McCain & Romney?

cawacko

Well-known member
It looks like Romney is saying he would like to be VP (if he is selected of course). After hearing some of the names thrown around I think he would make a good running mate for McCain.

McCain is obviously going to run on his experience and foreign policy credentials. To bring in Condi Rice for example would serve no real purpose. McCain needs someone with some strong economic credentials which Romney can provide. I guess Romney also resonates some with the social conservatives but not to the extent of a Hucklebee who would turn off many independents.

It's hard to say how much divide or dislike there really is between McCain and Romney. Is it just media driven or the real thing?

As this point my unasked for two cents is that Romney makes the best candidate.

And this is purely partisan but I thought this was a great quote from Romney... "Listening to Obama and Clinton discuss their national security credentials, Romney said, is akin to "listening to two chihuahuas argue about which is the biggest dog."

"When it comes to national security, John McCain is the big dog, and they are the chihuahuas," he said.






Romney says he'd take Veep, calls McCain "Big Dog"


Mitt Romney said in his first interview since departing the GOP race that he would accept the number two position on the ticket and that there is no lingering bitterness between him and John McCain.

“I think any Republican leader in this country would be honored to be asked to serve as the vice presidential nominee, myself included," Romney told FOX's Sean Hannity in a broadcast set to air tonight. "Of course this is a nation which needs strong leadership. And if the nominee of our party asked you to serve with him, anybody would be honored to receive that call … and to accept it, of course.”

According to two separate reports, Romney is being talked up as a running mate by members of the Bush inner circle. But McCain and his closest advisers have little regard for their former rival thanks to the bitter, year-long race waged between the two Republicans.

Romney says, however, that he thinks the wounds have healed.

“There are really no hard feelings, I don't think, on either side of this," he said in the interview. "There were no pacts and so forth that make people feel like that we will never come together. Instead these campaigns are all coming together. We are supporting our nominee enthusiastically, aggressively."

Romney said his top fundraisers have already met with McCain's campaign.

"We are laying out ways we can support his campaign.”

Romney also belittled the Democrats, saying that he thought Barack Obama would eventually emerge as their nominee and that such an outcome would play to the GOP's favor.

"I think he is the better match-up for Senator McCain because the public recognizes just how inexperienced he is," Romney said. "With Senator Clinton there is some confusion in perception that somehow being there while her husband was president made her a foreign policy-national security experienced person. She is not. She doesn't have any more experience, really, of a significant nature than Barack Obama does. But in Barack Obama's case, people recognize this guy was a state senator and before that he was a community activist. He has been a United States senator for a short, short period of time. He is in no significant way qualified to lead the country at a time of war, to lead the country out of an economic challenge. This is not a person who can stand up to Senator McCain.”

To make his case, Romney employed a canine metaphor.

Listening to Obama and Clinton discuss their national security credentials, Romney said, is akin to "listening to two chihuahuas argue about which is the biggest dog."

"When it comes to national security, John McCain is the big dog, and they are the chihuahuas," he said.

McCain will be on Romney's turf tomorrow night for a fundraiser in Boston, but aides to the Arizonan's campaign were uncertain if their former rival would be in attendance. The two last appeared together when Romney endorsed McCain last month in the former governor's Hub headquarters.


http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonat..._says_hed_take_Veep_calls_McCain_Big_Dog.html
 
Last edited:
Imagine if he could tap Petraeus for the VP slot.

That's really the only way I see him beating a Hillary/Obama (or vice versa) ticket.
 
Imagine if he could tap Petraeus for the VP slot.

That's really the only way I see him beating a Hillary/Obama (or vice versa) ticket.

Why do you believe that? (honest question not attacking) Is it because McCain has to run on national security for any chance to win so he might as well bulk up on it?
 
Why do you believe that? (honest question not attacking) Is it because McCain has to run on national security for any chance to win so he might as well bulk up on it?

McCain isn't going to be able to outperform either Hillary or Obama among moderate or liberal voters this year. His only real issue is the War on Terror.

The only real chance that I see for him, barring some particularly beneficial incident between now and November, would be to utilize Rove's strategy of relying only upon high turnout from the base.

Considering the lingering conservative distrust of McCain, I think they view him somewhat skeptically when he speaks about the dangers and conflicts facing America. Yes he is the nominee, but he is by no means a concensus choice. Even national-security type Republicans preferred Guliani.

I think by having a General, particularly one of Petraeus's high visibility and renown, articulating the same points McCain makes would resonate home much more effectively. Having Petraeus, who was so involved in the conflict on the ticket would be seen as the military's endorsement of McCain's views and would help to turn out every pro-war vote.

Conventional wisdom says that Republicans run to the right for the primary and then to the center for the general. But with large majorities opposing the Iraq War, and with the economy (McCain's weakest point) shaping up to be a major issue in November, I don't think McCain gains anything by choosing a liberal or a moderate as his runningmate. I think his best and maybe only strategy will be a repeat of the tactics used in 2004.
 
Last edited:
If a President McCain crafted another Illegal-alien Amnesty bill, got it through a Democrat-dominated house, and it wound up tied in the Senate... it would be interesting to see which way a Vice President Romney would vote as President of the Senate to break the tie.
 
If a President McCain crafted another Illegal-alien Amnesty bill, got it through a Democrat-dominated house, and it wound up tied in the Senate... it would be interesting to see which way a Vice President Romney would vote as President of the Senate to break the tie.

What do you think of my Petraeus Theory, Acorn?
 
McCain isn't going to be able to outperform either Hillary or Obama among moderate or liberal voters this year. His only real issue is the War on Terror.

The only real chance that I see for him, barring some particularly beneficial incident between now and November, would be to utilize Rove's strategy of relying only upon high turnout from the base.

Considering the lingering conservative distrust of McCain, I think they view him somewhat skeptically when he speaks about the dangers and conflicts facing America. Yes he is the nominee, but he is by no means a concensus choice. Even national-security type Republicans preferred Guliani.

I think by having a General, particularly one of Petraeus's high visibility and renown, articulating the same points McCain makes would resonate home much more effectively. Having Petraeus, who was so involved in the conflict on the ticket would be seen as the military's endorsement of McCain's views and would help to turn out every pro-war vote.

Conventional wisdom says that Republicans run to the right for the primary and then to the center for the general. But with large majorities opposing the Iraq War, and with the economy (McCain's weakest point) shaping up to be a major issue in November, I don't think McCain gains anything by choosing a liberal or a moderate as his runningmate. I think his best and maybe only strategy will be a repeat of the tactics used in 2004.

Ok, I see your point and its a legitimate one.

This story is purely antedotal. My sister is smart college educated blah blah blah. She follows politics but by no means is a political junkie. She's voted three times: Clinton, Bush, Kerry. She has no ideology like most of us here do. She would be a definite example of a swing or independent voter. Now when she went to vote in the California primary she voted for Obama because she's registered as an Independent and Independents can vote in the Dem prmiary but not the Repub primary in Calfiornia. Anyhow she tells me she will vote for McCain in the fall. That remains to be seen of course.

Like I said she is just one person. I'm not trying to imply she is represented of all independents out there.

Random story I know. My bad.
 
Imagine if he could tap Petraeus for the VP slot.

That's really the only way I see him beating a Hillary/Obama (or vice versa) ticket.

He's is currently occupied, Colin Powell would be a unstoppable, But I could vote McCain / Romney.
 
Okay so concensus among political junkie conservatives seem to be that Petraeus is fine where he is. I think average Republicans might be more receptive, but who knows.

It still seems that McCain will have to use the '04 strategy so I think his choice will be someone with comparable or better conservative credentials than himself.

I don't see him reaching to the center, lest the base fall out from under him.
 
Okay so concensus among political junkie conservatives seem to be that Petraeus is fine where he is.

It still seems that McCain will have to use the '04 strategy so I think his choice will be someone with comparable or better conservative credentials than himself.

I don't see him reaching to the center, lest the base fall out from under him.

Um yeah, I'd probably not like him as much if he quite to run for office. He is doing a fine and outstanding job.
 
Historically, studies have shown that the VP rarely a significant factor in voters' decisions, but I think that the VP on a McCain ticket will play a much more important role in the minds of voters because of McCain's age.

Hence my interest in this topic. I don't think it will matter in the Democratic ticket.
 
Okay so concensus among political junkie conservatives seem to be that Petraeus is fine where he is. I think average Republicans might be more receptive, but who knows.

It still seems that McCain will have to use the '04 strategy so I think his choice will be someone with comparable or better conservative credentials than himself.

I don't see him reaching to the center, lest the base fall out from under him.

My thought with Romney is that he has economic credentials has some conservative credentials that maybe McCain doesn't and yet was Govenor of a Blue state. Lord knows I'm not an expert but he seems to me to maybe be McCains best shot.
 
Historically, studies have shown that the VP rarely a significant factor in voters' decisions, but I think that the VP on a McCain ticket will play a much more important role in the minds of voters because of McCain's age.

Hence my interest in this topic. I don't think it will matter in the Democratic ticket.

I think you're right on that point and its a legitimate issue.
 
Romney has economic credentials and has staked out some extremely conservative positions on immigration and fiscal policy, but he has two notable pieces of baggage:

His Mormonism, which proved to be a bigger hindrance than I originally expected, and his perceived phoniness was also a spoiler for him.
 
Last edited:
Romney has economic credentials and has staked out some extremely conservative positions on immigration and fiscal policy, but he has two notable pieces of baggage:

His Mormonism, which proved to be a bigger hindrance than I originally expected, and his perceived phoniness, which was also a spoiler for him.

No question the phoniness or his flip flopping on several key social issues definitely hurts him. I'd argue if he was the best candidate he'd be the nominee and not McCain. But you are right, Romney has his own set of issues. There are several Govenors who have been named as potential VP candidates. I'm not familar with them. So at this moment, on the whole, Romney still seems the best choice to me.
 
I'd argue if he was the best candidate he'd be the nominee and not McCain.

Ha, and I would disagree. But it depends on your definition of "best".

Changing from party-selected candidates in the 19th century to primaries at the start of the 20th did not, contrary to expectation, improve the "crop" of candidates in any discernable way other than making the voters feel responsible individually when scandals broke out instead of just blaming the party leaders as they did when party leaders selected candidates.

There are several Govenors who have been named as potential VP candidates. I'm not familar with them. So at this moment, on the whole, Romney still seems the best choice to me.

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist would be a good choice that could push ever-important Florida to McCain.
 
Back
Top