McCain praises Romney's surrogate skills; VP stock rising?

 

"I'm appreciative every time I see Mitt on television on my behalf," McCain said at a fundraising event in New Mexico. "He does a better job for me than he did for himself, as a matter of fact."

 

There's no denying the former Massachusetts governor is angling for the No. 2 position on the Republican presidential ticket. He said back in March he would be "honored" to take the position and has been a constant fixture on cable news shows over the last several months — vigorously promoting the Arizona senator's candidacy while sharply criticizing that of Obama.

 

 

This would be an awesome choice by McCain, and IMO would rally the more conservative voters around him....

Romney is without a doubt the best choice he can make!

I agree with what has been said. Romney would be a smart choice--he would make up for McCain's perceived lack of economic savvy in the eyes of many voters and might make far right a little more comfortable and enthusiastic.

McCain praises Romney's surrogate skills; VP stock rising?

 

"I'm appreciative every time I see Mitt on television on my behalf," McCain said at a fundraising event in New Mexico. "He does a better job for me than he did for himself, as a matter of fact."

 

There's no denying the former Massachusetts governor is angling for the No. 2 position on the Republican presidential ticket. He said back in March he would be "honored" to take the position and has been a constant fixture on cable news shows over the last several months — vigorously promoting the Arizona senator's candidacy while sharply criticizing that of Obama.

 

 

This would be an awesome choice by McCain, and IMO would rally the more conservative voters around him....

 

What is your basis for this?

 

I thought in the primary, it was shown that over and over when the conservatives/evangelicals didn't vote for Huckabee they went to McCain NOT Romney.

What is your basis for this?

 

I thought in the primary, it was shown that over and over when the conservatives/evangelicals didn't vote for Huckabee they went to McCain NOT Romney.

He is speaking of fiscal conservatives, but that's what I consider myself and Romney doesn't really excite me more than anyone else.

 

I really, really like Bobby Jindal. I have only seen a handful of his stances but some of them are excellent.

He is speaking of fiscal conservatives, but that's what I consider myself and Romney doesn't really excite me more than anyone else.

 

I really, really like Bobby Jindal. I have only seen a handful of his stances but some of them are excellent.

 

I really like Jindal as well.

 

The thing that really makes me think Romney is the right guy, well two things really, are 1) He is as good as it gets when it comes to business and the economy, and 2) He would give McCain a realistic chance at winning Michigan, which would go a long way towards winning the White House.

I really like Jindal as well.

 

The thing that really makes me think Romney is the right guy, well two things really, are 1) He is as good as it gets when it comes to business and the economy, and 2) He would give McCain a realistic chance at winning Michigan, which would go a long way towards winning the White House.

You keep bringing up Michigan and that is an excellent point.

It would not excite this undecided voter. In fact, it would be a mark in the "negative" column for me.

It would not excite this undecided voter. In fact, it would be a mark in the "negative" column for me.

 

I'm reading a book on Romney right now, that might change your mind...

I'm reading a book on Romney right now, that might change your mind...

 

:lol: I have gotten stuck in a non-reading slump.

He is speaking of fiscal conservatives, but that's what I consider myself and Romney doesn't really excite me more than anyone else.

 

I really, really like Bobby Jindal. I have only seen a handful of his stances but some of them are excellent.

 

So, wouldn't the person appointed as director of the treasury department or whatever department oversees those economic issues be more of a concern than VP?:confused:

So, wouldn't the person appointed as director of the treasury department or whatever department oversees those economic issues be more of a concern than VP?:confused:

 

So, using that logic, who cares what qualifications the Presidential nominees have? Let's just pick a guy off the streets, because the people he appoints are the only ones that matter....

I mean wouldn't it make sense if you're a presidential candidate with a weakness in the economy, to pick a running mate who is far superior to anyone else on that issue?

So, using that logic, who cares what qualifications the Presidential nominees have? Let's just pick a guy off the streets, because the people he appoints are the only ones that matter....

 

That would be your logic from my question, not mine.

 

Who is more directly involved in the economic issues? Department of Treasury or VP?????

 

VP should be able to cover a whole host of issues rather than just one.

The Treasury appointment should be the top economic mind that they can possibly get.

 

I would assume the Treasury appointment will be dealing with economic/fiscal issues on a DAILY basis. The VP wouldn't.

 

I would expect that the VP position should be highly qualified across the board.

 

To address your statement, I would rather have what you suggested than Obama.

I mean wouldn't it make sense if you're a presidential candidate with a weakness in the economy, to pick a running mate who is far superior to anyone else on that issue?

 

Wouldn't it make sense for the person that will run the Treasury Department to be the best economic person you can get? Since they will be dealing with fiscal policy on a daily basis.

 

Where the VP will not.