Sponsored Links |
|
Think long and hard about why you respond to nonsense. Please!
Romney/Modwheat 2012
you're probably right about the effectiveness of selecting a VP to win a state. It still seems a good reason though. just not as good.
Florida is an important state. anything the mitt'ster can do to help his chances is a good idea. Wish he'd select mike pense myself. better he be a VP than the governor of indiana.
Sponsored Links |
|
FWIW, this is the kind of thing that drives me crazy when DF28 does it. [think it's him]. Taking an idea that someone posts and going to the extreme exaggeration. Not a way to encourage discussion.
I think the point was that a VP choice could help win a state. not guarantee it.
I think VPs are generally overated on their impacts on campaigns. I don't think they move the needle much in terms of a state. I guess you could say a pic would energize a part of the base (a social conservative for example). But mostly, I think it's the only thing to talk about for a while during the campaign and thus gets more importance than in the media and with politic fans than it does in reality.
I think this nails it. If you pick a dingleberry (Palin, Edwards, etc) its just not going to help much. If you pick a fairly well respected or energizing candidate from an important swing state, it would help.
I am wondering if Condi would do it. If for no other reason than to see her debate Biden. It would be like watching Hulk Hogan wrestle Richard Simmons.
I don't see where I made an extreme comment or an exaggeration. Please let me know where I did one or both.
The point is that the VP doesn't help you win a state and making a pick that assumes voters will think "I may disagree with that candidate, but he picked a guy from my state so I'll vote for him" makes no sense.
Think long and hard about why you respond to nonsense. Please!
And he'd be the VP, which is a ceremonial position these days. (except for DC, of course)
Rubio seems like the best option right now. Not for the votes in Florida, but because he's well spoken and isn't a dunce like most VP's that have been on the ticket the past 10 years.
I agree with your sentiment here, but disagree that the VPs have been dunces. Biden, well yes of course, but Cheney was no idiot. People may think he's a patriot, or they may think he's evil incarnate, but he's pretty smart either way (except when it comes to basic gun safety). I also remember seeing the VP debates for the 2000 election and hearing several people ask why those two weren't the folks running, and not the two clowns that were actually on headlining their parties tickets.
Mitt Romney's problem is the need to get the conservative base and TEA Party on board. He has two options in doing this. 1) A TEA Party backed veep 2) Depend on Obama's negatives to steer the conservatives and TEA Party toward him.
Two candidates have this ability.
1) Marco Rubio: Rubio was a TEA Party US Senate candidate. He is conservative. He may help carry the Hispanic/Latino vote due to his ethnicity. He, however, may cost some of the vote from the "birthers." A lot of the stuff with Obama birthers is shrouded in mystery while with Rubio it isn't. He was born to two non-citizen parents. This will no doubt cause a stir. Add this in with the Romney "birther" issue with his father being born in Mexico, but it would appear that Rubio's background may be the strongest against natural-born status of any of the three.
2) Rand Paul - TEA Party candidate. May sway some Ron Paul folks, libertarians, constitutionalists, etc. His biggest negative would be getting into ideological discussions such as the discussion over the Civil Rights Act.
Sponsored Links |
|