10

“Who will McCain’s second choice be?”


 

The Democratic National Committee gets out ahead of the Republican nominee’s veep choice.  A random highlight:

Fred Smith Fred Smith?
As CEO of FedEx, Smith has a grasp on reality rivaled only by Bush and Cheney.

Fortunately Canada’s Liberals won’t be indulging any of this nasty negative campaigning in the coming election. The Tories are eager to define themselves and the opposition, while Stéphane Dion is intent on doing neither.


 

“Who will McCain’s second choice be?”

  1. Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska.

    I think Dion is defining himself as a ‘tax and spend liberal’ pretty well all on his own.

  2. Ridge or Romney.

  3. Right jwl.. and you managed to forget the fact that Flaherty and Harper have managed to squander a multi-billion dollar surplus into a deficit the first quarter (given to them by the Liberals after rescuing Canada from Mulroney and his version of the Conservatives, wholeft a massive debt)

    I would love the Conservatives to try to paint that on Dion and the Liberals. It’s effortless to counter.

  4. Scott,

    On that, it’s all appearance versus reality. It’s politicians writ large I think, not any party. The Liberals SOUND like tax and spenders, but seem to always govern like fiscal conservatives. The Tories SOUND like fiscal conservatives (at least when they’re deriding the Liberals as tax and spenders) but spend like drunken sailors and run up deficits. Chretien, Martin; Mulroney, Harper. I was ever thus it seems.

    It’s like that recent report that found that Trudeau was Canada’s highest defence spender in the last 37 years when measured as a percentage of GDP. Who would’a thunk it based on all the rhetoric? (both then by Trudeau, and now ABOUT Trudeau)

    I’m almost to the point where I think I should look at a party’s rhetoric, assume that their actual governing will be the opposite, and cast my vote based on that. I’ve got to have at least as good a chance of getting what I want doing that as I do presuming they’ll govern like they say they will!

  5. Oh, on the actual question, I’d put money on Romney personally, if I had to bet.

    The real answer of course is, “no one has any idea”. Probably not even McCain yet. (Same goes for Obama I’d bet).

  6. Hillary Clinton?

  7. Is it not problematic that Romney started as a credible moderate state governor and turned himself into a national laughing-stock as a conservative presidential candidate who manifestly didn’t believe the things that were coming out of his mouth? Is that not a problem? It happened only like five months ago.

    As for Ridge, I’d have to say the threat level on that has fallen from orange (elevated) to yellow (high).

  8. McCain has to win over the evangelicals…and apparently they don’t want Romney, a Mormon.

    McCain wants Obama to announce his VP first….wonder why? If it’s a woman…McCain will pick a woman too? If it’s a military person will McCain do so too?

  9. Sarah Palin was the flavour of the month darkhorse candidate a while back, but she has problems back home in the form of an ethics investigation. The first rule of thumb for a VP pick is, “do no harm”, so that rules out anyone with obvious, current baggage.

    It is amusing to see all of the speculation about the VP selections. It is great fodder for the media and political junkies, but after the initial 48-72 hour buzz, no one hears from the VP candidate, and no one bases their vote on them. Heck, in 1988, Dan Quayle was Bush Sr.’s running mate, and he won big regardless.

    The VP choice is relevant in that quite often, the VP ends up being the party’s nominee at a future date. (Gore, Bush Sr., Nixon, Johnson, etc.) In terms of the impact on the current race, however, it has none.

    Regarding Romney, Paul is absolutely correct. Had Romney simply run as who he was, i.e. a successful businessman and moderate, northeastern Governor, he might have had a shot. Trying to remake himself overnight into this swashbuckling right winger simply made him look foolish, and like a phony. (The fact that the talk radio carnival barkers adopted him in an attempt to stop McCain also exposed them as fools, and far less relevant than they thought they were.) You could tell Romney didn’t believe half of the stuff he was saying, which cemented the creepy air of inauthenticity that plagued his campaign. The failed Romney makeover will likely stand for years in politics as an example of what NOT to do when running for President.

  10. Mr. Wells,

    I for one do think the things you’ve stated could be a problem with Romney as VP, and I wouldn’t pick him, it just seems from the chattering classes that he’s the leading candidate right now.

    As for the fact that he “manifestly didn’t believe the things that were coming out of his mouth” I’m not sure that’s a minus. Surely McCain doesn’t believe some of the things that are coming out of his mouth (both in the sense that he doesn’t believe them AND in the sense that he can’t believe he’s saying them!) and Obama’s no different.

    If we’re going to wait for them to pick VPs who will “say what they mean and mean what they say” we’ll be waiting a long time. And even then, the whole “actually believing the words coming out of your mouth” phenomenon will only last until the end of that candidate’s first press conference.

    Or am I just jaded?

Sign in to comment.