Why would Romney want to be McCain’s VP?

posted at 11:55 am on July 18, 2008 by Allahpundit

Why would anyone? Ruffini wonders:

Mitt Romney is already in line to be the nominee in 4 years if McCain loses under the GOP Law of Primogeniture. Why would he want to muck it up with a VP run? If McCain loses, it is all downside for Mitt. People would forget all the positive aspects of his Presidential run and remember his role on a losing ticket. (See Edwards, John.)

And even if McCain wins, Romney would face a tough road getting elected in his own right. Republicans are already facing voter exhaustion after 8 years in power. Could they win a third or fourth consecutive election even if they manage to pull it out in ’08? The possibility grows progressively unlikelier.

Follow the link for a refresher on the dismal fate historically of VP candidates, especially losing VP candidates, who reach for the brass ring. Anyone want to try floating a plausible scenario by which we’d see a Bush/McCain/Romney succession, even if Maverick only serves one term? Three men from the same party haven’t been consecutively independently elected since Grant, Hayes, and Garfield during the post-Civil War Republican stranglehold on government. (I’m not counting McKinley/Roosevelt/Taft or Harding/Coolidge/Hoover since both sequences involved presidential deaths.) Good luck replicating that with public opinion about the GOP being what it is. The only way you could conceivably do it is if McCain’s presidency was both a dramatic break from Bush and phenomenally successful, transforming the dynamic from three Republicans in a row to old Republican/new Republican/new Republican. But how phenomenal is his success likely to be with heavy Democratic majorities in both houses?

All of which is another way of saying that if Mitt’s hellbent on the presidency, he needs McCain to lose — which, ironically, makes him the Hillary to Maverick’s Obama, albeit even more so. As such, there’s no reason to join the ticket but plenty of reason, as Ruffini notes, to surf the VP buzz to raise his national profile. Exit question one: Is it really this simple, though? Mitt’s enough of a Boy Scout that if McCain went to him and said he needs him on the ticket for the good of country, he probably couldn’t say no, whatever the consequences for his ambitions. And even if he does stay off the ticket and McCain loses, he’s not in some catbird-seat position for 2012. Maybe he starts off as presumptive frontrunner, but conservatives will be looking for something fresh and an aging, fabulously wealthy patrician white guy who’s consistently underperformed electorally doesn’t match up well with Jindal and Palin. Exit question two: Per Ruffini’s logic, why would anyone want to be on the ticket this year? Thanks to their youth, Jindal and Palin are marginally better positioned than Mitt to re-create themselves later if they lose as VP now, but why make their 2012 task any harder than it is? McCain might find himself stuck with some Jack Kemp-type figure who doesn’t have any strong national ambitions himself, doesn’t really expect to win this time, but doesn’t have much to lose by saying yes.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2 3

And pro-Obama views shouldn’t be part of the debate, in my opinion, on a conservative website.

You saved me a long answer by acknowledging my point. Your opinion is irrelevant as to what should or shouldn’t be allow on this blog. Your irritation stems from the fact that the site allows things you thing it should not.

As to your claim that others are pro-Obama, if so, that’s their opinion. Which I think, to be fair, you are misrepresenting – “I’d rather 4 years of Bambi and 15-20 years of liberalism in the wilderness than 4 years of McSquish and 15-20 years of conservatism in the wilderness.” Anyway, I don’t think anyone has even been banned here before for having varying opinions. And I’m sure you have more in your arsenal for debate then attempting to play the moderator card (which you do not hold and thus weakens your argument). It is rather juvenile.

As far as lying and slander, you may be right, I’ve certainly not read all the comments. There is no need for lies, the truth about McCain is damning enough.

Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 8:50 PM

thing = think. Forgive the typo.

Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 8:51 PM

This is a conservative site. Conservatives generally support the conservative running for office, not the liberal. So I don’t plan on being silent (not attempting to deny anyone to say anything) when people like him lie about McCain, and advocate the democrat in this election.

wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 8:57 PM

the truth about McCain is damning enough.

This is the truth about McCain:

ACU releases 2007 ratings: McCain gets a B
posted at 10:36 am on May 14, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

The American Conservative Union has released its report on Congress for 2007, and John McCain will welcome the results. Despite missing a number of votes while campaigning for President, McCain voted often enough to win a rating of 80, a significant improvement over the 65 he got in 2006. That approximates his lifetime rating of 82.16 and gives McCain a little more ammunition for his argument to represent conservative values.

How did Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton score with the ACU? Barack Obama actually scored marginally higher than his caucus at a 7, having supported the ACU on earmark disclosure alone. Hillary gets a big, fat zero for 2007, after getting a whopping eight in 2006, as did Obama.

For those who see no difference between McCain and the two Democrats, this serves as a reminder that while McCain drifts to the middle on some issues, a large chasm exists between the nominees that will face off in November.

wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 9:00 PM

And I’m sure you have more in your arsenal for debate then attempting to play the moderator card

I played the “This is my OPINION card.”

wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 9:01 PM

I played the “This is my OPINION card.”

wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 9:01 PM

Thanks for the chuckle. That line is going to be the gift that keeps on giving.

ACU releases 2007 ratings: McCain gets a B

Let’s skip all the argument about ACU ratings, unless you think conservatives get their marching orders from the ACU.

The issue that conservatives have with McCain is CFR, McCain-Kennedy, LIV, global warming etc. Now in the years that those bills come up, his ACU number will be lower, and without them it will be higher. So we are left to exercise our own judgment about what his time in the Senate teaches us.

So I don’t plan on being silent (not attempting to deny anyone to say anything) when people like him lie about McCain, and advocate the democrat in this election.

Is someone trying to silence you? Power to the people! Seriously though, again I think you mislabel anti-McCain as pro-Obama. You can argue, and you probably have, that the consequence of not supporting McCain means support of Obama, but we know that’s an inaccurate statement to deliberate blur the lines and the sting of McCain criticism.

The difficulty is a natural one. One can either vote for the friend who has already betrayed conservative ideals (CFR is an serious attack on the 1st amendment) or you can vote for the enemy that you fear might do worse, but possibly could be less effective. Because that is a view that can be expressed in good faith, you are in error to attribute it to kos or huffpo.

Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 9:15 PM

“I’d rather 4 years of Bambi and 15-20 years of liberalism in the wilderness than 4 years of McSquish and 15-20 years of conservatism in the wilderness.”
Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 8:50 PM

That comment, not made by you, is an opinion. It clearly states that the person would rather have Obama as the president. I would not rather have Obama as the next president. What kind of response do you think that a commentator on a liberal site like the daily kos or the huffington post if they claimed to be a liberal just like all of the other people there, and then say that they would rather have McCain be the next president? Do you think that all the people there would nod their heads like baseball bobble-heads and agree? At the very least there would be scores of people explaining that their site is populated with liberals and that they did not appreciate someone expressing a conservative viewpoint, especially if it was based on no factual basis.

And ’20 years of conservatism in the wilderness’ if McCain becomes president, is an opinion, and it is without any sort of factual merit whatsoever.

wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 9:15 PM

unless you think conservatives get their marching orders from the ACU.

Did I say they did? No, I did not.

It is an accounting of his votes while in office, and is devoid of factually inaccurate opinion, which is that other person’s stock and trade.

wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 9:17 PM

wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 9:17 PM

re:acu. Okay, that’s fine. I don’t give weight to it too much because only measures the votes taken. One can easily avoid difficult votes, etc. I prefer to look at legislation they advocate. It’s not a measuring stick for me, but to whomever it has value, very good.

That comment, not made by you, is an opinion. It clearly states that the person would rather have Obama as the president.

What I’m trying to explain is that this is a mischaraterization. It is saying that the long view of conservatism is what is important to them.

And ‘20 years of conservatism in the wilderness’ if McCain becomes president, is an opinion, and it is without any sort of factual merit whatsoever.

It is an opinion, but whether it is one without merit is another question. Let me pose this to you: If Iraq continues in it’s current trend, do you disagree that the economy is going to become the number one issue? If the economy becomes the number one issue, and McCain has admitted economy is not his strong suit, is it going to help the Republican (and conservative) brand for him to be in office during some very slow growth or recession? Do you think his cap-trade, etc will improve the economy? Unless you think he has the skill set to serve in the country’s upcoming needs, yes, he has the capacity to hurt the Republican brand in the long term.

Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 9:24 PM

At the very least there would be scores of people explaining that their site is populated with liberals and that they did not appreciate someone expressing a conservative viewpoint

Interesting. Are you offended by dissent? Do you deride group-think as in the case of global warming? (I mean no snark)

Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 9:26 PM

, again I think you mislabel anti-McCain as pro-Obama. You can argue, and you probably have, that the consequence of not supporting McCain means support of Obama, but we know that’s an inaccurate statement to deliberate blur the lines and the sting of McCain criticism.
Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 9:15 PM

We are now down to two people. All the people who vote for Obama will be counted against all the people voting for McCain. In each state, that state’s electoral votes will be awarded to the winner. If the vote is close, then all of the people who could have voted for McCain and didn’t, will be contributing because they refused to lift a finger and make their voice heard to defeat Obama.

And at this point, after the republican primaries, criticism of McCain is what the democrats are doing. Again, I don’t want to do what democrats are in the process of doing. Since this is after the republican primaries, the time to choose a candidate is over. That happened already. And he won. He beat Mitt, and Fred, and Rudy, and Huck. The people have spoken.

What is the difference between being an ass and lying about about McCain the day before the election, and doing it now? The people who have decided to make this their daily job to trash McCain have only one purpose. To convince other conservative not to vote for him, and help to get Obama elected. This is being done at the liberal blogs, and I don’t see why this should also be done on conservative blogs.

It is selfish for someone who is angry that their candidate lost, to them advocate on behalf of the democrat to that they win, and their candidate try again in 4 years.

wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 9:30 PM

And at this point, after the republican primaries, criticism of McCain is what the democrats are doing. Again, I don’t want to do what democrats are in the process of doing.

That is another interesting position. I might note that some people criticize Rush and others (I don’t say justly or not, not my call) for not being more vocal about issues that deserved criticism which may have, if mobilizing the base, help move the administration (or presently McCain) into more friendly territory.

To say I won’t do something because someone else I don’t like does it is relatively short-sighted I think. I understand your point, but criticism from the left and criticism from the right are two different things and have two different effects. Criticism from the left will rally the base and possible friction off independents. Criticism from the right may move a candidate to secure their votes. Even if you dismiss it, I’m sure McCain is considering it, and will likely pick a VP candidate based on those very principles.

Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 9:35 PM

Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 9:24(26) PM

If someone had a magic ball and was able to guarantee that the economy was going to be horrible, and that it would benefit the conservative movement to have a democrat take the fall for that, I would be persuaded to do as mr.Dont’VoteForThaTtraitirMcCain advocates and help to get Obama elected. At this point, this is just an opinion, not a fact. I have more confidence in our economy. And, if the economy were to be bad for 4 years, I have no doubt that the media would spin this as the republicans fault, because of the bush tax cuts on the wealthy and not Obama’s fault at all.

I have no problem with dissent when within the confines of conservative thought. When it (in my opinion) moves into democrat advocacy, I do have a problem with this.

“Do you deride group-think as in the case of global warming?”

Global warming is more likely due to solar activity, not anything man made. Any time people talk about man made global warming, they always piggyback the US to pay for it all, (in the form of the US taxpayers) and allow China and other polluters to get a free pass. Carbon credits is a scam. Group think on Global warming with Al Gore claiming that there is a consensus is complete and utter BS.

wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 9:39 PM

I understand your point, but criticism from the left and criticism from the right are two different things and have two different effects.
Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 9:35 PM

In the age of the internet and youtube, these lines are blurring. If a republican criticizes a republican in public, then they know that some democrat can use this comment in response to their benefit – such as a “see? it’s the truth, even this republican agrees with us” and then the ‘different things’ that mean one thing from one person has a different effect. I am not advocating that no republican ever criticize another republican, I am just answering your comment and want you to see one of the other possibilities that are an unintended consequences to an action.

wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 9:45 PM

wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 9:45 PM

Because information can be disseminated more easily, freedom of expression should be reduced?

Besides what you saying is that Republicans or conservatives who have issue with McCain should actually go to democratic or liberal sites and express their views there. Isn’t that actively doing what you are concerned about passively, or as unintended consequence?

Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 10:01 PM

Quoting out of context. Mischaracterizing. Wanting to silence folks who disagree with you.

And, amusingly, underestimating peoples’ intelligence:

Which I think, to be fair, you are misrepresenting – “I’d rather 4 years of Bambi and 15-20 years of liberalism in the wilderness than 4 years of McSquish and 15-20 years of conservatism in the wilderness.”

Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 8:50 PM

I told you, _man, that my comment was still there in its entirety and that people can read it.

And, uh, I’m the liar and the secret Democrat. I express factually inaccurate opinions – this is a classic: you’re saying that my opinion that McSquish is a liberal is factually inaccurate. That does not compute. This from someone who alternately tries to argue that McSquish is a superduper conservative and that he’s not such a superduper conservative. From someone who provides true statistics that he uses to intentionally mislead.

Or maybe you really don’t understand thoughts as complex as the one I expressed.

misterpeasea on July 19, 2008 at 10:02 PM

Because information can be disseminated more easily, freedom of expression should be reduced?
Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 10:01 PM

Holy christ, can you read?

I am not advocating that no republican ever criticize another republican, I am just answering your comment and want you to see one of the other possibilities that are an unintended consequences to an action.
wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 9:45 PM

wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 10:13 PM

Holy christ, can you read?

That ends the conversation for me. Enjoy the rest of your evening.

Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 10:14 PM

Quoting out of context. Mischaracterizing. Wanting to silence folks who disagree with you.
misterpeasea on July 19, 2008 at 10:02 PM

Yup.

That’s what you do.

You also mock my name, you are a childish worthless excuse for a conservative.

wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 10:14 PM

That ends the conversation for me. Enjoy the rest of your evening.
Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 10:14 PM

How can possibly you read:

I am not advocating that no republican ever criticize another republican, I am just answering your comment

and come to the conclusion that:

Because information can be disseminated more easily, freedom of expression should be reduced?

wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 10:15 PM

This from someone who alternately tries to argue that McSquish is a superduper conservative
misterpeasea on July 19, 2008 at 10:02 PM

Wow, another person who can’t read.

Again:

are you going to come here and copy and past a bunch of lines that tells us all that McCain isn’t a very strong conservative as he should be? Because we already know that.
wise_man on July 18, 2008 at 5:57 PM

And:

I don’t see how ’supporting the same old’ has anything to do with how the republican voters in the primaries pick candidates. More voted for McCain, understanding that his is not a very strong conservative.
wise_man on July 18, 2008 at 5:46 PM

So you are again, lying about me.

Please stop. If you keep lying about me, then you are acting like an internet troll. Do not. Do this. Again.

wise_man on July 19, 2008 at 10:26 PM

That ends the conversation for me. Enjoy the rest of your evening.

Spirit of 1776 on July 19, 2008 at 10:14 PM

You’re winning a lot of hearts and minds, _man.

It’s rich that you accuse me of lying about you after someone else calls you out for misrepresenting my remarks.

And you’re now going to sit there and lie and say you haven’t been on this board for weeks shrieking about how McCain IS SO a conservative! He has an 82.6 from the ACU!!! That means he’s a conservative!!!!!!! Misleading with the truth.

I told you, the commenters here are smarter than that.

misterpeasea on July 19, 2008 at 10:57 PM

The ACU score is based on his votes. That organization gave him that score based on facts, not emotion, as you use to judge him. Just because you hate him for what he isn’t does not make him a liberal.

An “82.6″ ‘conservative score’ based on his votes, and I think a “7″ that Obama got because of his votes proves that McCain is not like Obama, like you falsely allege.

wise_man on July 20, 2008 at 9:06 AM

wise_man on July 20, 2008 at 9:06 AM

can you give that stupid rating a rest? thats all you argue, other than to lie and belittle others.

mcdain is a lib.

no drilling in ANWR
wants more gun control legislation
limited free speech
Amnesty for mexicans
closing gitmo
no ‘torture’ even saying that makes him a lib.
carbon cap and trade

captain queeg, mccain is a LIBERAL…get it through your fat head. and no real conservative can vote for that turncoat.

hope you get paid by the post.

right4life on July 20, 2008 at 9:13 AM

mcdain is a lib.
right4life on July 20, 2008 at 9:13 AM

You are a liar.

wise_man on July 20, 2008 at 9:28 AM

and no real conservative can vote for that turncoat.

So Barack Obama is going to be a better president, right4life? In case you haven’t noticed, this is now down to a choice between two people. A democrat, and a republican.

Are you paid to be stupid?

wise_man on July 20, 2008 at 9:30 AM

a choice between two people. A democrat, and a republican.

and they’re both LIBERAL

you must be in a great deal of pain, it has to hurt to be that stupid…DUHHHHHHHHHHHHH

right4life on July 20, 2008 at 9:45 AM

You are a liar.

wise_man on July 20, 2008 at 9:28 AM

oh yeah right because YOU say so, sure!! BWAHAHAHAHAH

you cannot dispute what I say. moron.

right4life on July 20, 2008 at 9:45 AM

So how much does Howard Dean pay you to come to a conservative site and lie about the republican? By the post? Or do you only do this out of love for Barack?

wise_man on July 20, 2008 at 9:51 AM

wise_man on July 20, 2008 at 9:51 AM

can you come up with some new lines? you’re really lame. you can’t argue the issues about captain queeg, so you’re reduced to saying:

you’re a lib
you’re lying

Squawk!!

run along and get your cracker.

right4life on July 20, 2008 at 9:57 AM

can you come up with some new lines?

I’m just responding to the idiot comment you made at 9:13 AM. I’m sorry, you didn’t like it? Well there is a simple solution, stop being a idiot, and then I won’t reply to you as such.

wise_man on July 20, 2008 at 10:17 AM

So If any one is not happy with all of Mccains views that makes them a lib!

AMartinez on July 20, 2008 at 10:33 AM

So If any one is not happy with all of Mccains views that makes them a lib!
AMartinez on July 20, 2008 at 10:33 AM

Incorrect.

Not all. But republicans typically vote for and hope that the republican is elected, not hope that the republican loses.

A question for you, right4life, misterpeasea, Spirit of 1776 or anyone who wants to answer the question:

Do you want Obama to be the next president.

A yes or no answer would be appreciated. I’m going to ask a follow-up question next.

wise_man on July 20, 2008 at 11:07 AM

Too bad. I was hoping for an honest answer to that question.

wise_man on July 20, 2008 at 9:43 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3