Talk Elections

Let us suppose that Mitt Romney  wins the Republican Presidential nomination in 2012.

Let us also suppose that, in order to keep the conservative base happy, as well as to have someone he believes will be a credible and capable Vice President, Romney picks Newt Gingrich.

1.  Will Gingrich accept?

2.  Would Gingrich be credible?

3.  Would the Romney/Gingrich ticket be viable in the election?

Please discuss. 

Gingrich has no experience in running for any statewide office even in a state in which he could have won such an office easily. The last two current or former Congressional Representatives who had gone no farther (Senate, Governor) who were nominated for VP (Kemp, Ferraro) lost. Jack Kemp had plenty of good ideas, and by all accounts, Geraldine Ferraro was a more-than-competent Representative. They just didn't know how to operate a statewide campaign beforehand. Neither was able to deliver New York State. 

Gerald Ford  spent almost his entire political career in the House of Representatives before he took over the Vice-Presidency from the disgraced Spiro T. Agnew. He just didn't know how to campaign outside of his district, and it showed in his effort to win the Presidency  by election.

I think Gingrich just doesn't have the image needed for a VP candidate, nor a Prsidential candidate.  A Romney/Paulenty or a Romney/ Danials combination would be better for the GOP. 

The trouble is that neither of them have held office since January, 2007.  And Gingrich hasn't held office since Real McCoy was hitting the Billboard Top 40.  If Romney wins the nomination, and he very well might, he's got a number of fine veeps to choose from-- but unless somebody on the ticket can say that they've found viable, proven solutions to the Recession, the ticket will not have very much credibility.

Remember, too, though that most voters don't vote for #2, they vote for #1.  I think Newt Gingrich would weaken the ticket a little bit, but I don't think it would be a deal breaker for the elections.  I don't think Sarah Palin really cost John McCain the election by herself.  She certainly didn't help the cause, but, McCain was just up against a strong wave of anti-Republican sentiment and an African-American candidate.

Flipped it would work, but Gingrich has beenout too long to be VP unless he's the runnerup in the primaries o romney

The VP candidate can be big trouble. I can't be sure that the tragicomic Eagleton/Shriver switch made a huge difference in the eventual result of the 1972 election, but it certainly did McGovern no good. Sarah Palin was an unmitigated disaster, but probably not enough to make the difference in a year of bad economic news. She probably lost Indiana, North Carolina, and NE-02, and quite possibly Florida. 

Gingrich has a "female" problem. I can imagine some Northern Republican choosing him for geographic balance only to find that his sexual escapades offend parts of the Religious Right.

Gingrich is just about the perfect choice for Romney. He's got federal leadership experience, so Romney could still claim he is an outsider, but has someone with Congressional experience to help him out. Gingrich might appeal in the South where Romney is going to have some issues (though so will Obama, obviously). Gingrich's strength as an intellectual "idea man" could still hold true as VP, but his adultery scandal would be much less relevant as VP nom.

I think being a kingmaker is about the best Gingrich could hope for. I'm assuming the race ultimately boils down to a Romney-Palin showdown and Gingrich could help where Romney is weak (the South). A well timed Gingrich endorsement could wipe Palin out and give Romney the edge.

Romney stands for the nomination on his  own merits, record, accomplishments, experience, intellectual status, and business savvy, whereas the reason, and the only reason that anybody is even discussing Palin as a potential candidate is, obviously, because she was plucked out of obscurity by a desperate Presidential nominee who believed that bringing her onto the ticket would energize the party because of her youth and attractiveness.  McCain failed to recognize that Palin was in fact a lightweight airhead far out of her league and far out of her capabilities as a national candidate.

McCain tried desperately to pass Palin off as an energy expert , totally laughable, and as a maverick who would shake up Washington, whereas in reality she turned out to be not much more than the brunt of jokes, lampooned by late night comedy shows, and the pathetic subject of internet
stories, some true, some not.

McCain proved a failure as a nominee for President by miserably failing his first major test as the nominee, that being to pick a credible, viable, capable, knowledgeable, and competent Vice Presidential candidate.     

1. Yes
2. Not really. His family life and affairs would bother some conservatives.
3. Probably not.

Gingrich will weaken the ticket no matter what side he's on. His best chance would have been in 1996....

As for the importance of the VP? It's important for obvious reasons. But Palin was disasterous because of McCain's age. Both my parents voted for Obama because of Palin. Palin didn't cost McCain the election, Bush did, but the election would have been closer if McCain picked a respectable running mate.

Mitt Romney's running mate in 2012 will matter less because Romney most likely won't die by 2016!

No Gingrich isn't VP material.

Newt on a Mitt ticket would be a singularly poor choice, and one thing Mitt is not, is dumb. It ain't happening. Among other things, can you imagine trying to get Newt to stay on message?  Oh dear. Plus, some voters, like myself, cannot accept Newt being one heat beat away.

So, no, that ticket is not viable.

Not a good choice. Newt's baggage from the '90s and Mitt's current problems combined won't do well. It's too... establisment-tainted.

Mitt would do much better choosing a vice president who is less-well known and brings more to the ticket.

Nixon once said (I can deliver a full quote, just from my memory) that a vice presidential nominee can't bring votes, but can be at least not harmful for the ticket.

Gingrich would be very harmful due to multiple reasons.

Romney/Gingrich 2012? Viable?

… No.

What do you know? Palin is a virtual expert on energy.  Have you read her book?  Heard her speak on the issue?  That's by far her strongest suit.   

She'd only be the brunt of jokes because liberals HATE conservative women because it shreds the image they promote of the Republican party as a "white man" party.

As for weakening the McCain ticket, just the opposite.  McCain only did as good as he did because of her.  You think conservatives would have voted McCain/Lieberman?  Hell to the no. 

If that is her strongest suit, then I am quite unimpressed. "Drill, baby, drill!" proved irrelevant as the economy melted down.  All that she is good at is extracting patronage from a  corporations that extract natural resources. That might be a good way of doing government in a country with huge volumes of extractable resources and a small population (as in Saudi Arabia), but mineral wealth is comparatively small in America in contrast to the size of the US population.

Such as I have seen of her books is... quite empty. It's heavy on anecdote and light on policy.      


No, it is because she is bonkers. Her poor grasp of logic manifests itself in a failure to understand the consequences of her statements. Her "death panels" canard is 100% indefensible. 


Right-wingers alone cannot win an election. Moderates decide. She scared too many moderates to Obama/Biden. Sure, the economic meltdown played its role, but so did she. 

Nods in agreement to what pbrower2a said.

I could not have said it better myself.

Us Republicans must face the facts, as uncomfortable as they were for us in 2008.  The circumstances were not favorable for any GOP nominee in that election.  After the meltdown, they became impossible. 

McCain did not, under any stretch of the imagination, do as well as he did because of Palin.  Some might say he did as poorly as he did because of Palin.

Myself, I do not believe it would have made one iota of difference to what McCain won in 2008 regardless of the running mate.

Of course, Palin did not lose McCain the election.  McCain lost McCain the election.  McCain, or any Republican, would not have won the 2008 election regardless.  I maintain McCain had no idea the scope of the derision his pick of Palin would make to the Republican ticket.  The Palin pick was a desperation move on the part of McCain.  He went for sensationalism, rather than going for competence, and rather than going for someone who was actually credible and qualified.

Anyone who can sit there and honestly say, with a straight face, that Sarah Palin is qualified to be Vice President of the United States, one heart beat away from becoming President of the United States, has my admiration as one of the truly great actors of the twenty first century.     

No Gingrich won't accept and those candidates aren't really a good match. Plus Gingrich is way over qualified for the VP.

Gingrich is too intellectually arrogant for any ticket.

There's a reason he was hated by the House Republicans.

Although in 1932 FDR picked House Speaker John Nance Garner for VP.

FDR won the 1932 election by default.

It's interesting that in the SF novel The Man in the High Castle (category alternative history), the Nazis win World War II after FDR is assassinated and John Nance Garner proves an ineffective President after succeeding FDR. The author Philip K. Dick was a certifiable nutcase, but the story is very convincing.     

Why is the Grinch considered the most conservative candidate?  He's been out of office for a decade and hasn't really done much in that time.  He's thrice-married and a Roman Catholic. He's a global warming believer.  The most conservative present-day candidate would be Barbour or Thune or a bunch of other southern senators like Demint, etc. 

the ticket of government run / mandatory health care and global warming on a Republican ticket. That will motivate Republicans to show up.

So was Dick Cheney

Neither Cheney nor Gingrich were/are qualified to be anything higher than the local dog-catcher.

no one can make Romney viable.

This could be a very viable ticket since both live near a major air hub. I think the ticket could be attacked a lot on integrity, however.

Why would a Mormon with a Roman Catholic VP keep the Conservative Evangelicals happy?  I think it would make them more upset actually.

You would be surprised.  These days the Evangelicals will vote for any christian as long as it means pushing Obama out.

That's good news for Romney then!

If he becomes the GOP nominee, that is.