Ten Reasons Mitt Romney Should Not Be the VP Nominee

National Review Online ^ | August 27, 2008 | David Frum

[KriegerGeist]

"Hence, the logical choice would be from someone who was NOT AN ALSO-RAN. In other words, NOT Romney, Huckster, Rudy."

I'm sure that this would just be wishing, but what would be the results of picking a Duncan Hunter or Tom Tancredo? No help because they're unknowns except to people like us?

This pick, I'm sure would NOT happen, BUT would knock the snot out of the whole 'race' thing: Former Lieutenant Governor of Maryland. A self-described Lincoln Republican. Michael S. Steele.

I like this guy and would vote for him as Prez or Vice-Prez.

[WOSG]

11. Not a neo-con.

Frum lost me at the “McCain smoked him in the debates”. Didnt notice that, at all.

As for the ganging up on Romney, easy reason: Romney was the guy to beat when he was leading in Iowa.

Need to have a “Top 10 reasons Romney threads descend into thread hell”.

[Zevonismymuse]

I suppose Thompson would be OK (and I really like him), but his campaign sucked, IMHO, so I don’t know what help he would be.

Whoever McCain picks needs to excite the base. Romney does that for many of us but obviously there are some people who are extremely anti-Romney. Whoever McCain picks will be better than either Obama or Biden. I just hope it is Romney so I can enthusiastically start promoting the GOP.

I'm with you on Fred Thompson. I agree with much of what Thompson says but he is definitely not an exciting candidate.

[ConservativeMan55]

Oh yeah.

I would definitely vote for Michael Steele.

He is great

[kabar]

Pursuing the Jewish vote is a chimera in much the same way as pursuing the black and Hispanic vote is. It is delusional, ignores history, and wastes resources.

The Republicans’ Hispanic Delusion Amnesty is not just wrong in principle, it’s bad politics.

Jewish Vote In Presidential Elections

[Texas Federalist]

If you are going to pick an old guy, Thompson is far superior to Romney in every way except hair.

[Texas Federalist]

Pursuing the Jewish vote is a chimera in much the same way as pursuing the black and Hispanic vote is. It is delusional, ignores history, and wastes resources.

But when the best choice on the short list just happens to be Jewish, it isn't unreasonable to pick him and hope there is some corresponding benefit in the Jewish vote.

[bayouranger]

I disagree totally.

In my age group (25-35) Romney is a vote magnet. Women love him, guys respect him & he can get the independent vote more so that the other possible choices. That being said, he's personable to boot.

Obama/Biden

McCain/Romney

The choice is too clear.

[WOSG]

NR actually endorsed Mitt Romney.

[MeanWestTexan]

I agree identity politics is certainly not a najor reason to pick a candidate.

A small “plus” on for political purposes? Sure.

[Behind Liberal Lines]

It’s just amazing so many people hate Romney, and conservatives no less. Most of the Republican primary candidates hated him but that’s understandable. Jealousy was definitely a factor. But NR ?

It's not hate. It's a realistic assessment of Rommney's many weaknesses as a candidate.

[freeplancer]

“Me, I don’t like Romney because he appears to be insincere”

Wow, that is really deep thinking. Do you think Jimmy Swaggart should be a VP instead?

“a significant percentage of people don’t like Romney”

Like everyone you hang out with? You are priceless.

[Vigilanteman]

An honest critique of these 10 reasons:

1. Family dog-- stupid argument. Never gained traction in the primaries.
   
2. Accomplishments as governor-- mainly valid argument, although Massachusetts was in less economic trouble when he left office than when he came in. The default setting for any lieberal state is economic trouble.
   
3. One term pledge-- stupid argument. I've never heard McCain make a one-term pledge, either implicitly or otherwise.
   
4. Windsurfing and hedge funds-- somewhat valid. Yeah, Romney is rich, just like Kerry. But he earned it rather than married it.
   
5. 2006 re-election-- stupid argument. Robert Erlich, who did a great job for Maryland and had high approval ratings, still lost in 2006. The default setting for Lieberal states is electing anyone with a "D" after their name. Especially in 2006.
   
6. Pro-life flip-flop. Valid argument. On the other hand, always pro-life McCain has Warren Rudmen advising him on judicial appointment. The same Warren Rudmen who gave us David Souter. How is a guy in the #2 slot going to improve this situation?
   
7. Everybody ganged up on him. Stupid argument. Hucksterbee was the only one totally focused on getting Romney out of the race, and for his own reasons of personal and religious hatred. McCain wanted him out only because he was his most serious challenger. Guilani's campaign was pathetic and he was never a factor. Fred Thompson actually cooperated with Romney by pulling out of Michigan so Romney would pull out of South Carolina. The strategy worked great for Romney, not so well for Fred.
   
8. Thin skin-- stupid argument. Nobody got attacked more and nobody held up better. He was the only one of the majors who had the backbone to actually run negative advertising against McCain.
   
9. Economy-- partially valid argument. He did a credible, but not a bang-up job on Massachusetts. Club for Growth said so. He did a bang-up job on the 2002 Olympics and Bain Capital where he was working with rational business people, not an overwhelmingly Marxist legislature.
   
10. Inexperience-- stupid argument. We could actually use more successful business people in government. Yeah, Paul O'Neill was a disaster, as have been other successful business people. But the pool is small compared with the pool of professional politicians who have been even bigger disasters. Ronald Reagan was a successful businessman before he went into politics. He wasn't the only one. The idea that our political leaders should be selected only from our pool of professional politicians is stupid.

    The final score:

    1. Valid arguments- 10%
       
    2. Partially valid- 30%
       
    3. Stupid arguments- 60%.

[MeanWestTexan]

Romney’s polling is bi-modal (as shown by the threads on him).

Romney has the highest “Favorable: Very Strongly”

Romney has the highest “Unfavorable: Very Strongly”

Indeed, Romney has the highest positive and highest negative ratings of any candidate.

The problem with Romney — on a pure political level -— is that a significant percentage of people actually dispise the man so much that they will stay home.

A 1 or 2% “stay home” factor would lose the election for McCain.

[SJackson]

Pursuing the Jewish vote is a chimera in much the same way as pursuing the black and Hispanic vote is. It is delusional, ignores history, and wastes resources.

I don't think anyone is suggesting Cantor because he's Jewish it's a minor issue.

You brought the issue to the thread back in post with the absurd statement that You left out one: Not Jewish.. Do you really think people opposed Romney in the primary, or oppose him as a VP because he's not Jewish?

[MeanWestTexan]

No, like 42% of the population recently polled by Rasmussen who have a negative opinion of Romney.

Highest negatives (and postives) of any candidate. Totally “bi-modal,” which would be a disaster for McCain.

[Theresawithanh]

I predict that McCain will surprise us all with the person he picks as his VP. There will be exploding heads. After all, McCain has made all of our heads explode at one time or another.

I don’t think it’ll be Romney. If it is, I think we’ll get to see what 8 years of Obama will be like. The good side? Hillary (and Bill) will be old news by 2012.

[Rennes Templar]

Fred Thompson. Fred Thompson? Oh yes, I remember him!

[Fudd Fan]

Well you sure surprised me! I thought your list would look like this:

1. He’s a Mormon
2. He’s a Mormon
3. He’s a Mormon
4. He’s a Mormon
5. He’s a Mormon
6. He’s a Mormon
7. He’s a Mormon
8. He’s a Mormon
9. He’s a Mormon
10. He’s a Mormon

But that would have been just a tad obvious, wouldn’t it.

[perfect_rovian_storm]

You need to get out more. _NOBODY_ respects a politically expedient fraud like Romney, except people who work for him and the ignorant. So, apparently, you’ve been hanging out with the Willard sycophants here or with ignorant folks. Either way, you’re hardly getting the full story.