Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22

Thread: Election 2012: the Romney VP pick

  1. #1

    Election 2012: the Romney VP pick

    There's a ton of topics you could discuss with regard to this mud-fest, the specious ads, romneys taxes vs almost every record Obama hasnt shown, the new tone of civility (or not)... but for this thread... I'm just curious what y'all think on the topic of the VP pick.

    We should know who it is pretty soon. Does it matter? Do you pick one that can help bring in a specific demographic/region, or do you pick the one truly most capable of filling in should you die in office? Do you want a smiling dreamer or a political axe man?

    And based on these considerations, who do you think *should* be picked, and for now, who do you think *will* be picked? Who should he avoid? Why?

    Just curious what others think on this.

    ---------- Post added at 22:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 21:58 PM ----------

    And ftr, i personally dont pretend to know who he's going to pick. I find it easier to make my prognostications after the fact, i'm right more often that way.

    Some that have been mentioned a lot (and i'll miss plenty cause this is off the top of the head) are Marco Rubio, Condoleza Rice, Gen Petraus, Chris Christi, Col Allen West, Tim Pawlenty, Rob Portman, Bobby Jendal, Paul Ryan, and a stack of others. Each has their pros and cons.

    Personally I'm thinking if Romney wins there a high probability he'll live thru his term, so i seriously doubt the vp will have to fill in, but its still a consideration thatll be raised.

    Condi Rice has been mentioned, and though she's strong ethically and as smart as a whip, she (a) doesnt want the job, and I think she means that, and (b) is a reminder of the Bush admin, and though i liked Bush, any reminder will energize the left and I'm not a fan of seeing a second obama term.

    Frankly all of them have some attributes I like, but the one I HOPE he picks is probably unlikely. I'd love to see Chris Christi take the role. Maybe because I identify with him. He's not a silver spoon type, he's down to earth, plain spoken, and just a little too quick tempered for his own good. He'll jump down someones throat and rip them a new backside unapologetically, but you never lack for knowing his position. Coy he is not. I want to see him go toe-to-toe with Biden.

    Anyone else gotta favorite?
    -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup. --

  2. #2
    Chris Christi is a freaking joke!
    Plus he is the most left leaning republican there is.
    And look no further than his love of islam!!!

    Picking him would turn off so many conservatives, Romney would lose for sure!

  3. #3
    K, we'll mark you down as "undecided" on Christie.

    [I studied the pollsters at MSNBC... I think I'm beginning to get it down.]
    -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup. --

  4. #4
    See, you are learning from the lefties at msnbc.

    Calling a definite vote against obama as a maybe vote for romney.

  5. #5
    So if you had your choice... who would Romney pick {and why?}?
    -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup. --

  6. #6
    I don't think Condi Rice would be a good choice, although she is clearly much smarter than anyone who has run for president in the last 20 years. Aside from the fact that she doesn't want the job, she doesn't excite people.

    Whoever Romney picks needs to be far more conservative than he is. He needs to excite the most conservative part of his voting base. A moderate choice would yield a wimpy turnout, just like we saw with McCain. I suspect that millions of conservatives did not vote in the last election due to McCain. The strange thing about McCain is that he runs vicious campaigns in Arizona when running for the Senate seat, but he ran a milk toast campaign against Obama.

    Marco Rubio could be a good choice. He appears to be both conservative and smart. Some people think he will help pull the Hispanic vote due to his Cuban ethnicity. I don't necessarily agree with that because Hispanics are not known to vote along race lines like our black voters do, but Hispanics do cross over to the conservative side much more often.

    Rand Paul could be a good choice. I think we need a hard-core conservative voice to help neutralize some of the damage done due to the combined efforts of Obama, Pelosi and Reid during Obama's first 2 years. I don't feel confident that Romney can or will do that. Rand brings some of his father's Libertarian core beliefs into the game, but he manages to separate himself from some of his father's unrealistic beliefs. I like Ron Paul, but 90% of what he claimed he would change is not within the power of the president to change.

    Colonel Allan West would actually be my first choice, but he doesn't show up on the radar. This guy is very smart and has a history of getting the job done. I like the way that he deals with the liberally-biased media. He could also pull some moderate black voters.

    Bad choices:

    McCain - this is self explanatory.

    Palin - she alienates too many people and needs to learn how to speak like someone who is not a hick.

    Pawlenty - good leadership skills, but doesn't excite people.

    Jindal - good conservative, but he has choked a few times, plus I'm not sure that Americans are willing to vote for someone who looks too much like a foreigner after four years of weak leadership and suffrage under a Kenyan president.
    Last edited by TopDogger; 10 August, 2012 at 12:49 PM.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." -- Benjamin Franklin

  7. #7
    The official announcement comes at 8:45 in the morning.

    Unofficially the Associated Press says they've been tipped that it is in fact Paul Ryan. That may be scuttlebutt, but it seems likely. We'll see in about 8 or so hours.
    -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup. --

  8. #8
    It came early. Paul Ryan was selected.

    Paul is a good choice. Actually, there were a lot of good choices this time around. Ryan is a budget hawk, which is something that we desperately need. He can get the Republican base as well as a lot of Independents excited.

    The Democrats are already assaulting him due to lack of international experience. That is probably a good thing compared to what Obummer has done on his international apology tours, as well as his visits to all 57 states.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." -- Benjamin Franklin

  9. #9
    Lol. Oughta be fun now. At 42, Ryan is the face of the GOP future and the go-to guy on serious economics... And thy're up against the only administration in history thats NEVER passed a budget (and they had majorities in both houses half that time).

    And yeah... Watching Biden debate any body oughta be fun, but Ryan will eat his lunch. Biden will go in trying to pull an elder statesman "hey there, junior" routine. Biden is so loose with facts. No Joe, FDR was not president at the start of the depression, and he didnt go in front of non-existent TV cameras to talk about it.
    -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup. --

  10. #10
    Think it will be fun, as now the democrats can start pushing ads out that Ryan wants to gut medicare and medicaid.

    Gotcha, no FDR did not at the time of the depression start, 1929, go on tv because he was not yet president.

    Oh, hate to burst your bubble, but FDR did go before tv cameras many times.
    1939 of course, but still that was the year he was first on tv.
    Not too many tv sets and they figure about 1000 total viewers!

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts