Romney: You know who’d make a good running mate?
posted at 10:25 am on February 16, 2012 by Ed Morrissey
Mitt Romney’s campaign and his super-PAC have begun ramping up their ad buys in Michigan to hit Rick Santorum where they believe he is weak — by painting him as an unreliable conservative, a big spender, and too much of a social conservative to win. They need to undermine his credibility in a hurry if they want to reverse his momentum and bring Santorum back down to the second tier. Santorum will have to find a way to defend himself while getting outspent, a task that Newt Gingrich couldn’t manage, and maintain his credibility as a national candidate.
In that, Santorum got some help yesterday from … Mitt Romney?
Mitt Romney, whose campaign is preparing a multi-million dollar wave of negative advertising to persuade voters that Rick Santorum should not be president, says he is open to the possibility of choosing Santorum to be his running mate should Romney win the Republican nomination.
Romney appeared on Fox News Wednesday morning and was asked, “You and Rick Santorum, we haven’t seen you go head-to-head yet…In the big picture, could you see a scenario where you two team up?”
“Oh, I think it’s always possible to have people come together in our party, whether it’s Rick and I, or others in the party, who knows?” Romney responded. “It’s a little early to tell something like that, but we have similar views on issues — very different backgrounds.”
Romney’s “very different backgrounds” description of Santorum points to an argument Romney plans to use through the February 28 primaries in Michigan and Arizona and on through Super Tuesday on March 6. Santorum has no executive experience — “hasn’t run anything,” Romney will say — and is not qualified to be president. Romney, on the other hand, has run private businesses, the 2002 Olympics, and the state government in Massachusetts during his one term as governor.
Well, here’s the problem with that argument when made at the same time as suggesting the opponent as a valid running mate. The position of VP/running mate exists for the sole explicit reason of replacing a President in a hurry, should the President die or become unable to carry out his/her duties while in office. (Even the one official duty of the VP, President of the Senate, puts the VP in position to act as the President’s proxy.) If the “different backgrounds” issue is a disqualifier for the top of the ticket, it’s a disqualifier for the bottom of the ticket as well.
In that very real sense, Romney has essentially stepped on his own message. At the same time he’s painting Santorum as unqualified for the Presidency, he’s trying to have it both ways and play to Santorum’s growing voter base by praising him in public by teasing out the possibility of a Romney/Santorum ticket. Romney sees the need to do this because of Santorum’s high favorability ratings, whereas with Newt Gingrich he could just goad the former Speaker into a public fight and drive up his negatives even further. However, this suggestion undermines the message Romney is using in Michigan, and it’s not a good moment for him to do that, considering his polling status in his native state.
Would Romney really consider Santorum for the bottom of the ticket? Possibly, but it wouldn’t make much sense for either man to have the other at the bottom of the ticket. Romney wouldn’t accept it anyway, although Santorum might, but there are other options for both. Santorum won’t gain anything by putting a Northeastern Republican on the bottom of the ticket (unless it were Chris Christie, perhaps); both would do better by picking a Tea Party favorite. Bobby Jindal is probably the best choice for either, although Susana Martinez or Nikki Haley could work.
Related Posts:








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: « Previous 1 2
Now there’s a dusty old name…I haven’t seen that sketch for at least ten years. Still remember it was funny!
MelonCollie on March 16, 2013 at 7:35 AM
Cheers:)
There is some amazing irony in your commentary – someone who sounds remarkably like a spoiled child calling me “juvenile” and “deliberately obtuse” for not being able to make sense of your delusional fantasies. I’ll have to leave it to others to make sense of your blatherings – which begin with the false premise- that the narcissistic Marxist grifter Obama and Romney are like ideological fraternal twins. It then wanders off into something I can’t comprehend. I gather it has something to do with being pissed off that Sarah Palin didn’t run as a third party Tea Party candidate, and thus being left with no choice but to stomp your foot, pick up your ball, and stay home? Or maybe you had Ron Paul in mind? Who the hell knows. I’m not going to waste any more time trying to make sense of your nonsensical ‘analysis’.
Buy Danish on March 16, 2013 at 8:37 AM
Romney did not rise to the occasion in the election, so why expect him to do so here?
Sherman1864 on March 16, 2013 at 11:40 AM
He lost by 3%, not a blow out, but a loss is a loss. He is a good and accomplished man who would have been a far better president than Obama who had no real accomplishments before his political life began. Romney isn’t a conservative and maybe that is why he lost but he is a respectable and humble man.
Dollayo on March 17, 2013 at 2:05 AM
He should be sorry he lost because he passed on the opportunity to unseat the Liar of Benghazi (oh, yes, where is that report now? What has the admnistration discovered?).
In a sense, this lack of political judgment disqualified him. We should have known not to nominate a person unable to beat McCain.
virgo on March 17, 2013 at 3:55 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2