Who does McCain pick? - Page 2 - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

SeattleUte · 08-26-2008, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

for all the talk of how much help Romney will be, Mitt certainly did not do very well in the primaries. His cash couldnt buy him Iowa.

Mitt brings baggage. A large chunk of whatever money he brings with him will be spent on dispelling the baggage....a distraction that could hurt the ticket.

I personally think that it doesnt matter who the VP is......Quayle, Cheney, Al Gore........who cares. Candidates are elected based in large part on their own likeability, not their VP.

Agree with this. If Romney is such a great "play" why'd he get flattened in the primary, by a pretty lackluster and underfunded field, and with a huge head start and a lot more money? Romney was never in the race. His big wins were Michigan and Massachusettes, neither likely to go for the GOP anyway.

TripletDaddy · 08-26-2008, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

does Romney have more baggage than Biden?

there were two pieces in Slate today about Biden's propensity to plagiarize, and how it still matters today.

No, but Obama did not pick a VP to help boost his chances.

The talk for McCain supporters seems to center around which strategic pick will help boost his profile and odds. I dont think any pick will help or hurt that much.

Obama's Q rating is likely higher than all these other guys combined, so by guess is that he is picking a VP running mate only because he is required to do so. He doesn't need any help getting more popular than he already is.

And truthfully, who casts a vote with the VP's acumen in mind? "I am going to vote for George Bush because Dan Quayle seems to have solid experience in areas x, y, and z."

BarbaraGordon · 08-26-2008, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Agree with this. If Romney is such a great "play" why'd he get flattened in the primary, by a pretty lackluster and underfunded field, and with a huge head start and a lot more money? Romney was never in the race. His big wins were Michigan and Massachusettes, neither likely to go for the GOP anyway.

Seattle, you're being silly. They're not considering running Romney for prez again. He bombed that attempt big time. They just need somebody who can tip the scales in a couple of the battleground states. Romney can deliver the most swingers.

And Michigan is not unlikely for the GOP. Massachusetts, well, that's another matter.

It's no secret I wasn't a big fan of Romney on his own. He's got more flip-flops than the shoe department at Old Navy, and he uses way too much hair gel. But as a VP possibility, if the church members will turn out for him (and I assume they will), he's McCain's best option.

I hear Palin mentioned but I don't think she offers much. She's cute and very pro-life, but she doesn't swing any states.

MikeWaters · 08-26-2008, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Agree with this. If Romney is such a great "play" why'd he get flattened in the primary, by a pretty lackluster and underfunded field, and with a huge head start and a lot more money? Romney was never in the race. His big wins were Michigan and Massachusettes, neither likely to go for the GOP anyway.

hasn't Biden had 3 failed Presidential runs, none of the particularly respectable type?

SeattleUte · 08-26-2008, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by landpoke

I'm hoping for Huckabee. I can't help myself, I just like the guy. It seems like he's always moments away from pulling out a guitar and belting out a rendition of "Jimmy Crack Corn" or some other folksy southern song. Always with a big smile on his face and a little mischievous twinkle in his eye.

Touche. Nice teasing response to the inherent pro-Romney bias around here, even Cali. Good for 3D and MW for not just automatically supporting Romeny because he's conservative and a Mormon.

SeattleUte · 08-26-2008, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

hasn't Biden had 3 failed Presidential runs, none of the particularly respectable type?

I don't think Biden was a good choice. It's not my field, but I think he was a terrible choice for many reasons. I also think his glibness will eventually get them into trouble. I've never found him entertaining.

il Padrino Ute · 08-26-2008, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

hasn't Biden had 3 failed Presidential runs, none of the particularly respectable type?

Biden couldn't get past Dukakis in '88.

As SU would say, speaks volumes.

SeattleUte · 08-26-2008, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

Seattle, you're being silly. They're not considering running Romney for prez again. He bombed that attempt big time. They just need somebody who can tip the scales in a couple of the battleground states. Romney can deliver the most swingers.

And Michigan is not unlikely for the GOP. Massachusetts, well, that's another matter.

It's no secret I wasn't a big fan of Romney on his own. He's got more flip-flops than the shoe department at Old Navy, and he uses way too much hair gel. But as a VP possibility, if the church members will turn out for him (and I assume they will), he's McCain's best option.

I hear Palin mentioned but I don't think she offers much. She's cute and very pro-life, but she doesn't swing any states.

I'm just responding to the chorus here that Romney is such a self-evidently great choice. He's not a no brainer great choice.

That being said, I'm for Romney. I like his stance on gay marriage and social issues in general. I also think he'd be good for Mormons. This isn't like Turkey electing an Islamic fundamentalist.