Video: The ten worst running mates McCain could choose
posted at 10:27 am on July 15, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Not as amusing as the list they put together for Obama but amusing enough, especially number six. This is a second draft, in fact: Their first “bottom 10″ list inexplicably omitted Hagee and Rod Parsley in favor of Pat Robertson and, er, Mitt Romney. Which is really amusing, since the more I read lately the more I think he’s going to be the pick. Click the image to watch.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
how on earth could Mitt be in the bottom 10?
jp on July 15, 2008 at 10:28 AM
For all the talk about Palin not having enough experience, she has more experience governing as a conservative than Mitt does.
jgapinoy on July 15, 2008 at 10:29 AM
ABC News Division is beginning to look a lot like Comedy Central.
fogw on July 15, 2008 at 10:34 AM
Because he’ll hurt McCain’s chances as much as any of the others mentioned.
Big S on July 15, 2008 at 10:35 AM
if he could, he would pick Uncle Ted as his running mate.
right4life on July 15, 2008 at 10:36 AM
Mitt would be fine because he doesn’t have a chance of being President so he might as well get Kemped in this Dole/Clinton rematch.
LevStrauss on July 15, 2008 at 10:39 AM
Mitt is highly regarded as a very competent management/financial guy by more people. Having him on the ticket would be tremendously reassuring during this period of economic turmoil. Palin would be good but Mitt would be better.
a capella on July 15, 2008 at 10:40 AM
Thank you for your Reaganesque optimism.
jgapinoy on July 15, 2008 at 10:41 AM
Being a businessman does not necessarily translate into being a good economist.
George Soros for President?
jgapinoy on July 15, 2008 at 10:42 AM
I’m disgusted by identity politics as much as anyone, but I don’t know if any White guy on the ticket will help J-Mac win.
Palin or Jindal.
jgapinoy on July 15, 2008 at 10:44 AM
You’re overestimating Mitt’s appeal on the issue of the economy. I feel like Cassandra here, but too may Republicans confuse business with economics, and Wall Street appeal with Main Street appeal.
Big S on July 15, 2008 at 10:44 AM
What? No mention of Dan Quayle?
Tony737 on July 15, 2008 at 10:48 AM
I like Mitt and believe he would make a fine VP but McCain’s campaign needs some JP4 to push it around the track. That is why I favor Palin, and naming her yesterday.
If Obama picks Governor Succubus or Senator Clinton then any minority or female pick on McCain’s part will look like copycatting. If he goes with Crist or Ridge he is going to put the electorate to sleep. Waiting around to react to an Obama pick is a big mistake.
Limerick on July 15, 2008 at 10:54 AM
I’m sticking with my original prediction of Gov. Crist as veep choice.
JetBoy on July 15, 2008 at 11:03 AM
I don’t quite understand why so many conservatives are now carried away with Mitt Romney. I know he was a more than competent businessman in the private sector. But as a politician, I see him as representing the brand of squishy big government capitalism (an oxymoron if there ever was one) that creates one fiscal disaster after another. The most obvious example is Romneycare, which I’ve read is poised to blow-up. If Romney is McCain’s pick, I bet the truth of the Romneycare fiasco will emerge on MSNBC and better drive-by front pages everywhere. Even if it isn’t a complete boondoggle (but how can it not be?) I bet it’s every flaw is exploited to his and McCain’s detriment. The bottom line for me is that Romney’s record (research his record on guns) just doesn’t match his conservative rhetoric. Of course I am glad he’s pivoted to the right, but after promising massive government spending to revitalize the auto industry, I can’t help but wonder if he’s an actual fiscal conservative. I don’t think he is.
And then there’s the whole Mormon thing. Like it or not, however unfair it may be, many evangelicals who are already uneasy about McCain will be pushed that much further away. Even if only 5% of evangelicals refuse to vote for McCain because of Romney, can McCain afford to lose 5% of such a large group?
Lest anyone misunderstand me, I don’t hate Romney. I think he’s an impressive guy and I am glad he’s on our side. But I just don’t see him as the new standard bearer of conservatism.
flyfisher on July 15, 2008 at 11:03 AM
FlyFisher,
Hey! Thanks for the first clear and seemingly unbigoted critism of Romney I’ve heard on this site. Really! It’s refreshing!
It makes you feel like you could actually have a discussion, instead of rolling your eyes at another Romney = Satan post.
Again thank you for raising the debate.
-Wasteland Man.
WastelandMan on July 15, 2008 at 11:15 AM
Appeal is appeal. Your point here is that he is appealing to “too many” for the wrong reasons. How is it possible to be too appealing to “too many” for any reason and try to spin that into a negative thing? That makes no sense. He’s either appealing or he isn’t. Just because he isn’t to the Big S does not mean that he isn’t to the vast vast majority. In this case perception is reality.
Zetterson on July 15, 2008 at 11:18 AM
+1
Limerick on July 15, 2008 at 11:18 AM
Perhaps, or perhaps not. I’m looking at the perception held by many voters. He is charismatic, a good speaker, and a problem solver. If we want a conservative economist, there is always Phil Gramm, but that didn’t work out so well, did it? I want whoever gives us the best shot in November. If people can’t get past the Mormon issue, perhaps we deserve Obama.
a capella on July 15, 2008 at 11:19 AM
Well news from the Grapevine (you know them rumor mills) is that Gov Sarah is asking Mccain to come up here and take a tour… with leading geologists and herself and a few others at ANWR.
More news when I hear something.
upinak on July 15, 2008 at 11:20 AM
My mistake Big S. I should have read your comment more closely. Disregard what I wrote.
Zetterson on July 15, 2008 at 11:20 AM
I still say Mitt and Mav cut a deal when Mitt dropped out.
Typhoon on July 15, 2008 at 11:22 AM
I like Mitt, and always have. But other than money, I don’t see what he would bring to the ticket. I see lots of negatives. You don’t really want to see all of the Mormon bashing again, do you, and if you think the press and pundits did a lot of it before he dropped out, wait till he’s on the ticket. He’s kind of a beta, and detracts from the alpha male pull of McCain (that’s not meant as a slam against Mitt, just a statement). Then there’s Dobson, who loved him when he was in the primaries and now swears if he’s on the ticket he won’t vote Republican (somebody please explain that to me).
There is one big plus for Palin nobody mentions: The Democrats are ready for anybody on the ticket but her. The Democrats would be scrambling to find the right way to knock her down. Everybody else, they’re ready for.
rightwingprof on July 15, 2008 at 11:23 AM
Did you get that from word of mouth or did you read that somewhere?
Zetterson on July 15, 2008 at 11:23 AM
It’s not the “Mormon issue” that is the biggest problem.
Big S on July 15, 2008 at 11:24 AM
Well, there’s the abortion issue. Other than that, they wouldn’t really need much because she takes away one of the Republican ticket’s biggest pluses right now: experience. There’s no need to “knock someone down” when they fall willingly on their own.
Big S on July 15, 2008 at 11:27 AM
In all honesty, I don’t think “the Mormon issue” is going to be a big topic of conversation during the general. It will be brought up by the less politically savvy elements embedded into the left side of the political spectrum but that will simply be a gift to McCain in the end. Why is this? Because, like a broken record, everytime the word “Mormon” is uttered it will be quickly and directly countered with the words “REVEREND WRIGHT”. That will completely change the conversation from, look how weird Mormanism is, into which church better represents contemporary American values? Which chuch appears to love America? On one side you will hear “love thy neighbor” and on the other side you will hear “USA of KKK” and “God Damn America”. This is a conversation the Republicans should want to instigate. They shouldn’t run from it.
I honestly think both Romney and Sarah Palin will be very good choices. We need to keep in mind that our arguments on this thread are not really about which of the two is acceptable and which one of the two is unacceptable. They are both very acceptable. One may be better then the other, though, and in the end that is what we are trying to figure out.
Zetterson on July 15, 2008 at 11:34 AM
Tuesday Morning Stupid.
Jaibones on July 15, 2008 at 11:35 AM
Perhaps I’ve missed you say it prior to my asking this question but, just out of curiosity, who would you like to see McCain pick for his running mate?
Zetterson on July 15, 2008 at 11:35 AM
Romney has already received the MSM anal exam and came out of it as clean as a candidate can be. McCain can’t afford to pick someone who may have a few big skeletons jump out of the closet just before the election. I’m not saying that Palin or anyone else is crooked, but McCain has to know these things prior to making his pick.
Greenhorn on July 15, 2008 at 11:42 AM
Unless the choice is David Duke, it’s not going to make a difference. It may get the base excited but it has been proven (don’t ask for a link because I don’t remember where I read it) that few people vote for a president based on who the VP choice. Sure, it would be nice to get a real conservative some national exposure but whoever McCain picks will have to support the McCain policies. So, unless McCain changes some of his views, the VP’s future fortunes will be tied at the hip with his/her boss. If McCain wins but pi$$es off conservatives, his VP isn’t likely to be seen in politics again. Paging Dan Quayle.
slug on July 15, 2008 at 11:48 AM
Understood. And, if Palin is able to sweet talk McCain up to ANWR for a little quality one on one time, even the perception of some receptivity on his part gives her that advantage.
a capella on July 15, 2008 at 11:52 AM
I know this is probably not exactly what you meant, but Quayle’s problems were not with conservatives. They were with those in the center politically who perceived him as a.) kinda dumb (”potatoe”), b.) a lightweight (”…I knew Jack Kennedy…” and c.) having misplaced priorities (he spent the ‘92 campaign season embroiled in the great Murphy Brown controversy.)
Big S on July 15, 2008 at 11:59 AM
Who ever McCain picks, I hope he/she is of presidental quality in case we have to impeach McCain.
allrsn on July 15, 2008 at 12:08 PM
See! Even liberals know that Mitt Romney is one of them. They understand the conservative voter way more than the establishment of the GOP does.
Al-Ozarka on July 15, 2008 at 12:10 PM
I’m a moderate “hawk” enamored with efficient government. My ideal picks would be either Giuliani or Gov. Rell of CT. I think either of them would help in moderate, blue-collar sections of the Northeast, which have been sorely neglected by the GOP for many years. However, I understand that I’m in the minority in the party nowadays, and think someone like Tim Pawlenty could be an excellent choice.
Big S on July 15, 2008 at 12:19 PM
Thanks for noticing. I believe our side needs to raise the debate. I believe the America I have known and loved faces an existential crisis. Actually, I see several existential crises and I worry about the kind of place we will leave our children. The current trends are simply unsustainable.
Islamic terror is real. They have a single-minded hate for us and they are patient. We are proving weak-minded, divided, impatient, and spoiled.
Political correctness, lefty-sanctioned fascism, grows more insidious every year. It has nearly shuttered our ability to have real debate on the important issues of the day and conservative politicians (like McCain) blow around like dandelions in the prevailing PC winds.
The nation’s financial obligations cannot possibly be met without inflating the currency or unprecedented levels of taxation. Meanwhile fools are touting universal health care as a “right.” There is no telling what other spending they have in store for us. Heck, even our own supposedly conservative president and congress shoved a massive drug bill down our throats. We are bailing out one sector of the economy after another. There is talk of nationalizing the airline industry, the energy sector, etc. So much for free-market capitalism (which we really haven’t had in a long time).
The specter of $10+ gas is very real and the “climate change” nuts are happy about it. $10 gas will close us down as an economic power for years until we have transitioned our way to a new energry source. I wonder if the U.S.A. would survive such a crisis in it’s current form. I hope the climate change kool-aid drinkers are saving their money because soon their ideology, their phony religion, is going to lead to $15 a gallon milk and $10 loaves of bread.
Millions of illegals have streamed across our southern border and no one has done a thing about it. Many stand and cheer the flagrant violation of our laws and sovereignty. Those who are upset about illegal immigration are labeled as racists and bigots (see political correctness reference above). No one seems to notice that a murderous drug war in Mexico is out-of-control and beginning to spill over onto our soil. What else and who else is coming across the border?
We seemingly lose a little more freedom every day, yet the people are apathetic about it. Many seem to believe the Supreme Court has given us a new right in the form of the right to own firearms when it has been in the Constitution all along. How can anyone believe we have been given something new? America’s founding principles have been forgotten (and lied about).
And everyone knows I could go on and on and on. My point is we face serious challenges, so it is crucial to elevate the debate on our side. I believe this is the most serious crisis for our nation since the Civil War, but instead of Abrham Lincoln, we’ve got John McCain (or Bob Barr). Our congressional leadership is shockingly poor, too. We must demand better from our leaders in Washington.
We need a million Paul Revere’s spreading the word that some of these things could take us down as a nation. We are still mighty and strong. But you cannot defy the basic laws of economics forever and get away with it. You cannot have a nation if your laws are laughed at. You are not free if when the citizenry become afraid to speak their minds, etc. The current trends are unsustainable. God help us if Obama is elected.
Okay, I will stop. I am depressing myself.
flyfisher on July 15, 2008 at 12:35 PM
I truly think the VP selection will be between Romney and Palin. Either would be a good choice.
Romney has a history of turning around troubled enterprises. That includes private sector companies such as Staples, to public sector entities such as the Olympics and Massachuessets. People wonder why Utah voted something like 95 percent for Romney. Utah’s not 90 percent Mormon–it’s more like 60 percent. So, even if you assume that every single Mormon voted for the guy, that still means he got at least 3 out of every four votes that weren’t LDS. Why? Because he turned around the Winter Olympics, and did so under budget, with class, and made it the most successful Olympics ever.
In Massachuessets, they are discovering how bad Duval is. Romney actually made it tolerable in that state–now he’s not there, the state is circling the drain.
If the Democrats want to bring up religion, then it’s easy to see who is more American: Mormons, who pretty much epitomize American values, or Reverend Wright’s church. Evangelicals who hate Mormons may well sit out the election, because I doubt there are enough Evangelicals who hate Mormons enough that would be okay with the Black Liberation Communism Obama subscribes to. I know people like Al Ozarka would crawl over broken glass to vote for Osama Bin Laden himself before he’d vote for a Mormon, but he’s in the minority.
Romney is the most experienced person, bar none, on economic issues in this election campaign. He can help erase Obama’s fundraising advantage, if that surfaces. Romney raised more money than any one else in the Republican primary. He was also the only candidate who mounted a credible challenge to McCain; beating McCain in a widely scattered selection of states–thus showing he could gather national appeal.
None of this is to take away from Palin, who is also an excellent choice. I’d be quite happy with her as well. But if the presidency is moving to a “co-presidency” bit–with McCain on foreign policy and Romney running domestic–that would be great. That’s a pretty powerful one-two punch.
Vanceone on July 15, 2008 at 12:42 PM
BS. Romney did not “turn around Massachusetts.”
Big S on July 15, 2008 at 12:49 PM
I think Senator McAmnesty should reach across the aisle once again and pick a liberal ally like Diane Feinstein! Hey why not? She agrees with him on most of the important issues and she is an older woman and can deliver the Hillary vote that McAmnesty is obviously going for…
sabbott on July 15, 2008 at 12:59 PM
You could be right. I recently saw a news report that he is now engaged, which would blunt some of the innuendo that floated around when he was mentioned before (around the FL primary victory).
cs89 on July 15, 2008 at 2:53 PM
It is psychology. Many of the Mitt lovers were very cool on him during the early period of the primaries, but once it came down to McCain, Romney, or Huckabee things changed. Romney was the only one left that didn’t scare the crap out of “conservatives”, they were in despair. In times where emotions are intense the probability of attraction is much greater. So ever since that pit in people’s stomach appeared, the possibility of McDole becoming the nominee, attraction to Mitt has grown in numbers for really no other reason. It can’t be electability because Mormons are hated openly by more people than almost any other group, it was better to be old than mormon in the polls that were done. The media seemed to hate him more than any of the other candidates as well, they always interviewed him with a sneer, at least the MSM.
So in conclusion, only the distress caused by the threat of a McCain or Huckabee nomination can drive “conservatives” into adequate desperation to cause them to run into the arms of a flip flopping Massachusetts politician that can’t win.
LevStrauss on July 15, 2008 at 2:58 PM
Well, I don’t know if Crist’s marriage is a sham or not…I don’t think so, but who knows anymore…but I’ve know it was going to be Crist since the night before the FL primaries.
Watch that video again if you can. You can just see it…it was written back then in stone.
JetBoy on July 15, 2008 at 3:23 PM
Take the best person for the job _regardless_ of race or gender. It just so happens that the best person for the job at this point would be Mitt Romney.
Theophile on July 16, 2008 at 2:52 AM
Comment pages: