviously, most Democrats would be less likely, but the vast majority of them are voting for Obama to begin with, so who cares?
Let’s not let the Dems dictate who we put as VP as our primary allowed them and independents to choose our candidate.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:13 am
Brett,
This story has already been retracted and denied. It is a rehash of some spring comments by a few frustrated Huckabee supported and is completely refuted by Zogby’s poll of 2 weeks ago.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:18 am
Illinois guy is right . . . Romney is at 35 on intrade right now . . . wonder why the 5 point increase?
July 30th, 2008 at 10:19 am
And the RomBots are lose!
Down with Romney.
Down with Huckabee.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:19 am
flamesuit = “on”
July 30th, 2008 at 10:21 am
#10, EricB: “Why do people keep saying that Romney will help in Colorado?”
Two reasons: 1) Some people look at a map and make the assumption that there must be a lot of Mormons in Colorado because it’s in the west, next to Utah. They’re wrong.
2) Romney won the Colorado caucus. Some people think that winning a caucus means a candidate is broadly popular. They’re wrong.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:22 am
The ‘so called’ leaders in the evangelical story are people I’m not familiar with. I know that Dobson, Land, Grueden, Jones, Perkins, Osteen, and a whole host of others were either very favorable towards Mitt, or had outright endorsed him. I don’t fear many evangelicals bailing on McCain to allow someone who is on the opposite side of every social issue to be elected. They are far too smart and have too strong of feelings about their issues than that. Its also strange that this group is not making threats about Ridge, who is/was being considered and is pro-choice.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:27 am
Fred Smith of FedEx would be awesome because I can’t think of anything Americans associate with COMPETENCE more than FedEx.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:28 am
I just heard a rumor: To bring “pep” and “energy” to the general election campaign, McCain will pick Fred Thompson for VP.
(Or, in other words, the “short list” just became the “bucket list”.)
July 30th, 2008 at 10:29 am
#31, Craig: “This story has already been retracted …”
Who retracted it? Can you provide a link in which the Times stated they were retracting the story?
July 30th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Wow, that Washington Post article has some great quotes (sarcasm):
“evangelical novelist Tim LaHaye, who supported Mr. Huckabee: ‘We aren’t against Mormonism, but Romney is not a thoroughgoing evangelical and his flip-flopping on issues is understandable in a liberal state like Massachusetts, but our people won’t understand that.’”
“Mr. Huckabee’s supporters tend to be “rabid” in their views against Mr. Romney because of his faith: They do not regard Mormonism as a Christian denomination.”
This isn’t even worth responding to.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:33 am
Adam,
Does the name Kwame Kilpatrick mean anything to you?
That may explain Obama’s troubles in MI
July 30th, 2008 at 10:33 am
If Fred Smith is pro-life, he would be excellent.
Smith got a poor grade at Harvard Business School for a business concept term paper… Smith’s idea? FedEx (JM)
July 30th, 2008 at 10:36 am
Fred Smith is quickly moving up my VP list. He has to pass Palin and Huckabee still, but he is doing well. I hope he is Pro Life.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:37 am
re: Washington Times article http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/ca9503d0-1ffc-4686-932a-56a99d3c852d
July 30th, 2008 at 10:39 am
The Detroit mayor’s position is generally considered a non-partisan spot, as such, Kilpatrick (thought he IS a Democrat, and a liberal one at that) is not usually identified as a Democrat.
You are far more likely to get milage out of our useless governor than Kwame (the dishonest slug that he is).
July 30th, 2008 at 10:39 am
#41 Jim,
My wife saw a sign saying “Impeach” along the side of the highway in Detroit.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:40 am
jim,
Good. I hope he is a big contribution to Obama’s downfall. And why not? The Dems sure had no problem tarring the entire GOP with guilt-by-association tactics in 2006.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:43 am
I would take Intrade with a grain of salt with a question like this. However, the reality is that it is almost certain to be Mr. Romney with Mr. Pawlenty as Plan B if you will. On the one hand, I do not think that we need to announce the VP pick right away, on the other hand, now that people in the McCain camp appear to be running their mouth too much, we might as well get it over with and deal with reality instead of rumors.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:51 am
Yesterday, July 29th 400 Washington insiders were polled as to who they believe would be the VP’s.
These were the movers and shakers, the DC elites:
Of the following, who do you think is the most likely to be John McCain’s pick to be his vice presidential running mate?
Republican Democrat
Mitt Romney 40% 42%
Charlie Crist 8% 10%
Joe Lieberman 7% 8%
Tim Pawlenty 7% 6%
Mike Huckabee 6% 7%
Carly Fiorina 4% 4%
Rudy Giuliani 4% *
Michael Bloomberg 1% 2%
Someone else 5% 3%
Don’t know/Refused 18% 18%
For Democrats:
Republican Democrat
Bill Richardson 19% 16%
Joe Biden 14% 17%
Hillary Clinton 9% 10%
Jim Webb 8% 9%
Chuck Hagel 3% 5%
Joe Lieberman 3% 2%
Al Gore 2% 3%
Kathleen Sebelius 2% 3%
Evan Bayh 2% 2%
Wesley Clark 2% 2%
Tim Kaine 2% 2%
John Edwards 1% *
Ralph Nader 1% 0%
Someone else 8% 8%
Don’t know/Refused 26% 18%
July 30th, 2008 at 10:51 am
I’ll accept that there are some Evangelicals who are either in objection to, or bigoted against, Mormonism, but, I really don’t see that it would lose us the south, or even significantly hurt us there.
A list of the most evangelical, Christian-conservative states has to include Iowa, Gerorgia, and South Carolina. In all of those states, Romney either led in the polls at one point. In Georgia, he split the state almost three-ways with Huckabee (34%), McCain (32%), and himself (30%). In Iowa, he came in second after leading in most polls since summer. In South Carolina, Romney led in several polls throughout the primary season, most notably in November, when Fred Thompson (himself a Conservative, Southern Evangelical) was also in the race.
I don’t doubt the existance of opposition to Romney as Veep, but I don’t see evidence of it having a significant negative impact in the state.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:53 am
BobH
This ” ad” / letter” is almost word for word identical to the Weyrich featured ” ad ” of April 8th. It is signed by the same cast. So, when I say it was retracted, I mispoke. I meant it was recycled old news, by the same cast, except for Paul Weyrich who subsequently disavowed the original and took his name off the original signature list. But the same cast has the old mimeograph running night and day promoting our latter day William Jennings Bryan.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:54 am
Sorry about the clutter in 49. I pasted it. I was prevented from posting the link.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:00 am
#50. There’s a whole lot more people besides Evangelicals who don’t like Mormonism: Feminists.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:02 am
Feminists don’t vote Republican anyway.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:04 am
“Feminists.”
…I think there are more things than Mormonism that are going to stop Feminists from voting Republican – like, you know, abortion, and traditional values….
July 30th, 2008 at 11:06 am
“There are a lot of evangelical Christians in Colorado (Colorado Springs comes to mind) that don’t like Romney and might sit out the election or even vote for Obama if Romney is on the ticket.”
I don’t think that all those “Christians ” are that way. Even if they are disinclined to support Romney on religious grounds then what makes you think the same people will vote for a man who is half black?
Ridiculous!
Romney has strong support in Colorado both from Evangelicals and from those who are not.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:12 am
#53.
And republicans get the feminists vote either way???
July 30th, 2008 at 11:12 am
%$ & 55. You’re so wrong to paint feminists as one issue voters. And for feminists over 50, abortion is not the litmus test it used to be, especially if younger women are seen as not being appreciative for what the older generation of women have achieved for them.
And feminists own businesses too.
And traditional values, what do you mean by that? Do you mean honesty, hard work and integrity? Feminists are all for those traditional values.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:14 am
For various reasons, certain groups tend to like Mr. Romney and certain groups do not. However, I do not see a huge gender gap. Unless, somebody has some polling data, I think it is non-sense to say that Mr. Romney will offend or attract women. I know women who like Mr. Romney and I know some who do not. Just like the general population. I further imagine that that gender gap among Mormons and other religions are also small.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:18 am
“Do you mean honesty, hard work and integrity?”
No, pro-life, traditional family, etc. – feminists are, in general, part of the progressive, liberal movement that favors all sorts of thing that stand opposed to traditional family values.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:19 am
How did we come to the conclusion that feminist dislike Romney?
July 30th, 2008 at 11:20 am
HearMeRoar,
Feminists vote liberal democrat about as much as blacks do. North of 90%. Since when did feminists become a major constituency of Republicans or even Independent moderates?
July 30th, 2008 at 11:22 am
HearMeRoar,
ACT Blog’s right (sheesh, Did I say that?). Sure, some feminists vote Republican, but they are about as likely to do so as inner-city blacks.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:23 am
I can picture McCain right now sitting with his advisers discussing how to win the feminist vote…
July 30th, 2008 at 11:24 am
Mark,
Maybe he ought to stick with what works and start calling them “sweetie”. After all, it doesn’t seem to be hurting Obama
July 30th, 2008 at 11:25 am
Ironically, most of us no matter what we think of Mr. Romney agree he has at best a very very small gender gap.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:26 am
#64, you might actually be right, he may be asking himself that. we will know with his VP pick.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:28 am
57. Someone posted a link to an article by Dick Morris and why Obama has a woman problem. You should read it. Women over 40 don’t like Obama. And women over 50 dislike him intensly. If McCain doesn’t have the guts to choose a woman for his VP, he should at least not choose a VP that turns off women.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:30 am
#66, I know in California, even though Mitt lost the state by 8%, he won the women vote by 4%.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:31 am
Isn’t it amazing how everybody just ignores what the Washington insiders poll shows, post #49?
I would tend to say they have a few more leaks reaching their ears that most of us do, agree?
July 30th, 2008 at 11:33 am
A a woman doesn’t have to consider herself to be a feminist to get indignant over Mormon doctrine as it pertains to women. And all that eternal polygamy doctrine where it is OK for the gander but not for the goose just irritates me to no end. If Romney is chosen, you better believe that this aspect of Mormonism will be in the spot light.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:38 am
HearMeRoar,
Any woman that is going to be appalled over what Romney’s church teaches is hunting for a reason to be appalled. Romney is not going to “Mormonize” the country if he gets on the ticket – love him or hate him – and any woman that feigns indignance over such an idea is almost certainly voting Democrat anyway.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:39 am
#69, be careful what you post. YOU ARE NOT CORRECT! Romney lost the male and female vote. He also lost catholics, latino’s, youth, etc…etc…etc..
July 30th, 2008 at 11:42 am
#58, HearMeRoar: “And traditional values, what do you mean by that? Do you mean honesty, hard work and integrity?”
LOL — good one. No, HMR, you know perfectly well that when the extreme SoCons say “traditional values” what they have on their minds is sex. As a matter of fact, it seems like sex is what they have on their minds most of the time.
They meet the old joking definition of Puritans: “People who are obsessed by the fear that someone, somewhere might be having fun.”
July 30th, 2008 at 11:45 am
71, Hearmeroar:
Romney’s religion has been vetted thoroughly during the primary process. For sure, there will always be bigots & Mormon detractors. But I’m beginning to think that it is not nearly as much of a political liability as many here are trying to make it out to be.
If the Obama 527s want to make an issue of Romney’s faith, then that makes the Jeremiah Wright / Phleger thing fair game. I’d welcom that battle.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:47 am
#71. Like Romney and his faith already havn’t been in the spotlight??? You have to understand going through the GOP with religion in the fore front makes going through the generals easy. If the Dems make an issue of Romney’s faith, all you have to say is the name Harry Ried.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:47 am
Illinoisguy
Nice post #49. That pool is very telling. If anyone ought to have a clue it would be the insiders. That is the best evidence yet of the pending Romney Vice Presidency.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:48 am
I never understood the so-con preoccupation with sex. Who cares what people do as long as it is legal?
July 30th, 2008 at 11:52 am
Illionoisguy:
OK, I stand corrected with regards to the California primary. I still would be a little shocked if putting Mr. Romney on the ticket would change the gender gap much more than it otherwise would be.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:55 am
#75. “If the Obama 527s want to make an issue of Romney’s faith, then that makes the Jeremiah Wright / Phleger thing fair game.”
But Romney hasn’t renounced the Mormon church, while Obama has renounced his church.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:55 am
But, Adam, if they had their way, practically nothing would be legal. It wasn’t long ago that homosexuality was a crime in most states. Adultery was a crime as well.
I suspect that many SoCons yearn for those days.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:58 am
BobH,
No doubt that you’re right about that. I guess I should have said more clearly that MY position is that I don’t care what people do as long as it’s legal. I just can’t for the life of me understand why other people don’t feel the same way.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
#80.
Why should he? Mormons don’t practice polygomy, nor do they teach it from the pulpit. Romney’s church teaches tolerance for others and patriotism for country.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
#73 – i just looked up exit polling on it two days ago, and it had Mitt winning the women vote in California.
That’s all I know is what it showed.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
HearMeRoar,
What religion do you practice if any?
July 30th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Ohio, I wasn’t claiming it would change the gender gap. I was only responding to what others were saying about the female voters.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
“1. But Romney hasn’t renounced the Mormon church, while Obama has renounced his church.”
Exactly my point. The teachings of Obama’s churcher were so bad that Obama was forced to run away from them. Are you saying that the Mormon church is as bad or worse than Obama’s? If so, you need to get educated. Here are just some of the wonderful things given to us by Obama’s preacher:
Wright, Obama’s minister for about 20 years, drew unwanted attention for the campaign when videos of his fiery sermons surfaced. There was audio of Wright screaming F— America! Also, In the speeches Wright suggested that the U.S. government may be responsible for the spread of AIDS in the black community and equated some American wartime activities to terrorism.
These are just some of the reasons why Obama finally rejected his church. Do you think any weird “Mormon” beliefs is the same as the strong anti-American rhetoric in sermons? I think not.
C’mon HMR, get educated on this.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
HearMeRoar:
With respect, this is non-sense to ask Mr. Romney to renounce his faith. I would not want to have to renounce my faith to elected to office. The fact the his faith is different from other people is a side show, let’s hear what he has to say and what his values and priorities are.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Romney 38.5
Pawlenty 30
They must have seen the insider poll taken yesterday.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
HearMeRoar,
I don’t know how many times I have to say this. The doctrine you keep bringing up is an OBSCURE religious doctrine that I doubt many practicing Mormons even know about themselves. It is not preached at the pulpit, in sunday school classes, and it not even mentioned in any Church literature generally available to Mormon members. In fact, the Mormon Church has made it clear through countless statements that it would like to distance itself as much as possible from polygamy. Even the doctrine itself doesn’t seem to be well understood among those in the know, and no statement is made as to what will eventually happen in the afterlife with respect to that doctrine anyway (contrary to what you keep asserting). It’s such a non-issue it’s not even funny. For a better idea of the roles Mormons believe in with regards to the differences between men and women, I suggest you look at the document they constantly trumpet at their general conference and teach about almost weekly in their meetings, the proclamation on the family.
http://www.lds.org/library/display/0,4945,161-1-11-1,00.html
Some excerpts: “we…solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.
“…All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God.”
” Husband and wife have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children. ”
“By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another ”’as equal partners”’. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed.”
July 30th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Let’s, for the sake of argument, discuss electoral map possibilities working under the assumption that McCain/Romney flips Michigan red.
This would give Republicans a +33 EV margin if the map does not change other than Michigan.
Now, let’s assume Obama does choose Kaine in hopes he turns VA’s 13 EV’s blue. This means the Republicans are now up by 20. Now, Obama would need 21 to get to 270. The following are the true toss-ups :
Florida 27
Ohio 20
Colorado 9
Iowa 7
New Mexico 5
Nevada 5
New Hampshire 4
I happen to believe New Mexico and Iowa will go blue, meaning this net’s Obama another 12. Now, he needs 9 more EV’s.
To get 9, he would need:
Florida solo
Ohio solo
Colorado solo
Nevada + New Hampshire
I think FL will go McCain, so that leaves the true “battlegrounds” OH, CO, NV, and NH. Now, does it make sense why Romney is your best chance? He is strong in CO, NV, AND NH. Romney, while maybe not the best candidate, does the MOST to help the map (Michigan being red obviously #1).
Of course, this is all working under the assumption MI goes Red and VA goes blue….which is not guaranteed due to VA’s high veteran population. If Kaine does NOT flip VA, Republicans are up 33 EV’s and Obama pretty much would has to win 6 of the following 7 :
Florida 27
Ohio 20
Colorado 9
Iowa 7
New Mexico 5
Nevada 5
New Hampshire 4
This is why, I think, Obama is doubling down on Kaine….VA is vital for his EV map quest. And I think this is why McCain is going to counter with Romney, as he is strong in the areas McCain most needs to flip and/or protect.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Fair enough Illionoisguy.
At the risk of open further the religious can of worms. I would rather Mr. Romney admit that he is a different religion than me rather than pretend he is one of my tribe so to speak. Besides, while I differ with Mormon theology, I would probably rather have the average American Mormon run the country than one of my own, but this certainly is not an endorsement (or a non endorsement) of Mr. Romney particularly.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Whoa, doggies! I’m not suggesting that Romney renounce his faith.
But while Obama can deflect, or at least try to deflect the “God Damn America” rants by saying he left the church, Romney can’t duck the weird, and women-oppressive Mormon beliefs because he still is a Mormon.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
HearMeRoar,
from the official mormon statement about husbands and wives:
“…equal partners…”
That is what you will find as you go talk to Mormons or go to any Mormon church in America. The only big difference you will see them preaching is the concept that mothers are better nurturers when it comes to rearing children than men and that ideally the husband’s main responsibility is being the caretaker. However, the Church does not in any way pass judgment or stop women who enter the workforce and even spend their lives in professional careers. In fact, I’d say more than half of Mormon women are doing this anyway.
The Mormon Church also places a big emphasis on everyone getting a college education, men and women.
This is why this is a non-issue.
Add to all this that Romney himself has stated countless times that he’s not running for pastor-in-chief. He’s not out to convert the world to his religion, he doesn’t want to run on his religion. He considers it a personal faith and respects the views of all Americans to live their lives as they see fit (a doctrine that all Mormons actually live by).
July 30th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
aero,
It’s still a big assumption that MI ultimately goes red, despite Obama’s troubles. We have no better than a 50/50 chance.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
I do not know much about the Mormon faith, but I doubt Mormons treat women as bad as you suggest.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Nice post aerofanatic #91:
Romney certainly does help out where McCain needs it. In more ways than one.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
HearMeRoar, are you listening to anything I’m saying? You said “women-oppressive Mormon beliefs”. Can you point me to a single example of this in the modern Mormon Church?
July 30th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
There is nothing in Mormon doctrine for feminists or any other woman to worry about. In fact, the women’s organization of the LDS church, the Relief Society, is the largest and oldest women’s organization in the world, founded to help give aid and comfort to the needy. The women of the LDS church are some of the most educated, talented and independent women I know. There are myths perpetuated about LDS women that are simply not true, so don’t worry about it!
Apparently you are here to bring up as many possible “Mormon” problems for Romney as you can, they don’t fly, sorry.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Ohio, why does it bother you that we believe ourselves Christian?
There were no creeds in biblical times, so to act as if its necessary to adapt the Nicene creed, or any of them for that matter, should not be a qualifier, because that would rule out all of the first 300+ years as being Christian.
Let’s rather look at the following which is a portion of what we call our Articles of Faith.
1. We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.
2. We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.
3. We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.
4. We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.
5. We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.
6. We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.
7. We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.
I realize that we believe in modern revelation, and that we believe in some marvelous occurrences in these latter days. But, how does that make us unworthy to be called Christians, just because you believe a little differently?
It just seems to me that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is Christian under nearly every definition, except one that would cause us to believe in the creeds.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
It’s interesting to me , reading all these comments about Romney and Mormonism and the Evangelicals, is that it is so much ado about NOTHING. Romney’s religion has absolutely nothing to do with whether he is a good choice for VP or not. And in fact, most Protestant Evangelicals feel exactly the same way. You don’t have to believe Zogby’s July 13 poll. Just look at the exit polling in Michigan where Romney beat Huckabee , 34% to 29 %, among the very same born again Evangelical base in Michigan. That just means, other issues are FAR more important to these voters than anybody’s particular religion. As many have said, we are not selecting Pastors, we are picking leaders..
July 30th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
For a discussion on eternal polygamy:
http://theculturalhall.com/?p=231
July 30th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
HearMeRoar, my last post was directed to you, and I would like ad that there are no “women-oppressive beliefs” in the Mormon church. If you think so, please explain.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Illionoisguy:
With respect, I think I side-stepped the issue of whether Mormons are Christians or not. I should have clarified. I would not want a non-Catholic (my particular denomination) to pretent they were Catholic even if they were better Catholics than the average Catholic.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
I did not mean to spell you state wrong in your name.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
aerofanatic: You are doing your math wrong.
When a state flips, the difference in the overall tally is double the state’s count. You subtract it from one column AND add it to the other.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Two things:
Hearmy roar.
I am a Mormon, married for 24 years. I have a bachelors and a master’s degree and chose to stay home mostly with my children, although I have taught part time in various situations for years. I run my own homebased business (completely independent of my husband) on the internet. I am currently taking classes to renew my teaching certificate so I can get a full time teaching job now that my “baby” is graduating. I am in no way, shape or form repressed and most other women in my church aren’t repressed. I say most because I have a good friend whose husband was abusive and got divorced, but that is not a Mormon thing. My 20 year old daughter is in her 3rd year of college getting a degree and two minors and I am sure if you ask her, she will tell you that in no way is she repressed. I don’t know where you get your information, but you are grossly misinformed.
On another topic, I turned on Fox news this morning and they had a story about McCain and talked about his possible VP choice. They showed three sets of pictures. The first set they showed to “shore up the conservative base”- Romney and Pawlenty. The second set they showed that is more liberal was Ridge and Lieberman. The third set may have just been women (sorry I can’t remember what they said, but they showed Kaye Bailey Hutchinson and Sara Palin. I wonder if McCain is floating names to see reactions.
July 30th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
sorry that was supposed to say HearMeRoar
July 30th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
LOL OHIO, why in the world would you think anyone would do that? lol
July 30th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
107. Linda, if your husband died – God forbid – would you be able to marry another Mormon man in the temple?
July 30th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Again, I guess I failed to make my point. My main point was not to open up the can of worms as to who is a Christian, although that seems unavoidable. I was trying to say that people should not renounce their faith for political reasons. Yes, I rather somebody admit their faith (even if it is different than mine) rather than pretend to be otherwise. In short nobody should renounce their faith.
Since the can of worms is open anyway, while each denomination has its own views and I have no theology degree, it is my understanding that many major denominations consider LDS to be Christian and Mormons not. Not that it is of any major political concern, but what if any is the difference between the two denominations?
July 30th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Yes, in fact I would, but we wouldn’t be married for eternity. My husband’s grandmother married her second husband in the temple. She is very happy and it has been a wonderful thing. For me and my husband and every other Mormon I know it is a non issue. We just don’t worry about it and figure God will sort things out, just like I personally don’t understand why some people are gay and how that works, but God will sort it out.
July 30th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
#112. But if it were you to die — God forbid — your husband could marry another Mormon woman in the temple and it would be for eternity, right?
July 30th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Ohio, they are both the exact same denomination, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
Thanks for clarifying what you meant above.
July 30th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
HearMeRoar – who cares? Why do care? Are you planning to convert to Mormonism, lose your husband and then wish to remarry in a Mormon Temple?
If you can’t see how ridiculous you are, I can’t help you.
July 30th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
#115. Women have come a long ways in terms of equality, but there are still things we can’t be. Like Catholic and Mormon priests. I’m not losing any sleep over it — there’s only so much a person can do to change the world.
But I always thought that I was in equal in the eyes of God, and that in heaven, I would not be treated any differently than a man. But apparently that is not the case in Mormon heaven. And that just bugs me tremendously. And if more women were aware of this doctrine, I think it would bug them too.
July 30th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
HearMeRoar and other feminists really dislike the LDS church for their opposition to the ERA in the 1970s.
I’m sure that she also believes the other things she is writing, but they are all propoganda that has been created, distributed starting with the LDS Church’s strong opposition to the ERA.
Since then feminists have been spreading lies and distorting LDS teachings in an attempt to confirm their preconceived belief that anyone against the ERA is anti-woman.
July 30th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
HearMeRoar,
Equal doesn’t mean the same. Look up the definitions.
July 30th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
HearMeRoar,
My husband could marry in the temple either for eternity or for time only if he feels it is right. As I said before, this is a non issue. This impacts the next life and not this life. What is your point? It seems that it is to tear down other people’s faith to build up your own. I understand my doctrine and I understand that some things are eternal and are difficult for an outsider to understand. Being a member of the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints and accepting its doctrine is MY choice, as well as every other member of our church. What proof do you have that we are repressed? This is your problem, not ours.
By the way, for a good portion of my life, I was an active Baptist, so I can understand both sides. All of my family are various kinds of evangelicals and born agains. Each of their churches have varying doctrines as well. There is no use discussing deep doctrinal points. It just doesn’t matter in terms of politics.
Romney is not going to force his church doctrine on you or anyone else. He didn’t in Massachusetts and he wouldn’t for the country. Although his beliefs, such as strongly fighting same sex marriage will come into play. Most conservatives are on the same page as Romney on the things that are important and that is what counts.
July 30th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
HearMeRoar,
What you don’t get is that in the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter Day saints (Mormons) we don’t get paid to do our callings and one calling is not higher than the other. Again, you don’t understand eternal principals. I remember when my husband was called as Bishop and my sister was bothered by that and complained that Mormon women couldn’t be bishop. I told her that no one in their right mind, including men, want to be bishop. This is not about rank and power. It is about serving God where we are needed. I am probably wasting my time trying to help you understand.
July 30th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Linda, I find it curious that you consider issues that impact your next life — eternity — to be a non-issue.
I realize Romney is not going to force his church doctrine on me. But I want my president, with every fiber of his/her body, to believe in the equality of women, not only in this life — but in the after life as well.
July 30th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Linda:
Romney didn’t force his church doctrine on anyone in Massachusetts, you’re right… he was too busy kissing up to the homosexuals and supporting Planned Parenthood.
July 30th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
It is a nonissue because as I said before, I accept it.
July 30th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Here comes the bigots again!
July 30th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
I think the verbage for Obama should included the latest:
“I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions”
July 30th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
oops, wrong thread!! lol
July 30th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
#121 “But I want my president, with every fiber of his/her body, to believe in the equality of women”
Would that be Barack “Sweetie” Obama?