Would picking Pawlenty hurt Romney?

[milhouse24]

With the reports that Rubio is not a finalist, it seems that Pawlenty has become the campaign insider choice.  It may seem that Pawlenty is a safe "do no harm" candidate. 

But is Pawlenty actually too safe and unknown? 

Does picking a virtually unknown Pawlenty actually hurt Romney and make him look weak? 

Is Pawlenty perceived as weak or does he have any strengths? 

Can Pawlenty help in midwest states and win them for Romney? 

Will people know how to say or spell Pawlenty? 

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

I think that anyone who's going to fire up the base is probably a Tea Party extremist, so if I were Romney, I'd pick a boring white guy like T-Paw or Portman. I don't think a bland running mate would hurt Mittens.

[Keystone Phil]

Spelling of a Vice Presidential candidate's name is always the top concern!

[nkpatel1279]

A Romney/Pawlenty or A Romney/Christie ticket= Losing home state.
Romney is going to lose MI,and NH. and Pawlenty will not help Romney-R in MN-10, as well as IA and or WI.  and Christie will not help Romney in NJ and PA.

[Maxwell]

Obamaney Care is the reason why Pawlenty won't be chosen.

Also, if you ever saw the debates, you would know how much of a blankity bloonk he was. Biden, as lolzy as he is, would CRUSH Pawlenty in the debate.

Although their flip flopping seems to match, so I guess the choice would make sense. They would also both lose their home states, which is dandy because Romney and Pawlenty are jokers.

[RogueBeaver]

1) IMO, yes. He wouldn't actively harm Romney but selecting someone who very publicly flopped on the national stage would send off bad signals.

2) Weak in the sense of *Inks* fortitude? Yes. (See Obamneycare for details) Politically weak, dunno.

3) No.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

No reason to pick Pawlenty over the more attractive and balanced (he has legislative, Mitt has executive) Thune.

[RogueBeaver]

No reason to pick Pawlenty over the more attractive and balanced (he has legislative, Mitt has executive) Thune.

Branch experience aside, they're basically interchangeable. Generic 50ish Midwestern R.

[Maxwell]

1) IMO, yes. He wouldn't actively harm Romney but selecting someone who very publicly flopped on the national stage would send off bad signals.

2) Weak in the sense of *Inks* fortitude? Yes. (See Obamneycare for details) Politically weak, dunno.

3) No.

for 3) Pawlenty, as soon as he remebered he was in a Republican primary, ran as far away from Cap and Trade as possible, just like Mitt Romney has run away from so many issues.

[RogueBeaver]

By 3) I meant could he help in a state, and the answer is no.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Romney campaign may be looking for a boring white guy, but not that boring.

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Heard on the POTUS POlitics satellite radio station that word on the street is that the campaign let this slip simply to pat Pawlenty on the back for a job well done so far... they will not pick him

[Iosif]

When was the last time a Presidential ticket won neither home state?

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

When was the last time a Presidential ticket won neither home state?

1972; South Dakota and Maryland both went for Nixon (though Maryland was also Agnew's home state)

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Despite my personal opinion of him, I don't see any significant way in which he'd hurt to be honest. He wouldn't help in any real way either of course, but if Romney wants to play it safe I guess that won't matter.

[big bad fab]

No harm: well, we talk about VP nominee, after all
This is just a media subject for 2 weeks: one around the picking, one around the vice-presidential debate.
On the contrary, T-Paw may indirectly counter-balances critics on Romney's poshness. And he is acceptable for social conservatives. And he is a Midwesterner, though I know he can't win Wisconsin by himself But, here again, he indirectly counterbalances Romney's both North-Eastern and Utah sides.
Pawlenty would only have a halo effect which will erase some of Romney's liabilities.
That's enough to pick a VP, honestly...

[muon2]

No harm: well, we talk about VP nominee, after all
This is just a media subject for 2 weeks: one around the picking, one around the vice-presidential debate.
On the contrary, T-Paw may indirectly counter-balances critics on Romney's poshness. And he is acceptable for social conservatives. And he is a Midwesterner, though I know he can't win Wisconsin by himself But, here again, he indirectly counterbalances Romney's both North-Eastern and Utah sides.
Pawlenty would only have a halo effect which will erase some of Romney's liabilities.
That's enough to pick a VP, honestly...

This looks like a pretty good summation. Note that recent VPs have been picked primarily to balance attributes lacking in the Pres nominee. Both Cheney and Biden fit that mold.

[WhyteRain]

I haven't given anyone VP advice since 2000 when I thought former Penn. governor Tom Ridge was the obvious pick for Bush.  (Bush would have probably won PA, making FL irrelevant.)

I haven't a "pick" for Romney, except that he should pick someone from west of the Mississippi.  Pawlenty technically qualifies, but I was thinking of somewhere farther west than Minnesota.

[Torie]

Yes, because his name is not Rob Portman.

[anvi]

I agree with a Portman pick, just because he would make an excellent VP and strategically he helps in Ohio, a crucial state.  I get the contrast stuff brought up above, but I'm a little bemused by the interest in Pawlenty.  The party establishment clearly dislikes him, and the primary voters proved to be quite underwhelmed with him too.  Plus, even though Biden is a gaffe machine, I think Pawlenty would look bad on a debate stage next to Biden.

[WhyteRain]

OK ... how about former Cong. Duncan Hunter (R-CA)?

Unlike Pawlenty, Hunter will help bring out Tea Partyers shaken by the Romney nomination.  Also, I think any Westerner will help Romney in crucial states like Oregon, Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada.

[Torie]

OK ... how about former Cong. Duncan Hunter (R-CA)?

Unlike Pawlenty, Hunter will help bring out Tea Partyers shaken by the Romney nomination.  Also, I think any Westerner will help Romney in crucial states like Oregon, Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada.

Er, no. He's the guy who wrote 450 bad checks through the House post office for starters. He has a pedestrian mind. He has no pull with swing voters. He's not very well educated. He in short is not Portman.

[milhouse24]

No harm: well, we talk about VP nominee, after all
This is just a media subject for 2 weeks: one around the picking, one around the vice-presidential debate.
On the contrary, T-Paw may indirectly counter-balances critics on Romney's poshness. And he is acceptable for social conservatives. And he is a Midwesterner, though I know he can't win Wisconsin by himself But, here again, he indirectly counterbalances Romney's both North-Eastern and Utah sides.
Pawlenty would only have a halo effect which will erase some of Romney's liabilities.
That's enough to pick a VP, honestly...

I think TPaw is a weak national candidate, a weak politician, and does not inspire strength or confidence to any voters.  He may be fine for the genteel Minnesotian, but is he the guy you want to go to war with in the nasty DC partisan bickering.  Biden is a strong voice and attack dog, Cheney is a strong, secure, attack dog; Gore was a strong confident advocate. 

I think a weak looking TPaw will make Romney look weak especially amongst the blue-collar white catholic union swing voters he needs to keep in the GOP.  It would hurt Romney in blue-collar ohio and virginia. 

Romney is not going to win this election by default because of a bad economy.  If he is going to win against Obama/Biden, he has to bring out the heavy artillery on all fronts, raise his A game to 110% and attack in the swing states and in political teardowns. 

[Zioneer]

I agree with a Portman pick, just because he would make an excellent VP and strategically he helps in Ohio, a crucial state.  I get the contrast stuff brought up above, but I'm a little bemused by the interest in Pawlenty.  The party establishment clearly dislikes him, and the primary voters proved to be quite underwhelmed with him too.  Plus, even though Biden is a gaffe machine, I think Pawlenty would look bad on a debate stage next to Biden.

Polls show that Portman is not really all that useful in Ohio, actually.

[5280]

I don't know how well of a debater Pawlenty is, but he would probably be a safe pick.