We know that Sen. Ayotte is one of about 15 people who will be considered should Romney capture the nomination:
Presidential candidate Mitt Romney has been pretty quiet about who he might pick as a running mate if he wins the nomination, but Monday said New Hampshire Senator Kelly Ayotte is on the list.
He said if he becomes the nominee, then he’ll start thinking about it, but he has gathered about 15 names.
“[T]here are terrific Republicans in the Senate, in the House, in governors’ offices. You’ve got extraordinary men and women. We have a very deep bench,” Romney said on Fox’s Hannity Monday night.
Romney added that he didn’t think that was always the case.
“I don’t know that we’ve always felt that way. This year is really exceptional and whoever our nominee is will be able to choose a remarkable, superb person to become the vice presidential contender,” he said.
He made the appearance on set with Ayotte, a freshman Senator from the key political state of New Hampshire, who endorsed Romney over the weekend.
Ayotte’s backing was a coveted one with her political star rising and popularity in conservative circles.
Post your “Dream Ticket” (and your rationale) in the comments.
Full story here.
Hat-tip: Ozzy
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:32 pm
Okay.
So how many chickens will you have?
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:32 pm
15 names is a rather lengthy short list. I’m sure he will shrink it down at a much later date. As for his VP choice. My personal choice is Mitt Romney-Paul Ryan 2012!!!
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:35 pm
She’s a terrible choice for a VP despite being a future star of the GOP.
The LAST thing Romney needs is a another moderate, New England Republican on the ticket, he needs someone to shore up his base. Also, New Hampshire is already in the bag for Romney anyway.
Rubio is the perfect pick, but the question is, will he accept? The 2nd choice would be Gov McDonnell from Virginia and maybe 3rd would be Governor Martinez of New Mexico. I would also put Chris Christie in the mix and Pawlenty would be a decent pick also, but it wouldn’t inspire the base.
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:37 pm
My ultimate dream ticket would be:
Gary Johnson / Ron Paul or Justin Amash or Rand Paul
We can’t afford more half measures. We need to cut trillions in spending immediately–as in within one year. That needs to come from entitlements and military spending, as well as everywhere else. In order to get out of this recession rutt, we also need a President who will mend our monetary policy, and there are only two presidential candidates currently in the running who understand the first thing about monetary policy (Johnson and Paul).
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:40 pm
3.
Moderate? Didn’t Sarah Palin endorse her last election?
I do agree that being from New England makes her a risky proposition at best. I’m still hoping for McDonnell but Romney is right, there are a bunch of good people out there.
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:40 pm
shes pretty cute!
my dream ticket is mitt romney by himself!
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:42 pm
Josiah Schmidt Says:
“there are only two presidential candidates currently in the running who understand the first thing about monetary policy (Johnson and Paul).”
And not a damn thing about foreign policy and of America as the leader of the free world and the most influential force internationally.
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:44 pm
Nope. Not Kelly this time around. Too new. And while getting the endorsement of this Tea Party senator is great, she seemed nervous and soft-spoken. Give her time and see what she has.
Mitt needs somebody conservative and dynamic. That would be Rubio even tho he’s only been in Senate a short while–and maybe won’t want to run this time around. Time may be running out for the country however, and I suspect that anybody who loves the country and is asked to run, will do it.
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:47 pm
Ozzy,
Johnson and Paul would make America the leader of the free world by actually making America free, not by the Romney/Gingrich/Cain methods of subsidizing dictators, bombing other countries under false pretenses, and starving women and children through crippling economic sanctions that don’t affect the regime in the slightest.
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:48 pm
Ayotte isn’t a national caliber politician. Someone noted, in a thread last night, that she sounded nervous on Hannity. Well that’s the way she always sounds- I’ve watched more than an hour’s worth of Ayotte video. She has this tremulous, slightly scared voice. A strictly Bush League talent. My dream ticket is Jindal/Ryan but I’m assuming you mean given our actual choices. That would be Romney/Jindal. I’ve laid out my reasoning in other threads, in some depth.
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:52 pm
New poll for you all to look over. I have no idea of it’s legitimate or not.
http://www.revolutionpac.com/2011/11/new-iowa-poll-places-ron-paul-firmly-in-first-with-25
,
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:54 pm
CAIN/NEWT ’12
Leadership and Inspiration combined with an Ideas Guy who has got things done
0r
CAIN/HUCK
Leadership and Inspiration combined with Enthusiasm for America’s Greatness
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:54 pm
Neither Paul nor Johnson is going to be POTUS. The best they can do is make their voices heard and hope the American people will listen and consider their point of view–and then, if they can convince enough people, the people will exert influence on those who can get elected.
With social media a factor, maybe “crippling sanctions” will work better now. Starving people are in a better position to raise up against their leaders and maybe effect the regime.
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:58 pm
That’s just sick and barbaric.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:00 pm
Women politicians are at a disadvantage. They are either screechy like Palin, Bachmann and Hillary. Or timid and nervous like Ayotte. Maggie Thatcher had a voice coach to lower her pitch. Of course, her British accent didn’t hurt either. Instant credibility.
The moral of the story: Get a coach. I was impressed with Condaleeza Rice during her book tour. She spoke with conviction and intelligence in a perfectly pitched voice.
I will never vote for Palin. I cannot stand to listen to her. I don’t care how brilliant she might be: Her voice is like fingernails on a blackboard. When she comes on FOX, I dive for the mute botton. I really do.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:04 pm
“With social media a factor, maybe “crippling sanctions” will work better now. Starving people are in a better position to raise up against their leaders and maybe effect the regime.”
Jesus Christ.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:05 pm
Romney/Huckabee would be a formiddable ticket. I think that would be one of the better ones we could come up with. With Romney’s strength in the west, midwest and northeat, and Huckabee’s strength in the midwest, west and south….it would be a great ticket to capture swing states. I think Pennsylvania would be an easy pick up with that ticket.
The other one would Romney/Rubio for obvious reasons. Rubio is just an amazing senator that has the ability to articulate the conservative positions without looking like a rich jerk that wants to stomp on the poor.
If i could pick my president out of the current crop…Ron Paul all the way. Of course that is unlikely to happen. My 2nd choice is romney. But i would love a Paul/Rubio ticket. I think it would be great and also say to the country, this isn’t about being neocon or non neocon….it’s about uniting our country, creating reform, and preparing for the future.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:07 pm
1. You’re reading way too much into that.
Mitt was on Hannity’s show WITH Ayotte when he was asked who was on his VP short list. Mitt refused to answer, saying it would be presumptuous because he’s not yet the nominee. But, he said, there were many highly qualified people from which to choose. Including Ayotte, he said.
That’s NOT counting chickens before they’re hatched.
She was on the show, endorsing him. He HAD to tip his hat to her.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:07 pm
15. Thanks for sharing.
Most would be ashamed to admit to being such a shallow and vacuous person, but you apparently feel comfortable enough among us friends.
Any other character flaws you want to confess to?
Don’t stop now, you’re on a roll.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:07 pm
#14 Oh, and Iran with a nuclear weapon isn’t sick and barbaric? You use the leverage you have. And you were the one bringing up starving women and children. I don’t know that crippling sanctions actually mean starving in this case. Just enough sanctions to cause just enough discomfort in the people to bring down the regime.
I know; I know; the Paul people believe in doing nothing except defend our own borders. You might be right; or you might be delusional. I believe the latter since on the day Israel was declared a state by the UN, Arafat declared a death oath on Israel. I do believe that such “oaths” will be carried out. They mean something in that part of the world.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:07 pm
Romney/Cousins
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:08 pm
3. She was the Tea Party choice in her senate race.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:08 pm
“With social media a factor, maybe “crippling sanctions” will work better now. Starving people are in a better position to raise up against their leaders and maybe effect the regime.”
Despicable. Shame on you.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:09 pm
8. I agree. She seemed nervous. Didn’t quite have her voice, yet.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:09 pm
1. Romney/Rubio (not happening).
2. Romney/Jindal (also unlikely).
3. Romney/McDonnell (likely and awesome).
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:09 pm
Romney pandering for votes in a state he leads. He should have simply praised her and left it at that.
Wolf Blitzer: “Gov. Romney, you have named freshman Sen. Ayotte as a potential VP. Is she prepared to be commander in chief?”
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:10 pm
#19 Teledude: Do you think I’m wrong? Then you are truly naive.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:10 pm
Can we please refrain from using my Saviors name in vain? Just please. I don’t care about the other cuss words people use….but it’s highly offensive to me to use our messiah’s name in vain.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:11 pm
#26 Blitzer: “Is she prepared to be commander in chief?”
Romney: “Far more prepared than the one we have now.”
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:11 pm
How about…
Newt/Romney (yes, I went there – to unite the party!)
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:13 pm
30. We don’t need Newt’s personal baggage and national socialist stances on cap and trade and all the rest to help Obama win the election.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:13 pm
27. I didn’t say you were ‘wrong.’
You appear to be struggling here today.
Try again.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:14 pm
KG,
All you have to do is when Palin speaks, just mute your TV, and just make sure the close captioning is on. Just read her speach as she says it. Other than that, Palin’s voice should not be a reason to disqualify her. If women had low deep voices like men, I really be freaked out.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:15 pm
#20,
Innocent human lives are not “leverage.”
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:15 pm
Mel Says:
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:52 pm
New poll for you all to look over. I have no idea of it’s legitimate or not.
http://www.revolutionpac.com/2011/11/new-iowa-poll-places-ron-paul-firmly-in-first-with-25
===
Yeah, it’s legit.
So Romney has slid to 4th or 5th as IA Gov Branstad has boldly predicted.
Can you say TOAST?
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:17 pm
I’m really not going to hash through the realities of foreign policy with a bunch of libertarian know-nothings…I’m really not… but do you actually know what a “sanction” is, or what it does, or do you just blindly repeat whatever anti-war talking points you can dredge up? Sanctions are specifically designed to cover military technology. Sanctions do _not_ cover food imports. And, um, also, the vast majority of countries under dictatorship have agriculturally-based economies, so if people are starving, it’s probably got nothing to do with sanctions and everything to do with stupid, cleptocratic mismanagement on the part of the dictator in question. This assertiohn is just factually wrong. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:17 pm
Telly,
Romney can’t be veep. Too much drag.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:18 pm
35. There is no expectations for Romney in Iowa. Newt not winning Iowa would seal his fate however and Romney would cruise to the nomination.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:20 pm
34,
And nations like Iran which sponsor terrorism and want to destroy another nation in Israel. That’s humane??
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:21 pm
“human life is not leverage”: oh, everyone should applaud your noble sentiments. So, how many millions are you willing to let die in pursuit of your non-interventionist fantasy-land? Because if you totally eliminate foreign aid, take a meat-axe to the military budget and basically tell the PRC to go forth and become a global hegemon, lots and lots more people are gonna die than might be killed because of sanctions (also, see my above point about how you don’t actually understand what a “sanction” is or how it works).
There is absolutely nothing practical or feasable, let alone desirable, about non-interventionism. Period, end of discussion.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:22 pm
35 CR,
In the last election in 08, McCain came in fourth place in Iowa and then went on to become the nominee. So, winning Iowa would help but, the nomination can be won without Iowa.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:22 pm
39,
Just remember that not all the people in a country are bad. Many of the iranians want peace with Israel. And there is an underground christian population there that is emerging. The bible already tells us what the end of this conflict is anyways. In order:
Psalm 83/Isaiah 17/Amos 1
Then later after that war:
Ezekiel 38 & 39 etc.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:23 pm
On the other hand, an Obama/Romney team up appears to be the dream ticket for MSNBC and Politico.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:24 pm
40,
The last time America tried a non-interventionist approach to the world, this little thing called World War I happened.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:24 pm
41.
So you’re saying Romney still has a shot if he finishes in 4th/5th.
Ok.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:27 pm
43,
That has as much chance of happening as much as the Miami Dolphins have in winning the Super Bowl this season.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:28 pm
37
Did you mean to say Mark Block is too much drag?
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:29 pm
44,
WWII happened that way. WWI wasn’t a non-interventionist thing at all…which is why it took so long for us to get into WWII. WWI we were pretty quick to get into something that had nothing to do with us.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:29 pm
My short list hasn’t changed:
1. Chris Christie
2. Marco Rubio
3. Paul Ryan
4. Bob McDonnell
5. Rob Portman
6. Tim Pawlenty
But if we WERE to put a woman on the ticket, Ayotte, Haley, and Martinez would be the only 3 worthy of consideration.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:29 pm
45
You think it’s even a remote possibililty Romney finishes 4th or 5th in Iowa?
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:30 pm
Anyone know if/where there will be an internet simulcast of tonight’s debate?
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:31 pm
50.
Gov Branstad really does. So does Bob Vander Plaats.
Me, too.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:32 pm
I’d really say it’s more WWII; WWI had really not that much to do with us at it’s start. The fact is, though, that the U.S. has almost never been non-interventionist in it’s foreign policy, particularly in what we consider to be our sphere of influence, libertarian claims about “what the constitution says” notwithstanding. It’s pure utopianism, plain and simple, and very little different from the marxist notion of the withering away of the state.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:34 pm
Romney’s not finishing fourth or fifth in Iowa, not with a solid 20 percentish in every poll since June. Ron Paul winning would be amazingly funny; I really hope it happens just because he probably won’t win anywhere else and it’ll throw cold water on the entire caucus system.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:34 pm
51,
CNN.com/Live.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:35 pm
49.
Dave the Rombot,
TWO northeasterners on the Republican ticket? You can’t get more stupid than that.
Obama would love you!
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:35 pm
Assuming Romney is the nominee,
1) Romney/Huckabee: the sign is in my yard, I’d be a campaign volunteer and check the couch for spare change.
other Romney running mates that are not vomit inducing for me:
2) Ryan 3) Jindal 4) Nikki Haley 5) Mike Pence
vomit inducing but would still vote for
6) Romney/Christie
Love Rubio but he has said no and I think that pairing him with Romney would end badly for everyone.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:36 pm
48,
Never mind what i said. I’m having problems with articulating what i mean today.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:37 pm
A.J.,
Yeah, i agree with your statement. Our country has always been pretty non-interventionist…until after WWII.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:39 pm
36.
“Sanctions are specifically designed to cover military technology. Sanctions do _not_ cover food imports.”
Under Carter:-
Oil Import Ban, > $10 Billion US Dollar Assets Blocked, Embargo on all US Trade and Travel
Lifted in 1981 after the Algiers Declaration
Under Reagan:-
Iran declared a sponsor of International Terrorism. US opposes World Bank Loans to Iran. US supports Iraq (Saddam Hussein – Yes that Saddam) in Iran/Iraq war. US bans imports from Iran.
Under Clinton:-
Clinton bans all US participation in Iranian petroleum development. Two months later expands sanctions to encomapss total trade and investment embargo.
Under Bush:-
Freeze of assets for Iranian individuals and foreign companies affilliated with Iranian trade.
Under Obama:-
Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act (CISADA) targets refineries (Iran now imports ~25 percent of its refined gasoline)
A generation of restrictions on trade, including food imports. To say that this only impacts military technology is wrong.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:40 pm
48,
We were staying neutral in both wars until the Germans sank the Lusitania and killed American lives on that ship which brought us into WWI. Of course we know Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor drew us into WWII. The funny thing is Ron Paul’s explanation that we should’ve stayed out of both world wars. Or that we should’ve never fought the Civil War. He claimed slaves could’ve been freed by other means. I’ll bet he proably would’ve let the South break away if he was president at the time.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:40 pm
CR, it’s not at all implausible that Romney could take 4th or 5th and still win just like McCain did. In fact, it’s quite similar to McCain in that Romney most likely will have N.H. locked up, and probably even more so than McCain did. New Hampshire has never seemed to care much how well a candidate does in Iowa, and as long as Romney takes N.H., he has a shot.
Of course, you don’t want to admit that, but your track record on picking candidates certainly doesn’t inspire confidence in your political predictive powers.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:40 pm
The criteria that I have heard Romney mention for his choice for VP if he (and we) are fortunate enough that he win the nomination is that it be a person who is immediately prepared to step in and serve as president, should it be necessary.
My criteria for the VP is that it be someone from the south who has TEA party cred (although I am less and less certain of what the TEA party is about), and can unify the Republicans.
My short list consists of
1. Bob McDonnell
2. Marco Rubio
3. Jim DeMint
4. Bobby Jindal
5. Mike Huckabee
I doubt Rubio would take it. He has already implied that VP is off the table for him. If he were in his 2nd term, however, I think he would almost have the VP slot locked up. Maybe even the top of the ticket.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:41 pm
52
Good. So you would be shocked if he came in 1st or 2nd?
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:43 pm
How long until we put people running for Senate on the short list for VP?
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:43 pm
Why Romney/Huckabee?
Huckabee:
1) has a blue collar background.
2) received trade union endorsements.
3) wants education reform without declaring war on teachers (the “weapons of mass instruction” line, music ed for all kids and his sister is a teacher.)
4) is very supportive of the tea party without being viewed as a tea party candidate.
5) is not a beltway or Wall Street guy.
6) is arguably the best retail politician of our day (see video of spontaneous standing ovation received for speech at NRA earlier this year)
7) will activate the socon/evangelical GOTV apparatus for Romney like no one else.
9) will deescalate racial tension in the campaign against Obama.
10) is a national figure with a base of support that is impervious to attack from the left and right.
NEW
11) NO overlap in their support, Huck gives Romney more of a mandate to govern as POTUS.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/147452/Romney-GOP-Supporters-Tilt-Upscale-Palin-Downscale.aspx?version=print
12) Class warfare cover (see 1-5)
13) Huckabee was in EARLY supporting Rubio and McDonnell. Both men would hit the trail hard for Mitt/ Mike.
14) Mitt/Mike could run a positive campaign giving voters a ticket to vote FOR, not just against Obama.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:43 pm
Anyone want to read a disgusting article by CNN Obama shill- Roland Martin.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/18/opinion/roland-martin-americans-lazy/index.html
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:43 pm
60,
Exactly. I’m just having issues today.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:46 pm
It would be REALLY great if people expect Romney to finish 4th in Iowa. 5th would be even better. I said weeks ago that the only 2 people who can win the state are Romney and Paul. They’re the only candidates who have a ground game in the state. The only thing that’s changed since is that both of those ground games have gotten better.
If Paul really IS at 25%, he will probably win the state, and Mitt will finish 2nd. That’s only one rung below the optimal outcome in the state. I would LOVE it if Ron wins the state, then goes on to finish 2nd in New Hampshire….and if he wins Iowa, he WILL finish 2nd in New Hampshire.
If that happens, it makes it a 2-man race between Ron Paul and Mitt Romney…..and locks up a Mitt nomination that will occur not much further down the road. Also, I happen to LIKE Ron a lot. I voted for him in 1988. We need all the Libertarians in the GOP we can get.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:48 pm
#64 “How long until we put people running for Senate on the short list for VP?”
LOL.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:49 pm
65.
A pretty compelling case. I’m just not sure Huck would want to do it and I really don’t know if the personal wounds have healed enough between the two to make a working relationship.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:51 pm
I hardly know anything about Sen. Ayotte, is it true people are saying she’s like a smarter, prettier, more conservative Palin?
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:51 pm
68.
Exactly. The other thing a strong showing by Paul would do is scare the hell out of many voters thinking about throwing their votes away on candidates who have no shot. Romney may not be their first choice but a Ron Paul candidacy is enough to bring a lot of people to their senses.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:55 pm
I’d be okay with Romney/Huckabee, but I don’t think Huck has much interest. I should really buy a Romney/McDonnell contract on Intrade.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:57 pm
73
I’ll echo that. McDonnell or Ryan, I think that’d be his best bet. It’d be fun to watch Ryan politely destroy Biden with sheer intellect.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:57 pm
If you’re looking to put a woman on the ticket, Ayotte, Haley and Martinez are all too new. If Romney is the nominee, and he wants a woman VP, he should take a strong look at Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin. Lots of experience and nothing really controversial in her past would make her an excellent balancing act for a Romney ticket.
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:59 pm
Craig the RomNot,
1. Christie would help Mitt lock down Pennsylvania, which can be won.
2. Christie will take apart Biden in the VP debate.
3. He will force Dems to play defense in several other NorthEastern states, including New Jersey.
4. He will play very well in the Industrial MidWest.
5. He will help with NorthEastern and West Coast fundraising.
6. He will make the best-possible attack dog for the ticket.
7. He’s completely loyal to Mitt…something that’s indispensable.
8. He’s a bridge to the VERY large Catholic voting bloc.
9. There’s no downside. No one is winning Southern states by bigger margins than Mitt.
I could go on, but in deference to your limited attention span, that’s a good place to stop.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:03 pm
76 That’s pretty much what I think too. I look forward to #2 – can you imagine?
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:04 pm
Funny. When I was growing up republicans cared enough about foreign policy to actually nominate a ticket with national security credentials. Romney/Ayotee, Romney/Christie, Romney/?, aside from being decidedly more liberal than any right-thinking conservative could support, have no national security experience. I get it that the election is about the economy, but governing is about keeping America safe.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:06 pm
Mac @ 65, well said. I’m not necessarily saying Huck would be my #1 choice for Mitt’s VP, (which is all still very presumptuous), but it would be a very formidable ticket and perhaps could be the strongest ticket we could serve up.
I think Huck would jump at the chance to be the VP. Obviously, I don’t know his inner thoughts, but when he announced he wasn’t running I got the feeling that his heart wasn’t into running for Pres. Running for VP is a totally different animal, and a totally different job. It also would make running for Pres in 2020 much easier for him.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:08 pm
78.
Yeah, but when you were growing up we didn’t have True Conservatives. They trump everything now or some I’m told. Must have a True Conservative on the ticket to add balance.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:08 pm
78
True. So who do you propose?
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:08 pm
which is more likely
a) mitt would actually pick this person as VP
b) mitt is floating this person as VP to score points in NH
i say B
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:08 pm
My short list would be (not in any particular order):
Rubio
McDonell
Huckabee
Haley
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:09 pm
55. Thanks, Ozzy!
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:09 pm
79 The thing about Hucakbee is I don’t think Romney will pick anyone who will have their own message. I think he’s going to want someone who stays on message, and I can’t picture Huckabee staying on Romney’s message.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:09 pm
Paul, Mitt was just being kind. It was merely a nod to the person sitting next to him.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:16 pm
I’d be curious to see who Ron Paul would choose as a VP.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:24 pm
I think Ron Paul will choose Rand Paul as VP.
You want a VP you can trust otherwise you end up in a Kennedy-LBJ situation. Or you have creepy VP’s like Dick Cheney causing problems.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:26 pm
I think this guy just sunk his chances today with that stupid ad taking Obama’s words out of context (actually Obama was quoting the moron McCain)
watch this short but deadly clip:
“Mitt Romney released his first campaign ad, which quotes President Obama saying “if we keep talking about the economy, we’re going to lose.” But those weren’t Obama’s words; he was quoting a strategist for Sen. John McCain in 2008.
In response, the Romney campaign has defended this blatantly dishonest campaign tactic as “not out of bounds.” Thus, ThinkProgress has created this completely in-bounds “advertisement” quoting Romney, in his own words:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjJorv8HBU4&feature=player_embedded
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:27 pm
she looks like an actress i’ve seen named Kacey
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:29 pm
Willard has a message?
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:29 pm
Oh, so we’re already picking Veeps now are we?
That’s Ok with me. I would say my dream ticket would be:
1) Rubio
2) Ryan
3) Nikki Haley
Who I think is actually going to be Romney’s runningmate–hard to tell, but here’s my guess: Nikki Haley, McDonnell other than that, I have no clue.
Honroable mentions are Jindal, McDonnell, Pawlenty (although I don’t think he adds that much to the ticket) perhaps Kasich.
Huckabee would be a pretty good pick, but I sense that he’s feeling great where he is right now.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:30 pm
89.
Good grief. Talk about over the top nonsense.
You think Obama plays fair with his advertising?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/26/us/politics/26ads.html?ex=1380168000&en=ee77cec5c6225e9d&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
That was the NYT slapping Obama around for flat out lying about McCain in 5 separate ads in a couple weeks. Last I look, Obama won the election.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:30 pm
I think the ad is wonderful and the controversy guarantees millions of people seeing it. So kudos to team Romney. Obama hasn’t done s*** on the economy so the quote applies back at him, because that is exactly what they are saying behind closed doors. They are going to make this election about “misleading ads” or “flip flopping” or anything besides the economy and you are sooo helpful to join him.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:31 pm
89 I know, Republicans are totally gonna be like, “how dare you misquote Obama!”
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:32 pm
Here’s an article of why many think Romney will be our nominee-
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/poll-45-percent-republicans-believe-romney-nominee-185157564.html
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:33 pm
Actually, I’ll add Chris Christie to that list upon second though–as long as he affirms a more socially conservative federal governing style.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:34 pm
88,
Paul will choose his son? By the way, why would Paul need a VP choice when he won’t be the nominee?
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:34 pm
Yeah, it’s kinda early for Willard to be picking out drapes and veeps.
ArizonaLuke Arizona:
Something to note – #Romney never got above the 25% mark in 2008 either. #NotMitt
1 hour ago Favorite Retweet Reply
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:35 pm
Perry/Bachmann – - – Let’s give the GOP a great national image!!
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:36 pm
98 I think Ron Paul would eliminate the position of VP in order to save people money on their taxes – just my 2 cents.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:36 pm
mattklewis Matt K. Lewis
GOPers must eschew intellectually dishonest TV ads: 1. It’s unethical, 2. They can win on the truth, & 3. It undermines future credibility.
4 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:37 pm
Cain/Rent-is-too-damn-high guy – - – really get out the black vote, and both have done equivalent amounts of policy preparation
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:37 pm
99 Seriously, why can’t he just wing it like Perry & Cain.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:39 pm
teledude Says:
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:26 pm
“I think this guy just sunk his chances today with that stupid ad taking Obama’s words out of context (actually Obama was quoting the moron McCain)”
==
I agree. The moron who chose Palin.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:41 pm
Ha! gotta love how CR criticizes others for backing loser candidates. Its a beautiful thing.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:43 pm
Romney is going to be very risk adverse with his vps, that’s why Ayotte and Martinez are probably no go. It’s still most likely Rubio with Christie as AG.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:44 pm
65.
Ok, Mac,
You just sold me again on:
CAIN/HUCK ’12!!
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:45 pm
105 You mean unintellectually dishonest ads. Intellectual people see this as what it is – funny. Using Obama out of context when he’s using a made up quote is pretty funny. It’s only dishonest if it’s deceptive – nobody who has half a brain will be deceived.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:46 pm
To the Romnots:
Ads are put together by staff, not the candidate. I doubt Romney knew the context when reviewing the ad for approval. That being said, even though Obama is taken out of context, the remarks seem to represent his thoughts. I assume that the quote was chosen to convey a message in the shortest time.
That being said, I would not want to be the one responsible for this today.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:48 pm
1. Romney/Rubio
2. Romney/Christie
3. Romney/McDonnell
4. Romney/Portman
5. Romney/Huckabee (don’t think this could actually happen though…)
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:53 pm
Romney is “risk averse” with everything. That’s why nobody likes him.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:53 pm
RomNots don’t act 1/100th this “offended” when ads AGAINST Romney take him out of context.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:55 pm
91 “Willard has a message?”
Yes, he does. But you don’t know that because every time you see him you either change the channel or plug your ears.
Thus remaining willfully ignorant.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:55 pm
112 Right, he’s only worked “low risk” jobs. Do you know how making such statements makes you look?
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:56 pm
61.
Doofus,
It’s IA + SC = FL and the nomination.
As for Weird Willard’s grand idea of NH = FL and the nomination, that’s insanity. So, go Romney!
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:56 pm
CR Says:
“They can win on the truth”
The truth? You can’t handle the truth!!!! Son, we live in our world with serious issues and those issues must be addressed by someone with political know how. Who’s gonna do it? You? Romney has a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for a far-right conservative and curse Romney. You have that luxury, the luxury of not knowing what we know, that a Tea Party candidates defeat, while tragic, probably will help save this nation and Romney’s existance, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, creates jobs. You don’t want the truth cause deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want Romney in that White House, you NEED Romney in that White House. We use words like Free-Market, Capitalism, and Small Governemnt as the backbone of Romney’s policies. You use them as a punchline. I have niether the inclination or time to explain to a man who works at the very jobs that Romney can provide and then question the manner in which Romney provides it. I rather you thank Romney and went on your way, otherwise, you start running for President. Either way, I dont give a damn what you think you are entitled to!!!
Damn, I’m good!!! Eat your heart out Jack Nicholson!!!
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:59 pm
#108 Cain/Huck? No way. Huck was the first one out of the box to declare (because of Cain’s lame handling of Allegation/gate): “The damage is done.” Actually Cain damaged himself before the allegations came to light–and afterwards with the Libya-pause. He’s done.
November 22nd, 2011 at 4:59 pm
For those of you who haven’t seen the ad, the ad shows the context in which Obama won the election by promising to fix the economy. Hence the quote, we will lose if we talk about the economy. The ad doesn’t expressly state that the quote is referring to McCain, but either way, the ad indicates that Obama promised Americans he would fix the economy. He hasn’t. That will be the message of this ad. If some of you want to throw Romney under the bus because you can’t understand the context that the quote is being used in, so be it. The ordinary American who sees this will remember Obama having promised to fix the economy. He has failed. The ad delivers that message, abunduntly.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:00 pm
The Romney ad is filled with irony not dishonesty. Get a brain, people.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:00 pm
Romney/McDonnell is the most likely ticket.
McDonnell is strong with social cons but not scary. He’s Catholic, and went to Notre Dame and Regent. He has been governor, attorney general, state legislator, and in the army for 27 years. And he takes Virginia off the table for Obama.
After McDonnell, Christie, Portman, and Thune would be the next likely choices.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:01 pm
57.mac Says:
November 22nd, 2011 at 3:35 pm
“Assuming Romney is the nominee,
1) Romney/Huckabee: the sign is in my yard, I’d be a campaign volunteer and check the couch for spare change.
other Romney running mates that are not vomit inducing for me:
2) Ryan 3) Jindal 4) Nikki Haley 5) Mike Pence
vomit inducing but would still vote for
6) Romney/Christie
Love Rubio but he has said no and I think that pairing him with Romney would end badly for everyone.”
===
Bingo, Mac.
(Except for ALL the times you mentioned Romney on top.)
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:03 pm
121,
I rather see a Mitt Romney-Paul Ryan ticket.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:03 pm
115 – Absolutely. It differentiates me in a positive way from the merry band of Rombots.
And yes, in politics, Romney is about as risk averse as you can get.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:04 pm
Rombots……
Rule number one of politics…..
When you’re EXPLAINING, you’re LOSING…..
Hence, this ad was a bad idea on the part of Team Mitt.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:05 pm
119 “For those of you who haven’t seen the ad, the ad shows the context in which Obama won the election by promising to fix the economy. Hence the quote, we will lose if we talk about the economy. The ad doesn’t expressly state that the quote is referring to McCain, but either way, the ad indicates that Obama promised Americans he would fix the economy. He hasn’t. That will be the message of this ad. If some of you want to throw Romney under the bus because you can’t understand the context that the quote is being used in, so be it. The ordinary American who sees this will remember Obama having promised to fix the economy. He has failed. The ad delivers that message, abunduntly.”
No, no, no, no. That isn’t the message you are supposed to get. A “true” “Christian” “conservative” (Anti-Romney-oids), would know that it shows that Romney is the spawn of Satan, Obama clone, and child molester. And that you have to vote for Obama to save America for Jesus.
Or something.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:06 pm
111.
Kavon,
“(don’t think this could actually happen though…)”
Why couldn’t it?
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:07 pm
Bob McDonnell has some issues that would be re-vetted (I dont care what you think…they WILL get re-vetted by the national press corps…Mitt will not want re-vetting)
Here is my Bracketology from earlier in the year
Shock and awe bracket
Marco Rubio vs Chris Christie
Statesman bracket
Jon Kyl vs Mitch Daniels
Safe and sound bracket
Rob Portman vs Pat Toomey
Win the whole dang great lakes bracket
Paul Ryan vs Tim Pawlenty
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:07 pm
117,
So Romney is going with the lying game as he tried with his 2008 political attack ads?
Btw, how’d that work out last time?
3rd place!
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:08 pm
#121: You could be right. Romney’s running on smart, mature, common sense, experienced, calculated, sane, proven conservative leadership. His VP would need to be somebody who could be a credible POTUS on day one. No high drama, controversy, baggage, cataclysmic change, extreme ideology or American idol personalities.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:08 pm
I like Paul Ryan but he would be a huge target for Obama. He’s and the liberals have been portraying Ryan as the guy wants to kill grandma (speaking of false ads, remember the Ryan lookalike pushing granny in the wheelchair over the cliff?) and adding him to the ticket would make the whole campaign even more about how cruel Republicans are. Say goodbye to the 65+ vote.
Besides, I’d rather keep Ryan in the House to put the plans into law. He’s the leader of the movement and taking him out would be a big loss.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:09 pm
128
those McDonnell issues are
1) the senior thesis about women thing
2) the gay rights after the election thing
3) the confederate day thing
I love McDonnell but I think these would get re vetted unnecessarily
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:10 pm
117.
Ozzy,
Classic!
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:11 pm
132
these issues cause two problems
1) distract independent voters
2) make it look like Romney “pandered to the hard right”
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:12 pm
Boomer Says:
“I like Paul Ryan but he would be a huge target for Obama. He’s and the liberals have been portraying Ryan as the guy wants to kill grandma”
I wouldn’t worry about that. Come Christmas time, Grandma is gonna get run over by a reindeer.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:13 pm
117,
Jobs? What jobs?
Oh, from the 47th out of 57 states one term gov of TaxaFeesachusettes.
Ok I get it.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:14 pm
#10 MEM “I’ve watched more than an hour’s worth of Ayotte video. She has this tremulous, slightly scared voice. A strictly Bush League talent.”
You ever heard Susan Collins?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KKWeTIg5Vk
That sort of thing must be a Yankee woman thing.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:14 pm
122.
Craig,
“(Except for ALL the times you mentioned Romney on top.)”
Chuckled at that one.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:19 pm
#137: Watch out talking about women’s voices. Teledude will get you.
It cannot be overestimated how important how you sound is in politics. For this reason Thatcher had a voice coach who lowered her voice and elevated her credibility. Rice has great credibility, IMO, due to the way she speaks. Heck, Newt has managed to pull ahead of Romney simply because of how he speaks.
And that’s how we got Obama over Hillary.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:20 pm
136,
You’ve never seen A Few Good Men with Tom Cruise and Jack Nicholson, have you?
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:20 pm
I’m with Josiah. My dream ticket would be Gary Johnson/ Jeff Flake. My ticket would be a bit geographically challenged, but there would be no doubt about who the Small Government alternative would be.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:21 pm
#141 Except Jeff Flake has endorsed Romney.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:22 pm
139.
If you haven’t seen it watch The King’s Speech.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:24 pm
Ron Paul/Gary Johnson, Ron Paul/Jeff Flake, Ron Paul/Michelle Bachmann
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:24 pm
Maybe Yankee women are just used to speaking while shivering in the cold. Teeth chattering and all that.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:25 pm
139 KG,
You think the dems have buyers remorse for picking Obama over Hillary?
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:25 pm
New Gallup Numbers
Newt 20
CAIN 14
Mitt 11
http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/sctsh-mm_0iyhcmypxpnrq.gif
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:27 pm
145,
I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but, there no women on the New York Yankees.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:27 pm
147.
Those are positive intensity ratings not poll numbers. And you’re worried about Romney not being honest?
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:30 pm
140,
Is that a Scientology cult chick flick?
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:32 pm
#146 Yeah, I think so. Her numbers are apparently really high. Obama got a lock on a bunch of primaries for all the Jeremiah Wright/Bill Ayes stuff came out on Obama.
It’s really a good question: Would she have been a better POTUS than Obama? I know people believe so but I wonder. Both are affirmative action candidates. Neither have had much experience, no record of accomplishment. He is a not-too-white/not-too black blank slate sonorous baritone at the teleprompter and she’s the wife of Bill.
Neither would have got to the dance on their own merits and record. Obama cannot make executive decisions because he’s completely clueless. My feeling is that Hillary’s the same. At least Hillary might have had Bill to lead her by the hand and be the shadow POTUS.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:33 pm
150 “Is that a Scientology cult chick flick?”
Nah, otherwise you would have seen it.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:34 pm
#148 Ozzy: Are you sure about that?
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:36 pm
An hour and a half away from CNN’s debate moderated by ol’ Wolfy Blitzed.
Rush claims he’s prepping for Newt!!
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:40 pm
#117 – Ozzy, I thought that was pretty good.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:45 pm
CNN:
“Former Speaker Newt Gingrich and 2008 unsuccessful White House seeker Mitt Romney will be joined on stage by businessman and former Godfather’s Pizza CEO and radio talk show host Herman Cain; Texas Gov. Rick Perry; Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, who is making his third run for the White House; Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota; former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania; and former Utah Gov. and former ambassador to China Jon Huntsman.”
Notice CNN didn’t say ‘Romney, who has not ever NOT run for the Republican nomination since before Clinton’
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:46 pm
154 “Rush claims he’s prepping for Newt!!”
Let the vetting of Newt begin.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:48 pm
157.
Rombot,
And you love it when it’s from the libs standpoint.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:54 pm
The absolute dumbest thing Blitzer could do, is to go after Gingrich with snarky lines provided by a group of liberal writers.
Newt will chew Blitzer up and not break a sweat.
November 22nd, 2011 at 5:57 pm
Major Newt screw up. Gets much worse when you see the timing:
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-gingrich-missouri-20111122,0,5253334.story
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:01 pm
What about those independents you Willardists prate about? Do they approve of lying about your opponents?
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:17 pm
Obama/Romney 2012!!!
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:19 pm
Romney/Specter 2012!!!
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:20 pm
Erin Burnett has a nose for news.
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:22 pm
If I were cynical, I might be able to think of a reason that a candidate who needs to win New Hampshire might name drop as a VP possibility a prominent person from New Hampshire ahead of the New Hamphire primary.
But that’s only if I were cynical…..
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:24 pm
Ayotte would be an interesting pick. My guess is that there is a contingent inside Romney’s camp that feels that Mitt really needs to take the reins of the party once nominated, sort of the way Clinton did when he selected his fellow DLC southerner in Al Gore. There is probably also another contingent who feels that Mitt needs to balance the ticket, and probably another that sees Mitt as the new Nixon, who will need to find his own Spiro Agnew to placate the Southern flank of the party without turning off the rest of the coalition.
Interesting that Nikki Haley seems to be popular among all of the wings of the party. She is a favorite of mine, but I fear what voters, particularly female voters, would do when faced with an attractive woman with infidelity rumors in her past. Just as female voters react positively on a primal level to “alpha males” like Bill Clinton, who have multiple affairs and still win the female vote by leaps and bounds, I wonder if the notion of an attractive female with this sort of accusation against her will gut her support among other women. It would be interesting to see just which demographics made her governor’s race so close in 2010.
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:24 pm
112
Yeah? And, is that why everyone loves risk takers Bachman, Perry, and Cain so much! Hah!
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:25 pm
Keith,
“Mitt was on Hannity’s show WITH Ayotte when he was asked who was on his VP short list. Mitt refused to answer, saying it would be presumptuous because he’s not yet the nominee. But, he said, there were many highly qualified people from which to choose. Including Ayotte, he said.”
Ah, so this sounds like pro forma feined flattery. Okay. But that negates the FPP.
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:27 pm
DaveG,
Mitt needs to balance the ticket. Unlike Bill Clinton- who had a quite varied and diverse background- Mitt Romney is culturally divisive. He’s rich, very Northeastern, plastic, and Baptist.
….more or less.
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:31 pm
Mike Huckabee is far and away the biggest no brainer if the consideration is primarily electoral. Consider that he’s ready, vetted, a proven campaigner, is strong with demographics where Mitt is weak, can debate well, can actually be POTUS, and would create some buzz. Plus he has shown polling strength in states like Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania- all states we’d very much like to win.
The fact that he’s Baptist like Mitt will not matter to most voters.
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:31 pm
BREAKING: Cain signs the anti-abortion pledge, leaving Romney as sole GOP presidential outlier!
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:34 pm
I thought Romney was Episcopalian or something?
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:40 pm
171 Romney’s in the unique position that he’s going to have to run in a general election.
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:41 pm
Craig,
Romney grew up Episcopalian, like all WASPy sons of governors, but he later became Baptist.
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:42 pm
161 So are you conceding the point that we need a candidate that appeals to independents?
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:46 pm
Craig,
There are tons of Baptists in Massachusetts, and well, you know……
November 22nd, 2011 at 6:52 pm
160 Yes, it looks like Gingrich just lost his best chance at winning a state in Feb.
November 22nd, 2011 at 7:28 pm
Ron Paul / Butch Otter
November 22nd, 2011 at 7:30 pm
168. Yes, it does. Too early for Mitt to be publicly talking about VP.
November 22nd, 2011 at 7:32 pm
Romney/Rice
November 22nd, 2011 at 9:34 pm
Not going to happen. I don’t know much about here, and she may be fantastic, but she is from practically the same state that Mitt is from and doesn’t make a whole lot of credentials to back her up.
The media will treat her like Sarah Palin round two.
Mitt was just trying to raise the profile of the endorsement.
November 23rd, 2011 at 7:14 am
“The fact that he’s Baptist like Mitt will not matter to most voters.”
I may need to have my coffee before understanding that sentence, but on first blush something is not right.
November 23rd, 2011 at 7:28 am
The only acceptable VP choice for us social conservatives is Michele Bachmann !
November 24th, 2011 at 11:03 pm
Ok, I agree that its still to early for VP selection time, but you have to start listening to these so called “vp dream team” members. BOTH Rubio and Haley have said multiple times they will not consider being a slot on the ticket. We need start thinking of others. Im all in favor of NM Gov. Susana Martinez. She’s smart, attractive, and can get us some minority votes. Ayotte is to inexperienced and the media would eat her alive.
November 30th, 2011 at 10:54 pm
Maybe I’m missing some inside joke or something but you guys all know Mitt was born, raised, and still is a Mormon right?
Also Huck is a big supporter of the whole “Mormons are cultists thing” for Huck to be Mitts V.P. would really cause some confusion. If Huck would even accept the position to campaign with a “cultist”.