The Institute of VP leaks, tips, and speculation (GOP edition)

[Lunar]

I mean, I'm pretty convinced it'll be Pawlenty.  I mean, imagine the reception he'll get since the convention is in his homestate!

I had some cool tips stocked up but VeepWatch on RealClearPolitics is a broken link right now and I forget the other ones.

[Lunar]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quoth Mitt Romney.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0808/Romney_Confidence_in_McCains_instincts_on_veep.html#comments

[Lunar]

No way has McCain not decided yet.  He's just saying that to make any leaks and tips less definite. 

[Lunar]

John Martin also said to expect Powell to be name-dropped:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Lunar]

ah.

Well, another Martin nugget:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Lunar]

McCain denies radio interview, states he HAS decided.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Lunar]

THE T-PAW STORM IS BUILDING

[Lunar]

Well, the general consensus is this:

Both are great at staying on message, both have done the media circuit, etc.

Pawlenty is an affable, mainstream conservative that is not off-putting towards moderates.  He speaks with a high amount of authenticity but he could get beaten back by Biden's aggressiveness in the debate, one of the few key moments of a VP's career.  No one serious thinks Pawlenty will cause Minnesota to flip, but I think it will be a great moment to bring the homestate governor out as your VP during the GOP convention.

Romney is less likable, but has access to business and Mormon networks for raising RNC cashflows.  He is a far better debater and could potentially match Biden in the debates.  However, Romney has pretty high negatives and there are many on this forum that will switch to Obama (PiT), become upset with their party (pick one), or will cease being undecided (Alcon).

Who knows who helps McCain more.  Generally VP's are picked for their lack of head-line grabbing negative baggage, or at least that lack of baggage is one of the most important qualifiers.  Given that, it seems that Pawlenty is about as perfect as McCain will get.

[Lunar]

No leak tonight:

JMart

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Lunar]

538.com says that its sources say NOT Pawlenty but are tight-lipped

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Lunar]

Eric Cantor on Larry King:  I think it will be Mitt Romney or Tim Pawlenty

im watching this eric cantor guy on television.  my goodness, he is horrid.  absolutely awful.

I KNOW.  I actually like him a bit.  I didn't realize how Republican Ben Stein was.

I think the Jew with the Southern accent with intellectual glasses is appealing though.  But he's not a fluid talker.

People need to stop saying Pawlenty is safe because he has no negatives.

The negative is the absence of positives.

Did I fall asleep and miss out on a massive electoral shift where the GOP brand suddenly became popular again?  To win, McCain must keep breaking the mold.

Yet the absence of negatives is one of the biggest positives a potential VP can have.

[Lunar]

Jeeze, the Palin love is just ridiculous.

Way more ridiculous that those of us hoping for Schweitzer since Schweitzer would not undermine Obama's two most powerful messages.  Palin completely eliminates the experience and the celebrity arguments for McCain for all of the swing voters with an IQ over 70... which is about half of them.

[Lunar]

Jeeze, the Palin love is just ridiculous.

Way more ridiculous that those of us hoping for Schweitzer since Schweitzer would not undermine Obama's two most powerful messages.  Palin completely eliminates the experience and the celebrity arguments for McCain for all of the swing voters with an IQ over 70... which is about half of them.

I disagree. I think experience (to be cliche) is much more important at the top of the ticket than at the bottom. I think Palin would be a very viable and legitimate pick.

I agree with you completely.  It is far more important at the top of the ticket.  That is why McCain could get away with selecting someone with the title of "Congressman" while Obama probably couldn't.

However, McCain's biggest arguments, meaning those that have gained the most traction with swing voters, are that Obama is a pretty-boy and only has 3-4 years of experience.  It'd be like if McCain went out of his way to appeal to the racist vote yet selected an African-American as his VP.  I'm not saying McCain is doing this, but it's a parallel.

And who are you jmfsct to say "enough talk!"  You have made possibly 100 posts about Palin, haha!  Most of them under 5 words.

I like Palin on a personal level, but if she's the VP I'll eat my hat.  She hasn't done the media circuit, which is pretty much required for a VP.  Notice that Cantor, Pawlenty and Romney have all done at least one relatively intense interview a week in order for the vetters to understand how the VP handles him or herself under pressure and ability to stay on message.  Why wouldn't the vetters ask Palin to do this like all of the others?  Because she's not being considered and not being vetted.  End of story.

Can anyone produce one solid tip or hint that Palin could be the one.

[Lunar]

I think Palin would be a solid choice, but she just hasn't done  the rounds.  VP choices need to prove they can handle constant media interviews and Palin just hasn't done it.  I will seriously make any bet with anyone at any rate that Palin is not the choice.

I know I sometimes make crazy predictions, but that is because I like being risky.  This is just common sense.  If you are seriously considering someone for a vice-presidential candidate, you have them do interview after interview until you are certain they are capable of sticking to a message and come across as sincere/authentic/intelligent/whatever.  Various Alaska governor interviews do not count as the scrutiny of the national media is a lot more intense.

If you could point to me 10 Palin interviews in the last 2 months by the national media, or anything close to that, I would appreciate it. 

Y'all have to chill on the Palin train.  Whitman is far more likely as at least McCain gave her a call-out on one of he three most trusted advisers and at least she does representative interviews/commentary for McCain.

[Lunar]

I admit I got hilariously blindsided by that and I constantly reference my insistence that I'd eat my own hat if she got picked as evidence of my own fallibility.  She had so many flaws, which eventually got exposed (so I was vindicated in a way), and I figured there were better "risky" candidates.

[Lunar]

I admit I got hilariously blindsided by that and I constantly reference my insistence that I'd eat my own hat if she got picked as evidence of my own fallibility.  She had so many flaws, which eventually got exposed (so I was vindicated in a way), and I figured there were better "risky" candidates.

Her only flaw (though it was HUGE AND FATAL!!!) was that she knew shockingly very little about the world outside of Alaska.  She was an extremely effective governor, and on top of her Alaskan game.  But I don't think the chick ever tuned into national/internation news in her life.  Can't really blame her for that though, with a very busy job and raising all those kids.

I actually cited that early on as a potential flaw.  I said specifically that I wasn't sure if she knew some of the basic national and international stuff that the average citizen wouldn't know, but we expect our politicians to like the three major religious groups in Iraq and whatnot.  I was actually hilariously attacked by some GOP types on the forum for saying that and being a big-city elitist (nevermind my hometown has 3,000 people).
 
But you totally kicked ass predicting that pick