Who should Romney choose as VP candidate? Options

[Tex]

I bet you thought I would say Perry

[southsider2k5]

I bet you thought I would say Perry

I was thinking exactly that. Then I thought "He did that on purpose". (IMG:style_emoticons/default/lolhitting.gif)

[caulfield12]

Sarah Palin picked Allen West, that's enough of a reason to think it would flop, just on that endorsement alone.

Having a Tea Party favorite isn't going to help much, because those people were always going to vote against Obama anyway and it's not like he has the magnetism of a Rubio to get people excited about him as a personality in and of itself.

[Balta1701]

Rubio says he's out. Somehow doubt they'd go for a Bush right now. Christie, I hate to say it, but his weight will be an image issue. He's also a little brash.

They all have to say they're out right now...they can't actively campaign for the position while they have another job. The end result of that would be them losing both their current job and losing the VP spot. Everyone knows he's a candidate...the real question will be whether he turns it down if asked after vetting. Ditto Haley, from SC.

I think it'll be Rubio...unless there's a private deal already struck.

[Balta1701]

Bold: No, he isn't...not in any circumstance, not ever. Obama is a heavyweight debater and orator, in the same division of the likes of Reagan. Biden, meanwhile, belongs in Dan Quayle's division.

Obama is a solid orator...but he isn't great off the cuff, and despite a lot of preparation...debates are all about off the cuff. He can go into policy details and he takes his time formulating a statement because of that...and honestly, debates aren't about that, they're about reinforcing your talking points and repeating them as many times as you can. Pausing, taking time, and illustrating detailed policy proposals is terrible TV. We don't elect guys like that, we want them to say what they have to say then get down to drinkin' beer with us.

No one has made headway in any debate this year with policy. Policy has only sabotaged people (Rick Perry trying to defend actual humane actions towards immigrants, for example).

[Y2HH]

Obama is a solid orator...but he isn't great off the cuff, and despite a lot of preparation...debates are all about off the cuff. He can go into policy details and he takes his time formulating a statement because of that...and honestly, debates aren't about that, they're about reinforcing your talking points and repeating them as many times as you can. Pausing, taking time, and illustrating detailed policy proposals is terrible TV. We don't elect guys like that, we want them to say what they have to say then get down to drinkin' beer with us.

No one has made headway in any debate this year with policy. Policy has only sabotaged people (Rick Perry trying to defend actual humane actions towards immigrants, for example).

But IMO, that's what makes Obama is a good modern debater...they don't actually "debate" much anymore. Obama does tend to stutter his point when put on the spot, but he has a good speaking voice, so he's not annoying to listen too. In modern debates, they can ask a question, and they often ignore whatever question it was and just reinforce an unrelated talking point or respond to an opponents previous point, despite the debate having moved onto a new subject. I guess you could say Obama isn't very good at old school debates, or debates where the moderators keep things on track, but they don't really exist anymore...more often than not the moderators have little to no control. It's more or less come down to being able to articulate/sound intelligent. And Obama is very good at that.

In actual debate presence, coupled with the ability to speak off the cuff, I've not seen anyone come close to Reagan in my lifetime, but of modern candidates, Obama is better than anyone that's tried.

** It's also possible that I only view Obama as a good debater because of the modern competition he's gone up against are that much worse. Just thinking of some debaters in recent years...Bush Jr. (not against Obama, but still), McCain, "Not Bill" Clinton,...the hodgepodge of republican candidates today. This is also probably why people believe Biden is a good debater...he was up against Palin...so of course he looked godly in comparison.

This post has been edited by Y2HH: Apr 6, 2012 -> 07:19 AM

[Tex]

I was thinking exactly that. Then I thought "He did that on purpose". (IMG:style_emoticons/default/lolhitting.gif)

I actually posted West first, then started laughing.

























Perry 2016

[Disco72]

I've heard rumblings that "people" have reached out to Bill Haslam (TN Gov) as a VP choice, but Haslam isn't interested. He could be someone that pops up more on the national radar in the next few years, though.

[iamshack]

But IMO, that's what makes Obama is a good modern debater...they don't actually "debate" much anymore. Obama does tend to stutter his point when put on the spot, but he has a good speaking voice, so he's not annoying to listen too. In modern debates, they can ask a question, and they often ignore whatever question it was and just reinforce an unrelated talking point or respond to an opponents previous point, despite the debate having moved onto a new subject. I guess you could say Obama isn't very good at old school debates, or debates where the moderators keep things on track, but they don't really exist anymore...more often than not the moderators have little to no control. It's more or less come down to being able to articulate/sound intelligent. And Obama is very good at that.

In actual debate presence, coupled with the ability to speak off the cuff, I've not seen anyone come close to Reagan in my lifetime, but of modern candidates, Obama is better than anyone that's tried.

** It's also possible that I only view Obama as a good debater because of the modern competition he's gone up against are that much worse. Just thinking of some debaters in recent years...Bush Jr. (not against Obama, but still), McCain, "Not Bill" Clinton,...the hodgepodge of republican candidates today. This is also probably why people believe Biden is a good debater...he was up against Palin...so of course he looked godly in comparison.

I think the best debaters can frame the issues in a way that the average person understands how it affects them and what their stake in the issue is, and what the competing interests are and what the alternative solutions may be.

I think Obama does that better than most.

[Reddy]

if he's willing to have Santorum (doubtful), that's the only ticket i see actually threatening Obama.

[caulfield12]

Rubio is scary, as a DEM, for the future. He'll be hard to stop, if he survives the vetting process, and he will easily turn the 25/75 disadvantage to 75/25 the other way around in terms of driving the Hispanic vote.

As far as debaters in my lifetime, that I've seen personally:

1) Mario Cuomo
2) Bill Clinton
3) Jesse Jackson
4) Barack Obama


Picking Santorum is insane. Hilary Clinton has the same exact demographic in terms of her appeal, and his presence on the ticket will scare almost every woman in America out to vote. Obama's ego is too big, and so is Biden's, but the perfect countermove to that would be placing Hilary on the ticket as VP.

[Rex Kicka**]

Rubio says he's out. Somehow doubt they'd go for a Bush right now. Christie, I hate to say it, but his weight will be an image issue. He's also a little brash.

I think Romney may have made a deal with Gingrich, for Newt to either be VP or in his cabinet, in exchange for staying in the race as long as possible to keep Santorum at bay. They had a private meeting a couple weeks ago.

Neither of the Paul's are going to work at all.

I think he goes for either Paul Ryan or Bobby Jindal - if he doesn't have a VP deal in place with Gingrich as noted above.

Chris Christie brings no help to the ticket. He would not be able to deliver New Jersey to Romney.

A powerful GOP establishment figure who can bring a state in play is what's crucial in Romney's pick IMHO. Rob Portman of Ohio might be a great pick actually. As long as you don't mind having two really dull people at the top of the ticket.

[StrangeSox]

Will adding another "GOP establishment" pick hurt the conservative base's enthusiasm even more?

[Rex Kicka**]

Will adding another "GOP establishment" pick hurt the conservative base's enthusiasm even more?

I don't think it helps, but it won't make them any more fired up than normal.

[knightni]

A Conservative Southern Governor or Senator would be Romney's safest pick.