
Kansas
In reviewing all the possible choices that John McCain would make, it seems to me that speculation seems to be centering around four people -- two men and two women -- Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, and Condi Rice.
I firmly believe Tim Pawlenty, though a competent governor, would be the disaster pick. If he is picked, I can imagine a collective "yawn" from the nation. First of all, he's not even that popular in Minnesota, where a poll indicated more Minnesotans would be less likely to vote for him than to vote for him -- so he actually would help Obama win Minnesota, not McCain. Though I'm sure McCain likes him, what does he had to the ticket? Nothing in my mind, and McCain needs to be mindful of the political consequences of such a choice. He is, right now, like it or not, the underdog and Pawlenty would do nothing to help that image -- in fact, he would enhance it.
Condi Rice would be an incredibly courageous pick and clearly would create a media sensation. I personally have always liked the idea and if Bush was any more popular than 30%, I think she'd be a shoo in. She is helped by the fact that we are now winning the war, and I think in the end the public would trust her with the nation...and like Obama, her winning the VP slot would be historic for blacks. The drawbacks are -- one, she's not been vetted as to many of her views on domestic issues, which are more moderate than not, which would potentially be harmful in McCain's courting of conservatives. Again, like it or not, McCain's campaign isn't exactly setting the world on fire right now, and Condi would be a risk -- would she motivate the masses or make the conservative base more upset? Hard to say. I'd like the choice but not sure that all would. If Condi were firmly pro-life, it would be a different story. Being at a crossroads in our nation regarding the life issue, however, I think that it is important to have someone who can speak on the issue, and speak well.
That brings us to Sarah Palin, the dynamic and gorgeous governor of Alaska. In my view, she would be a "home run" pick. She would motivate women, conservatives (she is rabidly pro-life) and be able to talk with authority on the energy issue, which is the predominant issue on Americans minds. She has been an executive, like Pawlenty, and has been courageous in dealing with lack of ethics in her state (despite what a poster in another thread says -- she may ruffle feathers but that's the sign of leadership to me, not a weak leader). Her ONLY drawback is that she is only recently elected and you could make a case she needs more high level experience. I dont think its much of one, but in the "readiness to be president" issue, I could see it hurting her.
That leaves us with Mitt Romney. Though not a home run or buzz-generator like Palin or Rice, he is a solid pick who would bring conservatives on board and bring crediblity on a host of issues. While the flip flop charge may hurt, I dont think it would as much in the #2 spot. He would also help win Michigan, Colorado, and bring a boatload of bucks to the campaign, which McCain sorely needs if he is going to win. Romney talks well, has no baggage family wise, and is a likeable fellow that I think creates the perfect #2. Also, I have no doubt he could take over if he had too. He is, what I call, the "safe choice" that brings a lot of positives with limited negatives, unites conservatives, and doesn't have the snooze factor of Tim Pawlenty.
So, I say -- while outside of Pawlenty, I would be thrilled with any of the above, and while my dream choice would have been our man Fred Thompson, I hope that John McCain picks Mitt Romney -- simply because he helps create a clear path to victory while also providing competent leadership to the job at hand.
MCCAIN/ROMNEY '08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Greetings all, I apologize for the recent hiatus -- I've been busy becoming engaged (I'm a lucky guy) and therefore haven't had time to post recently.
However, recent Supreme Court rulings have brought me out. Despite George W. Bush having appointed Roberts and Alito, it is increasingly apparent that the Supreme Court is increasingly liberal, with Anthony Kennedy slowly drifting left.
The two most glaring examples of this were in the GITMO decision and in today's decision regarding the death penalty being applied to child rape cases.
While Barack Obama is paying lip service to the cause of being against the court's ruling today, he did support the GITMO rulling and there is no doubt he would appoint very liberal justices in the old of Ginsburg. Heck, Bill Clinton was a political animal as much as anything, and HE appointed Ginsburg and Breyer, so what would an openly avowed liberal like Obama do? It's very scary, especially given the U.S. Senate is going to be a 54/46 or 55/45 split if current trends continue.
To me, this is the issue that should get social conservatives off their butts in support of John McCain. If fighting the war against terror wasn't enough, then this should be. Yeah, McCain may not exactly be marching in pro life rallies and going to social conservative events all the time, but the man has a pro life record and you could argue without him we wouldn't have Roberts and Alito, depending on how you argue the Gang of 14 debate.
Imagine this scenario for a moment. Sometime in 2009, John Stevens, who is in his 80's, gets ill and has to resign from the court. Many issues before our country and world are in the balance -- GITMO, the death penalty, Roe v. Wade, eminent domain. Who would you want?
John McCain might appoint someone like Diane Sykes, an attractive conservative, pro-life appeals judge out of Wisconsin. Barack Obama? Someone like Sonia Sotamayor, a liberal judge out of the 2nd circuit.
The recent rulings out of the court -- hopefully the 2nd amendment one tomorrow goes against his trend -- put into light the #2 issue, behind the war, of why conservatives must put aside their primary quabbles and go out and work for Senator John McCain.
In a year where Republicans in general look to be in trouble, it is absolutely amazing to me that the Democrats are going to nominate Barack Obama. Given Hillary's latest string of wins (an ARG poll also shows her winning South Dakota and close in Montana, which would be really embarassing for Obama) and the decision about delegates, Hillary is very close to winning the popular vote under all of the scenarios -- even the one that gives the uncommitted votes in Michigan to Obama.
Given that, and the fact Hillary has done so well in all the swing states, it is simply amazing to me-- and funny, in some ways -- that the Democrat superdelegates seem hell bent on nominating Obama, who I think will prove to be a disaster for them -- even though they have an out with the popular vote thing.
The pastor problems are issues...add that to the Michelle Obama video incident, and obama's extreme positions on the war, I think McCain will end up winning by a pretty solid electoral margin. If Hillary were the nominee, I would say we were in trouble. I have to say that though I disagree with her, Hillary has come across as a much more reasonable figure over time ... and would probably beat McCain in the general. Obama, however, I think will be this year's Michael Dukakis.
Not saying Obama isn't formidable -- he is a great campaigner -- but we are quite fortunate that the Dems are going down that road.
- FredFan4McCain's blog
- Login or register to post comments
As I stated in my analysis piece, I have thought quite a bit about McCain's potential VP selections. Assuming he doesn't go with a real wild card like JC Watts, I think out of the standard figures that it should come down to three people:
Condi Rice
Mitt Romney
Mark Sanford
I got to those three "finalists" after doing a little bit of a "primary" among the several groups. Get me the best governor, best national figure, and best former candidate/official. I explained that in my previous blog entry.
After analyzing the three finalists, my initial reaction was to go with Condi Rice. I think it would be an historic pick, and to me, to be honest, makes the most sense. Who could deny that Condi has the experience? The knowledge? She's not politically ambitious yet perhaps a run for VP would give her some. I think she would bring women, moderates, and some minorities.
That said, she is so tied to Bush and I think in the current climate I'm not sure if all the above qualities could overshadow that enough, particularly given Obama's focus on trying to make McCain Bush III.
Sanford is an attractive choice because of his credentials as a conservative, but I don't think he brings you anything (McCain will win SC), and I think McCain needs more of a national figure. I think the public would spend a lot of time getting to know Sanford, and I'm not sure that's wise. read more »
- FredFan4McCain's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1 trackback
Hey all, been doing some more thinking about the potential VP choices. As you know in the past I did a more detailed look at Romney, Huckabee, and Condi, and I wanted to list some of the other contenders and my thoughts.
CURRENT GOVERNORS -- There are a handful of governors that could appear on McCain's shortlist. They are:
Tim Pawlenty -- Minnesota
Sarah Palin -- Alaska
Mark Sanford -- South Carolina
Bobby Jindal -- Louisiana
Out of these, there are two that are appealing -- Palin and Sanford. Palin has Jindal's problem though of not being in office that long, and I think she could use more time to build her stock. Down the line, I think she will be a presidential candidate, maybe in 2012 even. Pawlenty has been in office 6 years but I am not that impressed with the guy and I dont think he brings Minnesota. Sanford is appealing because he is a rock ribbed conservative, a bit of a maverick in his own right, and I think would help lock in the south. However, in the end, I would not pick any of these. read more »
Rasmussen Kansas:
McCain 55
Obama 34
Rasmussen Arkansas
McCain 57
Obama 33
- FredFan4McCain's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Hey folks, I'm back after being quite busy the past two weeks. I thought I would resume my series of VP Options. As you may recall, previously I examined both Condi Rice and Mitt Romney. I was going to review Fred Thompson next, but with Fred taking his name out of consideration, I won't do that. So, the next person I thought I would examine is Mike Huckabee.
I'm no fan of Huckabee myself, but here are some of his positives. He is the former Governor of an important must-win state, Arkansas. He is personally likeable. He ran a tough race on a low budget. He is certainly solid on most social issues, and would help with evangelicals.
The negatives are that his record is quite spotty, and that with conservatives as a whole, he's not inspiring. His record on accepting gifts and with criminals is full of holes that ObamaClinton could easily exploit. Word is that the most common phrase used in Arkansas prisons during Huckabee's term was "Pardon Me."
That said, he remains an option and must be discussed.
Hey all, last week I announced that each week I would make a new post about a potential VP candidate for McCain. Last week, I discussed Condi Rice. You can see that here:
This week, I'm going to discuss Mitt Romney.
Mitt Romney clearly has political aspirations beyond where he is now, and I think he plans on running for President again. It was clear throughout the primary cycle there was some animosity between McCain and Romney, but Mitt ended up taking the high road by getting out before he had to, endorsing McCain in the process.
Was this a calculated move to try to get on the ticket, thus making Mitt the likely successor? After all, the GOP has a history of choosing the "next in line" -- and since McCain has a possibility of only being a one termer, due to age, perhaps Mitt thinks that this would be a good way on the ticket.
The question is -- what does Mitt bring? One might say he brings conservatives, but I'm not so sure. Mitt ran as a conservative, but do conservatives really trust him? Would conservatives really rally around McCain? Aside from that, what state does he bring? McCain is not going to win Massachusetts and would already win Utah, so what else?
The one benefit Romney would bring is executive experience -- along with some knowledge on the economy, which is sure to be an issue this fall.
I don't think Mitt would be a bad choice at all, but I am not sure of the benefit it brings McCain - and Romney would be constantly angling for time, given his own ambition.
Thoughts?
Next Week: Sarah Palin
Since the major discussion of this summer regarding McCain will be who he picks as Vice President, I thought I'd make a series of threads (one every few days) about particular possible VP choices, and allow people to comment/discuss.
It would be my preference that these discussions involve a tone which is productive and positive, and not negative. Examples:
Productive: I don't think Fred Thompson would be a good choice because McCain may want someone younger due to his age.
Not productive: Fred Thompson is old and grumpy and didn't even want to be President.
I know this might be difficult as we all have our favorites -- I'm not big fan of Huck, for example -- but I just wanted to offer that.
Anyway, with that minor ground rule out of the way, I thought I would start the discussion with Condi Rice.
POSITIVES:
- Experience is unquestionable.
- Ready to step in at any time.
- Continuity between former administration and current administration.
- Female and a minority; possible benefit vs. Hillary or Obama.
- Leader
- Inspirational
- Doesn't seem political, due to not being in elected office.
NEGATIVES:
- More of a moderate, may not sit well with conservatives
- Too tied to Bush -- McCain may not want the tie that strong.
- Doesn't have a "governing" record in any elected office, kind of the negative side of the last positive point.
I bring this up because two days ago, a poll showed that in NEW YORK, of all places, a McCain-Rice ticket would beat an Obama-Hillary ticket.
Thoughts, everyone?
- FredFan4McCain's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Hi all, sorry I have not yet posted. Actually tried the other day but had some kind of issue with the site so I couldn't. I am trying again!
First of all, want to say I am honored to be an Editor here. I have not yet had time to devote to posting, but look to spend more time over the course of the fall. For those who dont know my background, I am extensively involved in Kansas politics and have even been a candidate myself. Am still a Fred Thompson supporter but am following Fred in supporting our nominee, John McCain.
Second of all, as I see it, I think McCain's choice for Vice President is extremely important, and would love to see some focus on this site towards that end. I think McCain should focus on a small list of potential running mates. Here are my suggestions: read more »



