Who other than Palin?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 109224
  • Start date

Deleted member 109224

At the time in 2008, Sarah Palin made sense as a pick. She had that "real american" populist vibe going for her, fought the oil lobby in Alaska, excited the GOP base, and was something of a change factor (female VP) while running against Obama. The issue was they didn't probe her enough to figure out all the baggage going on there.

Lieberman's first go-to's for VP aside from Palin were Lieberman and Pawlenty,

What other prospective running mate could have the same positives that Palin had (excites the base, "real american", disruptive, a change factor, etc) without the baggage?

Meg Whitman perhaps? Bobby Jindal is another possibility.
 

Asp

Jackson Lennock said:
At the time in 2008, Sarah Palin made sense as a pick. She had that "real american" populist vibe going for her, fought the oil lobby in Alaska, excited the GOP base, and was something of a change factor (female VP) while running against Obama. The issue was they didn't probe her enough to figure out all the baggage going on there.

Lieberman's first go-to's for VP aside from Palin were Lieberman and Pawlenty,

What other prospective running mate could have the same positives that Palin had (excites the base, "real american", disruptive, a change factor, etc) without the baggage?

Meg Whitman perhaps? Bobby Jindal is another possibility.
Click to expand...

Both of the last are lightweights and Pawlenty is so boring he might just be made of card stock.

Mitt Romney could be an interesting choice.
 

Deleted member 109224

Asp said:
Both of the last are lightweights and Pawlenty is so boring he might just be made of card stock.

Mitt Romney could be an interesting choice.
Click to expand...

What about John Thune? He was a kind of a tea party before the tea party sort of guy, fairly young (under 50), and was well liked by the base for beating Daschle in 2004.
 

samcster94

Banned
Asp said:
Both of the last are lightweights and Pawlenty is so boring he might just be made of card stock.

Mitt Romney could be an interesting choice.
Click to expand...
Jeb is too, but his last name might be an issue(even if Florida is important).
 

TRH

Wildcard F. Kennedy said:
Colin Powell, if they could have ever convinced him to join the ticket.
Click to expand...

I don't think he'd want to, not least since 2008 didn't seem too promising for the GOP, and throwing in the hit to his reputation for Iraq, he wouldn't command quite the same respect as he did eight years earlier.

As for who might work, perhaps Mike Huckabee? He wasn't nearly as contentious as he would be in 2016, and he'd command the respect of social conservatives and the South.
 

Emperor Julian

Considering Powell endorsed Obama I find it unlikely he would accept McCain's offer unless he was against a Democrat that Powell found to be much worse.
 

Theoretical_TJ

That's really part of the problem here, weak candidates or otherwise decent candidates with an unfortunate last name that cycle.

I think Huckabee or Romney are probably the best choices. Lieberman makes a fascinating if unlikely hypothetical 3rd way.

The problem with Palin is that she just hadn't been groomed for national office from an early stage. I even think I remember hearing some talk radio host mentioning she was coming out too early. I think her 2008 performance was no less or more embarrassing than many of us would do being elevated way up in the limelight that early and quickly. Now if Palin had just missed the short list but the Rs had seen fit to start preparing her for 2012, then she could have been an extremely formidable pairing with Romney, and less so Huckabee.

In fact, I'm pretty sure Romney/ATL Palin is a fearsome duo in 2012.
 

David T

Romney or Pawlenty are obvious, "safe" choices. But of course 2008 was not the year the Republicans could play it safe. They had to shake things up--but Lieberman (probably McCain's preferred way of doing this) was too controversial with Republicans. Maybe if he had a sudden conversion on abortion, he would be acceptable to them, but that would just look too opportunistic. (Abortion would also be Tom Ridge's big problem.)

Anyway, I still am of the "nobody votes for the veep" school: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...minute/2000/06/nobody_votes_for_the_veep.html It's possible that in very close elections like 1960 or 2000 the choice could affect the result, but certainly not in 2008.
 

Deleted member 109224

Theoretical_TJ said:
That's really part of the problem here, weak candidates or otherwise decent candidates with an unfortunate last name that cycle.

I think Huckabee or Romney are probably the best choices. Lieberman makes a fascinating if unlikely hypothetical 3rd way.

The problem with Palin is that she just hadn't been groomed for national office from an early stage. I even think I remember hearing some talk radio host mentioning she was coming out too early. I think her 2008 performance was no less or more embarrassing than many of us would do being elevated way up in the limelight that early and quickly. Now if Palin had just missed the short list but the Rs had seen fit to start preparing her for 2012, then she could have been an extremely formidable pairing with Romney, and less so Huckabee.

In fact, I'm pretty sure Romney/ATL Palin is a fearsome duo in 2012.
Click to expand...

That'd be a Trumpy ticket.

Romney was Trumpish on immigration (ran right to attack Rudy-08 and Rick Perry-12), trade (bashed china), entitlements (protect them). They're both northeastern moderate businessmen with checkered political records. Palin has the cultural energy, and would help with Romney's turnout issues.
 

Expat

You can't really say Meg Whitman or Jindal are weak when the comparison point is Palin. Whitman doesn't excite the base, of course, but Jindal could sneak in there (purely in the sense that Palin DID sneak in there, so why not him?) Then again, he's only been in the House for two terms by 2008.

I agree that Huckabee's the only person mentioned who had any real juice behind him IOTL. In a situation where he gets a little more heat in the primaries it might just become a natural fit that the two form the ticket.

Thune (et al) never really *excited* anyone, just pleased them with purity.

Giuliani's still an interesting proposition in 2008 if you want to go maverick. He'd also have to perform better in the primaries for this to happen.
 

Deleted member 16736

Huckabee would my go-to not Palin choice in the event that McCain's campaign realized that they probably wouldn't win women voters that year anyhow.
 

Theoretical_TJ

George Allen of Virginia is a legitimately strong candidate, except for the pro choice position. He could mitigate it by going to the opposite position of the typical Catholic democrat which is to say "I think it should be legal, but I think it's a legislative matter for the states and not by Supreme Court fiat." And to highlight any restrictions he favored.

In '08, that's probably enough to assuage the base, given the unequivocal views on the other side of the ticket.
 

TRH

Theoretical_TJ said:
George Allen of Virginia is a legitimately strong candidate, except for the pro choice position. He could mitigate it by going to the opposite position of the typical Catholic democrat which is to say "I think it should be legal, but I think it's a legislative matter for the states and not by Supreme Court fiat." And to highlight any restrictions he favored.

In '08, that's probably enough to assuage the base, given the unequivocal views on the other side of the ticket.
Click to expand...

Maybe if he'd pulled out re-election against Webb, which was a really close one, then he'd get more consideration. Otherwise, picking a guy who'd just been voted out seems questionable.
 

JDGiant

TRH said:
I don't think he'd want to, not least since 2008 didn't seem too promising for the GOP, and throwing in the hit to his reputation for Iraq, he wouldn't command quite the same respect as he did eight years earlier.

As for who might work, perhaps Mike Huckabee? He wasn't nearly as contentious as he would be in 2016, and he'd command the respect of social conservatives and the South.
Click to expand...

I've always thought that Huckabee was the only Republican running that year who could have won the general. A populist in the year of the financial crisis, and arguably the smoothest GOP candidate to come close to winning the nomination since Reagan.
 

dw93

He should've went with Pawlenty or Huckabee, the former is probably the better bet as he doesn't have Huckabee's extreme social views (though they're still pretty conservative).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top