Yes, Rob Portman is going to be Romney’s VP
Romney has other options. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is bold and blunt—two things Romney will never be. Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels is highly regarded but has said he’s uninterested in national office. Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell is said to be a Romney fave, but his recent signing of a law mandating invasive procedures for Virginia women seeking an abortion would highlight social issues. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal might be a good choice, if he’s upped his game from his 2009 response to the State of the Union address, which he apparently did in character as Kenneth the Page from 30 Rock.
And so, by process of elimination, we circle back to Portman. He’s from Ohio, the quintessential swing state, where he consistently won his southern Ohio House district with 70 percent of the vote. In his 2010 campaign for Senate he outspent his opponent 9-to-1, garnering 57 percent of the vote and carrying 82 of his state’s 88 counties. Impressive. He has executive experience as well, having served George W. Bush as budget director. There’s a big downside there: it was Bush’s budgets that turned history’s biggest surpluses into history’s biggest deficits, mostly by cutting taxes for the rich and bogging us down in endless wars. Romney, whose agenda focuses on still more tax breaks for the rich and who opposed Obama’s withdrawal from Iraq, could be painted as a man determined to drag us backward. As Obama strategist David Axelrod has said, Romney “sees the world through the rear-view mirror. He watches Mad Men and thinks it’s the evening news.”











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
Or, conversely, Portman’s not conservative enough to have the squishes nipping at his heels and parsing every syllable and calling it a gaffe.
ddrintn on April 9, 2012 at 9:33 PM
Wow!Wow! This should really excite the base!
Another white! YAH
Another Senator! YAH!
A real “Swing Independent” MAGNET! YAH!!
And to think….no one knows who the hell he is!! YAAAH!
WTHATT!!??
katy on April 9, 2012 at 9:36 PM
And not nearly as valuable. ; )
Bmore on April 9, 2012 at 9:36 PM
If Romney really is concerned about a VP that can step in and take over on day one Jindal is the perfect choice. Honestly, Portman would be the worst choice I can imagine. Bush’s budget guy? Are you kidding? The media is going to unload on whoever we put up. Why give them a sitting duck the size of Mitt’s mansion.
AmeriCuda on April 9, 2012 at 9:37 PM
Finally, a choice that shows guts, imagination, and intelligence. If not McChrystal, something along his line is the best possible choice for Romney’s VP.
That’s my choice, too. The liberal base would go nuts. General Betray Us, Again! And how could Obama go after Petreus without criticizing himself?
Mr. Arkadin on April 9, 2012 at 9:37 PM
I completely agree with this post. I would be STUNNED if Romney picked Bush’s budget director. Jindal is indeed the perfect pick. He checks every single box, except the swing state one.
GOPRanknFile on April 9, 2012 at 9:40 PM
I hear you..
Dire Straits on April 9, 2012 at 9:41 PM
I thought Ed said L4L wouldn’t be back…?
thirtyandseven on April 9, 2012 at 9:41 PM
It would seem that OH, FL, and VA are the real battlegrounds this year. And Obama is ahead in each right now. OH is +8 for Obama according to Rasmussen.
Buckshot Bill on April 9, 2012 at 9:42 PM
But wow, is Romney weak or what? I don’t recall all this speculation about McCain’s VP pick this early, and McCain was a pretty weak candidate in his own right.
ddrintn on April 9, 2012 at 9:43 PM
Ouch.
ddrintn on April 9, 2012 at 9:44 PM
Romney is unelectable.
Forget the presidency, Romney is a sure loser. Let’s concentrate on retaking the Senate and then hope the GOP nominates a conservatives in 2016.
Norwegian on April 9, 2012 at 9:47 PM
I have no idea who Rob Portman is but I do know who Paul Begala is. And I’m not terribly interested in hearing any more.
Dirt McGirt on April 9, 2012 at 9:48 PM
Wishful thinking on the democats’ part.
SouthernGent on April 9, 2012 at 9:48 PM
As soon as Romney dropped out at CPAC, I remember the speculation about whether McCain would choose Romney as VP. As soon as a candidate seems to be the presumptive nominee, the speculation begins whether he/she is seen as strong or weak.
Also, let’s not forget the scenarios are slightly different. When McCain was the presumptive nominee, the Dems were still battling it out so even if there was a dearth of VP speculation, it was because they were waiting on the outcome of the Dems’ race to see what weaknesses to exploit (Hillary made quite a charge at the end).
GOPRanknFile on April 9, 2012 at 9:48 PM
That is the typical claptrap but it removes things from their context.
When George W. Bush took office the economy was melting down from the dot-com bubble. 9 months after he took office we were attacked on 9/11 and shortly after that an antrax attack.
Our economy came to a screeching halt. The travel industry was pretty much dead. The budget surpluses were generated by fantastic amounts of alternative minimum tax from the dot-com bubble. That bubble burst in March of 2009 when the NASDAQ started to tank and people started taking huge capital losses. Those capital losses wiped out any capital gains in 2009 and were carried forward for several years.
The economy was in very rough shape in the first three quarters of 2001 and worsening.
The tax cuts along with interest rate cuts were absolutely required to keep the economy limping along.
The economic meltdown we are in NOW was forecast as early as 2001 by the Bush administration. In 2001 they began to argue for closer regulation of the GSEs. That lasted all the way until 2005 when McCain introduced legislation in the Senate to more closely regulate the GSEs but the Senate Democrats would not support it for the cloture it needed to come to a vote.
crosspatch on April 9, 2012 at 9:50 PM
But all in all, Portman is not a bad choice for VP. His voting record is more conservative than Santorum’s.
crosspatch on April 9, 2012 at 9:50 PM
He is not as weak as Palin and he is beating the rest.
CW on April 9, 2012 at 9:52 PM
He has 5 choices in my opinion.
1. Ryan has advanced a vision that is the alternative to liberalism and would inspire conservatives and show the nation Romney want to fix problems. He helps with Wisconsin.
2. West brings a lot of what Ryan does because he’s supported the Ryanplan. He brings his military experience, diversity and helps with Florida.
3. Fortuno helps with the Hispanic vote, is a governor who’s shown how conservatism is effective, but being from PR doesn’t necessarily help with a state or region.
4 Jindal helps with the South, helps with energy, helps healthcare.
5. Condi Rice is still well liked despite Bush connection,, brings diversity, is brilliant, and if things happen with Iran in the next few months she might be the only choice.
All five would be great in a debate with Biden. I hope he picks Ryan.
cpaulus on April 9, 2012 at 9:52 PM
Exactly. Atlanta itself is already pretty blue so we better have someone who can win the suburbs or we’re in trouble.
alchemist19 on April 9, 2012 at 9:54 PM
Indeed. Romney does better than Newt and Santorum in a matchup against Obama.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/ga/georgia_romney_vs_obama-2150.html
GOPRanknFile on April 9, 2012 at 9:57 PM
What convinced you he’s going to pick Palin?
Basilsbest on April 9, 2012 at 10:01 PM
So weak, that they are about to get him in first round….
“So I started asking people: ‘Why do you have Swiss bank account?’ One, you believe the Swiss Franc is a stronger currency than the United States dollar. And that is apparently the decision the Romney family made during the Bush presidency. And secondly, you want to conceal something. You want to hide something. Why would you have a Swiss bank account instead of one in the United States? I would like to … ask the press to really press some of these questions, the obvious questions. When is the last time a presidential candidate for the United States had a Swiss bank account? I think the answer is never.”
Danm….
Can.I.be.in.the.middle on April 9, 2012 at 10:23 PM
The incomparable Michael Barone at RCP on Mitt’s strengths and weaknesses and what he needs to do. Yes Virginia, there is a world out there beyond the angry and ignorant rants of angryed and ddrintn.
Basilsbest on April 9, 2012 at 10:27 PM
Yes, if you ask the right question, the answer is never. Romney has throughout captured the vote of the best educated (and smartest).
Regrettably, people who have no doubt that they are conservatives are now thinking like liberals.
Basilsbest on April 9, 2012 at 10:36 PM
Either you are an Obamabot who in the tradition of the paranoid style, like every other liberal nowadays, sees conspiracy around every corner, or you are just desperate. Rich people have Swiss bank accounts because Swiss banks are incredibly secure. Hundreds of banks in the U S have collapsed. This is just a lame attempt by Obama to try and get the focus off his failure of a presidency by doing what he does best: demagoguing. If the best Obama can do is he has a Swiss bank account, it’s gonna be a long campaign.
cpaulus on April 9, 2012 at 10:36 PM
So, this guy eliminates a small handful of the dozens of possible VP choices Romney could pick, and asserts that this definitively proves Romney must pick Portman? Look, while there is much to appreciate about Portman, Romney has plenty of time to make his decision, and has far more people he could choose from than outlined above.
My sense, Romney is going to wait until the primary is completely and utterly sown up, will see where he needs the most help when we’ve fully moved into General Election mode, and then make his decision then.
If the economy takes a turn and Romney stands to win easily, then yes I could see him picking Portman. Portman is a low-risk option, he doesn’t help Romney as much but he cannot hurt him as much either. If Romney is running behind however, I would expect him to accept a slightly riskier VP.
This is why I’m not getting too involved in the Veepstakes just yet. Neither Bush or McCain chose their VP’s until the summer, and I don’t expect Romney to make an announcement any sooner than that. Between now and then, a LOT could change, so we just cannot know yet.
WolvenOne on April 9, 2012 at 10:37 PM
katy on April 9, 2012 at 9:36 PM
I was going to simply say “How exciting”; thanks katy.
Schadenfreude on April 9, 2012 at 10:48 PM
I’m saying Susana Martinez or Portman.
Vanilla Salt on April 9, 2012 at 11:17 PM
Natalie Portman has a better chance.
Need a Western governor or a known figure like Ryan or Rubio.
A “Who?” candidate won’t help.
profitsbeard on April 9, 2012 at 11:34 PM
Someone from Ohio would be a good strategic pick and frankly, Portman looks pretty good from his voting record. The man is pretty conservative.
crosspatch on April 10, 2012 at 1:13 AM
THE US needs conservatives with military experience in the White House….NOT a another pair of HO-HUMs!
ABR/West 2012
or
Perry/West 2012
Pragmatic on April 10, 2012 at 2:08 AM
Palin/West 2012. None of the party boss establishment b.s. Romney/Portman makes me want to puke. Conservatives don’t want it. What has Rob Portman done beside add a half trillion in debt the 13 month or so he was at OMB.The insiders suck. It is time for a Conservative Revolution! F- the party bosses! F- the GOP establishment. F- Mitt Romney. F- Karl Rove. F- Reince Priebus.
CoolChange80 on April 10, 2012 at 2:22 AM
Palin/West will work too!
Pragmatic on April 10, 2012 at 3:13 AM
Mittens/Bobbins 2012!
Buckshot Bill on April 10, 2012 at 3:49 AM
Palin’s irrelevant at this point. It’s Romney who’s been talked up for nearly 4 years now as the world-beater, not Palin.
ddrintn on April 10, 2012 at 7:24 AM
That’s a bit different from searching for a VP nominee to help drag a weak candidate over the finish line. This stuff has been going on in Romney’s case for months now already.
ddrintn on April 10, 2012 at 7:25 AM
But just for the fun of it, I’ll bet Palin, if she had run, wouldn’t still be having to run ads against Rick Santorum right now.
ddrintn on April 10, 2012 at 7:37 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2