Comments on: Let’s Speculate: A McCain-Romney Ticket? What About The Question?

By: CarlH

CarlH — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 22:08:12 +0000

Oops, that’s March (not April) 23 for Venocchi’s article! I thought DST had messed with my body clock–but Easter in March has pushed me over the edge I guess.

By: CarlH

CarlH — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:42:15 +0000

The Boston Globe’s Joan Venocchi, clearly not a Romney fan, does some speculating of her own (on Sunday, April 23): McCain and Romney: Mitt’s moment - at last? Yikes!

Romney’s Mormonism is mentioned only once (and as one of several possible “positives”) as perhaps helping McCain “in Nevada, which has a large Mormon population.” Yikes, indeed.

By: Tinker

Tinker — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 04:53:39 +0000

The absence of the question re: Romney’s potential veep run is interesting. While I believe that the Obama fiasco and Huckabee’s exit are certainly contributing factors, I have a strong sense that it indicates something deeper that has largely been obscured, given the laser-sharp focus on the question.

I suspect that opposition to Romney’s run may have been more about the conservative way in which Republicans go about vetting their presidential candidates than the question itself. That would square generally with Nixon’s, Reagan’s, and Bush 41’s experiences, in which they all had to pay their dues before the party gave them the nod. While this wasn’t what happened for Bush 43, it may just be the exception which proves the rule, and conservatives who might feel burned by his less-than-stellar presidency, may be returning to old tried-and-true methods.

If this is really what’s happening, then it’s possible the question, and the illogical persistence of the flip-flop moniker, served as a convenient cover for the real underlying objection which may have been as innocuous as “Mitt, we hardly know ye.”

As an eternal optimist, I like the implications of this possibility. It would indicate that, contrary to the smug tongue-clicking of the MSM at their long held prejudice against the religious right, there may be a whole lot less bigotry against Mormons in the Republican party.

By: 4thnephite

4thnephite — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 22:28:05 +0000

Bro. Romney has given “the Question” to bed. I would like to hear the Huckster give his definition to the question, since he is the first and only one I know of who brought up this constitution matter.
McCain has already brought up his lack of knowledge with the economy, Mitt would be an excellent choice.
Why not the “Dynamic Duo” Nice ring and I know conservatives would be happy. I think John needs him now.

By: CarlH

CarlH — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 16:07:49 +0000

Here’s one prayer for no lightning strike! Despite the current blip showing McCain ahead of either Democratic candidate, I fear the McCain-Whoever ticket–heading a Republican Party in total disarray and without anyone (including its presumptive nominee) articulating anything that even remotely seems to be resonating with voters–is destined to be Dole-Kemp redux (or worse). “The Question” would undoubtedly be used (and, undoubtedly, advantageously) by the very media people who are saying nothing about it right not, let alone the Democratic candidates to bog down an already problematic campaign for McCain. As for Romney, being the VP candidate on a losing ticket may get Romney some party-loyalty brownie points, but the stench of a losing–and possibly disastrous–campaign would overwhelm any such “bounce” (a political reality for which John Edwards is just the most recent “Exhibit A”).

By: lkm55

lkm55 — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 13:15:41 +0000

I don’t believe McCain would chose Huckabee as veep. His record as a spender in AR will be enough to disqualify him, plus McCain holds grudges, and Huckabee did not bow out gracefully like Mitt did. McCains daughter has said on her blog it won’t happen.
I had hoped Mitt would return in 2012 the same way Reagan did in 1980. Unfortunately, it may take 4-8 years as the Vice President for the evengelical community to get over their predjudice of Mormons.
The most improtant thing is that Mitt Romney’s voice continue to be heard both in the republican party, and the nation at large.

By: mrclark411

mrclark411 — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:19:17 +0000

Why would evangelicals not worry so much about Vice President Romney?

An idea: Maybe evangelicals’ problem with Romney and Mormonism has nothing to do with him governing. Maybe it has everything to do with the perceived credibility boost that it would (or would not) be given if he were to be elected as the presidential nominee.

If Romney is not directly elected (as McCain’s VP), then if something were to happen to McCain and Romney becomes the President, evangelicals can rest easy that Romney was not voted into that most powerful office and thus his religion is not given the stamp of approval that a general election would require.