Which GOP pols, if picked as '12 VP nominee, would become the 2016 frontrunner?

[Mr. Morden]

Basically, think of this as 16 separate questions.  If Portman is Romney's choice, then does he become frontrunner for the 2016 GOP nomination (should Obama be reelected)?  If Rubio is Romney's choice, does he become the frontrunner, etc.?

[Landslide Lyndon]

It depends on how well they perform on the campaign trail. If they bomb then they will follow Sarah Palin's footsteps into obscurity.

[Vasall des Midas]

None. Being the losing '12 VP nominee would weaken, rather than improve, the standing of each and every Republican already established as a potential presidential contender.

[Ѕenator Αverroës]

None. Being the losing '12 VP nominee would weaken, rather than improve, the standing of each and every Republican already established as a potential presidential contender.

If the VP nominee is someone who Republicans like anyway, I think they'll be pretty eager to blame Romney alone. McCain-Palin style.

[Vasall des Midas]

None. Being the losing '12 VP nominee would weaken, rather than improve, the standing of each and every Republican already established as a potential presidential contender.

If the VP nominee is someone who Republicans like anyway, I think they'll be pretty eager to blame Romney alone. McCain-Palin style.

And how well did that work out for Palin?

(Yes, I know. Palin has herself and her family to blame. I don't think that's the full story here though.)

[Ѕenator Αverroës]

Palin was a loose cannon with no self-discipline, no prior experience with national politics, and marginal policy knowledge. And she still came out of the 2008 election beloved by most in her party.

I don't know if she'd have been a plausible nominee if she'd made a serious run, but at least a sizable minority of academics, journalists, and political actors would have considered her either the apparent frontrunner or co-frontrunner. It's hard for me not to believe that a more serious and experienced politician could pull it off.

[crypto-fascist superhero]

Historically speaking, none of the above.  List of losing VP nominees:

2008 - Sarah Palin
2004 - John Edwards
2000 - Joe Lieberman
1996 - Jack Kemp
1992 - Dan Quayle
1988 - Lloyd Bentsen
1984 - Geraldine Ferraro
1980 - Walter Mondale - became frontrunner for '84, but had previously been elected VP under Carter
1976 - Bob Dole - became frontrunner 20 years later and won nomination
1972 - Sargent Shriver
1968 - Ed Muskie - became initial frontrunner but lost nomination to McGovern
1964 - Bill Miller
1960 - Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr.
1956 - Estes Kefauver
1952 - John Sparkman
1948 - Earl Warren
1944 - John Bricker
1940 - Charles McNary
1936 - Frank Knox
1932 - Charles Curtis
1928 - Joseph Robinson
1924 - Charles Bryan
1920 - Franklin Roosevelt - became frontrunner 12 years later and won nomination/presidency
1916 - Charles Fairbanks
1912 - Hiram Johnson
1908 - John Kern
1904 - Henry Davis
1900 - Adlai Stevenson
1896 - Arthur Sewall
1892 - Whitelaw Reid
1888 - Allen Thurman
1884 - John Logan
1880 - William English
1876 - Thomas Hendricks
1872 - B. Gratz Brown
1868 - Francis Blair, Jr.
1864 - George Pendleton
1860 - Herschel Johnson
1856 - William Dayton
1852 - William Graham
1848 - William Butler
1844 - Theodore Frelinghuysen
1840 - Richard Johnson
1836 - Francis Granger
1832 - John Sergeant
1828 - Richard Rush
1824 - Nathaniel Macon
1820 - Richard Stockton
1816 - John Howard
1812 - Jared Ingersoll
1804/1808 - Rufus King
1800 - Charles Pinckney - became frontrunner and won nomination
1796 - Aaron Burr - tied Jefferson in 1800 election in electoral votes (pre-12th amendment)
1792 - George Clinton
1789 - John Jay

[Vosem]

As food justice pointed out, Charles Pinckney was the last to pull it off; he was the losing VP candidate in 1800 and then the losing presidential candidate in 1804. However, for most of its history the VP slot was irrelevant, but it's been steadily gaining power since the 1950s (ironic, as presidential deaths have become less common than they used to be). Could a competent pol pull it off in the modern day? Yeah, it seems pretty likely. I don't think 2012/2016 are the cycles for that, though.

[Mr. Morden]

It doesn't make sense to compare to election cycles pre-McGovern/Fraser reforms of the 1970s, since the nomination process was completely different back then.  Since then, the GOP has almost always had a strong frontrunner going into the next presidential nomination cycle, up until 2008.  In 2008 and 2012, the field was fairly splintered, with no overwhelming frontrunner in the mold of, say GW Bush in 2000.

I see 2016 as being another cycle in which there is no strong frontrunner on the GOP side, so it wouldn't necessarily take much to become the frontrunner.  The boost of publicity associated with becoming Romney's running mate might be enough to do it, assuming the candidate in question does a decent job on the campaign trail.

Barring Romney's running mate becoming the frontrunner, I see Christie as being the most likely frontrunner for the 2016 GOP nomination (again, assuming that Obama wins reelection), so in my mind, this poll is equivalent to asking "Which of the potential Romney running mates could use their status as his running mate to eclipse Christie for 2016?"  (Please, no fat jokes about "eclipsing Christie".  )