Latest Romney campaign leaks on VP search: they want a "boring white guy"

[Mr. Morden]

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=CBD1171C-FB83-49C0-9DD8-4689F47966B5

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I guess brown skin and/or a uterus are inherently risky and exciting.

Anonymous leaker also names names re: the names at the top of the list (for now):

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course, keep in mind, leaks don't happen by accident.  The Romney campaign surely has an agenda in leaking this, so treat it with the appropriate skepticism.

[Mr. Morden]

Well, maybe a Biden-like pick? Someone who is a boring white guy who perhaps is a little weird? Could anyone see a Santorum or Thune?

Santorum, no.  Thune, OTOH, seems like the ultimate safe, boring pick.  Certainly more safe than McDonnell, who'd have the baggage of stuff like "Confederate History Month" and a Master's thesis in which he described working women as "detrimental" to the family:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=151429.msg3273646#msg3273646

[Mr. Morden]

VP CW was wrong in '08 and hopefully it will be wrong again.

It depends on whether you're talking about the CW on the Dem. or GOP side, and from which point in time.  On the GOP side, McCain made a last minute decision to pick a dark horse option, so that upended the CW.  On the Dem. side, Obama leaked his shortlist of Bayh, Biden, and Kaine (later amended to include Sebelius) in July:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=79958.0

and that remained the shortlist until the end.

I expect that Romney will also leak his shortlist at some point because, unlike McCain, he'll want to subject his eventual pick to media scrutiny before he makes a final decision, so that he can still change his mind.  But it's still really early, so I wouldn't put a great deal of faith in this sort of thing yet.  I doubt there really is a shortlist yet.  Probably just a longlist.

[Mr. Morden]

Honestly, I thought this was the most interesting part of the story:

"New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who is said by insiders to want it the most and also to annoy some aides with his aggressiveness"

I would not have expected Christie to be the most desperate for the vice presidency.  I guess he really really wants national office, and the chances that he runs for prez in 2016 (assuming Obama wins reelection this year) are even higher than I thought.

[Mr. Morden]

I really like Thune as a competent guy who appeals to evangelicals, but he is a bit young, and he would likely turn down Romney and wait to run himself in 2016.

51 years old (slightly older than the current president) is a bit young?

And I highly doubt that Thune would turn Romney down to run himself in 2016.  Thune has given a classic non-denial denial of interest in being VP, which means that he probably wants it.  I don't know if Thune wants to be president (he did pass on a run this time, after all), but clearly accepting a spot on Romney's ticket would boost his chances of eventually getting there.

[Mr. Morden]

Christie's latest attempt at generating VP buzz: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHN0ZeS5c-4&feature=player_embedded

[Mr. Morden]

I don't see why people think that Daniels's family situation would be such a killer.  I mean, yes, it looks like his wife doesn't want him to run for national office, so he probably won't.  But if Daniels did agree to be veep, I don't think the family history would be that big a factor.  I mean, for heaven's sake.  McCain (the actual presidential nominee, not the VP nominee) started dating his current wife while still married to his previous wife, and that was a complete non-issue in the '08 campaign because it happened a million years ago.  Why would the actions of Daniels's wife in the 1990s matter that much if Daniels is the VP nominee?

That said, I have a feeling that Daniels would make a terrible running mate, because he'd always be going off message.  Then again, it's not like Biden does any better.

[Mr. Morden]

I'm not sure how "Pawlenty" is  "foreign sounding name".  As a native of the "Real America" of the Midwest, I'd say that the 3-4 syllable German and Polish last names there sound more "American" to me than WASP-y names like Bush or Clinton.

[Mr. Morden]

Virtually every American has a last name that can be traced to a foreign country.  OK, if you tweak "foreign" to mean "a country that doesn't speak English", then that's not true.  But certainly in the Midwest, it's absolutely common for people to have last names like Blagojevich, Hoekstra, Kleczka, Pawlenty, Rostenkowski, Sebelius, and Sensenbrenner, and for politicians to get elected with such names.

I don't think the "voter confusion over the candidate's last name" thing is at all an issue.  In fact, I find it utterly ridiculous that someone would be less likely to vote for Romney if his running mate has an unusual last name.  The reason why most recent presidents have had Anglo-Saxon last names is because a disproportionate number of presidents are people who have $ and who got degrees from Ivy League schools several decades ago.  Until recently, that was a demographic that skewed heavily towards people with Anglo-Saxon last names.

Also, of course, there was more suspicion of Catholics and "white ethnics" back in Eisenhower's day.  Nowadays, it's a non-issue.  I mean, about 75% of the likely 2016 presidential candidates are Catholics, which obviously would have been unheard of not long ago.

[Mr. Morden]

I highly doubt a single southern state (or any state) would flip from Romney to Obama over the last name of Romney's running mate.  It's not as if the voters even need to know the running mates' last names when they vote.  What next?  Gore lost Florida because voters thought "Lieberman" had too many letters?

In any case, even if this sort of thing were an issue, I don't see what's confusing about the name "Pawlenty".  It's an incredibly easy name to remember.  Much moreso than, say, "Schwarzenegger".