Hot Air Survey: Vice Presidential Edition

posted at 12:01 pm on June 22, 2012 by Patrick Ishmael

It’s baaaaack. If you’re on Twitter, you can send me questions here. Will publish the survey results later this weekend, so stay tuned.

This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.


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

Bob McDonnell

El_Terrible on June 22, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Just showed up. : )

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 12:48 PM

I say Joe Manchin for VP…

I think it would be ingenious to pull the most conservative Democrat in the Senate in as a running mate for a few reasons. For starters, it would show bipartisanship. That destroys Obama’s campaign messaging that will certainly target an “obstructive” “do nothing” Republican Congress (unfortunately the media will never point out that the Senate is Dem controlled, and Obama had a Congress that could have done anything for his first two years…).

Although a Democrat, Manchin will probably play better with the social conservative base than Romney can. Not to mention his blue collar image. Americans will recognize Manchin as “that Governor who was always on TV for coal mine collapses.” He has crisis credibility that has put him in the public spot light in situations where he was dealing with the ultimate blue collar workers in this country. He’ll relate better with working folks than Mitt ever could.

My more devious reason… if elected we’d have a special election to replace a West Virginia Senate seat. Likely with a Republican. Perfect.

I could go on and on with reasons, but why not try bringing him over to the GOP. Worst case scenario, if he were to accept, he’d go back to West Virginia as a Senator where the people really wouldn’t care he had switched parties. It doesn’t imperil his career so he would have no reason to reject. And unlike McCain wanting Lieberman in 2008, Manchin is a guy the GOP base would embrace. Probably more so than the candidate at the top of the ticket.

eski502 on June 22, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Necessary qualification: must be duller than Mitt.

Field narrows to: Tim Pawlenty.

No one will say ‘Gee, the wrong guy is at the top of the ticket’ with him at VP slot. Nice, comfy, oatmeal style dull with just a bit of MN humor. Smarter than Biden, too… but so are most of the birds coming to feed on my back deck…

ajacksonian on June 22, 2012 at 12:37 PM

I don’t know about that, Pawlenty had the balls to tell Iowa corn farmers that he wouldn’t support Ethanol subsidies. Romney just pandered as usual. So really, though they are both total Rinos, Pawlenty should be at the top of that ticket. .

Buckshot Bill on June 22, 2012 at 12:49 PM

I restarted Firefox and I’m still getting the blank white…

OmahaConservative on June 22, 2012 at 12:43 PM

big blank here … will try later ….

conservative tarheel on June 22, 2012 at 12:44 PM

I am using Chrome and still getting a blank.

Dr Evil on June 22, 2012 at 12:46 PM

I tried all browsers and still getting a blank

OrthodoxJew on June 22, 2012 at 12:49 PM

I restarted Firefox and I’m still getting the blank white…

OmahaConservative on June 22, 2012 at 12:43 PM

big blank here … will try later ….

conservative tarheel on June 22, 2012 at 12:44 PM

I am using Chrome and still getting a blank.

Dr Evil on June 22, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Tried IE and it wasn’t there either…

OmahaConservative on June 22, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Oops, there it is now…

OmahaConservative on June 22, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Survey failed upon clicking submit. Vote again?

eski502 on June 22, 2012 at 12:51 PM

My EXTREMELY dark horse pick:

Tom McClintock, R-CA.

peski on June 22, 2012 at 12:51 PM

heh! we need Sarah. let someone else go to the slaughter

renalin on June 22, 2012 at 12:45 PM

I wouldn’t worry about, I doubt she’d accept if Mittens did try to pick her. She certainly seems to be in no hurry to endorse him.

Buckshot Bill on June 22, 2012 at 12:52 PM

I got through to the poll, filled it out and clicked submit, but I never received a “Thank You for your Vote” or any similar such message. It just took ages then went back to the blank white. So I don’t know if it went through properly.

For the record I voted Bobby Jindal and gave Romney 315 EVs.

Gingotts on June 22, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Slow and or not accepting my entry.

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 12:54 PM

OH, and I would like to register a protest that Zombie Vampire Slayer Lincoln was excluded from the list of VP candidates…

SWalker on June 22, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Slow and or not accepting my entry.

Went through finally, back to blank screen. Do we know if it in fact was submitted.?

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 12:56 PM

I can’t see anything either, I’m on Safari.

vegconservative on June 22, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Blank screen here, too. Sure hope this thing gets fixed. Love your surveys, Ish!

plumorchard on June 22, 2012 at 1:01 PM

so….mitts for amnesty and single payer. that leaves out muslims.hmmm…oh yeah, christies got that covered. maybe it’ll be him.

a hamas endorsement would be further icing on the cake.

renalin on June 22, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Patrick love these surveys, does this one merit a do over?

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 1:08 PM

I love these polls. I especially love all the people marking themselves as 7 on the fiscal conservative scale and then supporting Romney. Absolutely comedy gold.

besser tot als rot on June 22, 2012 at 1:12 PM

I love these polls. I especially love all the people marking themselves as 7 on the fiscal conservative scale and then supporting Romney. Absolutely comedy gold.
besser tot als rot on June 22, 2012 at 1:12 PM

haha, didn’t have to support Romney on this survey fortunately. Just his running mate.

eski502 on June 22, 2012 at 1:14 PM

I picked Rand Paul, but that’s just a long shot dream. Of the real contenders, I’m hoping for Jindal. Other slightly less preferred candidates are Rubio, Ryan, Daniels, Perry.

besser tot als rot on June 22, 2012 at 1:15 PM

haha, didn’t have to support Romney on this survey fortunately. Just his running mate.

eski502 on June 22, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Yeah, I know. Just brought back some nostalgic memories.

besser tot als rot on June 22, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Heck getting rid of Obama is the game changer.

Blank screen.

DanMan on June 22, 2012 at 1:17 PM

I am going to go with Allen West. I noticed Gov Rick Perry isn’t on the VP list. Rick Perry was running for President not sure why he’s excluded, but Pawlenty is included?

It’s not like a southern christian conservative Governor on the ticket would help Romney or anything like that/

Dr Evil on June 22, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Condoleezza Rice and there’s no way Romney will lose!

Conservative_Hippie on June 22, 2012 at 1:19 PM

Survey not submitting from my iPhone either.

Governor Snyder should be considered from MI. He might bring the state to the red column.

karenhasfreedom on June 22, 2012 at 1:22 PM

It’s blank again.

Dr Evil on June 22, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Cheney for VP!
Liz, that is.

Dexter_Alarius on June 22, 2012 at 1:24 PM

eski502 on June 22, 2012 at 12:48 PM

you know, that is`nt as insane as it seems at first, BUT can Manchin be trusted (uhhh then again, can ANY pol be trusted? duhhh).Romney could do worse I guess.

NY Conservative on June 22, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Big blank blank.

mythicknight on June 22, 2012 at 1:28 PM

I am black lesbian trapped in a guy’s body. Mitt must select me.

CoolAir on June 22, 2012 at 1:33 PM

One would think a self-proclaimed conservative site would employ people familiar with and knowledgable of the Constitution. Mr. Ishmael not only incorrectly thinks nullification is unconstitutional (it isn’t), but he is unaware of the 12th Amendment. Neither Jindal nor Rubio are Constitutionally eligible for VP; neither one is a natural born citizen.

Dante on June 22, 2012 at 1:36 PM

John Thune! Can’t believe he wasn’t even listed as a choice. If you want a ticket where both have experience while they look, sound, and act Presidential, Thune is on the short list.

If you are looking to play identity politics or choose someone because they are from a specific state, then we are no better then the Democrats.

weaselyone on June 22, 2012 at 1:36 PM

How come Dan Quayle isn’t offered as a choice?

Mark1971 on June 22, 2012 at 1:38 PM

John Thune! Can’t believe he wasn’t even listed as a choice. If you want a ticket where both have experience while they look, sound, and act Presidential, Thune is on the short list.

If you are looking to play identity politics or choose someone because they are from a specific state, then we are no better then the Democrats.

weaselyone on June 22, 2012 at 1:36 PM

He’s a generic conservative Republican with no noteworthy accomplishment after 7 years in the Senate besides looking presidential and a career politician who never had a job in the real world. That sort of undermines one of Romney’s campaign themes.

But I’m sure he’s on Romney’s short-list and being vetted (if only because he’s been such an early and dedicated supporter/surrogate to them).

joana on June 22, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Survey not working for me.

mechkiller_k on June 22, 2012 at 1:41 PM

One would think a self-proclaimed conservative site would employ people familiar with and knowledgable of the Constitution. Mr. Ishmael not only incorrectly thinks nullification is unconstitutional (it isn’t), but he is unaware of the 12th Amendment. Neither Jindal nor Rubio are Constitutionally eligible for VP; neither one is a natural born citizen.

Dante on June 22, 2012 at 1:36 PM

That’s more or less as correct as saying Sen. Taft’s foreign policy preferences were just like Ron Paul’s.

joana on June 22, 2012 at 1:42 PM

I think the pick will be McDonnell, Pawlenty, or Portman, but I’d like Jindal or Rubio.

El_Terrible on June 22, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Oh, and I can’t see the survey either. What kind of browser/OS are those able to see it using?

joana on June 22, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Jindal/West or ABR/West!

Pragmatic on June 22, 2012 at 1:43 PM

..I had 3 or 4 I would like…don’t give so many names.

KOOLAID2 on June 22, 2012 at 1:50 PM

You didn’t. Just pointing out that squishy rage which is only apparent against conservatives. Huntsman, right?

ddrintn on June 22, 2012 at 12:28 PM

JOOOOOOOOOOON HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUNTSMAAAAN!!!!!!!!!!

;-)

Abby Adams on June 22, 2012 at 1:50 PM

That’s more or less as correct as saying Sen. Taft’s foreign policy preferences were just like Ron Paul’s.

joana on June 22, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Taft was a proponent of non-interventionism.

Dante on June 22, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Condoleezza Rice and there’s no way Romney will lose!

Conservative_Hippie on June 22, 2012 at 1:19 PM

You are right, love her, but she is adamant she is not interested…besides waittill they’ll start the neocon BS! The paulistas will go banana over her pick…

jimver on June 22, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Jindal, but he has to work on his diction :)…he has every sine skill needed for VP…does anybody know id there’s a ‘deadline’ whereby Romney is expected to announce his VP…what’s the timeline we are looking at?

jimver on June 22, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Condoleezza Rice and there’s no way Romney will lose!

Rice is a left-leaning idiot. She was much of the force behind Bush’s idiotic veering leftwards and towards stupidity in his second term. She is AWFUL.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 22, 2012 at 2:07 PM

How come Dan Quayle isn’t offered as a choice?

Mark1971 on June 22, 2012 at 1:38 PM

Good point. His few gaffes aren’t nearly as outrageous as the dozens of gaffes Obama and Biden have made.

The Rogue Tomato on June 22, 2012 at 2:08 PM

That’s more or less as correct as saying Sen. Taft’s foreign policy preferences were just like Ron Paul’s.

joana on June 22, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Taft was a proponent of non-interventionism.

Dante on June 22, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Of course he was. And of nuking China during the Korean War too. Oh wait.

Learning history with Rothbard: the shortest path to ignorance.

joana on June 22, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Condoleezza Rice and there’s no way Romney will lose!

Rice is a left-leaning idiot. She was much of the force behind Bush’s idiotic veering leftwards and towards stupidity in his second term. She is AWFUL.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 22, 2012 at 2:07 PM

This is funny, most analysts consider her diplomacy as a continuation of the style of Kissinger and Baker. Not that they are/were my fave necessarily…II was not born yet when the first was a Secretary and just a child when the second was in office ….but If those two men are left -leaning (especially Kissinger) then I have nothing else to say :)…

jimver on June 22, 2012 at 2:26 PM

That 270 to Win site is pretty nifty.

I made Pennsylvania red. :)

PatriotGal2257 on June 22, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Of course he was. And of nuking China during the Korean War too. Oh wait.

Learning history with Rothbard: the shortest path to ignorance.

joana on June 22, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Taft didn’t advocate nuking China, but your comment means nothing regarding noninterventionism and even less without context.

Dante on June 22, 2012 at 2:31 PM

That 270 to Win site is pretty nifty.

I made Pennsylvania red. :)

PatriotGal2257 on June 22, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Awesome…

OmahaConservative on June 22, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Trust me, it’ll be a pick that will either cut himself further away from conservative support or kill us with boredom.

Belle on June 22, 2012 at 2:59 PM

I vote for the vanilla white blank screen candidate for VP.

Jindal should stay where he is. Not sure if he knows how to campaign. If he campaigns like Perry that is not good.

At least Mitt would guide the VP choice to not campaign Himself into single digits like a Perry.

SparkPlug on June 22, 2012 at 3:09 PM

Is there anyone from the Midwest that he could get some Hispanic or other minority help from so he would deflect the certain “RAYYYYYYYYYCIST” claims (and help alleviate the white guilt that drove some voters to Obama in ’08)?

I’ve often thot of Governor Brian Sandoval of Nevada. Last year, he was mentioned in some article about running for President.

http://www.briansandoval.com/brian

bluefox on June 22, 2012 at 3:12 PM

It should be Newt. Hands down the best except for his marital baggage.

Alan West.

That’s my final answer.

SparkPlug on June 22, 2012 at 3:14 PM

Dark horse pick: Sen. Ron Johnson from Wisconsin.

TedInATL on June 22, 2012 at 3:18 PM

This is funny, most analysts consider her diplomacy as a continuation of the style of Kissinger and Baker

I could care less for Baker and I really don’t give a flying f–k what “most analysts” say. I saw her as SecState. I don’t need to refer to any analyst to know what she is. I saw her asinine, ridiculous, and lefty policy and I also saw how she helped to push the Bush 2nd term way left (though that is ultimately Bush’s responsibility).

If you don’t know what you’re talking about then don’t try to hide behind “most analysts”.

Baker was an arabist, BTW, and Bush Sr. was the worst foreign policy President the GOP ever put up. Bush Sr. was total and incredible sh!t. His reaction to the fall of the Soviet Union was to empower the UN. WHat a dumbsh!t. That was one of the worst diplomatic moves in all of human history, as the UN is an extremely dangerous and insidious organization that never should have been empowered and should have been put to sleep when the USSR fell.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 22, 2012 at 3:20 PM

jindal and rubio NOT qualified! I REPEAT…NOT qualified. Mitch Daniels got a job. Will it be rino/rino or rino/conservative? If it’s rino/rino it is obamaromaplenty. If it is rino conservative it should be romney/Sarah.

Mr. Sun on June 22, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Most of the day I couldn’t even see the survey. Now I can see it but the submit button doesn’t work.

This is a bad omen for google, as docs just can’t handle the load. It’s not ready for prime time, my friends.

My pick is easy: Condi Rice

She clearly gives Mitt the best chance to beat Downgrade.

shanimal on June 22, 2012 at 3:26 PM

I agree with weasleyone. John Thune.
Conservative, first senator to endorse Romney, took Daschle to the woodshed in ’04. Only 51, and stands 6’4. Looks like a combination of Kennedy and Lincoln. Been in the senate and the house for 14 years. From a small state but how about Biden (Delaware) and Cheney (Wyoming). In this case size does not matter.
Yeah, I cannot believe some of the names that are on that VP list.
It will be Thune. Take it to the bank…..

Rapskins on June 22, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Patrick, I may have voted more than once. The whole web site is acting screwy today. Sorry. Do Over?

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 3:49 PM

As much as I hate identity politics, the Asian Indian population is exploding. That being said:

“Rhodes scholar; secretary of his state’s Department of Health and Hospitals at age 25; president of the nine-campus, 80,000-student University of Louisiana system at age 28; assistant secretary of the federal Department of Health and Human Services at 30; congressman at 33; governor at 36; and re-elected last year in a 10-way race with a stunning 66 percent of the vote.”

mike_NC9 on June 22, 2012 at 4:06 PM

Condoleezza Rice and there’s no way Romney will lose!

Conservative_Hippie on June 22, 2012 at 1:19 PM

You are right, love her, but she is adamant she is not interested…besides waittill they’ll start the neocon BS! The paulistas will go banana over her pick…

jimver on June 22, 2012 at 2:03 PM


Well, it’s nice day and the ledge looks inviting so …

My choice because I expect her to be on Romney’s short list:

Condoleeaz Rice

and if Romney asks, she will say yes.

Let’s break down the nuts & bolts of it

She has the foreign policy cred Romney lacks and needs on the ticket. It may all be “It’s the economy, stupid” right now … but that can change in a heart beat (Syria, Iran, Egypt, Israel, China, Russia, etc).

She has been in the White House before and tied into the National Security apparatus. What she does not know off the top of her head would take her 15 mninutes to get up to speed on after her first classified briefing.

She blunts, if not outright trumps, the Race card because she is not an “identity politics” selection but the “head and shoulders above the rest” selection for foreign policy credentials compared to the rest of the list. Being an African American woman of no small accomplishments – there are going to be African American voters deeply unhappy of the gay marriage evolution who would have a reason to vote for Romney. There are a lot of women who will see ANOTHER man being selected as VP as an absolute glass ceiling.

Condoleeza Rice debating Joe Biden on any topic is as close to re-enacting Christians (Biden) being fed to lions as you are ever likely to see on your television. It would be a bloodbath.

I could go on but I’ll save more for later.

Right now, Romney 316; Obama 222

PolAgnostic on June 22, 2012 at 4:17 PM

She has the foreign policy cred Romney lacks and needs on the ticket. It may all be “It’s the economy, stupid” right now … but that can change in a heart beat (Syria, Iran, Egypt, Israel, China, Russia, etc).

She has been in the White House before and tied into the National Security apparatus. What she does not know off the top of her head would take her 15 mninutes to get up to speed on after her first classified briefing.

She blunts, if not outright trumps, the Race card because she is not an “identity politics” selection but the “head and shoulders above the rest” selection for foreign policy credentials compared to the rest of the list. Being an African American woman of no small accomplishments – there are going to be African American voters deeply unhappy of the gay marriage evolution who would have a reason to vote for Romney. There are a lot of women who will see ANOTHER man being selected as VP as an absolute glass ceiling.

Condoleeza Rice debating Joe Biden on any topic is as close to re-enacting Christians (Biden) being fed to lions as you are ever likely to see on your television. It would be a bloodbath.

I could go on but I’ll save more for later.

Right now, Romney 316; Obama 222

PolAgnostic on June 22, 2012 at 4:17 PM

ii believe so too, most of shat tou wrote there, I am less optimistic than you though that she’d accept it, if offered to her..as for Condi debating Biden, can you imagine that ???? …..If I were Biden I’d simply decline to participate, and declare inability to raise to the task of debating Condi :)….

jimver on June 22, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Of course he was. And of nuking China during the Korean War too. Oh wait.

Learning history with Rothbard: the shortest path to ignorance.

joana on June 22, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Taft didn’t advocate nuking China, but your comment means nothing regarding noninterventionism and even less without context.

Dante on June 22, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Yes, he did. We’ve already gone through this. Do you want those links again? Apparently you’re dishonest to the point of blatantly lying.

Two days later, Senator Taft attacked what he called Truman’s “appeasement of the Chinese.” This appeasement, he said, “makes a larger war more likely in the future.” Taft spoke in favor of bombing China and helping Chiang Kai-shek’s forces invade the mainland.

Truman’s dismissal of General Douglas MacArthur in April led Taft to change his mind yet again. Now he joined MacArthur in advocating the use of Chiang Kai-Shek’s Nationalist Chinese troops in Korea and employing “every possible means to drive the Chinese Communists from Korea.” Withdrawing U.S. troops, he wrote to a friend in June, would result in Korea becoming “100 per cent Communist,” and might lead to a communist takeover of Japan. This latest shift flabbergasted his critics. Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., charged that Taft and his allies were using MacArthur as “protective coloration” to give themselves “an air of deep concern with the outside world.” Richard Rovere agreed; it was, he claimed, “astonishing…to find Taft, who voted against the North Atlantic Treaty and the dispatch of troops to Western Europe, eager to form an alliance with the Kuomintang junta.

http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/dialogue/moser.html

Taft said he had favored Gen. MacArthur’s plan for extending the Korean hostilities to include the bombing of Manchuria

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2229&dat=19520302&id=QuEyAAAAIBAJ&sjid=cwAGAAAAIBAJ&pg=2262,865278

Books like America’s Response to China: A History of Sino-American Relations, Kirk’s biography or Richard Rovere’s “What’s happened to Taft?”

How ignorant do you need to be of history to not even know that Taft invited MacArthur, a crazy interventionist, to be on his prospective ticket as Vice-President?

Well, ignorant enough to buy the Rothbardian fables Paul sells you.

And stop with the laughable “well, you just don’t know what non-interventionism is” tactic. Non-interventionism is the other side of the coin of hawkish interventionism. Both are ideological and unconservative foreign policy.

No surprise the same folks who believe Rothbard’s complete fabrications of history also are birthers. Let me guess: you’re also an Alex Jones fan.

joana on June 22, 2012 at 4:35 PM

Rice is a left-leaning idiot. She was much of the force behind Bush’s idiotic veering leftwards and towards stupidity in his second term. She is AWFUL.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 22, 2012 at 2:07 PM

As if Bush’s first term was any better. Heck, his worst policies – NCLB and the Medicare bribe – were arguably in the first term.

I don’t like Rice, but at least she isn’t an incompetent fool like Donald “McCain is wrong, no surge is needed” Rumsfeld.

joana on June 22, 2012 at 4:38 PM

i believe so too, most of what you wrote there, I am less optimistic than you though that she’d accept it, if offered to her..as for Condi debating Biden, can you imagine that ???? …..If I were Biden I’d simply decline to participate, and declare inability to raise to the task of debating Condi :)….

jimver on June 22, 2012 at 4:32 PM


Condi Rice has a severe case of conscience.

If Romney makes the case that SHE can be a transformative person who is in the right place at the right time to help her country and the world …

… she would have to give in and serve again.

Look at the list above. Is there anyone else who is anywhere near her level on foreign policy?

I’ll make another prediction. If Romney asks and she agrees to be his VP … global economic markets will spike sharply upwards for the next 24 hours following the announcement.

It is also easy to visualize Romney actually doing what others have only paid lip service to before:

Have her as VP head the day-to-day foreign policy/national security teams & meetings.

Romney is used to delegating authority while maintaining oversight & control. Condi Rice would be able to fill that “working VP” slot.

LOL – the debates … Biden would be well advised to cancel due to “heart problems” whether there is just one or ten.

WTH, it’s Friday. One more prediction: If Romeny chooses Condi Rice before the Democratic convention … Joe Biden will remove his name from consideration for a second term as VP.

PolAgnostic on June 22, 2012 at 4:49 PM

This is funny, most analysts consider her diplomacy as a continuation of the style of Kissinger and Baker

I could care less for Baker and I really don’t give a flying f–k what “most analysts” say. I saw her as SecState. I don’t need to refer to any analyst to know what she is. I saw her asinine, ridiculous, and lefty policy and I also saw how she helped to push the Bush 2nd term way left (though that is ultimately Bush’s responsibility).

If you don’t know what you’re talking about then don’t try to hide behind “most analysts”.

Baker was an arabist, BTW, and Bush Sr. was the worst foreign policy President the GOP ever put up. Bush Sr. was total and incredible sh!t. His reaction to the fall of the Soviet Union was to empower the UN. WHat a dumbsh!t. That was one of the worst diplomatic moves in all of human history, as the UN is an extremely dangerous and insidious organization that never should have been empowered and should have been put to sleep when the USSR fell.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 22, 2012 at 3:20 PM

Hmmm, you have managed in one wide sweep to dismiss all US foreign policy from Nixon, via Reagan (Baker served on Reagan’s National Security too, before becoming Secr of State under Bush Sr) and to ghe two Bushes…riiight….They should have consulted you re: their picks all this while…BTW, is Kissinger an Arabist too? :)… As for Bush Sr, care to enlarge, what on earth are you even talking about when you say he empowered the UN…how exactly did he do that?…he was ambassador to the UN long before he was even a VP, but what’s that even got to do with it…As for he UN, let’s get serious, it has no power, you can rant all day long, but the truth is it was so designed in purpose, with the Security Council and all so that they will never agree on anything, they are safely locked in there, therefore reducing the UN body to posturing and kabuki…WTO is the only intl organization with real power and leverage, UN is a midget by comparison…sure, it’s legit to get angry at their idiotic and not so subtle attempts at power grab every now and then, like for sintance their ridiculous highjacking the socialist envrion nuts agendas and trying to give it all some intl legitimacy, but they failed at that too, and I mean epic fail…rememebr the IPCC panel scandal and all…so, no, am not buying your argument, but sure you are entitled to your own opinion..

jimver on June 22, 2012 at 4:52 PM

Rice is a left-leaning idiot. She was much of the force behind Bush’s idiotic veering leftwards and towards stupidity in his second term. She is AWFUL.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 22, 2012 at 2:07 PM

As if Bush’s first term was any better. Heck, his worst policies – NCLB and the Medicare bribe – were arguably in the first term.

I don’t like Rice, but at least she isn’t an incompetent fool like Donald “McCain is wrong, no surge is needed” Rumsfeld.

joana on June 22, 2012 at 4:38 PM

Rumsfeld comparison came to mind too when I was thinking about the skills and that bit of fresh air that RIce brought to Bush’s second therm…what an arrogant, clueless idiot this Rumsfeld, at least he acted like one..

jimver on June 22, 2012 at 5:01 PM


Henceforward and forevermore, let it be known …

Romeny = Romney

… which is why it is amusing when I am accused of being a Mitt-bot because I type his name wrong ALLLLLLLL the time

PolAgnostic on June 22, 2012 at 5:08 PM

LOL – the debates … Biden would be well advised to cancel due to “heart problems” whether there is just one or ten.

WTH, it’s Friday. One more prediction: If Romeny chooses Condi Rice before the Democratic convention … Joe Biden will remove his name from consideration for a second term as VP.

PolAgnostic on June 22, 2012 at 4:49 PM

We would be looking at a hillary/ rice debate then :)…now, that would be interesting, while hillary does not raise to condi’s level by any stretch, at least she is not brain dead like good ole Joe..

jimver on June 22, 2012 at 5:08 PM

Thanks for doing the work for this, Patrick.

And no to Condi Rice. She’s pro-abortion. I didn’t like her treatment of Israel, and I think Bush listened to her on foreign policy more in his second term than Cheney, which was a mistake.

It also opens things up to more Blame Bush tactics by Obama.

If Romney’s policy is do no harm on his Veep pick, then it’s not going to be Condi.

INC on June 22, 2012 at 5:10 PM

It also opens things up to more Blame Bush tactics by Obama.

If Romney’s policy is do no harm on his Veep pick, then it’s not going to be Condi.

INC on June 22, 2012 at 5:10 PM

I like her a lot, but I agree she will probably not be under consideration coz of the ‘more of the same, more Boooosh’ vulnerability…

jimver on June 22, 2012 at 5:15 PM

I hope that lots of folks like me lied on all their answers!

MJBrutus on June 22, 2012 at 5:16 PM

Jindal, but he has to work on his diction :)…he has every sine skill needed for VP…does anybody know id there’s a ‘deadline’ whereby Romney is expected to announce his VP…what’s the timeline we are looking at?

jimver on June 22, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Well it has to be before the convention. There is no floor as to how early it can be done, but Romney is a by-the-book sort of campaigner, so there is no reason to think it won’t be in August as is usually the case.

The London Olympics end Sunday, August 12 and my belief is Romney the pick sometime early that following week. It will bring the campaign back to the forefront of casual voters’ minds, and hopefully with a narrative that favors him (assuming he makes a good pick.) Executed well he can ride the boost to the convention two weeks later.

Gingotts on June 22, 2012 at 5:26 PM

I hope that lots of folks like me lied on all their answers!

MJBrutus on June 22, 2012 at 5:16 PM

:)

jimver on June 22, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Well it has to be before the convention. There is no floor as to how early it can be done, but Romney is a by-the-book sort of campaigner, so there is no reason to think it won’t be in August as is usually the case.

The London Olympics end Sunday, August 12 and my belief is Romney the pick sometime early that following week. It will bring the campaign back to the forefront of casual voters’ minds, and hopefully with a narrative that favors him (assuming he makes a good pick.) Executed well he can ride the boost to the convention two weeks later.

Gingotts on June 22, 2012 at 5:26 PM

Thanks, I was wondering…

jimver on June 22, 2012 at 5:33 PM

If the pick a person that’s not a natural born citizen ( see Vattel) I’m looking at Gary Johnson. :-(

bill glass on June 22, 2012 at 5:59 PM

And stop with the laughable “well, you just don’t know what non-interventionism is” tactic. Non-interventionism is the other side of the coin of hawkish interventionism. Both are ideological and unconservative foreign policy.

No surprise the same folks who believe Rothbard’s complete fabrications of history also are birthers. Let me guess: you’re also an Alex Jones fan.

joana on June 22, 2012 at 4:35 PM

Okay.

You’re still a pistol.

But bravo.

hawkdriver on June 22, 2012 at 6:02 PM

INC on June 22, 2012 at 5:10 PM

Exactly.

pannw on June 22, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Thanks Patrick..Should be interesting results!..:)

Dire Straits on June 22, 2012 at 6:26 PM

And no to Condi Rice. She’s pro-abortion. I didn’t like her treatment of Israel, and I think Bush listened to her on foreign policy more in his second term than Cheney, which was a mistake.

It also opens things up to more Blame Bush tactics by Obama.

If Romney’s policy is do no harm on his Veep pick, then it’s not going to be Condi.

INC on June 22, 2012 at 5:10 PM

Let’s take the abortion litmus test first and throw it out.

Its day has passed. The law of the land for the last 2+ generations has been legal abortion on demand.

I am not asking anyone to like it or agree with it. It is time to face reality and focus on the achieveable.

With respect to Israel and Condi Rice; after four years of Obama and Hilary, I think the Israelis would be overjoyed to deal with Condi Rice again.

With respect to her foreign policy approach – she has had four years to mature and reflect, they may be more to your liking now.

My biggest question for you, laying aside the items mentioned above, is who else covers as many bases as the VP pick as she does?

My focus is first, last and always on winning.

My second focus is on governing. Anyone wanting to be elected President this year is going to have to answer, “How will you govern?”

Because four years of “I won” and “Present” have the bulk of Americans furious with everyone.

PolAgnostic on June 22, 2012 at 6:30 PM

kingsjester on June 22, 2012 at 12:18 PM

You know how Obama wants to transform America?

Jindal is transforming Louisiana.

Education reform is just his latest conquest in a state that desperately needed transforming:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuDoIXauKys

itsnotaboutme on June 22, 2012 at 12:18 PM

I truly admire if not outright love Bobby Jindal (and his wife, they have a wonderful familial statement together)…

BUT HE’S doing a very difficult but necessary thing in that state and it’s going to have wonderful repurcussions nationwide, especially in previously DNC-Socialist dominated educational areas. The important ramifications to our nation’s future from such changes as Jindal is working toward should never be undervalued or overlooked.

Lourdes on June 22, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Romney 390
Obama 148

hawkdriver on June 22, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Heh heh heh, that was my projection as well… ;)

SWalker on June 22, 2012 at 12:25 PM

I TRIED to be conservative (as in, understated) and estimated Romney at “380″ so we were close.

Lourdes on June 22, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Ed Morrissey on June 22, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Ed, if you are still on thread and see this, none of this works on an iPad. And this week an issue with java, HA and iPad devices has started. Is the site tinkering, is that why there is a problem?

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Whattheheck IS it with java?! I’ve had more problems with java on every single computing device I’ve ever used over the years. Get it right or replace the dratted thing.

Lourdes on June 22, 2012 at 7:54 PM

PolAgnostic on June 22, 2012 at 6:30 PM

You can throw the abortion ‘litmus test’ out if you want. It’s a free country, for the time being. However, you can consider my vote thrown out with it, and I will wager mine isn’t the only one. You may not care about the millions of legally butchered unborn babies our government has allowed, and often paid for, but I do. I’m just coming to the point where I can see myself switching the lever for Mr. $50 abortions Romney. If he spits in my face and picks a pro-abortion VP, he will never see my vote. EVER…

There are a fair few good candidates he can pick who are solidly pro-life. He dam* well better pick one of them.

pannw on June 22, 2012 at 8:10 PM

Romney 390
Obama 148

hawkdriver on June 22, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Heh heh heh, that was my projection as well… ;)

SWalker on June 22, 2012 at 12:25 PM

I TRIED to be conservative (as in, understated) and estimated Romney at “380″ so we were close.

Lourdes on June 22, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Those aren’t estimates.

They’re wishful thinking outbursts.

I can’t even figure out what you crazies did to get to those numbers.

My ceiling right now for Romney is 338: McCain states + IN + NC + VA + FL + NV + CO + OH + PA + NH + WI + MI + IA + ME cd-2

I guess one could add OR in a super-optimistic scenario, but which other state do you think Romney will win?

joana on June 22, 2012 at 8:26 PM

joana on June 22, 2012 at 4:35 PM

Where in your post does it say Taft proposed nuking the Chinese, which is what you claimed?

Nowhere.

Dante on June 22, 2012 at 8:39 PM

Additionally, Taft’s position on China had everything to do with their involvement against us in the Korean War. Context is key.

Dante on June 22, 2012 at 8:42 PM

It seemed to take my responses, but never acknowledged them.

Er, twice…and no, I’m not a dem!

Who is John Galt on June 22, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Heck getting rid of Obama is the game changer.

Blank screen.

DanMan on June 22, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Can we hack this code into the TOTUS?

Delicious irony, blank screen for Zero to Umm….Umm….Umm… his way through.

Who is John Galt on June 22, 2012 at 8:49 PM

Whattheheck IS it with java?! I’ve had more problems with java on every single computing device I’ve ever used over the years. Get it right or replace the dratted thing.

Lourdes on June 22, 2012 at 7:54 PM

Java is the reason I quit programming after 25+ years.

They update it all the time, it’s a moving target with no concept of “stable version for a year or two”.

Not to mention Java Programmers. They’re psychotic…they want to update it all the time ;)

My #1 criterion for “good software”: It Works. We can make it “elegant” or “pretty” or “use the newest cool stuff” later, as long as It Works.

Who is John Galt on June 22, 2012 at 9:01 PM

Where in your post does it say Taft proposed nuking the Chinese, which is what you claimed?

Nowhere.

Dante on June 22, 2012 at 8:39 PM

Haha, you’re beyond redemption. I even linked to a newspaper article from 60 years ago in which he says exactly that himself.

All you needed to know was some basic history.

joana on June 22, 2012 at 9:12 PM

Additionally, Taft’s position on China had everything to do with their involvement against us in the Korean War. Context is key.

Dante on June 22, 2012 at 8:42 PM

Oh, now you admit his position was not quite RonPaulian?

And sure, context is key.

Except for fanatical “non-interventionists” and “interventionist neoconservatives” to which context, circumstances are always irrelevant and all it matters is their ideological view.

Or are you saying that according to Ron Paul non-interventionist principles the Korean War was legitimate? Is that what you’re saying? Warning: I read more Rothbard and Ron Paul than you ever will.

joana on June 22, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Thanks, Patrick. Love these.

Elisa on June 22, 2012 at 9:23 PM

I picked Jindal.

After Jindal, I would go with Santorum or Pawlenty. A few others I like alot, but wouldn’t pick them this time for VP for one reason or another.

I like Paul Ryan just as much as Jindal for VP and as a future President, but he is desperately needed in the Congress to lead in a Romney administration. Guts, initiative, follow through, effectiveness and intelligence are rare qualities in a congressman.

Ryan is all of these, as is Jindal as Governor. Same with Scott Walker; needed where he is to finish his job. Good for a future Pres pick.

Elisa on June 22, 2012 at 9:27 PM

Of course I shouldn’t even think about who I’d like as VP, no less mention any names.

My support is the kiss of death. lol

Just look at my list of nominees for Pres. Palin, Perry, Cain, Santorum.

Elisa on June 22, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3