Rubio Endorses Romney

[ishii]

Saw this coming:

“Florida Senator Marco Rubio, a favorite of the conservative Tea Party movement, endorsed Mitt Romney on Wednesday calling the former Massachusetts governor the inevitable Republican presidential nominee”

reuters.com/article/2012/03/29/us-usa-campaign-romney-rubio-idUSBRE82S02F20120329

Rubio:

“I am endorsing Mitt Romney and the reason why is not only is he going to be the Republican nominee, but he offers at this point such a stark contrast to the president’s record," Rubio said in an interview on Fox News.”

But is he open to the vice presidency?

“I* don’t believe I’m going to be asked to be the vice presidential nominee,” Rubio said. “That’s not what I intend to be. That’s not what I want to be and that’s not going to happen.”*

I still think that if asked, he would accept out of a sense of duty. Rubio could help deliver Florida, give ideological and geographical (and ethnic) balance to the ticket. Also, he’d be the first hispanic vice presidential nominee. Maybe someone could look up to see if he’d be the first catholic vice presidential nominee.

I say, go for it Mitt- pick Rubio.

Ishii

 

[_Abyssinia]

I think the chance of Rubio being the VP nominee is tiny.

Actually, I think a woman on the ticket might be a better choice anyway. It creates a contrast with the Obama/Biden, it could help to get the womens vote, and it could help with Democrat attacks of a fictional Republican ‘war on women,’ a female VP could refute attacks from a perspective that a man can not.

Gov. Susana Martinez could be a good choice, there was just an NPR article written about her, she has a pretty high approval rating at 66%, over 50% even with Democrats and Hispanics:

npr.org/2012/03/29/149594586/latina-gov-a-rising-star-just-not-to-some-hispanics

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

IActually, I think a woman on the ticket might be a better choice anyway.

Any suggestions?

 

[KevinAK]

Any suggestions?

Michelle Bachmann was the first name that came to mind. I prefer to see her replace John Boehner as Speake of the House though.

I believe Mr. Rubio is mistaken. Romney is farfrom the shoo-in for the nomination that the GOP elite would like to think. The majority of conservatives have REJECTED him. Rubio’s reputation as a conservative may take a major hit as a result of his endorsement.

 

[Dale_M]

Any suggestions?

Abyssinia did suggest Susana Martinez, governor of New Mexico. I know little about her, but she seems to have even less political experience than Rubio. Aside from being elected governor in 2010, her previous offices was district attorney or assistant district attorney. I think Romney would want to pick a candidate who has received some national scrutiny from the press. We all know what happened the last time around when that didn’t happen first.

I dunno…according to the NPR article, Martinez may have problems within the Hispanic community. Nationally, her candidacy would pull less support among Hispanics than Rubio’s would. Plus a significant percent of New Mexico Hispanics (33%) strongly disapprove of her job performance, which would likely be exploited by Democrats.

 

[Havard]

Michelle Bachmann was the first name that came to mind. I prefer to see her replace John Boehner as Speake of the House though.

I believe Mr. Rubio is mistaken. Romney is farfrom the shoo-in for the nomination that the GOP elite would like to think. The majority of conservatives have REJECTED him. Rubio’s reputation as a conservative may take a major hit as a result of his endorsement.

Romney has 55% of the delegates that have already voted up to this point. He only needs to win 45% of the remaining delegates, and he’s marching into more favorable territory, not less, in the second half of the primary season. He’s ahead by double-digits in the polls in the upcoming delegate-rich, winner-take-all states of California and New York.

The only way Romney will not get the nomination is if there’s a huge crisis or scandal between now and June.

 

[Havard]

I say, go for it Mitt- pick Rubio.

Ishii

Agreed. Or Gen. Petraeus, or Jeb Bush.

Martinez is too unknown, imho. I would have said Nikki Haley, but look what her endorsement did for Romney in her own state. Bachman is unlikely, but it could work.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

I still think that if asked, he would accept out of a sense of duty. Rubio could help deliver Florida, give ideological and geographical (and ethnic) balance to the ticket. Also, he’d be the first hispanic vice presidential nominee. Maybe someone could look up to see if he’d be the first catholic vice presidential nominee.

He’d be the first Republican VP nominee. Joe Biden (say what you will) is the already the VP and is Catholic.

 

[Havard]

(say what you will)

Well, he to his credit, he was against the HHS mandate. He’s far from where he should be, but at least he’s not gone the way of Sebelius or Pelosi (also Catholics).

 

[_Abyssinia]

Well, he to his credit, he was against the HHS mandate. He’s far from where he should be, but at least he’s not gone the way of Sebelius or Pelosi (also Catholics).

But Biden seems to have embraced HHS mandate now, after Obama’s faking account trick.

 

[Dale_M]

He’d be the first Republican VP nominee. Joe Biden (say what you will) is the already the VP and is Catholic.

Actually, the first Catholic to be a Republican VP nominee was William E. Miller. He was Barry Goldwater’s running mate in 1964.

For Democrats, I think the first Catholic VP nominee was Edmund Muskie. In 1968 he was the running mate of Hubert Humphrey.

 

[ishii]

I think the chance of Rubio being the VP nominee is tiny.

Why?

Actually, I think a woman on the ticket might be a better choice anyway. It creates a contrast with the Obama/Biden, it could help to get the womens vote, and it could help with Democrat attacks of a fictional Republican ‘war on women,’ a female VP could refute attacks from a perspective that a man can not.

Interesting perspective. Assume the Obama campaign will pull out all the stops in terms of smear tactics and ad hominems - that is all he has going for him. So you think a female VP would be a good counter to the “GOP war on women” attack? I think they’d be more successful against Santorum in that respect.

Gov. Susana Martinez could be a good choice, there was just an NPR article written about her, she has a pretty high approval rating at 66%, over 50% even with Democrats and Hispanics:

npr.org/2012/03/29/149594586/latina-gov-a-rising-star-just-not-to-some-hispanics

while I like Susana Martinez, I watched a clip of her on Youtube of the gubernatorial debate in the last election and wasn’t much impressed. The gender issue aside, I think Rubio is a much more effective, articulate communicator. I do think the vice president has to be someone a little bit interesting/exciting rather than a midwestern governor or senator.

Ishii

 

[ishii]

Michelle Bachmann was the first name that came to mind. I prefer to see her replace John Boehner as Speake of the House though.

Bachman? I think she’s a better communicator than Palin but less charismatic. Could give good answers to the tough interviewers but I think her style is too strident - plus she wouldn’t really help with any kind of gender gap, imo.

I believe Mr. Rubio is mistaken. Romney is farfrom the shoo-in for the nomination that the GOP elite would like to think. The majority of conservatives have REJECTED him. Rubio’s reputation as a conservative may take a major hit as a result of his endorsement.

The only way for Romney to not get it is for the nomination to go to the convention and have some other candidate get it. Neither Santorum nor Gingrich have any way of catching up with Romney, but if they stay in the race, they will make it hard for Romney to get to the required # of delegates.

Don’t think Rubio’s conservative credentials are in question due to his endorsement. Santorum endorsed Romney in 2008 - are his credentials in question? No, they aren’t.

 

[ishii]

Actually, the first Catholic to be a Republican VP nominee was William E. Miller. He was Barry Goldwater’s running mate in 1964.

For Democrats, I think the first Catholic VP nominee was Edmund Muskie. In 1968 he was the running mate of Hubert Humphrey.

Thanks for your answer. Rubio would be the first hispanic catholic to be vice president.

Ishii

 

[Dale_M]

I do think the vice president has to be someone a little bit interesting/exciting rather than a midwestern governor or senator.

I dunno… Jesse Ventura was a Midwestern governor, and Joseph McCarthy was Midwestern senator. Both were interesting and even exciting (in a scary sort of way). However, I wouldn’t have wanted either one as a VP.

The traditional role of the VP candidate was to be the attack dog of the ticket, making all the negative charges and engaging in rough and tumble back and forth. The idea was to allow the presidential candidate to remain clean and well, presidential. However, it seems PACs and SuperPacs have replaced that role.

Another traditional role of the VP candidate was to balance the ticket in terms of geography and ideology. However, I wonder if that hasn’t diminished in recent decades, with the VP almost an afterthought. As long as the VP candidate doesn’t hurt the ticket, maybe s/he doesn’t matter.

2008 was an unusual year in that the Republican VP candidate outshone her running mate. Certainly she was interesting and exciting, but I wonder if by outshining McCain she didn’t lessen enthusiasm to vote for him.

 

[ishii]

I dunno… Jesse Ventura was a Midwestern governor, and Joseph McCarthy was Midwestern senator. Both were interesting and even exciting (in a scary sort of way). However, I wouldn’t have wanted either one as a VP.

The traditional role of the VP candidate was to be the attack dog of the ticket, making all the negative charges and engaging in rough and tumble back and forth. The idea was to allow the presidential candidate to remain clean and well, presidential. However, it seems PACs and SuperPacs have replaced that role.

Another traditional role of the VP candidate was to balance the ticket in terms of geography and ideology. However, I wonder if that hasn’t diminished in recent decades, with the VP almost an afterthought. As long as the VP candidate doesn’t hurt the ticket, maybe s/he doesn’t matter.

2008 was an unusual year in that the Republican VP candidate outshone her running mate. Certainly she was interesting and exciting, but I wonder if by outshining McCain she didn’t lessen enthusiasm to vote for him.

Jesse Ventura - not one of my favorite governors. I don’t consider his brand of militant anti-catholicism and wing-nut conspiracy ideology to be the least bit interesting. Glad he’s out of office and consigned to the late night nut-fudge radio shows, and Bill Maher angry atheist show. I don’t think anyone really listens to him.

Vice presidents used to provide balance - LBJ helped Kennedy win some of the southern states (as well as help secure the votes of numerous dead people). This year the vice president could help at the margins - and in a close election that could be the difference. For example, Rubio could help Romney win Florida - remember how important Florida was in 2000. Or, he could perhaps pry a few percentage points of hispanics away from Obama.

Ishii

 

[_Abyssinia]

Why?

Because he has consistently said he does not want to be VP.

Interesting perspective. Assume the Obama campaign will pull out all the stops in terms of smear tactics and ad hominems - that is all he has going for him. So you think a female VP would be a good counter to the “GOP war on women” attack? I think they’d be more successful against Santorum in that respect.

I think a female VP would be a good counter against that attack, yes.

while I like Susana Martinez, I watched a clip of her on Youtube of the gubernatorial debate in the last election and wasn’t much impressed. The gender issue aside, I think Rubio is a much more effective, articulate communicator. I do think the vice president has to be someone a little bit interesting/exciting rather than a midwestern governor or senator.
Ishii

She is a popular governor, she must be doing something right in her state and her communication skills may have improved since that debate.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Who Will Romney Pick to Be His Running Mate?

TWS: “Would anyone on that list be pro-choice?”

Romney: “No.”

weeklystandard.com/blogs/who-will-romney-pick-be-his-running-mate_634874.html

 

[HailStarofSea]

Actually, I think a woman on the ticket might be a better choice anyway. It creates a contrast with the Obama/Biden, it could help to get the womens vote, and it could help with Democrat attacks of a fictional Republican ‘war on women,’ a female VP could refute attacks from a perspective that a man can not.

Prior to the inclusion of Sarah Palin on the McCain ticket, I heard people say that it would be good to include her to have a woman on the ticket - probably to steal disillusioned Hillary supporters. I thought that doing this would be look so obvious and cynical that it would have the opposite effect. It did. Women formed “Women against Sarah Palin” groups. McCain got a smaller % of the female vote in 2008 than Bush in 2004. It was about a 5% difference. The difference is that Obama and Clinton looked like they had fought battles to overcome mountains and were qualified in their own right, while Palin looked like an unqualified candidate that McCain had picked because she was attractive. In addition, Palin was far to the right of most women.

Susana Martinez might be helpful because she is a governor in a blue state, meaning that she has learned how to appeal to moderates, independents, and liberals far more than Sarah Palin or others in red states. All the popular GOP in this election seem to run in blue states, Mitt Romney, Chris Christie… In addition, doing this will seem less cynical because it has been done twice, not just once. And she adds diversity to the ticket so the GOP seems to be sincere in trying to appeal to the whole country, not just small segments of it. But will people think that if the GOP loses, they will revert back to old ways? Is this sincere inclusion or simply desperate and cynical tokenism?

Personally, I suspect that the person who would be most popular might be the person who could be most trusted on the economy. Romney seems to represent the top 1% so is there anyone who could argue convincingly that they represent the poor and lower middle class (of all races) AND can make our economy strong? That’s what drove Clinton to popularity (a blue governor from a red state) and a poor background. Perhaps Felix Sabates? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felix_Sabates Not only was he a businessman that appears to have treated his employees well, but he also was the co-chair of a North Carolina Institute of Medicine Task Force on Latino Health. Of course, he won’t do anything for the “war on women.”

 

[HailStarofSea]

As for Rubio, Obama said he didn’t want to be President initially and then ended up running. Rubio has come out with a book to be released in a few months with his life story which suggests that he wants a higher profile and may mean he does in fact want to be VP.

“It’s not going to happen,” Rubio told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell on Wednesday. “I’m obviously flattered that people think about me that way. There are some things I’d like to get done here in the United States Senate. I’m enjoying the role that we have here.”

“Of couse, you would have a lot more power as vice president, potentially,” Mitchell pressed.

“Oh, you think so?” Rubio responded. “Well, I’m enjoying my time in the Senate. It’s a privilege to serve here, and it’s really what I’m focused on. I’m not going to be the vice presidential nominee, but I’m always flattered when people bring it up. I think they mean it as a compliment.”

Anyways, do you have any evidence that he doesn’t want to be VP? Saying, I’m focused on being in the Senate but I’m flattered that people are considering me for VP is not the same as "“For months, I have been adamant about the fact that I would not run for president,” Christie said. “My language was clear and direct. No many how many times I was asked the question for me the answer was never anything but no.”

The VP should be someone “who has the skills and the courage to get the financial house in order.” I would like to know if there are any in the GOP of any ethnicity who do.