“The GOP elite” already know who they want as VP

posted at 5:30 pm on January 3, 2012 by Tina Korbe

It’s hard to know, sometimes, whether prominent GOP politicians really support the GOP presidential candidate they support — that is, whether they actually agree with the views the candidate expresses — or whether they just want to be considered for the largess of a new president. One of the first favors the eventual GOP nominee will be able to bestow: The vice presidential nomination.

Sure, other explanations exist as to why the likes of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte and South Dakota Sen. John Thune support Mitt Romney — but they would probably not be too bent out of shape if Romney — should he secure the nomination — tapped ‘em for the VP slot.

Meantime, U.S. News and World Report reports that the GOP elite — whoever they are — have their own ideas about who should be vice president. The aforementioned gals don’t make the list, but the guys — surprisingly like Romney himself — do. Here are the details:

While over a dozen names were suggested by the strategists, some with the campaigns, four top the list: South Dakota Sen. John Thune and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, both surrogates for Romney, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, the most talked-about Hispanic in Washington, and former Secretary of State Condi Rice.

“Romney is likely to have to go right,” said one former Bush aide. “He’ll need somebody to generate enthusiasm from the base. Rubio fits the bill.”

Some suggested that while most of the top picks appear easy and safe candidates, it is not out of the question that Romney would choose a surprise. The reason: Romney himself is the safest of the GOP candidates and might need some spice to rev up the Republican base. But it won’t be Sarah Palin. Not one of our experts mentioned her, though former McCain adviser and former Hewlett-Packard executive Carly Fiorina got a vote.

Gotta say: I would not be excited if Mitt Romney selected a single one of those four. Of them, I like Rubio best — but I’m panicked to pluck any GOP Senator out of the Capitol when we desperately need majorities in both houses of Congress. The other two men are plagued with problems similar to Romney’s. And, as for Condi, well, I admire her prodigious accomplishments — but there’s a reason you rarely hear the name “George W. Bush” on the campaign trail these days and anybody in his administration carries some big-government baggage.

Surely a GOP nominee Romney would be smarter than to permanently solidify his establishment image by selecting an establishment-ordained candidate. My suggestion (if he doesn’t take Iowa by storm tonight and move on to take the GOP nomination): Rick Santorum.

Update: This post originally incorrectly stated the article about GOP insiders’ VP picks came from The USA Today when, in fact, it came from U.S. News and World Report.


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

I, for one, am very grateful for this. I am not being facetious. Your concern is understandable. But your sense of responsibility and desire to rid this country of one of the gravest mistakes it has ever made in electing an INCOMPETENT and SUBVERSIVE POTUS is truly commendable.

I will do the same NO MATTER WHO IS NOMINATED.

The War Planner on January 3, 2012 at 6:28 PM
This over and over again. The primaries are for all of us to choose the candidate we want. When the time comes to rid the U.S. of this regime and its cockroaches we must all unite to do it. We will hold whomever is the President feet to the fire.

SouthernGent on January 3, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Both of you.. SouthernGent (isn’t that redundant) and War Planner…I thank you for the kind words. But seriously…I don’t get the daily briefings. Some things O’bozo does can be construed to strengthen our position (It takes a leap of faith, I’m not sure I have it..) but his domestic policies, in isolation, are disastrous. The idea of one more supreme court nominee from him is terrifying. I have three kids to think of.

WryTrvllr on January 3, 2012 at 7:09 PM

Liberty 5-3001 on January 3, 2012 at 7:04 PM

That’s why I think Blackburn would be such a perfect choice for him. It give the ticket regional balance and a conservative with impeccable credentials but is sane and won’t send indies running away in horror. She has also been a relentless critic of ObamaCare, reinforcing Mitt’s commitment to ending it.

MJBrutus on January 3, 2012 at 7:09 PM

I would not be excited if Mitt Romney selected a single one of those four.

So Tina, have we moved onto accepting the inevitable?

Liberty 5-3001 on January 3, 2012 at 7:10 PM

It [calling Christians "fanatics"] was just a question. It’s a bit creepy you can find hate in it.

Only in your hate-filled world. I have stated many times before in multiple other forums that I’m a Christian Conservative. I’m a Christian first and foremost, a Conservative second, and a Republican third (but only because there is no viable Conservative party).

What’s exactly the problem that plagues Romney, Christie and Thune? I mean, Romney is a moderate, but what about the other two?

joana on January 3, 2012 at 6:35 PM

Romney is most definitely a squish Moderate, holding all three positions on every issue. He’s Flip Flopney for a reason.

Christie is the rarest of breeds. In fact, there is no other like him. He’s a rock-solid Moderate with a backbone. I like that he’s rock-solid and a loud-mouth, sticking it to the far-left Liberals. He’s the best New Jersey could ever dream to have. That said, he’s most definitely a Moderate. (Second Amendment, for one particular issue.)

And Thune? I don’t really know anything about him, but judging by the fact you lumped him in with two known Moderates, it is likely that he, too is a Moderate.

In all my time commenting here at Hot Gas (all 2 weeks or so), I have never mentioned Christie or Thune, so I find it curious that the way you formed your question suggested that I have stated positions regarding them.

I’m a three-prong Conservative:
Fiscal Conservative
Social Conservative
Strong National Defense Conservative

I’m also a Tenther^2 : Tenth Amendment and Tenth Commandment. And there’s a definite difference between a Bell Curve Tenther and a Hyperbolic Curve Tenther (self link), with the former being a false Tenther. It is impossible for a Liberal to produce any economic agenda that stays true to the Tenth Commandment (another self link). In fact, the further away from the Tenth Commandment one gets, the more Liberal one becomes.

There are issues that immediately disqualify a candidate from my vote. If you are pro-abort, I will never vote for you. If you are anti-zionist, I will never vote for you. There are other issues, but you get the idea.

John Hitchcock on January 3, 2012 at 7:14 PM

What is with the Rubio for VP nonsense? There is a little problem he has that isn’t going away. Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution states that in order to be President one must be a natural born citizen (which means born of citizen parents). The 12th Amendment applies this section to the Vice President. Marco Rubio was born a citizen BUT he is not a natural born citizen. His parents were not citizens at the time of his birth and did not become so until he was four. Obama can point to a citizen mother, Rubio can’t point to a single citizen parent. It is a problem.

Christie ignite the base? Please.

Tarnsman on January 3, 2012 at 7:15 PM

My suggestion (if he doesn’t take Iowa by storm tonight and move on to take the GOP nomination): Rick Santorum.

While Santorum is more or less revered by certain segments of the GOP’s conservative base, I think it would be bad strategy for the GOP nominee to tap him for VP. Many on the right are probably/possibly not aware of this, but Rick Santorum is absolutely hated on the liberal Left: reviled, despised, the object of nearly unmatched vituperation and venom–and I only write ‘nearly unmatched’ because Sarah Palin has held the top spot on that particular list for three years now. Santorum’s surname is, in fact, a euphemism for sexual detritus of a kind that doesn’t bear describing here.

Strategically, a winning campaign seeks to generate enthusiasm among one’s base while simultaneously depressing the base of the opposition. A Santorum VP pick would fairly galvanize the left and even left of center Blue Dog moderates (whatever few of those remaining).

In my view, if Romney wins the GOP nomination he’ll need a VP on the ticket equipped with a vibrant, larger-than-life personality. No offense to Mitt Romney, but he doesn’t exactly fill the air with star-power charisma–but then, neither did Coolidge, and ‘Silent Cal’ was an extremely capable chief executive. For that matter, Truman wasn’t exactly a commanding presence, either, but history remembers him kindly. A Romney/Christie pairing would pose a formidable opposition to Obama, and so would Romney/Ryan. Along those lines, a Romney/Rubio matchup would be nearly unbeatable. Rubio’s star is rising, and he has enormous base appeal.

Like Obama, Gingrich would not pick a VP candidate who could possibly outshine or upstage him. We’d get the Republican equivalent of Biden, whomever that would be.

Perry, on the other hand, would be wise to pick someone more polished, with a solid foreign policy background to offset his obvious shortcomings in that area. In my opinion, if Perry then Condoleeza Rice. I sound as bad as the late Muammar Gaddafi, but I love that lady.

Ron Paul would, of course, select his friend Cosmo, a seven-foot-tall, invisible Nazi rabbit whose been feeding Paul all his ideas for decades now.

troyriser_gopftw on January 3, 2012 at 7:17 PM

Cam Newton will win the next 5 Superbowls.

mike_NC9 on January 3, 2012 at 6:43 PM

Not as long as the Panthers are in the same division as the best team playing right now.

Del Dolemonte on January 3, 2012 at 7:19 PM

Brit Hume has given out the order that Mittens is The One?

Well, that’s it then. Better start the process of closing down this site – it’s just a waste of time now.

I wonder who Our Betters will pick for VP? Bet they won’t tell us right away to build excitement.

Horace on January 3, 2012 at 7:20 PM

“So the dude that lost to the dude that lost to Obama is the only dude that can beat Obama?”

Who is John Galt on January 3, 2012 at 6:35 PM

This.

nicefly on January 3, 2012 at 6:37 PM

Reagan lost to Ford, who then lost to Carter. Then Reagan destroyed Carter 4 years later.

I’m all in favor of the GOP nominating a true Conservative every single POTUS election cycle. But this notion that Moderate Republicans can’t win elections is a myth. Bush 43, Bush 41, Nixon, and Eisenhower were all Moderates. And between them, they won 7 out of 8 elections. Dole and McCain lost for a number of reasons. Being a Moderate hurt Dole, but only because he was running against a popular incumbent who, 4 years earlier, touted himself as a new kind of Centrist Democrat. Dole and McCain would have both beaten Dukakis, Mondale, and Carter (when he ran for re-election).

ardenenoch on January 3, 2012 at 7:21 PM

Ron Paul would, of course, select his friend Cosmo, a seven-foot-tall, invisible Nazi rabbit whose been feeding Paul all his ideas for decades now.

troyriser_gopftw on January 3, 2012 at 7:17 PM

You must be talking about Harvey’s evil twin brother. I just knew he would come to no good.

Horace on January 3, 2012 at 7:22 PM

Would you PUHLEASSE spare me the Martel shiite.

WryTrvllr on January 3, 2012 at 6:44 PM
Martel was neither shiite nor sunni. He was Christian and Pagan.

Carthoris on January 3, 2012 at 6:59 PM

Yes.. but he, and his grandson spared western civ a whole lot of stonings. In this he should be revered, not have his name taken in vain.

Who will protect us next. Ferdinand. He’s dead. Alexios? Long gone. Leopold I,… also dead. Any heirs?…………(chirp)

Never forget what they gave us. To forget it, is to squander it.

WryTrvllr on January 3, 2012 at 7:23 PM

MJBrutus on January 3, 2012 at 6:52 PM

That’s a good combo.

Cindy Munford on January 3, 2012 at 7:26 PM

MJBrutus on January 3, 2012 at 7:09 PM

Hmmm, I will have to check her out more. She’d be a dark horse, no doubt. I suppose the only knock against her is being from the House rather than a statewide might not be enough of a vote draw, but I’m definitely for someone from a right-leaning state (same with McDonnell) I’ve always liked Jindall the most. It might draw attention to a little known fact that Indians (dots not feathers) actually lean Republican. Even in my lefty NY county, there’s an official Indian-American Republicans group

Liberty 5-3001 on January 3, 2012 at 7:44 PM

I was suprised to not see Haley Barbour, especially with the concerns listed. Was glad to see Paul Ryan and Jeb Bush on there. Consider the backlash of panderism in the media for Condi. I’m not one to give a crap about that if it’s the correct choice. Rubio would have similar issues, just not as bad. Also Rubio is an interventionist (neo-con or whatever) and had no problem with the unconstitutional war against Libya.

Could also consider outgoing Reps and Senators…Kyl? It’s VP, it’s a vanity position for the most part. It was unfortunate in 2008 they were able to use it as if it was a part-time President.

John Kettlewell on January 3, 2012 at 7:47 PM

Based on the “logic” exhibited here by the Romney Haters, they would rather have 4 more years of O’bama than elect a Republican. Why don’t they just call themselves Democrats and get it over with?

Standard Disclaimer: I’m no Mitt Bot. But I would rather have a Republican making the next few SCOTUS appointments than to have O’bama make them. If he puts 2 or 3 more of his people on that Court, it’s all over.

Del Dolemonte on January 3, 2012 at 5:43 PM

This. Well said, Del.

Dopenstrange on January 3, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Tarnsman on January 3, 2012 at 7:15 PM

A WND-approved opinion is one we can trust, no! /sarc

Liberty 5-3001 on January 3, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Tarnsman on January 3, 2012 at 7:15 PM

So apparently the birthers are bipartisan? You guys just don’t quit, do you? Read and weep

Liberty 5-3001 on January 3, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Who wants to end their political career? That’s what happens with all VP candidates who are on a losing ticket in modern times. In addition, the odds of a VP serving on a winning ticket going on to win the POTUS is about as good as winning the lottery. I would like to see John Boehner picked as VP. We need to end his sorry political career.

they lie on January 3, 2012 at 7:56 PM

A “natural born citizen” is an American born in the US, or born outside the US with one or two US citizen parents. (I’m on the fence regarding anchor babies of illegals, but babies of foreigners with permanent legal resident status are “natural born citizens”.)

John Hitchcock on January 3, 2012 at 7:57 PM

“So the dude that lost to the dude that lost to Obama is the only dude that can beat Obama?”

Who is John Galt on January 3, 2012 at 6:35 PM

This.

nicefly on January 3, 2012 at 6:37 PM

Reagan lost to Ford, who then lost to Carter. Then Reagan destroyed Carter 4 years later.

I’m all in favor of the GOP nominating a true Conservative every single POTUS election cycle. But this notion that Moderate Republicans can’t win elections is a myth. Bush 43, Bush 41, Nixon, and Eisenhower were all Moderates. And between them, they won 7 out of 8 elections. Dole and McCain lost for a number of reasons. Being a Moderate hurt Dole, but only because he was running against a popular incumbent who, 4 years earlier, touted himself as a new kind of Centrist Democrat. Dole and McCain would have both beaten Dukakis, Mondale, and Carter (when he ran for re-election).

ardenenoch on January 3, 2012 at 7:21 PM

I knew Ronald Reagan…Ronald Reagan was a friend of mine…Mitt Romney is NO Ronald Reagan!!!

nicefly on January 3, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Ron Paul would, of course, select his friend Cosmo, a seven-foot-tall, invisible Nazi rabbit whose been feeding Paul all his ideas for decades now.

troyriser_gopftw on January 3, 2012 at 7:17 PM

I love me some fellow Millennial film tastes

Who wants to end their political career?

they lie on January 3, 2012 at 7:56 PM

I highly recommend that you read the hilarious and informative book “Veeps”, by Bill Kelter. It’s a catalog of mini-biographies for every single elected Vice President (save for Captain Big Effin’ Deal), and its contents should make anyone think twice about potential VP noms. After perusing, it seems like the best route might be to lean towards picks who are not too far from their political career twilight years

Liberty 5-3001 on January 3, 2012 at 8:04 PM

While it may be fun for some “strategists” to speculate, it really is far to early to be talking about the VP nomination.

john.frank on January 3, 2012 at 8:08 PM

While perhaps not Romney’s preferred choice, Huckabee would seem to be a uniter who would bring lots of good (conservative) stuff to the ticket, particularly for the Social Conservative crowd.

He’s got executive budget balancing experience, an excellent debater, possibly better than any of the existing group and would do well against the Dems and media. Plus, he’s got a history of winning several important (Super Tuesday) States.

Perhaps most importantly, he’s remained relatively neutral during this primary season, but at the same time has been active in the media so he’s not out of practice as far as speaking into a mike or teleprompter goes.

drfredc on January 3, 2012 at 8:33 PM

drfredc on January 3, 2012 at 8:33 PM

I cannot say with any kind of certainty, but I would suggest Huckabee would make Tenthers shudder. Huckabee has a reputation of being a Statist and soft on crime mixed in with some relatively strong Social Conservative principles.

And he reminds me of Mister Rogers.

John Hitchcock on January 3, 2012 at 8:39 PM

Santorum is my pick for the top of the ticket (and has been since the summer), but I’ve always thought he would be a good number 2 pick. Pennsylvania is more likely to swing in the red with Santorum on the ticket.
I was hoping West would run, but he didn’t. I’m hoping he’s also high on the list of some. As was mentioned several times earlier in the year, a Gingrich/Biden (if Biden is still on the ticket) would be great. I think a West/Biden debate would be great. West has plenty of military experience, he’d be able to handle discussions with other nations. He’s an articulate fighter that doesn’t hold back. I believe Florida will go red regardless of who is on the ticket. West would energize the tea party base.
Other choices: Jim Jordan (help’s swing Ohio and tea party), Jan Brewer, Nikki Haley, Scott Walker.
Haley Barbour could handle the job pretty well, but he’s a bit of the establishment type.
Keep Rubio and Demint in the senate, save them for later.

ritewhit on January 3, 2012 at 8:54 PM

The idea that Romney would pick the rat with dentures as his VP is beyond absurd. Being Mr. Sloppy Fifths at the Not-Romney Gang Bang is hardly qualification for the Vice Presidency.
Romney is not going to pick a VP to placate his “base”, nor does he have to. Last I looked, winning your party’s primary is proof enough that you’ve got your “base” behind you. Picking a VP to excite the “base” is a recipe for disaster, as McCain/Palin proved in 2008. Palin (whom I like and admire) excited the “base” and horrified just about everyone else, helping sink an already floundering McCain campaign. If McCain had picked an economically literate technocrat for VP (like Romney?), he might have won.
Romney probably had his VP short list a year ago. He’s a cautious, methodical man who only makes decisions after carefully analyzing all the information. No surprise, unvetted, go-with-his-gut choices for Mitt Romney. His pick will be a person publicly visible enough over a long period to offer little chance of a media surprises.
I expect Romney to do one of two things:
1. Double down on his strengths, and pick a strong organization man with an unimpeachable record of fiscal management. Bankers, academics, and Wall Street types are out of public favor right now, so a good conservative/governor is probably the ticket. It will not be Christie, because Romney will not pick another Northeastern moderate.
2. Pick someone with strong foreign policy credentials (not Condi Rice), hawkish but not overly belligerent. Not a Senator or Congressman, and no-one associated with the State Department; either a military man or someone with age and gravitas who has made his way with distinction through the upper levels of the defense bureaucracy.
I vote for number two. Obama is most vulnerable on the economy, but his foreign policy approach is a soup urn of disaster with a few croutons of success floating on top. However tasty the croutons, the soup is still slop. And as the hysteria over Ron Paul shows, there still more than a few voters rightly concerned about keeping America safe.

Mr. Arkadin on January 3, 2012 at 9:21 PM

Santorum? He’s a nut!

rubberneck on January 3, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Not one of our experts mentioned her, though former McCain adviser and former Hewlett-Packard executive Carly Fiorina got a vote.

Given that one of the “experts” suggested Carly Fiorina as a credible VP nominee, I can only conclude that the panel was comprised of Bob Shrum, the 2008 Detroit Lions and the ’62 Mets.

fitzfong on January 3, 2012 at 9:58 PM

Once again, the GOP could pick a candidate that generates so little excitement, they have to pick an exciting vice-presidential candidate.

bflat879 on January 3, 2012 at 10:00 PM

While perhaps not Romney’s preferred choice, Huckabee would seem to be a uniter who would bring lots of good (conservative) stuff to the ticket, particularly for the Social Conservative crowd.

He’s got executive budget balancing experience, an excellent debater, possibly better than any of the existing group and would do well against the Dems and media. Plus, he’s got a history of winning several important (Super Tuesday) States.

Perhaps most importantly, he’s remained relatively neutral during this primary season, but at the same time has been active in the media so he’s not out of practice as far as speaking into a mike or teleprompter goes.

drfredc on January 3, 2012 at 8:33 PM

Yeah, that’s the ticket, a tax raising, criminal pardoning, food policing, bible thumping, “it takes a village” liberal will shore up the conservative base. I’m sold.

fitzfong on January 3, 2012 at 10:05 PM

I dissagree Tina.

I think Condi would be a Wonderful Choice for Vice President. THAT is one Magnificant woman.
If she would only accept.

Marco, on the other hand, would be a great VP also, but…you’re right. He needs to stay in the senate a few more years.

Foxfire on January 3, 2012 at 11:01 PM

While perhaps not Romney’s preferred choice, Huckabee would seem to be a uniter who would bring lots of good (conservative) stuff to the ticket, particularly for the Social Conservative crowd.
drfredc on January 3, 2012 at 8:33 PM
You are kidding, right? I’d sooner vote for barryO, who I hate. Huckabee is the sleaziest politician out there today. Reminds me of a Jimmy Swaggert, and Jim Baker combined with a Fatty Arbuckle and Michael Vick.

lonestar1 on January 3, 2012 at 11:10 PM

I forgot to put this comment in quotes:

While perhaps not Romney’s preferred choice, Huckabee would seem to be a uniter who would bring lots of good (conservative) stuff to the ticket, particularly for the Social Conservative crowd.
drfredc on January 3, 2012 at 8:33 PM

Iowa should not get to vote first. Andrea Mitchell is right,

lonestar1 on January 3, 2012 at 11:13 PM

“And, as for Condi, well, I admire her prodigious accomplishments — but there’s a reason you rarely hear the name “George W. Bush” on the campaign trail these days and anybody in his administration carries some big-government baggage.”

Condi let State run their with own foreign policy not Bush’s.

davod on January 4, 2012 at 12:53 AM

PS: Mind you, Powell was just as bad. What was so bad about Condi’s lack of control was she was supposed to be much closer to Bush, and presumably, more on board with his policies.

davod on January 4, 2012 at 12:57 AM

Allen West.

That is all.

Yakko77 on January 4, 2012 at 2:58 AM

A Romney-Thune ticket wins 350+ electoral votes.

ak90049 on January 4, 2012 at 8:10 AM

A “natural born citizen” is an American born in the US, or born outside the US with one or two US citizen parents. (I’m on the fence regarding anchor babies of illegals, but babies of foreigners with permanent legal resident status are “natural born citizens”.)

John Hitchcock on January 3, 2012 at 7:57 PM

Last I looked, John Hitchcock was not one of the Supreme Court Justices. Those of us with serious questions about the meaning of NBC in the context of Art II Sec 1 want a decision by a competent legal authority. There is plenty of evidence out there to argue against your opinion. The federal courts (including SCOTUS) need to stop ducking the question, hear the arguments and make a ruling. This should have been settled at least 4 years ago.

Dexter_Alarius on January 4, 2012 at 8:52 AM

Romney probably had his VP short list a year ago. He’s a cautious, methodical man who only makes decisions after carefully analyzing all the information. No surprise, unvetted, go-with-his-gut choices for Mitt Romney. His pick will be a person publicly visible enough over a long period to offer little chance of a media surprises.
I expect Romney to do one of two things:
1. Double down on his strengths, and pick a strong organization man with an unimpeachable record of fiscal management. Bankers, academics, and Wall Street types are out of public favor right now, so a good conservative/governor is probably the ticket. It will not be Christie, because Romney will not pick another Northeastern moderate.
2. Pick someone with strong foreign policy credentials (not Condi Rice), hawkish but not overly belligerent. Not a Senator or Congressman, and no-one associated with the State Department; either a military man or someone with age and gravitas who has made his way with distinction through the upper levels of the defense bureaucracy.

If Romney follows option 1, he could try Mitch Daniels or Haley Barbour. If he follows option 2, David Petraeus.

Steve Z on January 4, 2012 at 9:22 AM

I like Ryan, Rubio, or West for the VP slot. Although… it is nice to have them where they are now too. But if Romney gets the nomination he is going to need someone as close to bullet proof as possible. The Republicans cannot afford any weak links when the MSM is so protective of Obama’s re election.

magicbeans on January 4, 2012 at 9:50 AM

How about Bobby Jindal?

Del Dolemonte on January 3, 2012 at 5:39 PM

I’m late to the party but I could definitely get behind that choice. He was quite vocal (hence increased visibility) of the Administration’s clean up (cover up) efforts of the oil spill. He did a lot to begin cleaning up political corruption there in LA. As a Virginian, I wouldn’t mind McDonnell too.

No chance in H*ll, but Scott Walker would be fun. Would really stir the pot there…

lucyvanpelt on January 4, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Two problems with Santorum.

One, he is a Big Government social conservative. In this sense, “conservative” is a misnomer because anything Big Government leads to the exact opposite of being a fiscal conservative. He will not correct the direction of our spending which is leading us to near-term eventual doom.

Two, each and every conversation about Santorum will eventually morph (baited by the left) into a Roe v. Wade argument that is certain to end in failure for Santorum. If he is the Republican nominee, Obama wins re-election and the United States as originally founded is lost forever. Take that to the bank.

Carnac on January 4, 2012 at 10:38 AM

I’m a conservative, not a republican. Also, I am tagged as “hispanic”. That said, the only way to win any hispanic support is to have Rubio as VP. Period. Most hispanics are like the blacks, they vote for dems because they give them federal freebies. We may take some of these votes with Rubio. Screw around with this and you’ll have Obambo for 4 more years.

rjulio on January 4, 2012 at 12:09 PM

Santorum would be a disaster!!!!!! (at VP, or as pres).

Besides his pro-life stand, which is admirable, he’s got nothing. He’s small time. He’s like the little brother of the cool guy that everybody likes. He’s just tolerated. And, troyriser_gopftw is right above. The left HATES him.

This election cannot be about pro-life. That’s a loser for this election. (If that’s your single issue, fine. But it’s a loser for this one.) This election is about Obamacare.

People tolerate Romney, but people LOOOOOOOOVVVVE Rubio. Even lefties can’t object to him too much. And, that hispanic vote would come in handy (even a part of it).

Romney/Rubio – that’s election gold! (Florida can find another conservative senator.)

Pablo Snooze on January 4, 2012 at 1:24 PM

So basically, my choices are:
A. John McCain 2.0 (Romney)
B. Bush 2.0 Complete with Crony Capitalism (Perry)
C. a Has Been Ex-Conservative, turned RINO (Newt)
D. A guy I know virtually nothing about, but apparently I should vote for him, because he’s really Conservative (Santorum)
E. a Snide fool, whose only notable accomplishments in this campaign, is producing one or two stinging one liners. (Huntsman)
F. Hot Air’s favorite Chew Toy, and person I’m not allowed to agree with ever, because that would somehow make me a crazy “Paul bot conspiracy theorist” no matter if I agree with some, but disagree on others. (Do I even need to talk about this?)

Yep…. things are looking great for the Republican party.

Razgriez on January 5, 2012 at 4:15 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3