Posted on 06/03/2008 10:11:07 AM PDT by KatyLoraleyVidales
"Intrade, which correctly picked the winner of every state in the 2004 general election, evaluates the veepstakes chances of 30 prominent political figures..."
According to Intrade, it's all Governors for the VP spot. Former Gov. of Massachusetts Mitt Romney takes the lead with 19.2%, followed by former Gov. of Minnesota Tim Pawlenty with 15.6% and lastly Former Gov. of Arkansas Mike Huckabee with 14.1%
With all the campaigning that Romney has been doing on behalf of John McCain, many people are left wondering who he was truely campaigning for...McCain or himself. Romney attended McCains Memorial Day BBQ Bash. Although, Huckabee did receive an invite he declined the invitation. Two other individuals who attended the BBQ who raised VEEP Speculating Eyebrows were Charlie Crist and Bobby Jindal...Governors of Florida and Louisiana (respectively).
McCain is seen as too moderate for the majority of conservatives and religious conservatives across the nation. This is more than likely a repercussion of the McCain campaign trying to distance themselves, somewhat, from the Bush Administration in attempts to appeal to moderates making it easier to beat Obama in November...
(Excerpt) Read more at rightupfront.org ...
If “McCain is seen as too moderate for the majority of conservatives and religious conservatives across the nation,” as the article suggests, then picking a liberal like Romney is suicidal.
Where does Mitt stand on cap and trade and the global warming scam?
I hope he doesn’t pick The Huckster.
Romney has a lot of advantages for McCain. Electorally speaking, he could help insure a win in MI, a vital state, for the ticket. Just as important, Obama is running strongly in the Southwest states. Romney could help the GOP ticket win those states (UT, NM, NV).
How about Condoleezza Rice? She would help add votes from minorities and women, and she is not a RINO.
Running unqualified minorities is the dems game. We shouldn't try to beat them at it.
Intrade is useless for this type of operation. When predicting elections, you are evaluating an event that has a probabilistic outcome that is somewhat rationally tied to knowledge.
But here we are talking about a choice a person would make. And the knowledge of how that person will choose is non-existent. So intrade isn’t combining a mass “common wisdom”, it’s just reflecting the random speculations of a mass of people.
“Intrade, which correctly picked the winner of every state in the 2004 general election, evaluates the veepstakes chances of 30 prominent political figures...”
I think that’s a crock. What I remember was that intrade only got it right either the day of or the day before the actual election as more info leaked in.
Tim Pawlenty is not a former Governor. He is the current Governor of Minnesota.
It would be smarter to make him Secretary of the Treasury.
75% of FReepers disagreed with that allegation. Romney pased muster on the ultimate conservative litmus test, A FR poll. Sure it was late and begrudgingly. But time again conservatives voted for Romney in State after State. Rush did a spot on it and plugged a FR thread which posted the raw data.
What you should probably be wondering is what the vast majority of conservatives know and understand about Romney that you may have missed.
The same place any CEO with a brain stands. He knows its a crock. And he knows foriegn countries like CHina will never comply with their end of the deal anyway which he has stated time and again.
I like Condi and think she is qualified though the left can paint her as tainted by the current administration. Though if we are playing the minority game JC Watts is a good pick as well.
Sometimes true. You can look at theri site and see how typical trends go day by day. Intrade has correctly predicted in faster cycles than the MSM or other polls. In FReemarket capitalism and the 24 hour news cycle every hour counts. Intrade beats all others hands down. Putting money into the mix with Capitalistc principles works.
Please inform me, using specific examples of how Romney demonstrated his conservativism. And I don’t mean after he began his run for the nomination and changed his stripes.
Rice is better qualified than everyone in Congress.
There was the time before his Presidential run that he rescued some drowning boaters... but you'll probably just claim he was trying mimic Reagen just to "fool" conservatives.
What you really need to ask yourself is what did 75% of FReepers understand about Romney's conservatism that you are willfully blind to.
Spell correction =Reagan
"Human Events" even pegged him as one of the top 10 RINOs... of course this was well before the Liar changed his stripes and decided to run for the GOP nomination.
Ranked by the editors of Human Events... 8. Gov. Mitt Romney (Mass.) Has said, “I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country.”
They listed him for his changeing stand on abortion to fully pro-life.
IOW, they didn't believe his conversion on the issue. It's the conservative conversion for me but not for thee argument.
They left off other presidential candidates like the obvious pro-abortionist Rudy Guliani which IMO, deligetimizes the list and their justification of Romney's inclusion for his past abortion position.
They also forgot to add Mccain to their list.
In their favor, Human events did endorse Fred... but not until almost 2 weeks after voting started in Jan.
Like I said before 75% of FReepers came to understand Romney's conservatism on 95% of the issues and came to believe his conversion on the abortion issue.
I'll trust 75% of FReepers as they were polled this year over an article post from 2005 by a few of the editors at Human Events who intentionally left off Rudy and McCain.
The odds on the markets show a great deal of uncertainty: no one knows who McCain will pick.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.