Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If part of Romney's strategy in picking a running mate is regional, it should be based on the Midwest, not the South or West.
Here's why:
Romney can't worry too much about the South -- it is the Republican stronghold. If he has to divert resources there, he can't win. He has to rely on holding there and competing where the bulk of the big swing states are located. Besides, the two biggest swing-state prizes there are more southern than Southern (Florida, particularly the peninsula, where most of the people live, is more a land of transplants and Cuban Hispanics, as opposed to cultural Southerners -- and Virginia, where the population is increasingly centered on blue-ish NoVa in and around Arlington).
And the West is a place where Romney performs reasonably well already. But most Western states aren't swing states. Sure, there's Colorado and New Mexico and Nevada, but they don't amount to much electorally.
But, the Midwest? Ohio. That alone is perhaps the ultimate swing-state prize. And it borders Michigan and Pennsylvania, two other potential swing states that are of similar character -- Rust Belt states -- one of which Romney will probably need as part of a winning coalition. And, conceivably, Wisconsin would be part of this strategy.
I'm not saying there aren't good running mates in the South and the West. There are. And Romney might pick one as part of a strategy that is not based on shoring up regional support. But if he's going, at least in part, on a regional strategy is picking a running mate, he should look to the Midwest.
Great analysis. However, the GOP is losing women voters in droves due to their weird obsession with women's reproductive issues. Any intelligent,
moderate women in Ohio that fit the bill?
Romney will probably have to make a strange pick since he's so far behind Obama; Obama had the luxury of running ahead so he picked Joe Biden, a very safe vanilla pick. Count on it being a token like non white or female like Rubio or Nikki Haley. He might even go out of his mind and put Allen West or Jan Brewer on but I doubt that unless he becomes really desperate.
Nikki Haley has removed herself from the short list of candidates. She does not want to be considered right now. I actually don't think it will be a strange or off the wall pick. I think it will be a very common sense sort of thing. However, contrary to popular belief. the candidate does not make this decision on their own. They are sort of directed in the way to go, so who knows?
I like Gary Johnson and Rand Paul but I doubt that they will be considered as a running mate. I think Paul Ryan, Rob Portman, and Mitch Daniels would also be great fiscal conservative choices. If not VP, I would make Paul Ryan the Treasury Secretary, Rob Portman the Commerce Secretary, and Mitch Daniels the Chief of Staff.
I never thought Santorum would be a VP candidate for Romney to begin with. In fact, the first time I saw the assertion put forth in the media, I scoffed at it. It's not even a reasonable notion to entertain in the slightest.....Romney confirmed that.
I think she could be a good choice, but I agree with nmnita and tmsterp that she could end up being another Palin. I don't think she's even remotely like Palin, but I do question whether she would be ready for national politics and how moderate swing voters would perceive her.
Plus the MSM might try and make her out as another Palin even though she is nothing like Palin.
I never thought Santorum would be a VP candidate for Romney to begin with. In fact, the first time I saw the assertion put forth in the media, I scoffed at it. It's not even a reasonable notion to entertain in the slightest.....Romney confirmed that.
Well, he burned his bridges with that silly comment equating Romney to Obama anyway.
I realize this does nothing to burnish his conservative credentials, but Scott Brown might have some appeal. He appeals to women, independents, the socially liberal wing of the Tea Party, and he's not a bad speaker.
i would agree with you except Romney doesn't need the northeast as much. With or without Brown there are only a certain number of states the GOP will carry in NEndland. One thing we all need to remember, the VP candidate doesn't really sway many voters or at least in the past. The most important thing, don't choose one that will hurt you, none are going to help that much.
to PhenomenalAJ: Jan Brewer? you must be out of your mnd, she would never help the ticket and AZ is pretty solid Republican anyway.
I like Gary Johnson and Rand Paul but I doubt that they will be considered as a running mate. I think Paul Ryan, Rob Portman, and Mitch Daniels would also be great fiscal conservative choices. If not VP, I would make Paul Ryan the Treasury Secretary, Rob Portman the Commerce Secretary, and Mitch Daniels the Chief of Staff.
I really think it is looking more and more like it might be Paul Ryan. He and Romney are very in synch it seems. However McDonnell from Virginia was always on the short list also I think.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
