Who will be Mitt's running mate?

I'm not going to lie, I liked the pick at the time.

 

I just figured Obama would go with someone from Ohio or Florida.

 

I lived in the Congressional district next to his for six years and I honestly could not tell you a single thing about him.

 

I can't think of anyone from either state that would have helped him (not that he needed it...).

They like to say that picking a VP from a certain state doesn't usually help, but I kind of discount that because it really hasn't happened enough times to really judge this.

 

Rubio does have issues, but I think the birther stuff is way down the list.

The drug dealer brother-in-law might be more problematic.

 

Not any more than Romney, whose father was born in Mexico.

 

In what, 3 1/2 years?

 

There's a story on this in Politico today, in which some unnamed GOP bigwig is quoted as saying "they're looking for an incredibly boring white guy." So Portman or Pawlenty it is.
As with most human organizations, the Romney campaign is overreacting to the last war (campaign). They don't want a Palin, so they'll overreach the other way.

 

That's one way to look at it, but in some ways they need a "game change" too -- Romney in and of himself is a pretty boring guy and doesn't really fire up the base very much on his own. Many of them doubt he is really "one of them."

 

Star, the overriding theory of the Romney campaign is that they want to make the only candidate in the race Obama, on the basis that economic dissatisfaction will result in Romney winning if he keeps the lowest possible profile and just keeps saying "Obama sucks." That's how they think Reagan beat Carter in 1980, which is only partially correct. Reagan also had to be a good enough campaigner to make people not think he might start World War III, which he was.
This is a pretty passive stance for a challenger. Reagan had a large and specific set of policy proposals. Romney doesn't have much more than "I'll reverse all Obama policies." Extreme risk avoidance can be pretty risky. Right, Mr. Dimon?

 

Basing your whole platform on "Obama sucks" is very risky if you're not prepared to argue that:

a) Bush -- whose policies Romney intends to continue and in fact double down upon -- didn't suck much worse, and

b) Your side has continually tried (and usually succeeded) to monkey-wrench anything and everything Obama has tried to do. Undoubtedly this will continue and probably ramp up over the next few months.

 

The GOP seems to want to couch its plans for Medicare and Social Security -- as in, not say what those plans plainly are. Having the author of said plans on the ticket would make that end-around a lot more difficult.