Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-17-2012, 11:17 AM
 
4,412 posts, read 3,957,230 times
Reputation: 2326

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
Silly Bainer.
You know, you may be the the only person on the internet using that term. And you use it a lot.
It's not sticking.

As for Romney, who knows what McCain's people found. I'm inclined to think that they chose Palin more than passed over on Romney.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-17-2012, 11:19 AM
 
3,265 posts, read 3,192,061 times
Reputation: 1440
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike View Post
The same group vetted all the potential candidates. Steve Schmidt vetted Romney, Brownback, Crist and Powell as well as Romney and Palin. Imagine how Mitt felt, being passed over in favor of Sarah Palin.
Schmidt's now claiming it wasn't him who saw Romney's books but a different staffer. Though he says it's Mitt's wealth that's behind them passing on him. How he knew about Romney's wealth without going through his taxes, well that's a mystery for the ages I guess.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2012, 11:21 AM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,890 posts, read 18,745,357 times
Reputation: 3146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Mon View Post
You know, you may be the the only person on the internet using that term. And you use it a lot.
It's not sticking.
It's. Perfectly accurate term, I don't particularly care if it sticks. As long as it irritates you, it's a good day!

It never occurred to me that others used the term, so I checked. It is gaining use. Google Bainers continue to lie.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2012, 12:10 PM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
29,212 posts, read 22,344,773 times
Reputation: 23853
Quote:
Originally Posted by box_of_zip_disks View Post
Schmidt's now claiming it wasn't him who saw Romney's books but a different staffer. Though he says it's Mitt's wealth that's behind them passing on him. How he knew about Romney's wealth without going through his taxes, well that's a mystery for the ages I guess.
That could well be true. The vetting was done by a small group of McCain's advisors, and McCain had dallied for so long in choosing anyone that the vetting process was very hurried. Some of the choices, like Powell, were eliminated quickly, and others didn't want the job.

I don't remember anything written about Mitt that said he really wanted to be McCain's VP. Once he learned he was being vetted, I think he turned them down. Romney and McCain did not like each other at all, both personally and politically. I certain that Mitt realized McCain was losing very early on, and by then, had his sights set on 2012. For sure, the most bitterness during the debates came from McCain and Romney. They attacked each other much more than directing attacks to all the others.

McCain and all his advisors were desperately seeking a game changer who would put some spark into the campaign. Sarah Palin simply blew all the others away back then, and she was a different person in the earlier days of the campaign. Schmidt acknowledged openly that their only goal was to win the election, and was the one who recommended Palin the strongest of the group. I don't think Romney was ever considered seriously at all.

I also think Schmidt had an amount of self-serving when he made his statements on regretting Palin's choice. For a professional political advisor like him, an open admission made him appear as a honest advisor. Big league politics is all about honest assessments on how a candidate is doing, and if Schmidt had tried to blame others for Palin, or defended his choice totally, he would never get another job as an advisor again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2012, 01:40 PM
 
1,692 posts, read 1,959,158 times
Reputation: 1190
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
Perhaps McCain saw a man who as a member of a somewhat peculiar religious group and as a wealthy investor, would inevitably induce a horrendous cacaphony from the ******* moonbat hordes. McCain did not want to put the country thru such a spectacle. Thus he went with Sarah Palin, lol.
Then the conservadummies unleashed a cacophony on the black man.

Funny, huh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2012, 06:25 PM
 
Location: Montgomery County, MD
3,236 posts, read 3,936,635 times
Reputation: 3010
McCain hated Romney's guts and needed a conservative. A lot of the extreme right hates Romney as much as McCain. Still I think picking Palin was a stupid idea and Romney would've been a better pick.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2012, 06:34 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,890 posts, read 18,745,357 times
Reputation: 3146
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhenomenalAJ View Post
McCain hated Romney's guts and needed a conservative. A lot of the extreme right hates Romney as much as McCain. Still I think picking Palin was a stupid idea and Romney would've been a better pick.
McCain said today, Romney's returns were clean as a whistle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 09:52 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
77,771 posts, read 104,672,365 times
Reputation: 49248
Quote:
Originally Posted by walidm View Post
Source

Romney’s other advantages, according to people involved in McCain’s screening process:

— He is squeaky-clean and fully vetted by the national media.

But there’s one big problem: Despite the buddy-picture choreography of a McCain-Romney campaign swing, McCain remains less than enamored with Romney.

McCain sources also say he’ll pick his vice presidential candidate based more on ability to govern than ability to help in the election. Source

And so here we are... Fully vetted, squeaky clean, snubbed Romney.


What did McCain see during vetting that made him pass over Romney for Palin?
i think the VP choice, especially in 2008 had more to do with McCains campaign team than with McCain's choice. They didn't do a particularly good job, finding Palin, it was a gamble, it didn't work, she has made out like crazy and I don't think this has much to do with Romney period. Actually everyone thought, up until a few hours before the announcement Pawlenty was the choice. What happened in 2008 and what we have today are not the same thing. People are makng way too much out of this...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 09:57 AM
 
Location: Area 51.5
13,887 posts, read 13,664,841 times
Reputation: 9174
Quote:
Originally Posted by pollyrobin View Post
Seriously, do we all actually think McCain vetted anyone.
After all, he picked Palin
Quote:
Originally Posted by pollyrobin View Post
No, McCain's camp knew a "Mormon" would upset the evangelical base.

McCain's VP pick, campaign, was one of those things where you just went
"What were they/he thinking" and then just say - Wow, I could have had a V8
And you've got Biden!



Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 10:03 AM
 
Location: Charlotte
12,642 posts, read 15,593,556 times
Reputation: 1680
Lightbulb hmm...

Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
Lol, what makes you think he passed on Romney?
New to this?

McCain: Palin Was "Better Candidate" Than Romney Source

McCain was asked to explain why he took a pass on the more-polished Romney—and in his response he appeared to indirectly ding both Romney and one of the men rumored to be on his current vice presidential short-list, saying that neither were better suited for the job at the time than the then-Alaska governor.

"Oh come on, because we thought that Sarah Palin was the better candidate," he said. "Why did we not take [Tim] Pawlenty, why did we not take any of the other 10 other people. Why didn’t I? Because we had a better candidate, the same way with all the others. ... Come on, why? That’s a stupid question."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:31 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top