Poll: Who should be Mitt Romney’s running mate?
Consider this either a bonus “2012 Tuesday” or an extra “Poll Position” this week: Who should be Mitt Romney’s running mate?
With almost six weeks to go before the Republican National Convention, this feels too early for the “veepstakes” to be winding down and shortened to three serious candidates. But that’s what Reuters reported yesterday, saying Romney’s short list comprises Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty and Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio.
That means no Chris Christie, Mike Huckabee, Marco Rubio or Paul Ryan — bona fide GOP rock stars who would charge up the base but also draw heavy Democratic fire for various reasons.
Loading ...Here’s a quick pro and con list for each of the three:
JINDAL — Pros: In his second term as governor and has extensive experience for someone so young (he just turned 41); particular knowledge and policy success in the important areas of health care, energy and education reform; strongly identified as a social conservative who could pump up enthusiasm in that part of the Republican base; could attract voters in the fast-growing Asian-American community. Cons: Much-publicized flop in delivering GOP response to President Obama’s 2009 address to Congress is still the No. 1 thing many people know about him; can veer off into the weeds or wonkishness in discussing policy; Louisiana is already a sure thing for Romney in November.
PAWLENTY — Pros: Served two terms as governor; already vetted somewhat by the media due to his own short-lived presidential campaign; personal story appeals strongly to blue-collar workers (credited with coining the phrase “Sam’s Club Republicans”) and critical Midwest swing states; probably the safest pick Romney could make. Cons: His campaign was short-lived in large part because he didn’t connect with GOP voters (we also now know from the way the primary went that he bailed out too soon, before he had a chance to be given the “second look” everyone else got); his record as governor didn’t help Minnesota Republicans build on his electoral success; it’s far from clear Romney could win Minnesota even with him on the ballot.
PORTMAN — Pros: For a first-term senator, he has extensive experience in Washington (12 years in the House, stints as U.S. trade representative and director of Management and Budget) and could be “Mr. Inside” to Romney’s “Mr. Outside”; makes Ohio more winnable for Romney; on a personal note, I dealt with Portman a good bit while he was the U.S. trade representative and always found him one of the more genuinely impressive people in public office. Cons: His experience at USTR and OMB came during the Bush administration and would make it easier for Obama to campaign against George W. Bush (not that he won’t try anyway); just as vanilla as Pawlenty.
Any of the three would be more believable than, say, Joe Biden as someone who could be elevated to the presidency in an emergency. Any of the three strike me as more likely to help Romney’s chances than to hurt them, which is pretty much the whole ballgame. Jindal and Pawlenty strike me as more comfortable than Portman in the “attack dog” role the running mate traditionally fills — although the advent of super PACs and the negative tone we’ve already seen from both sides makes me wonder whether that tradition still holds up very well here in 2012. If picking from this group, and maybe even from the entire veepstakes field, I’m fairly certain I would go with Bobby Jindal.
But what about y’all? What’s your take: Should it be Jindal, Pawlenty, Portman — or someone else? If it’s the latter choice, let us know in the comments thread. In any event, vote in the nearby poll as well.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
285 comments Add your comment
SBinF
July 18th, 2012
10:11 am
Biden has a way with words, you may not like him, but it’s somewhat amusing that you say he is completely unfit for the job. He’s been a public servant longer than either of us have been alive…
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 18th, 2012
10:13 am
Kyle @ 9:53- A lot of the bones made by Republicans about Condi during the Bush years were because she disagreed with many of the things Bush was doing.
Surely the Romney campaign understands that if he leaves a gaping hole in his foreign policy creds, the obozo Super Pacs will forget all about the “outsourcing” and “offshore” nonsense.
And I wouldn’t bury the Bush years so enthusiastically. Many people long for the days when we had a leader that didn’t despise us.
iggy
July 18th, 2012
10:14 am
Dan Quayle.
iggy
July 18th, 2012
10:16 am
“He’s been a public servant longer than either of us have been alive”
Yeah…those delaware folks dont seem to be very intelligent.
Hillbilly D
July 18th, 2012
10:17 am
One man’s “public servant” is another man’s “feeder at the public trough”. That goes for both sides of the aisle. They get paid pretty well for being “servants”.
JDW
July 18th, 2012
10:17 am
@Tiberius…”A principled person would reign in the people who work for him and raise the level of discourse”
Yet Romney keeps on dodging and lying…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/21/mendacious-mitt-romney-bid-liar-in-chief
Maybe you could give him a call and get him to stop.
Uh Oh
July 18th, 2012
10:17 am
I report
Maybe you wouldn’t bury the Bush yrs, however there is a reason Romney doesn’t bring up his name, he is not out campaigning for Romney and the media was not allowed close to Cheney’s place for the fundraiser.
Spin it all you like, Bush’s Administration may or may not be vilified in the future, but the Republicans are not looking to bring him up today.
They dropped him in 06 and haven’t looked back.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 18th, 2012
10:17 am
I dare anyone to name one thing Biden has “served” the public with in his long, sorry tenure in government. Just one thing that’s made a difference for the good.
You can’t do it.
Not unless you’re talking about pork going out to some corporation or Mega bank.
DannyX
July 18th, 2012
10:18 am
“Senators and Governors who spoke out against it and use it as a “rallying cry”, yet HYPOCRITICALLY had their hands out and took money directly from that stimulus.”
Indeed Uh Oh, the Republican hypocrisy was overwhelming. In fact while every single Republican member of the US House and Senate were screaming NO, our very own Republican Gov., Sonny Perdue was busy writing a letter to Obama demanding more stimulus money. Perdue wasn’t representing just Georgia with his letter, he was writing on behalf of every single Republican governor in the country as head of the Republican Governors Association. Every Republican governor signed the letter, even Sanford in SC who originally said his state would not accept stimulus funds. Texas used the money to keep their rainy day fund intact.
Btw, did you and the others here that were against the stimulus cash your stimulus checks?
TRUTH
July 18th, 2012
10:18 am
Hmmmm, Jindal – Do you remember his speech in 2008? Well you R’s do have a selective memory and no doubt have applied your revisionist theories: Pawlenty – Mr. Excitement, himself. Mitt picks him, he will definitely get the boring vote. TPAW, that nickname is more exciting than the individual; Portman – Let’s see, the GOP wanted him to be Prez, he declined, now he may be a VP pick….what you think if Mitt is elected (DOUBTFUL!!), Portman could then run for Prez, thus allowing the GOP possibly 16 years of governance…. wait for it….wait…… now….
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHHAHAAAAA………………Georgia State has a better chance at winning the National Championship.
OBAMA/BIDEN 2012!!
Jack
July 18th, 2012
10:19 am
I’m going to vote for Romney and Portman as VP is a good choice.
Uh Oh
July 18th, 2012
10:19 am
HillyBilly D @ 10:17
I’m with you on that. Just merely pointing out to Kyle that the many Republicans are not being honest about that stimulus and Kyle know it himself.
But yes, Democrats will do the same
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 18th, 2012
10:19 am
“He’s been a public servant longer than either of us have been alive…”
That in itself should be enough to not vote for him.
zeke
July 18th, 2012
10:21 am
How about me! No one knows me or my background. And, I WOULD HAVE NO PROBLEM ATTACKING TO ANY EXTREME THE SOCIALIST MORON CURRENTLY IN THE WHITE HOUSE!!
OBOZO HAS TO GO! THERE ARE ABOUT 20 MORE OR LESS DEMOCRAT SENATE SEATS UP FOR ELECTION, AND, THEY ALL HAVE TO BE DEFEATED! WE MUST RID OUR GOVERNMENT OF THESE SOCIALIST MORONS!!
SBinF
July 18th, 2012
10:22 am
People who throw around the term “socialist” are highly unlikely to know what it means.
At least I’ve found that in my experience….
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 18th, 2012
10:25 am
Uh-oh – Would you like to tell us why a lot of congressional democrats won’t bring up obozo’s name or will not be attending the party’s convention in Charlotte?
Jefferson
July 18th, 2012
10:25 am
Cheer up Zeke.
Hillbilly D
July 18th, 2012
10:26 am
“He’s been a public servant longer than either of us have been alive…”
If that’s the case, he must have started before he was a teenager. :lol :
Hillbilly D
July 18th, 2012
10:26 am
Messed up my
the cat
July 18th, 2012
10:26 am
I report-please do tell us which congressional democrats will not attend the convention.
JDW
July 18th, 2012
10:26 am
@Tiberius…”Of course, the tag line “What is Mitt Romney hiding?” doesn’t suggest anything illegal, now does it?”
As usual you wouldn’t get it if it bit you on the bottom.
Romney has multiple issues with his taxes…
1) He has availed himself of every slimly loophole that the rich use to keep from paying their fair share. Once he shows his cards he can’t credibly argue against the position that those of wealth should pay at least the same percentage of their earnings in taxes as a fireman, policeman or teacher.
2) He has made a lot of money from Bain and quite likely a lot of that was during the time when he was “not involved”. It is hard enough for him to explain his own sworn statements to the contrary how is he going to explain the money?
3) Releasing his taxes will bring the issue of carried interest to the forefront and that single issue alone will make a few very rich people very unhappy…pssst…lots of those are the ones funding his campaign.
There may be more but I can guarantee those are in there.
Uh Oh
July 18th, 2012
10:27 am
“People who throw around the term “socialist” are highly unlikely to know what it means.”
Put you must admit, it does make for great sound bites. Gets used daily on talk radio, tv and written in columns across the country, only to be regurgitated like a macaw would mimic words. Seems to be working very well.
Uh Oh
July 18th, 2012
10:29 am
I report
Basically for the same reason. He is poison in some districts
With that said, that was a nice deflection to my answer of the Bush years.
again, do not be looking to hear or read about Bush Co being a focal point in words or appearances during this campaign.
Like it or not, they ran from him.
next
SBinF
July 18th, 2012
10:32 am
“If that’s the case, he must have started before he was a teenager. :lol :”
Biden was in the Senate for 36 years. I’m not sure how old Kyle is, but he seems to be about my age or a bit older.
“Put you must admit, it does make for great sound bites. Gets used daily on talk radio, tv and written in columns across the country, only to be regurgitated like a macaw would mimic words. Seems to be working very well.”
This may be true, but people who follow global politics and have even a cursory understanding of political and social theory cringe each time the terms ’socialist’ ‘communist’ or ‘fascist’ are thrown around (often interchangeably).
the cat
July 18th, 2012
10:32 am
Still waiting on that list of congressional democrats not attending the convention.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 18th, 2012
10:32 am
Thanks for admitting that you don’t want to know anything about Romney’s tax returns for legality’s sake, JDW.
You and your President are just glorified Peeping Toms.
Hillbilly D
July 18th, 2012
10:35 am
SBinF
It’s a joke. Not all of us are spring chickens.
SBinF
July 18th, 2012
10:35 am
Republicans are running from the Bush brand faster than those brides at the Filene’s annual wedding dress sale.
SBinF
July 18th, 2012
10:36 am
Oops sorry. I be slow.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 18th, 2012
10:37 am
“Still waiting on that list of congressional democrats not attending the convention.”
Google is your friend, the cat. Took me all of 10 seconds to find it.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/list-of-democrats-skipping-the-partys-national-convention-continues-to-grow/
Do I have to type them out for you, or are you going to at least READ the link? From ABC, no less.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
July 18th, 2012
10:37 am
cat-
Earlier today, Talking Points Memo reported that Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill will not be attending the convention, becoming the third Democratic senator, and eighth Democratic member of Congress, to opt out of the event.
Uh-oh –
Asked to compare President Obama to former President George W. Bush, 56 percent said that Obama was either “worse” (34 percent) or “about the same” (22 percent) than Bush, said a USA Today/Gallup poll.
And Gallup is a wholly owned subsidiary of the democrat party, by the way.
SBinF
July 18th, 2012
10:39 am
The legality of Romney’s tax returns was never the issue. Repeating it won’t make it true. I want to know what his effective tax rate is….and how he manages to pay a smaller percentage of tax on income of 20 million than I do for my income which is far, far smaller. It’s obvious that what he’s doing is legal. That doesn’t make it right.
I’m single and work a full time job. I pick up extra work as a gigging musician. I work 6 days a week. I use the 1040EZ form, and it takes me an hour or so to do my taxes. I’d love to have his accountants.
stands for decibels
July 18th, 2012
10:40 am
I voted for “someone else,” and my VP pick for Mitt would be Susana Martinez, NM’s Governor.
It’s a shame she (almost certainly) won’t be picked mostly (not solely) because the GOP don’t want a repeat of Going Rogue.
SBinF
July 18th, 2012
10:41 am
Ooh, Martinez. That’s a “Mexican” sounding name. I bet if Romney picked her, Latinos would flock to the Republican party in droves!!!1
Uh Oh
July 18th, 2012
10:42 am
“And Gallup is a wholly owned subsidiary of the democrat party, by the way.”
Unsubstantiated LIE, but I digress.
All that spin will not change the fact that you stated don’t be so quick to forget the Bush yrs. YOUR PARTY ALREADY DID……. It is over for them in regards to Bush. Accept it and move on.
stands for decibels
July 18th, 2012
10:42 am
And Gallup is a wholly owned subsidiary of the democrat party, by the way.
That’s why Nate Silver has documented a +2.5% pro-Republican house effect for Gallup, I guess.
Because they’re a “democrat [sic] party” subsidiary.
the cat
July 18th, 2012
10:43 am
Tiberius – pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 18th, 2012
10:37 am
“Still waiting on that list of congressional democrats not attending the convention.”
Google is your friend, the cat. Took me all of 10 seconds to find it.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/list-of-democrats-skipping-the-partys-national-convention-continues-to-grow/
Do I have to type them out for you, or are you going to at least READ the link? From ABC, no less.
So in your world a lot=6? OMG, you crack me up!
stands for decibels
July 18th, 2012
10:44 am
I bet if Romney picked her, Latinos would flock to the Republican party in droves!!!1
no. Not claiming that.
It would, however, signal to swing voters that he was not a corporate robot.
(and sure, it might help draw some Latino voters who are on the fence. Nothin’ wrong with that.)
md
July 18th, 2012
10:45 am
“Does anybody really base their vote on who the VP is?”
Maybe for the truly undecided that are also truly not tied to an ideology.
To me, I look at the VP as a person that can’t really move the needle up, but can definitely move the needle down.
Would I want Biden as my President…..heck no. Would I want Palin as my President….heck no.
Which leads me to my forever pet peeve of allowing the candidate to pick their own running mate. I think the VP’s should be voted on as well.
And I definitely think any in the order of succession should be voted on prior to ascending……it’s hard enough to envision Palin or Biden as President, but just a few short years ago, Pelosi was 2nd in line……..that’s a double heck no.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 18th, 2012
10:45 am
“I want to know what his effective tax rate is….and how he manages to pay a smaller percentage of tax on income of 20 million than I do for my income which is far, far smaller.”
So you’re admitting that you’re a Peeping Tom as well, SBinF?
And he pays a smaller percentage because it is legal for him to do so and because he worked his butt of to get in a position where he could take advantage of the laws that allow him to do so.
Uh Oh
July 18th, 2012
10:47 am
the cat
Has nothing to do with D or R. Those folks are attempting to save their hide. Obama will not be winning any of the states that those people represent.
Republicans are attempting to make this some sort of “new” development, but in fact officials from both parties have done this in the past.
Arcos
July 18th, 2012
10:47 am
I am still for Rubio. Mitt has to win Florida and the only demographic he really needs help with is Latinos. Rubio does both of these and more. He will definitely be a great attack dog, practically already is. Additionally, he sits on the foreign affairs committee and has the foreign experience that Romney could use in debating what Obama has not done to help America internationally. Lastly, Rubio is a rock star with a strong connection to the tea party. He will fire up that base across the country where the three you mentioned won’t as much. Just my thinking.
the cat
July 18th, 2012
10:47 am
Peeping Tom must be the talking point of the day. you are so predictable in never having your own original thoughts. Must have gone to religious schools.
JDW
July 18th, 2012
10:49 am
@Kyle…”Is that really the kind of person you think would be well-suited to meet with heads of state and otherwise lead the country?”
More so that Jindal, Pawlenty and Portman. Gaffes are a normal part of our overhyped media cycle these days and frankly way overblown. Romney walks around with his foot in his mouth half the time. By way of contrast just see if you can match the gaffe to the VP contender…
-Referred to the ACA as ObamneyCare on a Republican National Committee conference call…BTW the name came from Pawlenty himself except he was afraid to use it.
-Formed an exploratory committee AFTER announcing a candidacy on national TV…that’s a no no
-Claimed that “under Obama Federal jobs have substantially increased”…of course that’s contrary to the published facts…talk about a softball
the cat
July 18th, 2012
10:49 am
I think Romoney needs to pick that crazy old lady gubner from Arizona. She was good at putting her finger in the President’s face, remember? She has more balls than Mittens.
Contarded To The Core, Hate for no other reason, except..,
July 18th, 2012
10:49 am
How about “Bud” Abbott from Abbott and Costello fame?? I think he’d be a great fit for Mitt!!
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
July 18th, 2012
10:50 am
“So in your world a lot=6?”
No, that’s what IR/YW stated. I was just responding to your generic request for a list. Please try to pay attention, cat.
SBinF
July 18th, 2012
10:51 am
“It would, however, signal to swing voters that he was not a corporate robot.”
Unfortunately for Mitt, he is a corporate robot. He doesn’t know how to be anything else.
“And he pays a smaller percentage because it is legal for him to do so and because he worked his butt of to get in a position where he could take advantage of the laws that allow him to do so.”
He worked hard? Yes, I imagine the wealth he was born into didn’t have much to do with his “success” in life. And you have proven my point. Everything he did with his taxes was legal, that doesn’t mean it’s right. It simply means the system is gamed so that people who make a lot of money are able to take advantage of options that are not available to those of us who work every day for a wage. They take advantage of laws that they created to help themselves. Sadly, I’m not sure that you even see the irony in your words. It is in fact a correct use of the logical fallacy, begging the question. He worked hard to take advantage of laws that rich people enact so that they can work hard and take advantage of laws they created. And around we go in circles.
Hillbilly D
July 18th, 2012
10:51 am
officials from both parties have done this in the past
And they’ll do it until the end of time. The number one priority of any politician is self-preservation.
jconservative
July 18th, 2012
10:52 am
Kyle Wingfield at 9:53 am – I agree with the basic idea on having a hands off on the Bush administration. But Romney is surrounding himself with former Bush people in his campaign.
I just do not like Condi Rice as a political candidate. She has never won a single election for anything. She is an experienced academic and diplomat, but a political novice.
Romney needs some political help as he is getting little from his current staff. Romney has 2 wins and 2 losses as a political candidate (lost to Kennedy 1994, won governor in 2003, lost to McCain 2008 and has the nomination sewed up this year). The three candidates listed have won elections.