Romney Veep

[Mr. Morden]

Some likely short listers include:

John Thune
Rob Portman (if he wins that race in Ohio)
John Kasich (if he wins that race in Ohio)

Yeah, I'm thinking the GOP's VP pool is going to be fairly shallow in 2012.  Though if they do well in 2010, they might have some good people ready for 2016 or 2020.

[Mr. Morden]

DeMint actually endorsed Mitt last time around, so maybe... but he'd be too polarizing. They'd need a fresh face who can speak intelligently.

Honestly, DeMint's comments about excluding single mothers from being teachers are, by themselves, just about enough to sink any ambitions he might have of being on a national ticket.  Romney just wouldn't want to take that kind of political risk on him.  Romney would want someone who checks all the boxes of GOP litmus tests, yet simultaneously doesn't frighten swing voters.

I also don't think he would necessarily go with someone like Rubio, who'll be so new to the national political scene, and doesn't have as much experience dealing with national issues or the national media.  Not after the fiasco of the Sarah Palin pick.  Too much of a risk there.  That's why I think Kasich or Portman might be good.  They'll be "new" faces in the 2010 election, if they win, in that they'll be new to statewide office.  But they also have past experience, and have been around long enough to know the game.  But of course, they first have to win this November.

[Mr. Morden]

Alexander is now as old as Biden.

You don't say.  May I ask when Alexander was younger than Biden?

[Mr. Morden]

Romney isn't winning.  His favorables with Republicans aren't good enough.

McCain and Giuliani led the field last time. Romney is the only one running who appeals to the big ticket states, and the only one who can reasonably appeal to independents.

While I won't say that he won't win, barring scandal, he has his work cut out for him.

Um, what big ticket states does Romney appeal to? Utah?

California, New York, Florida, Illinois.

Three of those states haven't voted for a Republican nominee for President since the Soviet Union was in existence. In 2008, every one of those three voted for Obama by huge margins.

No offense, but this is the second time in two days that you seem to be totally clueless about the distinction between the primaries and the GE, even when it's completely obvious from context.

[Mr. Morden]

Romney isn't winning.  His favorables with Republicans aren't good enough.

McCain and Giuliani led the field last time. Romney is the only one running who appeals to the big ticket states, and the only one who can reasonably appeal to independents.

While I won't say that he won't win, barring scandal, he has his work cut out for him.

Um, what big ticket states does Romney appeal to? Utah?

California, New York, Florida, Illinois.

Three of those states haven't voted for a Republican nominee for President since the Soviet Union was in existence. In 2008, every one of those three voted for Obama by huge margins.

No offense, but this is the second time in two days that you seem to be totally clueless about the distinction between the primaries and the GE, even when it's completely obvious from context.

OK. Some Democrat will win the respective Utah primary in 2016 and some Republican will win the respective Vermont primary in 2016. 

Not sure what your point is here.  You make it sound as if it's a triviality to win the primary of a state that your party is going to lose in the GE.  Which is of course preposterous.  California has a lot of delegates, so it certainly helps a GOP candidate to win the primary there.  It helps them to win the nomination, even though they're going to lose it in the GE.  Whereas VT has only a handful of delegates and its primary is fairly late in the calendar, so it's irrelevant.  Whether I primary is important is disconnected from whether it'll be a swing state in the general election.