Mitt Romney Running Mate Speculation Thread

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (285 of them)

how low can she go?!

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 16 April 2012 22:24 (2 years ago) Permalink

CNN just went through this--all the usual names plus, because Romney's supposedly losing women so badly, Condoleezza Rice. Meanwhile, Ralph Reed, who's been creeping me out for two decades, says that Romney needs more unscripted moments, so people get to know him better. Hasn't every one of Romney's self-inflicted wounds the past few months been an unscripted moment?

clemenza, Monday, 16 April 2012 22:58 (2 years ago) Permalink

hush, let Ralph have his illusions

Aimless, Monday, 16 April 2012 23:00 (2 years ago) Permalink

I'm gonna go with Christine O'Donnell.

Harried Ice Craw (Deric W. Haircare), Monday, 16 April 2012 23:09 (2 years ago) Permalink

For a split second I thought she was aiming for a dartboard across a crowded bar.

Andrew Farrell, Monday, 16 April 2012 23:14 (2 years ago) Permalink

I'm gonna go with Christine O'Donnell.

Lord Jesus, I know You are disappointed in me and that my prayers do not ascend to Your great throne. But hear, O Lord, the words of your servant, Deric W. Haircare. He is a good man, and his idea has much lol to recommend it. Christine O'Donnell, Lord. ttyl w/b

same old song and placenta (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Monday, 16 April 2012 23:39 (2 years ago) Permalink

rubio's incredibly lukewarm (=overtly unimpressed) endorsements of romney probably mean he's out, no?

flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Monday, 16 April 2012 23:55 (2 years ago) Permalink

mitt's not afraid of the witch

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/04/13/odonnell-and-romney.html

it's smdh time in America (will), Monday, 16 April 2012 23:56 (2 years ago) Permalink

"i mean, i wish it had been somebody else -- but anybody on the republican ticket will be better than obama" is what he said on the TV IIRC.

flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Monday, 16 April 2012 23:56 (2 years ago) Permalink

rubio's incredibly lukewarm (=overtly unimpressed) endorsements of romney probably mean he's out, no?

Rubio, a protege of Jeb Bush's, surely can read the tea leaves as assiduously as Madison did Gibbon: both look towards 2016.

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 16 April 2012 23:57 (2 years ago) Permalink

nah 2012 is actually prob a more winnable election than 2016

iatee, Monday, 16 April 2012 23:59 (2 years ago) Permalink

The candidate with no incumbent will be less for grabs than the one with an incumbent?

mh, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:00 (2 years ago) Permalink

Sean Hannity agrees.

xpost

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:00 (2 years ago) Permalink

the gop will still be in basically the same shape it is today, prob worse + the economy will be better + lotsa strong dem candidates

iatee, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:02 (2 years ago) Permalink

haha how are we defining "strong"? I see a landscape in which "centrism" will triumph over honesty about economics.

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:03 (2 years ago) Permalink

It was ever thus -- I just don't know what there is to look forward to in 2016 besides better Nicki Minaj records.

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:04 (2 years ago) Permalink

"strong" = "capable of winning a national election"

iatee, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:04 (2 years ago) Permalink

imo fuck centrism, just look like you make sense and hope that the tea party/weirdo social conservatives/regional wackos continue to keep looking extra crazy and push your platform

mh, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:04 (2 years ago) Permalink

what's the platform?

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:07 (2 years ago) Permalink

Dems have tread water for years. Tea Party crazies make it easier for Dems to score Halperin-esque "tactical" victories.

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:08 (2 years ago) Permalink

well I never said "a solidly left-wing politician is going to win the presidency" but the 2008 and 2012 gop primaries were not aberrations, they're the new norm.

iatee, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:10 (2 years ago) Permalink

guys

Mitt Romney running mate speculation thread

not "revisit overarching theories of how the political process works" thread

sincerely, Thread Cop

same old song and placenta (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:11 (2 years ago) Permalink

in conclusion rubio would take that vp spot in a second

iatee, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:12 (2 years ago) Permalink

christie and romney would make such a delightful pairing, i pray for this

lag∞n, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:12 (2 years ago) Permalink

I know Christie's belligerent, and a bully, and a loudmouth, but I think the main thing is that he gives the appearance of being jolly. And Mitt + jolly is a winning combination.

clemenza, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:26 (2 years ago) Permalink

he gives the appearance of being jolly when you see him in a picture maybe, because jolly is just another word for fat, but when you see him actually open his mouth he just comes off like your asshole boss

iatee, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:28 (2 years ago) Permalink

That jolly appearance would last about a week. He'd flip out pretty quickly on somebody who asked a question he didn't like. xp

improvised explosive advice (WmC), Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:30 (2 years ago) Permalink

yeah christie is a non starter, itd be awesome tho, he is so huge and belligerent, amazing contrast w/the mittster

lag∞n, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:32 (2 years ago) Permalink

I know Christie's belligerent, and a bully, and a loudmouth, but I think the main thing is that he gives the appearance of being jolly. And Mitt + jolly is a winning combination.

because he's fat...?

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:49 (2 years ago) Permalink

veep choices are often asked to be the more strident and attacking half of the ticket, so christie's being naturally belligerent may not disqualify him. if I were willard, I would hope to have a veep who would choose his fights strategically, rather than just going at folks like a guard dog hurling himself against a chain link fence.

Aimless, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:51 (2 years ago) Permalink

if romney needs to repair his relationship with evangelicals, christie is NOT the way to go.

flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:55 (2 years ago) Permalink

I would think Christie would be a bridge too far for Mitt - it's true, your running mate gets to be the guy who gives the appearance of "shooting from the hip" or whatever but Christie's just tone-deaf. It's easy to imagine his gaffes becoming the day's main story again and again, and to imagine him wanting to double down on whatever the gaffes were. Altho post-Palin that may well be the strategy, some "I stand by everything I'll ever say" dude, but I think team Obama would completely tee off on somebody like Christie

same old song and placenta (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:55 (2 years ago) Permalink

like didn't he tell somebody in a college crowd to suck his dick recently? in which case I join lag∞n in praying for Christie to join the Romney ticket

same old song and placenta (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:56 (2 years ago) Permalink

I was kidding around with the jolly stuff...I'm mostly basing my Christie prediction on how much time the two of them were spending together for a while there, and the (probably mistaken) belief that Romney will want to pick someone who's not as bland as he is. And, as Aimless points out, he might, with some discipline, be a good attack guy. But then I can quickly think of other reasons why he'd be a poor choice. The one thing I don't think anyone's mentioned is that the best pick today (politically) might not be the best pick in August--it'll depend where the race stands then.

clemenza, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:02 (2 years ago) Permalink

Right you are. Mitt and his team will look at a lot of polling and focus group info before they make their choice, and they won't drop a clue until the convention, other than to float the names of people they think might help them for having been mentioned on the short list (without attribution, natch).

Aimless, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:07 (2 years ago) Permalink

pretty sure nominating a Muslim to a judge position disqualifies Christie from national republican political nomination in 2012, no?

Clay, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:09 (2 years ago) Permalink

One of the CNN people--Crowley, I think--said that with so much media overkill today, "surprise" is at a premium, and that all the people who are at the top of the list right now may have been talked-out by August. As always, I sat in my chair and thought, "Hmmmmn, sounds reasonable."

clemenza, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:11 (2 years ago) Permalink

xp
not when the incumbent's middle name is hussein.

Aimless, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:12 (2 years ago) Permalink

that's sooooo 2008!

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:14 (2 years ago) Permalink

even if mitt goes for a surprise & game changing vp pick which he v well feel is necessary come convention time you can bet it will be v well researched and prudent

lag∞n, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:26 (2 years ago) Permalink

yeah like I said upthread thematically I think mitt's 'game change' temptation would be a non-politician

iatee, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:29 (2 years ago) Permalink

he should pick someone from wall st

lag∞n, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:30 (2 years ago) Permalink

Or else K street.

Aimless, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:33 (2 years ago) Permalink

Romney/Bronze Bull '12

goole, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:36 (2 years ago) Permalink

I was about to jokingly say Elizabeth Dole but she's too old this election cycle

mh, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:36 (2 years ago) Permalink

Not sure how crucial it will be for the #2 to have ironclad rightwing credentials - they're not running a primary campaign anymore and there's nobody who will be running attack ads calling out someone for their Muslim-hiring ways or whatever.

Doctor Casino, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:39 (2 years ago) Permalink

he should pick someone from wall st

― lag∞n, Monday, April 16, 2012 8:30 PM (10 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

shia leboeuf?

flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:41 (2 years ago) Permalink

romney/boykin '12

mookieproof, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:42 (2 years ago) Permalink

Not sure how crucial it will be for the #2 to have ironclad rightwing credentials - they're not running a primary campaign anymore and there's nobody who will be running attack ads calling out someone for their Muslim-hiring ways or whatever.

― Doctor Casino, Monday, April 16, 2012 9:39 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

a lot of people are already supporting mitt though gritted teeth, if he chooses someone heterodox they may just throw their hands up

lag∞n, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:43 (2 years ago) Permalink

he should pick someone from wall st

― lag∞n, Monday, April 16, 2012 8:30 PM (10 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

shia leboeuf?

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Monday, April 16, 2012 9:41 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

respect

lag∞n, Tuesday, 17 April 2012 01:44 (2 years ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.