The repukes are pretty predictable: That's why McCain's VP will be Romney

[cali]

Who else could he choose? Crist? Not hardly. Pawlenty? To what end?
Kay Bailey Hutchinson? Sarah Palin? Romney has a national following. He's got money. He was the choice of the repuke establishment. He's got that ever important repuke credential: A succssful businessman. The geography is right.

The repuke pool for vp candidates is small and shallow. I just can't see McCain choosing anyone else.

[H2O Man]

1. Romney

is, I think, the most likely choice. I think McCain has been pressured to accept him, even though he holds Romney in utter contempt.

[cali]

2. yep. I suspect there's been a great deal of pressure on McCain

to pick Romney. And I agree that McCain holds him in contempt.

[H2O Man]

4. More, McCain is

smart enough to recognize that those advocating that he add Romney to the ticket aren't doing it to help him. Their goal is to provide Romney with a platform that allows him to deliver part of the message that they intend him to run on in 2012. The republican powers who plan to run the "Ken doll" candidate against Obama in 2012 do not respect McCain in the least; they are hoping that Obama is unable to deliver on his promises of change, and that America will vote for Romney (who will have a Cheney-type VP).

[Cosmocat]

8. Agree with all points ...

In a really bad crop, Romney is pretty clearly the least atrocious ...

Romey is McCain only younger, smarter and better looking ...

He is the only R on their slate who flip flopped more than McCain, but he has the "Reagenesque" good looks thing that these freakjobs get off on ...

[shaniqua6392]

3. I agree he will pick Romney.

He has the economic experience McCain does not. McCain will probably be able to take Michigan if he picks Romney too. Right now the poll numbers between Obama and McCain here in Michigan are really close. I can't believe Michiganders would choose another Republican after all we have been through the past 7 years. How incredibly stupid. But Romney will really help him here in Michigan.

[saltpoint]

5. Happily for us, anybody McCain can choose carries a significant negative

for at least one group in his base.

Romney at least has some cash, so I agree that he's the likely frontrunner.

It should bother McCain, though, that Romney is slobberingly eager for the job.

[cali]

6. No kidding. As Waterman points out, the repuke party establishment

wants to set up the ken doll candidate for 2012- when McCain will be 76 years old.

[rndmprsn]

18. can romney use his enormous wealth as a VP pick in a campaign....

that has already accepted federal funds?

[saltpoint]

19. Good question. I don't know.

Romney has a huge negative for fundie voters -- his Mormonism -- but on the other hand the rest of the field is so horrible that even someone like Romney has a chance.

[rucky]

7. Dunno. A couple days ago Dobson made a move to endorse McCain

so I think it'll be Huckabee.

[H2O Man]

12. Very important point.

I think it fits well with the OP's point on McCain's dilemma: which bad choice will he take? If he picks Romney, he will not have the enthusiastic support of the religious right-wing; if he picks Huckabee, he will not have the support of the forces that Romney fronts for.

Also, McCain is faced with another factor. In the republican primaries, against a weak field of candidates, McCain only looked "good" on the stage when he didn't speak, and instead had a sly smile when another candidate looked foolish during the debates. He knows that he doesn't compare to Obama as a speaker. If McCain picked Huckabee, then as the head of the ticket, McCain will be seen as the least talented communicator. Huckabee has the charm of an Andy Taylor-like character from Mayberry, RFD.

Romney is only capable of delivering prepared texts. His strength is certainly not thinking on his feet, especially when it comes to foreign affairs. His only speech that earned a grade over a C- was the one he delivered when he dropped out of the republican primary, and McCain had to know that Romney gave that speech in the context of beginning his 2012 campaign.

[BlueStater]

9. Great. Two flip-flopping losers on the same ticket. n/t

[Douglas Carpenter]

10. yes, geographically it makes sense

It would give McCain some edge in New Hampshire and perhaps Michigan which looks like they both could go either way and it will force the Obama campaign to spend more money and time in Massachusetts thus deverting resources.

It's not without its drawbacks. When Romney was Governor of Massachusetts he had to position himself as moderate or almost liberal on social issues. When he ran for President he had to completely change his tune. That may be difficult with some socially conservative voters. Also, many conservative-Evangelical Republicans who are less than enthusasitic about McCain to begin with will also have a problem voting for a V.P. who is a follower of the polytheistic Mormon religion and only a recent convert to social conservatism.

Also Mitt Romney, unlike his late father, does not have a personality and shows little sign of holding deep convictions about anything.

[babylonsister]

11. While logical, I've heard the argument

Romney is too tall and 'pretty' compared to McCain, and that might not bode well. He'd emphasize the age of McCain. I know it's petty but that meme is out there. Otherwise, I agree, Romney with 'economics in his DNA' would seem to be the logical choice.

[Vinca]

13. Won't that drive away the fundies? They've got a Mormon phobia. nt

[cali]

14. I don't think the "Mormon phobia" quite lived up to its billing

during the primaries. And all of McCain's possible choices have serious drawbacks.

[Vinca]

15. Maybe we'll have to drive to Mitt events with large, stuffed dogs

strapped to the roof of the car.:rofl:

[cali]

16. Love it. I envision Clifford on the roof of a 1968 stationwagon.

:rofl:

[Douglas Carpenter]

17. that is an interesting question...I suppose time will tell

Mormonism is a polytheistic religion, a belief in many, many gods with the God of the Bible being only one among thousands and thousands of gods. They also believe that mortals such as us can eventually advance on and become gods equal in greatness to the God of the Bible.

I doubt that most Democrats would care as long as the candidate represented their position on issues. Morris Udall was a Mormon and an icon of liberalism. But nobody knew and fewer cared about about the late Morris Udall's religious beliefs.

But many fundamentalist and conservative-evangelicals do care and they care about it deeply. However, since Gov. Romney has now flip flopped his positions on abortion and other social issues to be in line with the right-wing fundamentalist position - will that win over those fundamentalist voters like it seems to have for James Dobson?

[SidneyCarton]

29. Your characterization of Mormonism is incorrect.

We believe in the doctrine of exaltation, that man can become like God. Therefore yes, we believe God is one of many exalted beings, but we do not worship any exalted being other than our creator. Therefore calling us polytheists is inaccurate, we do not worship multible gods.

[Douglas Carpenter]

30. but is it correct that Mormonism believes in the existence of multiple gods

even if they only worship one God?

I was told this by a Mormon missionary many years ago. Granted he did not volunteer that information. I had read it somewhere and I asked him if it was true that Mormonism believes in the existence of multiple gods. And he described it as one of the deeper truths that is revealed to Mormon believers as they grow in the faith.

No offense intended. I was attempting to explain why many fundamentalist Christians would not consider Mormons to be Christians. Of course many fundamentalist Christians would not consider anyone other than fellow fundamentalist Christians to be Christians.

I have no feelings one way or the other regarding the Mormon faith. Perhaps Mormonism is right that their are thousands of exalted beings equivalent to the creator God of the Bible. Perhaps Mormonism is right that humans can also become exalted beings. Far be it from me to claim to know.

I would have gladly voted for Morris Udall for President of the United States. I would gladly vote for any Mormon or Evangelical, or Catholic or Muslim or Jew or Buddhist or atheist or whoever, provided I was comfortable with their position on political issues.

[SidneyCarton]

31. No offense taken,

This tends to be a point of considerable contention and lewd allegation in regards to my faith, and as such I was just trying to clarify the details of this doctrine. Yes, this is one of the major problems the fundies have with us and what makes them allege that we are not Christians. That said, if John Hagee now determines what Christianity is, I have fewer qualms about not being included in that group, I don't think Christ would be either.

The religion of a candidate registers little for me either. Had Romney been the Republican nominee, I would have vehemently opposed him, should McCain name him as veep, I will vote for Obama with twice the satisfaction I had before.

[nc4bo]

20. I think it'll be romney too.

Shrub/Dick vs. McJackass/SlickWilly. yep! It will truly be a Bush III regime.

[niceypoo]

21. Romney = Ted Baxter

[cali]

23. Just what have you got against dear departed Ted Baxter

that you'd insult his memory so egregiously?

[caledesi]

28. Good One! NT

[CanonRay]

22. I agree.

They need his money. He's one more thing that will piss off the conservative base.

[Beetwasher]

24. Probably. You Can Certainly Immediately Reject Any Woman Or Minority

They they are pretending to consider.

[book_worm]

25. the dark horse, the hail-Mary may be Ridge of Pennsylvania

[snooper2]

26. Ghouliani?

I think that stupid fuck still might be the choice...

[Douglas Carpenter]

27. Rudy Giuliani like Tom Ridge and Joe Lieberman are all pro-choice

I suspects that pretty much puts them out of the race for V.P.