Posted on 08/11/2012 4:31:23 PM PDT by lasereye
About a month ago, I wrote a piece evaluating Mitt Romney's possible running mate selections. Part of my thinking was that it would be good to lock myself in on the various picks. I rated Paul Ryan in the middle of the pack. Here's what I wrote about him:
The Wisconsin congressman might not have unusually conservative social views, but his economic stance is terrible for a Republican Party that wants to attract blue-collar whites. Romney has endorsed the Ryan budget plan, so maybe his negatives are already built in, and maybe it would be good to have a vice president who could explain that plan well. I doubt that, though; in this case the “no harm” category should probably be a “negative-one.”
Overall, I gave Ryan pluses for being a social conservative (but not over the top), representing a swing state (and a swing area of a swing state, at that), not having Bush ties, and having sufficient experience. I gave him minuses for not representing a swing demographic, not having gubernatorial experience, not having endorsed Romney early, and for being otherwise controversial.
Having had about three hours and four cups of coffee to digest the Ryan pick, I’m still of the same mind. I think this is overall a middling-to-poor choice. But it isn’t a middling pick in the sense that there are a bunch of mushy pros and cons. The pluses and minuses are pretty stark.
Here are some additional thoughts on this. First, the “not a bad pick” thoughts:
1) This is about Romney picking a veep he’s comfortable with. Ezra Klein writes that this “is an admission of fear from the Romney campaign. You don’t make a risky pick like Paul Ryan if you think the fundamentals favor your candidate.”
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
I meant to post this to Politics/Elections, not political humor.
Paul Ryan - The candidate who sleeps on a cot in his Congressional office.
VS
Harry Reid - Who’s now a multi-millionaire and stays in the Ritz Carlton.
Which of these men is most like us, Democrats.
I know it’s hard, but think about it.
Paul Ryan HAS been on the national stage, right up there in a direct appearance face to face with the Current Occupant of the White Hut himself. In February 2010, Congressman Ryan basically took apart the funding gimmicks that were supposed to make the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” somehow reduce the deficit, and exposed the clever double-counting and shifts of funding from Medicare and Medicaid to cover the general population, while taking away coverage from the seasoned citizens.
it belongs in Political /Pathetic Analysis category
Ryan may be a good man and a man with ideas. But who picks a VP for ideas? Biden hasn’t had an idea in the past decade or two. Romney has just handed Obama four more years on a platter. VP is picked for image and votes. The image is too WASP. Sorry, I am one, but there it is. Against our semi-black president you shouldn’t look too white. It’s not hip. The unthinking and hip vote, the same vote Obama got before, is going for him, along with a bunch of union folks. Ryan brings only votes Romney already had.
No he didn’t hand the election to Obama. It’s a very good choice and Trende gets it wrong. Ryan would be great at rebutting opposition to his plan. Romney was going to be hit with it anyway from Dems. And VP candidates don’t deliver states.
Dems are cartoon campaigners because that is what their simple minded constituency understands.Dems have already floated ads accusing Romney of killing a unionist steelworker’s wife. Now for the ads featuring Ryan throwing the steelworker’s mother off a cliff.
That may be true, but I can't remember such an "anyone but the incumbent" sentiment since Jimmy Carter in 1980. That has to be factored into the predictions, and Trende isn't doing that.
Ryan is Catholic, and I think this election will bring more and more Catholics into the party, and Democrats will actively drive Catholics out of theirs. Since Catholics have been roughly 50-50 democrat and republican, this will shift to the republicans favor.
I think Mormon is a lot closer to Protestant than Unitarian.
But on to an unimportant issue — What about Ryan’s House seat? WI’s primary is this Tuesday. There are no other candidates running.
Senate candidate Mark Neumann is Ryan’s predecessor (although under the 2012 lines, Neumann’s home is in District 5 rather than District 1) — would he (or any other candidate) need write-in votes to become the nominee?
I suppose Ryan could simply win Tuesday then some time before the convention resign his candidacy — or maybe Wisconsin allows candidates to run for Congress and VP at the same time; maybe not.
You would think all the stories about Ryan would have at least considered these questions though.
Also I thought I responded to a thread that said Ryan didn’t appeal to blue collar workers — but isn’t Ryan’s seat full of blue collar workers? His predecessor twice removed was Les Aspin (with Barca D and Neumann R in between).
Just what the GOP is lacking more big government, social justice types.
Reality will kick in at some point and constrain big government. There isn't an option, I am at least confident of that.
I hope you’re right, but my experience is people vote their pocketbook even if the ships sinking they’ll be last.
The half-white Obama must be a VASP then...
Ryan can run for reelection to his congressional seat too. Congressmen can do that if running concurrently for President or VP. Any other office and it’s a pick one scenario.
You expect a Republican to get the hipsters? It doesn’t matter who the VP selection is.
I thought there were some states that disallowed that. My recollection from 1988 (Bentsen ran for Senate and VP) was that TX was one of the states that allowed it, but quite a few others did not.
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.