Santorum: Gingrich would make a good running mate

posted at 12:45 pm on March 9, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

I’m just going to take a wild guess and say that Newt Gingrich might agree with this concept — but have issues with the order. Newsmax interviewed Rick Santorum yesterday and discussed the strategy of choosing a running mate. Santorum told Newsmax that he wants a “strong and principled conservative” who has been “tested” and can stand up to the rigors of the job in case the unthinkable happens.  And Santorum thinks he might have found a pretty good candidate for the job — coincidentally campaigning in the same states as Santorum himself:

Saying he’d look for a “strong and principled conservative” as a running mate should he win the Republican presidential nomination, former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum tells Newsmax that he certainly would consider rival Newt Gingrich for that vital role.

When asked if he would consider the former House Speaker as number two on his ticket, Santorum said Gingrich had been “tested” by the bruising GOP race and that makes him an attractive vice presidential candidate.

Santorum tells Newsmax that his choice would be a core conservative who is “willing to stand up and fight for the things that I believe in.”

“My principal and only criterion for vice president is to make sure that I have someone that I have confidence that if something should happen to me that they could carry on and do what I promised the people of America I would try to do,” he said.

It’s an interesting thing to say as both men attempt to push the other out of the race.  Gingrich is trying to hang on with his Southern strategy, although the Rasmussen poll from earlier today shows a dead heat in Alabama.  Normally, the pressures of this strategy would set both men against each other, and this kind of commentary would undermine that message if Santorum felt that Gingrich’s Southern strategy could work.  This might be a subtle jab at Gingrich’s chances of success, or a way for Santorum to attract some of Gingrich’s followers in Alabama and Mississippi by promising to consider him as VP, or a little of both.

It won’t happen, of course, but it’s interesting to speculate on what would happen if Gingrich bowed out and endorsed Santorum for a slot on the ticket — or the other way around.  The last presidential candidate I recall who made that kind of decision on running mates before the convention was Ronald Reagan in 1976, and it backfired on him at the convention when Reagan picked Richard Schweiker in order to attract liberals and centrists to his banner.  Either way, a consolidation of this sort would be bad news for Romney, but so unlikely given the personalities involved that its only value is fantasy-politics fun.


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

Reagan picked Richard Schweiker in order to attract liberals and centrists to his banner

RINO.

kunegetikos on March 9, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Both have been vetted and neither are really conservative or would either be a good running mate for the inevitable nominee Mitt Romney.

BobScuba on March 9, 2012 at 12:48 PM

The worst thing any of the nominees can do is pick each other. They all fit the mold of “rich white guy.” Dems are going to play race card/class warfare card for all it is worth in this election.

They need to pick a West, Rubio, Jindal or a Blackburn..

melle1228 on March 9, 2012 at 12:49 PM

…and I thought McCain/Palin was terrible.

rubberneck on March 9, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Crap with a side flavor of urine. Just the dish independents crave for.

Archivarix on March 9, 2012 at 12:52 PM

It won’t happen, of course, but it’s interesting to speculate on what would happen if Gingrich bowed out and endorsed Santorum for a slot on the ticket — or the other way around.

Let it go Ed. Romney has this.

rubberneck on March 9, 2012 at 12:52 PM

“My principal and only criterion for vice president is to make sure that I have someone that I have confidence that if something should happen to me that they could carry on and do what I promised the people of America I would try to do,” he said.

Pat Robertson’s kind of old isn’t he?

BacaDog on March 9, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Once again, what is the attraction to Santorum’s record, or as
I like to put it, lack of a record?

Amjean on March 9, 2012 at 12:54 PM

The worst thing any of the nominees can do is pick each other. They all fit the mold of “rich white guy.” Dems are going to play race card/class warfare card for all it is worth in this election.

They need to pick a West, Rubio, Jindal or a Blackburn..

melle1228 on March 9, 2012 at 12:49 PM

West sets his hair on fire, not gonna happen.

There are two that fit the bill for Progressive Mitt McCain.

Rubio or Martinez.

Neither inspire anything so they’d be a perfect match for the equally unappealing throwaway nominee of McRomney.

Christie is also to much of a Hair on fire guy, not happening.

PappyD61 on March 9, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Bad news for Romney, but stupendously good news for Barack Obama. Of course it’s always been more important for the TC’s to demolish Mitt than to get Obama out of the WH.

Nevermind the future welfare of the country.

Santorum/Gingrich or Gingrich/Santorum? The Republicans will lose all 57 states.

In fact, we’ll end up with a far-left Dem POTUS and a Dem-controlled Congress.

This country will be finished. But as long as Romney is put out to pasture, that’s all that matters, right?

Meredith on March 9, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Ed said:

Gingrich is trying to hang on with his Southern strategy, although the Rasmussen poll from earlier today shows a dead heat in Alabama

And another Rasmussen poll today has Romney leading by 8 in Mississippi.

Jon0815 on March 9, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Ricky, you’re a dope.

When you call Gingrich a “strong and principled conservative” who has been “tested,” that’s pretty much a ringing endorsement of Newt in Alabama and Mississippi. Why vote for Ricky when they can get a “strong and principled conservative” in Newt?

Emperor Norton on March 9, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Once again, what is the attraction to Santorum’s record, or as
I like to put it, lack of a record?

Amjean on March 9, 2012 at 12:54 PM

His name is not Mitt Romney. Santorum is a 3rd rate candidate. Gingrich is second rate. Both unelectable with women.

rubberneck on March 9, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Saying he’d look for a “strong and principled conservative” as a running mate should he win the Republican presidential nomination, former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum tells Newsmax that he certainly would consider rival Newt Gingrich for that vital role.

You lost me Rick.

Gingrich is a “government solutions” guy and a WILSON/FDR Loving Progressive. If Santorum really thinks that Newt is that……?

America…….

…….pick your Progressive, because that’s the only choice either party is going to give us.

PappyD61 on March 9, 2012 at 12:58 PM

hahahaha, as if Gingrich’s ego would play second fiddle that Santorum.

haw. haw. haw.

Jeddite on March 9, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Whereas I would hold my nose and vote for either if Romney was not the nominee, I would never be able to stomach the two together on a ticket. Too much smug ego for one ticket.

BettyRuth on March 9, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Mitt McCain………thrower of the election (2008/2012).

“I can’t say that I blame President Obama for the unemployment numbers. I mean, of course they are too high, but I think he’s doing the best he can but I just think he’s in over his head.”–

–statement from Romney in 5….4….3….

PappyD61 on March 9, 2012 at 1:01 PM

hahahaha, as if Gingrich’s ego would play second fiddle that Santorum.

haw. haw. haw.

Jeddite on March 9, 2012 at 12:58 PM

If it meant knee-capping Romney, then ya, he would.

SWalker on March 9, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Santorum anything is definitely Fantasy-politics.

Moesart on March 9, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Newt will tell him maybe: a Newt/Santorum ticket.

galtani on March 9, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Whereas I would hold my nose and vote for either if Romney was not the nominee, I would never be able to stomach the two together on a ticket. Too much smug ego for one ticket.

BettyRuth on March 9, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Oh shut up and go vote for Obama already.

SWalker on March 9, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Bad news for Romney, but stupendously good news for Barack Obama. Of course it’s always been more important for the TC’s to demolish Mitt than to get Obama out of the WH.

Nevermind the future welfare of the country.

Santorum/Gingrich or Gingrich/Santorum? The Republicans will lose all 57 states.

In fact, we’ll end up with a far-left Dem POTUS and a Dem-controlled Congress.

This country will be finished. But as long as Romney is put out to pasture, that’s all that matters, right?

Meredith on March 9, 2012 at 12:56 PM</blockquote

Quit being a "matyr for Romney" Ummkay. Most of us will hold our nose, get drunk and vote for Politician Barbie despite Mittwits best efforts to chase us away.

When he loses, you own him. I, as a Conservative am not getting blamed for that one!

melle1228 on March 9, 2012 at 1:03 PM

I’ve been saying that all along! But!…I didn’t have Rick being #1 at the time. Mmmmmmmmmmmm! Abbott and Costello! Got to think on that!

KOOLAID2 on March 9, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Wouldn’t evangelical heads explode? There’s Santy, family man…and, er, Newt.

Worst ticket ever. Santy needs a governor, or someone who’s done something either than legislate and lobby.

changer1701 on March 9, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Fitting since Rick’s not a conservative and neither is Newt.

Oh wait Sarah Palin said Newts a conservative so I guess that means just Rick isn’t.

Swerve22 on March 9, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Fitting since Rick’s not a conservative and neither is Newt.

Oh wait Sarah Palin said Newts a conservative so I guess that means just Rick isn’t.

Swerve22 on March 9, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Face it- none of them are conservative really.. It really is a race to vote for the person who is less “squishy moderate.”

melle1228 on March 9, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Perfect example of how these guys will say anything.

Santorum/Gingrich, huh? Attractive ticket for swing voters. \s

Priscilla on March 9, 2012 at 1:09 PM

This is nothing more than payback for Newt’s “junior partner” comment. Newt is damaged goods and no one in their right mind (Sarah Palin, I’m talking to you) would consider him for high office.

rogaineguy on March 9, 2012 at 1:09 PM

Newt up by 4 over Romney in MS

d1carter on March 9, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Bare in mind, after what Romney did to him in Florida, Newt just want’s him some sweet sweet payback. Santorum and Newt combined have the ability to knee-cap Romney in true Tonya Harding style. Even as a VP pick, that is something Newt could live with.

SWalker on March 9, 2012 at 1:14 PM

This is nothing more than payback for Newt’s “junior partner” comment. Newt is damaged goods and no one in their right mind (Sarah Palin, I’m talking to you) would consider him for high office.

rogaineguy on March 9, 2012 at 1:09 PM

ROTFLMAO and that is why nobody in their right mind pay’s you for your opinion.

SWalker on March 9, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Ricky, you’re a dope.

When you call Gingrich a “strong and principled conservative” who has been “tested,” that’s pretty much a ringing endorsement of Newt in Alabama and Mississippi. Why vote for Ricky when they can get a “strong and principled conservative” in Newt?

Emperor Norton on March 9, 2012 at 12:57 PM

So true! Thanks Rick.

Hope some of Santorum’s voters move on over to Newt now, especially considering he’s much more articulate, qualified, capable and has powerful solutions to bring out country back from the edge of the abyss.

IndeCon on March 9, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Not to pick on anyone; seriously.

But examining the advice or criterion stated or implied above and more than once concerning the only suitable VP selections, and not only on this thread, how is it that centrists much less moonbats are supposed to be shocked by CRT? Not to deny that the aforementioned are not unworthy suggestions.

kunegetikos on March 9, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Hang in there Newt…!!!

Seven Percent Solution on March 9, 2012 at 1:17 PM

After beating up on each other and telling the world all the other persons faults, one will say, “this is the best man in the world to be my running mate.”????

Only a loser would try that strategy. And American’s don’t fall for losers (after 2009, at any rate).

DuctTapeMyBrain on March 9, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Ummm…Exactly how would Newt’s 3 wives fit in with Santorum’s strong position on “family values“?

Women have a good reason not to trust Newt and will vote against him.

The one positive thing I can honestly say about Obama is that he appears to be a good husband and father.

wren on March 9, 2012 at 1:20 PM

A ban on condoms during space sex? Compromise.

kunegetikos on March 9, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Face it- none of them are conservative really.. It really is a race to vote for the person who is less “squishy moderate.”

melle1228 on March 9, 2012 at 1:07 PM

This!! Our chance at a true conservative went out the window when Bachmann flamed out (along with Palin choosing not to jump in, though I can’t blame her for that).

Bitter Clinger on March 9, 2012 at 1:21 PM

Newt up by 4 over Romney in MS

d1carter on March 9, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Brand new Mississippi Republican Presidential Primary from Rasmussen

Romney 35,
Santorum 27,
Gingrich 27,
Paul 6

And even if you only want to believe the ARG poll, Newt up only by 4 in AL is not something he should write home about.

galtani on March 9, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Both have an ego bigger than the good of the land.

Ironically, the one whom Mitt destroyed, is keeping him afloat.

Schadenfreude on March 9, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Over a week ago, I offered the opinion that if Romney hung on to Ohio, he had such a lead in delegates that the only way Santorum or Gingrich could win was by one of them dropping out and endorsing the other, and that was only if they did it before Romney won 5 states on Tuesday and piled up a bigger lead yet. He did, and they didn’t.
Gingrich won’t win another state. If he doesn’t drop out, he’ll contine to split the vote with Santorum, and Romney will continue winning good second places, pluralities and outright majorities. If he does, those who would have voted for him won’t all go to Santorum, they’ll be split with him and Romney, and in that case if the split is anything near equal, the advantage is with Romney, and he wins even more.

Confutus on March 9, 2012 at 1:25 PM

I love how each commenter finds the most positive poll for their guy. Put away the cigars, crowns and the champagne. The math doesn’t add up for either. So much more will happen, that will shock you.

Schadenfreude on March 9, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Talk about a Sh*t Sangrich

Elizabetty on March 9, 2012 at 1:27 PM

So much more will happen, that will shock you.

Schadenfreude on March 9, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Care to elaborate?

BacaDog on March 9, 2012 at 1:28 PM

A Santorum/Gingrich ticket would be national political suicide but hey, why fool around with half-measures when we can take it all the way?

It can’t just be me but, I mean, have some of you Not Romneys actually looked at Gingrich and Santorum? I mean really looked? Everything about those two is unappealing, offputting, abrasive and alienating, guaranteed to turn off every right-leaning independent voter out there. Either one would be beaten handily by President Obama in the general election, but the two of them together? That’s a Democratic dream ticket right there.

I’ve got a deal for you, Not Romneys. If you get your way and the GOP nomination goes to Santorum (or less probably Gingrich), and Santorum or Gingrich get utterly smashed in the general election (as either or both almost certainly will), then you members of the True Blue Conservative Purity Brigade either shut up for the next 4 years or–even better–split off from the Republican Party and become another ineffectual protest party like the Libertarians. You can draw inspiration from American history and resurrect the Know Nothings. Take the Ron Paul supporters with you.

troyriser_gopftw on March 9, 2012 at 1:31 PM

I don’t mean to sound like a defeatist, but I wonder if, after losing the upcoming election, the party will ever recover from the damage this group of clowns has caused. I also wonder how much more damage Mr. President can do to our country over the next five years. Probably a lot. But then he’ll be gone, never to be president again. And that thought makes me feel good. Hopefully we’ll come up with a strong group of contenders by the time the next election comes around.

scalleywag on March 9, 2012 at 1:32 PM

Wouldn’t Gingrich running as Santorum’s VP be a bit like the Beatles touring as the opening act for the Monkees?

DRayRaven on March 9, 2012 at 1:40 PM

I’ve got a deal for you, Not Romneys. If you get your way and the GOP nomination goes to Santorum (or less probably Gingrich), and Santorum or Gingrich get utterly smashed in the general election (as either or both almost certainly will), then you members of the True Blue Conservative Purity Brigade either shut up for the next 4 years or–even better–split off from the Republican Party and become another ineffectual protest party like the Libertarians. You can draw inspiration from American history and resurrect the Know Nothings. Take the Ron Paul supporters with you.

troyriser_gopftw on March 9, 2012 at 1:31 PM

This is EXACTLY the attitude that makes me want to stay home on the election day.

How about I offer you the same deal when Romney gets trounced. Moderates ALWAYS lose to the more liberal person. People who refuse to learn from history and all that.

melle1228 on March 9, 2012 at 1:45 PM

I’ve got a deal for you, Not Romneys. If you get your way and the GOP nomination goes to Santorum (or less probably Gingrich), and Santorum or Gingrich get utterly smashed in the general election (as either or both almost certainly will), then you members of the True Blue Conservative Purity Brigade either shut up for the next 4 years or–even better–split off from the Republican Party and become another ineffectual protest party like the Libertarians. You can draw inspiration from American history and resurrect the Know Nothings. Take the Ron Paul supporters with you.

troyriser_gopftw on March 9, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Oh and btw, most of us have said that we would hold our nose and vote for Mitt, but his supporters are really doing their best to push us away.

This is exactly what I said is happening in another thread. Don’t need our vote-fine..

melle1228 on March 9, 2012 at 1:49 PM

How about I offer you the same deal when Romney gets trounced. Moderates ALWAYS lose to the more liberal person. People who refuse to learn from history and all that.

melle1228 on March 9, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Then stay home and give it to the socialist out of spite and pique. I’m pretty much past caring what the fringe outliers who have the gall to call themselves conservatives do or don’t do on election day. You and yours want to be wooed and won over. You want to feel powerful and important: Pay attention to me! Pay attention to me! As a Republican, I just want to win. Speaking only for myself, I don’t have the patience for this kind of petulant nonsense. You’re all acting like Gingrich when Clinton sat him in the back of Air Force One, across from the crew latrine. His lip trembled with childish rage. He nearly cried.

News: You don’t matter. I don’t matter. The country matters. We need to beat President Obama and the Chicago Machine and stop the downward spiral into a failed socialist superstate before it’s too late, if it isn’t already.

troyriser_gopftw on March 9, 2012 at 1:57 PM

You and yours want to be wooed and won over. You want to feel powerful and important: Pay attention to me! Pay attention to me!

Says the attention whore who just told a bunch of people to “leave his party.”

melle1228 on March 9, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Santorum could certainly find a better, more appropriate running mate than Gingrich.

Pork-Chop on March 9, 2012 at 2:02 PM

The last presidential candidate I recall who made that kind of decision on running mates before the convention was Ronald Reagan in 1976, and it backfired on him at the convention when Reagan picked Richard Schweiker in order to attract liberals and centrists to his banner.

The other aspect of the 1976 campaign that is akin to this year’s is the fractured nature of the GOP right now. In 1976 Ford loyalists were angry that there was any effort to replace him as President (it was his turn). That fracture and the aftermath of Watergate led us to the second worst President in modern history behind the current occupant of the White House.

I only hope that whenever the primary is over, there will be enough healing to do what really matters. Defeat Obama, retain majority in the House and kick the Dems out of the Senate leadership.

Happy Nomad on March 9, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Ummm…Exactly how would Newt’s 3 wives fit in with Santorum’s strong position on “family values“?

wren on March 9, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Much better than Santorum’s belief that women should be submissive to men, actually.

alwaysfiredup on March 9, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Says the attention whore who just told a bunch of people to “leave his party.”

melle1228 on March 9, 2012 at 2:01 PM

If I wanted to be an attention whore, this wouldn’t be the place to do it. No one other than hopeless political junkies reads these posts.

troyriser_gopftw on March 9, 2012 at 2:07 PM

I doubt that Newt Gingrich would consider Santorum on his ticket.

The best Santorum can hope out of his run is maybe a Romney position in a Romney administration if by some outside chance Romney could beat Obama in the General. Rick Santorum is not going to be on the republican ticket.

Dr Evil on March 9, 2012 at 2:09 PM

If I wanted to be an attention whore, this wouldn’t be the place to do it. No one other than hopeless political junkies reads these posts.

troyriser_gopftw on March 9, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Lol. +1.

I doubt that Newt Gingrich would consider Santorum on his ticket.

Dr Evil on March 9, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Then he’s not as smart as I think he is. Grassroots conservatives are honestly torn btw Santorum and Gingrich and will support either as long as he looks viable. They have many of the same voters, so they both should be seriously considering joining forces. It’s just a question of egos (which, contrary to popular opinion, are very common to all politicians and wannabees).

alwaysfiredup on March 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM

if tricky ricky ran with zombie reagan he would still lose!

reliapundit on March 9, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Santorum and Gingrich could call themselves The Zombie Brothers. That way they’d still have a career path after losing the election by 17 points —Halloween Parties, bar mitzvahs…

claudius on March 9, 2012 at 2:59 PM

Fitting since Rick’s not a conservative and neither is Newt.

Oh wait Sarah Palin said Newts a conservative so I guess that means just Rick isn’t.

Swerve22 on March 9, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Both are more conservative than Romney.

alwaysfiredup on March 9, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Much better than Santorum’s belief that women should be submissive to men, actually.

alwaysfiredup on March 9, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Newt asking Marianne to let him screw around with Calista is not asking his wife to be submissive to him??

Elizabetty on March 9, 2012 at 3:08 PM

Santorum did not say, as Ed’s title suggests, that Gingrich would make a good running mate. And Santorum did not say that Gingrich possessed all the attributed he wanted in a VP.

When asked if he would consider the former House Speaker as number two on his ticket, Santorum said Gingrich had been “tested” by the bruising GOP race and that makes him an attractive vice presidential candidate.

Santourm was being gracious when he was asked about Gingrich being on the ticket. Cpme on Ed, this is sloppy journalism.

fight like a girl on March 9, 2012 at 3:35 PM

Santourm was being gracious when he was asked about Gingrich being on the ticket. Come on Ed, this is sloppy journalism.

Sorry for not wearing glasses when I posted that. I was being sloppy. :)

fight like a girl on March 9, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Santorum-Gingrich has a ring to it. Like the ring you get when your head is being inexorably squeezed by a vice.

If the Democrats threw over the current ticket for Jeremiah Wright-Amanda Clayton (the million dollar lottery winner still collecting food stamps) Santorum-Gingrich would lose nonetheless.

MaiDee on March 9, 2012 at 3:41 PM

I’m trying to be nice about the candidates but have to let off steam now and then: TweedleDee and TweedleDum.

jeanie on March 9, 2012 at 6:43 PM

I could see a Santorum/Gingrich ticket actually ending up with negative electoral votes.

carl todd hand on March 9, 2012 at 7:11 PM

Ummm…Exactly how would Newt’s 3 wives fit in with Santorum’s strong position on “family values“?

Women have a good reason not to trust Newt and will vote against him.

The one positive thing I can honestly say about Obama is that he appears to be a good husband and father.

wren on March 9, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Many marriages have problems but not all of them are in the public eye. However, to use these against Newt after 10+ years, one must believe that change for the better is not possible. This was his personal life, not policy. This is where I see many in Congress that enact policy by their votes that is Anti-American, both R’s & D’s and continue to be elected.

I’ll keep Newt and vote against any and all R’s that are now in Congress that are NOW voting against us.

Unless one is publicly beating his wife and children, then we don’t really know if he’s a good husband or father. It’s not this area of his personal life that incurs wrath, it’s his policies he’s enacted. For that he deserves to be voted out.

Newt while Speaker worked for the betterment of the Country and made changes that the good ole boys of both parties didn’t like.

Whether both would make a team, I don’t know. However, Newt’s talents should not be overlooked and there should be a place for him in any R Administration.

bluefox on March 9, 2012 at 7:12 PM

Fitting since Rick’s not a conservative and neither is Newt.

Oh wait Sarah Palin said Newts a conservative so I guess that means just Rick isn’t.

Swerve22 on March 9, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Since Santorum has never governed, then how did Newt govern when he was Speaker if it wasn’t Conservative? Compare that to Romney’s governing in MA. There is a difference. It’s one thing to talk, but it’s another to walk that talk.
Newt has walked the talk; Romney has talked out of both sides of his mouth, but he’s not governed as a Conservative.

That is the test and the way I look at the meaning of Conservative.

bluefox on March 9, 2012 at 7:18 PM

Both have been vetted and neither are really conservative or would either be a good running mate for the inevitable nominee Mitt Romney.

BobScuba on March 9, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Just stand them next to Mitt Romney, and suddenly they’ll look plenty conservative.

There Goes The Neighborhood on March 10, 2012 at 1:53 AM