Well, the 12th amendment to the Constitution that says that the President and Vice-President can't be from the same state, but the Romneys can work around that -- when Mitt was running for governor of Massachusetts, the law there was that he had to be a Mass. resident for seven years, but he had just spent three years in Utah working on the Olympics, so he claimed that the house in Utah was in Ann's name. So she can be from Utah, while he is from Mass, and they won't violate the 12th amendment.
Slate Reports That the Drudge Report Reports Romney Would Like Petraeus, But Slate Says, Erm... No Drudge reported with his usual breathlessness: “A Petraeus drama has been quietly building behind the scenes.” If so, it’s happening far, far behind the scenes, as far away as in Matt Drudge’s head.
Has Matt Drudge scooped anything since Monica Lewinsky? I'm not sure why he still gets credibility all these years later.
I can't think of a duller ticket than Romney/Portman, 'cept maybe Romney/Pawlenty. Romney/Ryan would be interesting... I would think that would fire everyone up a bit.
Would Ryan swing independents? http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/10/u...aul-ryan-to-be-mitt-romneys-running-mate.html In rallying around Mr. Ryan, a champion of cutting government spending and reining in the costs of programs like Medicare and Medicaid, conservatives are calling for Mr. Romney to select someone who can push their fiscal agenda, but they also are setting the stage for a possible letdown on the right if Mr. Romney chooses someone else in his race against President Obama. A strongly worded Wall Street Journal editorial on Thursday urged Mr. Romney to pick Mr. Ryan, saying he “best exemplifies the nature and stakes of this election.” The editorial follows a fresh wave of public pressure from other conservative outlets for Mr. Romney to erase doubts about his commitment to conservative causes — an issue that has dogged Mr. Romney since his days campaigning as a liberal Republican for the Senate in Massachusetts.
I suppose it's always been this way, but it's odd (to me) when running mates are brought in to somehow shore up a glaring weakness in the presidential candidate. I understand a balanced ticket, get how a VP might (or might not) affect the vote in an important swing state. But, of course, the VP has no real authority in the executive branch, and I think most voters get that. Mitt has trouble connecting with... well, a lot of people: he's not enough of a social conservative (so he could pick a running mate who is); his fiscal background isn't small government enough (so he could pick a running mate who has that trait). And so on. I just don't get it. Mitt is the guy who emerged on top in the R primaries. He's obviously a very flawed candidate. I see how a VP choice might be pawned off as somehow spackling over a gap or two in his political CV. But, in the end, he's the one person running for presidency for the R party. He can't just delegate away fiscal decisions or his administration's positions on social issues. It's the antithesis of the "buck stops here."
Except that Ryan would scare the bejesus out of all the silverhairs down in Florida, so it could have an huge impact in that regard. In terms of pure horse race politics, it makes zero sense.
It's up there, but I think photo ops with local food favorites top the list. For instance, McCain's selection of Sarah Palin probably proved more damaging than Bachmann's sausage fellating picture.
Weekly Standard says it'll be Paul Ryan: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/romney-prepares-pick-ryan_649722.html
Well I waited 90 minutes into the NBC Olympic coverage to see something I was interested in, only to have the special report on Ryan being the pick.
I didn't expect Ryan although I listed him in the top 5 in my first post, as he's the riskiest choice. But the perception of a floundering campaign from Romney over the last month has altered the conventional wisdom. More importantly, his failure to make any consistent gains in the polls under the highly favorable circumstances over the last couple months caused him to re-evaluate IMO. Pawlenty and Portman are more status quo, and I think Romney needed a "Game Changer" so he took a chance on Ryan. A BIG chance.
Paul Ryan is a great pick for the base of the GOP. Not so much for winning the election. Romney is apparently choosing a Veep to shore up his base. That pretty much tells you where his campaign stands.
I think Palin's effect in 2008 is overstated by most, and she probably had more negative effect as a VP candidate as anyone since I've been paying attention. McCain got a convention bounce, in part due to conservative excitement about Palin, but conventions often give noticeable and brief bounces so that's not all that unusual. The reason that Obama won by 7 rather than the 2 to 3 points he was leading all summer until the conventions had a lot more to do with the economic meltdown than Palin's performance down the home stretch. The economy was in free fall the month before the election and Obama just kept saying McCain = Bush. Palin was a sideshow for political reporters and us junkies and maybe fired up some right wingers who were probably going to vote for McCain anyway. Why I think the VP pick is overrated is because it is an interesting event to political reporters and junkies so they talk about it as if it has a meaningful effect every time. In the end though, there is very little evidence that it actually matters - certainly not nearly as much as the pundits tell us during the summer leading up to the pick and after it as well.
The media's blown it before, but if it is really Ryan, it will make a bit of a splash with the pundits and conservative political junkies. What you should ask yourself is who exactly is going to vote for Romney, who wouldn't have otherwise, because of Ryan on the ticket and vice versa. I suspect that those two groups are rather small and I don't see why one would be significantly larger than the other.
If he really is selecting Ryan, Romney is giving the Ryan budget a big ole hug. Im not sure you want to do that when your behind in the race. Portman or Macdougal could have had some effect on the outcome if Romney manages to tighten the race up again, but Ryan just means the Obama campaign gets to directly link the Romney/Ryan campaign to ending medicare, which is about as wise as covering yourself in gasoline soaked rags and taking up smoking.