McCain and Romney: Mitt's moment - at last?

Boston.com ^ | March 23, 2008 | Joan Vennochi

[Rome2000]

Don't know who McCain will end up picking, buy I do know 2 wrongs don't make a right.

Why would McCain want to piss off conservatives by picking a liberal liar who believes God lives on KOLOB and magic underwear?

No thanks.

[broncobilly]

But the VP position is almost entirely symbolic, and the message here is “conservatives need not apply”.

---

No. The message I get is that no one is “pure” enough to represent the conservatives, and if we can just kill off all the RINOs then maybe some budding, non-impressive conservative will have a chance.

[Cobra64]

Yes, but here on FR, there are so many one issue voters that they are discouraged by any contender. Fred and Duncan satisfied all five of my hot buttons. They're not viable now. So, going down the list, who is the next person in addressing my issues? That's the way I look at it.

[samtheman]

the message here is "conservatives need not apply".

How would you go about changing the message? Who would you suggest?

[Cobra64]

What Romney DOES offer is economic expertise to help balance McCain's economic ignorance.

Bingo! Something that most single voter FReepers never think about.

[Content Provider]

I don’t think McCain has any possible VP pick that can remedy his fundamental flaws. If we’re talking replacements for McCain, though, I could come up with a few names that would have no trouble rallying the party.

[Content Provider]

No. The message I get is that no one is “pure” enough to represent the conservatives, and if we can just kill off all the RINOs then maybe some budding, non-impressive conservative will have a chance.

That canard is old and tired already. Conservatives have compromised time and time and time again. It is time someone compromises back.

If we never stand on principle then we are not conservatives, we are jellyfish.

[July 4th]

Yes it does. Likewise McCain-Lieberman.

When I saw McCain touring Europe and the Middle East with Lieberman last week, I couldn't help but wonder whether that's a picture we'll be seeing a lot of in the coming months.

[Wuli]

i just don’t get the idea that ‘conservatives’ in the gop who, for the most part, did not support mcpain would or should change how they vote in november based on who mcpain picks for veep

only the gullible - believing a veep can change or affect the policy direction of the potus - vote for a potus based on a veep choice

that said

i was not a mcpain supporter and wanted any goper besides mcpain

that said

i want, more urgently, anyone but billary/bama

and

that will not be any third party candidate

so, at this point

mcpain can name his dead great grandmother as veep and, as a conservative, i am still going to hold my nose and vote for him

if this were ignorant sheeple or dims or media talking heads debating this issue i could understand it

here, at freerep, i cannot see what difference it makes to OUR priorities

[stevem]

Conservatives love him

Let's not go overboard on this one.

[cinives]

LOL I still think it’ll be his “best bud” Lieberman.

[LukeSW]

While Romney is smart, young and energetic, I think he is swayed too much by his philosophy of pragmatic utilitarianism. Meaning, he goes where he sees advantageous flows.

And I am actually know Mitt. I have watched him for years. I have defended his (and my) faith here on Free Republic vigorously. But in many ways, Romney's lack of philosophical grounding troubles me greatly.

For VP, I am much more impressed with Senator Coburn of Oklahoma. The governor of Alaska would be good also, but I believe she is "with child" making a campaign too difficult.

Tom Coburn gets it. He understands conservative ideals implicitly. He understands the health care issues better than anyone I have seen in politics. Being a physician doesn't hurt, either. But at core, Tom Coburn understands the power of real market forces. Romneycare in Mass. is a transparent attempt to solve the health care problem the wrong way.

Coburn is also very good on immigration. More important he uderstands the constitution and is fully grounded in conservative ideals. Finally, he understands the systemic flaws in the current system in DC and has solid ideas on how to fix them.

Southern, conservative, smart, courageous. I think he would bring real advantages to McCain's campaign and serve to bring McCain back to the base of the Republican party. The two of them could appoint Romney to be Secretary of Treasury or Secretary of Commerce and you would have a very strong administration.

[samtheman]

McCain is flawed, but he is basically a law-abiding American.

Hillary isn’t law-abiding.

Obama isn’t American.

[stevem]

Wish Reagan didn't go for a balancer in Bush

I don't think Reagan cared that much about balance. He thought party unity was important. In 1980 Bush was the clear Republican favorite after Reagan.

I may be wrong about this, but I believe in the next decade these two became real friends.

[Wuli]

mcpain’s veep choice will be

younger and married with children

in an elected office now or very recently

well recognized and popular in their own state

smart and actively promoting free market policies

not having taken any positions offensive to
conservatives

affable, congenial personality that makes a great and smart presentation of themselves in any public or media venue

someone able to be a full time, 24/7, campaigner, even more so than mcpain

someone who will be seen, by how they work on the campaign, as a full and active partner with mcpain, not a lackey

someone with whom mcpain has, or will rapidly develop, a level of trust a potus needs in a veep

i don’t think this person, whoever they are, was any of the alternate gop potus candidates in the primaries

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

>>My take is that McCain gets 70% to 80% on issues dear to me.<<

For one thing, McCain’s “conservative rating” has been going down for several years. But suppose you are right about the %. The trouble is that, included in the missing 20%-30% are issues in which McCain’s position would result in millions of new Dem voters or worse. All 3 remaining POTUS candidates, as well as our current POTUS, put the interests of Mexico above those of the USA.

>>Romney would add another 10%-15% making it 90+%.<<

As McCain has told us, he is not looking for a VP with whom he has ideological disagreements. So I believe that Romney would have to flip on immigration again to get McCain’s approval. How would having not only a flipper, but an extremely recent flipper, on his team, help McCain? I am very skeptical about the % going up from a VP nominee.

>>Giving the fact that I don’t see a 100% guy<<

There is no “100% guy” and everyone knows it, including McCain bashers.

[broncobilly]

That canard is old and tired already. Conservatives have compromised time and time and time again. It is time someone compromises back.

If we never stand on principle then we are not conservatives, we are jellyfish.

---

If you are trying to work together with other people, life is one giant compromise.
If the conservatives had someone to propose, it would be different, but they don’t. All they have is a longing for another Reagan, two conservatives who have shown themselves to be poor campaigners, and a list of budding newcomers who seem like lightweights.

[Content Provider]

I'm sorry, but that's preposterous. McCain is a champion of lawbreaking illegals, has a history of skirting the law himself (Keating 5), and can't even abide by a law he himself wrote!

The three of them are the worst set of Presidential candidates ever to be inflicted on this country.

[Content Provider]

History is against your argument. The most successful conservatives in the modern era - Reagan and Gingrich - accomplished what they did by standing their ground and refusing to compromise core principles.

Maybe you’ll understand when McCain names Linda Chavez as his VP.

[9YearLurker]

Hey, Mitt’s already demonstrated his facile flipping bona fides.