According to this article Mac is leaning toward Romney, for the good reasons of executive competence and fundraising prowress. The arguments against him are the same--McCain doesn’t really like him, the Mormon issue, and he’s too standard a choice in times that call for audacity. Bobby Jindal apparently is not mentioned by McCain insiders, because he would call attention to Mac’s age. The only new name is South Dakota’s Senator Thune. As far as I know he’s a solid and somewhat boring guy, but I don’t know very far.
How boring can you be if you can knock out the entrenched Tom Daschle? (Who was VERY well-known and entrenched here in SD.)
For what it's worth, I think Thune would be a good choice, and in fact somewhat randomly predicted to my class this Spring that he would be the nominee (we had read a book about his race against Daschle).
What about Zell Miller?
Thune is a good man, as is DeMint.
To pick Romney is to court disaster. It's guaranteed to outrage the base, for the base knows that Romney doesn't believe half of what he he's been saying of late.
Two Rockefeller Republicans aren't going to cut it. He's got to reach out to the base, really reach out to them. He can promise Romney various departments, Homeland, FEMA, perhaps Defense. But he can't tap him as the VP.
And Peter, concerning bores, ------------------- you may need to cut some VP candidates something of a break.
If you want personality, go with Curt Schilling. But if you're perusing the ranks of Republican office holders, ----------- don't hold your breath waiting for Mr. Personality to present himself.
Zell Miller is too old and wasn't such a good governor. But he would be another maverick. Dan, I will cut the bores a break. I'm tentatively warming up to Thune. The "enthusiasm gap" would probably widen, I agree, if Romney were picked.
It appears that it’s all down to Alaska Gov Sarah Palin or Mitt Romney, and team Romney fears Palin now has the best shot, so Romney camp is mounting a blogosphere-wide assault via Politico.
The tip-off that Politico is just a “promote Romney” piece is that it mentions EVERY NAME in the next two tiers of Veep prospects EXCEPT SARAH PALIN!!! — even names far more unlikely than Palin (since Romney camp knows Palin is the ONLY ONE who tops — I’ll say tops by far — Romney as McCain’s best pick).
Bottom line, Romney and Politico fear Palin most — as do the Dems and the MSM. (By the way, the Dems and MSM do not fear Romney the most — which says a lot.)
AOL, a main on-line pro-Obama/pro-Dem player, is now carrying the Politico piece promoting Romney buzz.
Clearly AOL wants McCain and the GOP to lose the general elction — hence they gladly promote Romney (no mention of Palin).
Also, CNN had Romney — kind of out of the blue — attacking Obama. Again, CNN, wanting McCain and the GOP to lose, gladly promotes Romney (to attempt to avert the Palin threat).
All the media frenzy which will surround the remarkable Palin “story” — essentially free to McCain — will be worth millions and millions of dollars of coverage and PR (more money than Romney would provide anyway).
It's possible Ted is exaggerating. But it is true, I hear, that Palin is still under serious consideration, and she was missing from the POLITICO article. I also agree that PALIN or JINDAL would be the audacious pick Mac needs.
Among other things, I think Palin would be helpful to McCain on energy issues---she just wrote an open letter to H Reid demanding ANWR be opened up for drilling. Also, the issue of gun possession has a big profile after a major 2nd ammendment ruling and she's a long standing NRA member.
Not to mention she's, ah, charismatic.
Is age as much an issue as we think it is?
Take a look at the New Jersey Senate primary, between the ancient Lautenberg and Rob Andrews. Lautenberg, who is over 90, easily handled, and I mean easily, effortlessly, handled Andrews, absolutely delivered a smackdown.
So if age was all that, ------------------- why are there so many like Specter, Lautenberg, Byrd and Feinstein in the Senate?
Not to mention, even as old as he is, Zell Miller is STILL probably five times the guys we're looking at, guys such as Ridge. What other Republican would have even thought of, let alone delivered the speech that Miller gave at the Convention? That speech was one of the finest speeches we've seen in recent times, {of course that has to be qualified, it was a fine speech for what it was intended to do, and that was finish off the Democrat nominee}. A guy who could deliver that speech, who could unload on the candidate of the '60s, Kerry, is a guy that we could use.