McCain's Top Ten VP Choices, again
Back in February, ExLg did a series covering the potential vice presidental candidates for the Republican side. After three months and recent veep-related developments, I thought it wise to revisit and revise that list.
I created the first analysis since so many names were being tossed around without consideration of their electoral impact. Sure, I like Michael Steele and Gen. Petraeus as much as the next guy, but would they bring Sen. John McCain closer to victory?
Read the original post for the complete background, but here's a summary of my analysis. I assessed each potential Veep on the following attributes:
- Presidential: If elected, McCain would be one of our oldest presidents. And with the physical hell he’s endured in those 71 years, his health will be a major campaign issue. When you look at how rapidly presidents age due to job stress, he needs someone ready to assume command from day one.
- Standard-bearer: Except in the case of Cheney, nearly every VP is assumed to be the party’s heir apparent. Will McCain’s choice enthuse the base as they look to his future leadership?
- Ideological balance: A true-blue conservative could help turn out the base. A moderate or liberal could bolster the middle. There are pros and cons in this area, depending on McCain’s general election strategy.
- Geographic advantage: If a candidate can deliver a state, he will be a phenomenal asset in this evenly divided nation. A running mate won’t turn a blue state red, but he could help drag a purple state into the R column.
- Experiential diversity: We haven’t elected a sitting senator since JFK. Lack of executive experience and a long paper trail are a couple of big reasons for that.
- Age/Ethnicity/Gender: I hate this category, but McCain will be an old, white male facing a younger African-American or woman. And every criticism he makes will be reported by the MSM as being either racist or sexist accordingly. He might want to defuse those charges with a “diversity” pick. However, he will then be criticized as choosing a token.
With the strongest candidates, I considered other issues (voter perception, skeletons in the closet, popularity, etc.). All in all, I think the analysis has held up well. Everyone in my original Top Ten stayed in, although most changed position.
Mitt Romney was originally ranked quite low since I figured McCain's personal animus made that choice a near-impossibility. But since that time, these men have campaigned together in winning fashion and Romney continues to build bridges to both conservatives and party insiders. Giuliani, originally ranked high, has almost completely dropped from sight; his rank has dropped accordingly.
Charlie Crist, the Governor of must-win Florida, now seems less valuable since McCain is already crushing Hillary and Obama in statewide polls. And after Obama's ill-fated adventures in the Rust Belt, an Ohioan like Rob Portman is that much more attractive. Without further ado...
The Top Ten Republican VP Choices
- Gov. Tim Pawlenty (stayed same)
- Rep. Rob Portman (up from #7)
- Gov. Mitt Romney (up from #9)
- Gov. Mark Sanford (down from #4)
- Gov. Charlie Crist (down from #2)
- Mayor Rudy Giuliani (down from #3)
- Gov. Haley Barbour (down from #5)
- Gov. Sarah Palin (down from #6)
- Sen. John Thune (down from #8)
- Rep. Chris Cox (stayed same)
OK - eliminate those who are not governors (puhleeeeze) and the liberals, and you're left with Mitt Romney and Haley Barbour. And if you really want a female, Sarah Palin is left sadly in the dust by Marsha Blackburn, if you want a conservative to balance McCain's woefully liberal nature. Just sayin . . . !
Reply to this
Marsha Blackburn is my Congressman.
She is no conserevative.
See her unconstitutional votes at my old blog:
mickeywhite.blogspot.com
See current info at:
bluecollarrepublican.com
Mickey
Rossville TN
Reply to this
Here's an important piece of advice: If it looks like it's going to be McCain/Palin anyway (and that should be a "no brainer" for Team McCain), McCain should announce NOW or VERY SOON, rather than later towards the convention. There's currently a growing chorus for Obama/Hillary (as VP) ticket (in fact the Dems are likely aware of the Palin phenomenon). If the GOP waits while movement for Hillary as VP grows -- even worse until after it is solidified that Hillary will/could be VP pick -- selecting Palin will be portrayed by Dems/liberal media more as a reaction by GOP selecting its own female (overshawdoing Palin's own remarkable assets), rather than McCain taking the lead on this. Selecting Palin now or early (contrary to the punditocracy) will mean McCain will be seen as driving the course of this campaign overwhelmingly, and the DEMS will be seen as merely reacting. And, there's absoultely no down-side to this because even if Hillary is a no-go as VP for Obama, the GOP gains by acting early. McCain the maverick. Palin the maverick. Do it now!
There's no reason, and actually substantial negative, in McCain waiting to see what the Dems do first insofar as his picking Palin as VP, because, no matter who Obama picks, Palin is by far (and I mean far) the best pick for McCain and the GOP, especially in this time of GOP woes. The GOP can be seen as the party of real 'change' (albeit I hate that mantra, change, change, bla bla), while not really having to change from GOP core conservative values, which Palin more than represents.
In light of the current oil/energy situation, as well as the disaffected female Hillary voters situation, and growing focus on McCain's age and health, Palin is more than perfect -- now.
(Perhaps Team McCain is already on to this.)
Reply to this
has anyone considered john flake as mccains vp candidate?
Reply to this
I'm a big Jeff Flake fan, however I believe he is precluded from being McCain's running mate. If memory serves, a ticket cannot offer two candidates from the same state. Bush/Cheney almost ran into this issue (they both lived in Texas), but Cheney's official residence was still listed as Wyoming.
Reply to this
Leaving Bill Owens off the short list is a big mistake. Owens would bring the business expertise that all the pundits say Romney brings, but he brings integrity that Romney lacks. Owens as governor did the things that Owens as candidate said he would do. Romney only used the governorship of Massachusetts to fill out his resume to make his run for president more credible and he spent his four years avoiding political controvery and serious political battles and left the Commonwealth and its middle income wage earners worse off than when he carpet-bagged his way into the gubernatorial race. Romney can be expected to do for the nation what he did to Massachusetts, increase waste, increase patronage spending, avoid the controversy and battles that might impact a re-election bid adversely. Owens could be expected to do for our nation what he did for Colorado, and that is improve the quality of goverment and the lives of the governed.
Reply to this
The only argument against Jindal, Palin and a few others is lack of experience. Pick one of them and force the Dems into a debate about experience. Do they really want to get into that?
Reply to this
There's currently a growing chorus for Obama/Hillary (as VP) ticket (in fact the Dem are likely aware of the Plain phenomenon). If the GOP waits while movement for Hillary as VP grows -- even worse until after it is solidified that Hillary will/could be VP pick -- selecting Plain will be portrayed by Dem/liberal media more as a reaction by GOP selecting its own female (rather than McCain taking the lead on this.thanks for the nice post.i would like to say thanks to u and appreciate to u.
Reply to this