The truth is no one wants to be Romney's VP running mate

[NNN0LHI]

That is why it is taking so long to choose one.

Anyone who takes it will be finished politically after the election. Who wants to be the next Palin?

Don

[Firebrand Gary]

1. You might be on to something here, Don.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. How telling is that?

And I suspect you're right. Nobody wants the role because this candidate is going to lose.

[BlueStreak]

3. The people most often discussed are ALREADY finished politically

Jindal, Protman, Pawlenty.

None of them have any political future.

For that same reason, Ryan, Christie and anybody else aspiring to run later will not take it.

Romney should just flip a coin between Trump and Cain.

[nanabugg]

4. Paul Ryan does. Believe me, he does. He'll be the real President. nt

[Rosa Luxemburg]

11. will there be any lifeboats for him

when the Titanic sinks?

[B Calm]

13. The guy who wants to end medicare and soc sec, great choice!!

[jmowreader]

19. Which is why he WON'T be the choice

Not even Romney is stupid enough to pick a running mate like that.

[B Calm]

67. LOL, that will never happen!

[TreasonousBastard]

29. But it would get him out of the house.

[MissMarple]

35. Poor baby, he needs a mani/pedi.

And lunch wearing his sandles.

I just couldn't help myself, sorry.

[freshwest]

21. Rand Paul also offered himself already but wasn't picked. But Romney's courtingbaggers. Could be.

The nextweeks ought to be interesting, if for nothing else than being easier to gagging with a spoon for purging oneself.
I expect to see one of the most shameful displays of venality in the galaxy there. The only thing missing will be Darth.

[Volaris]

54. What is the possibility that Romney would ask RON Paul?

It would bring in the Libertarian wing, encourage a real debate about the nature of American Foreign policy, which might actually be fun for our side, by the way...it might bring the 'Baggers more closely into the fold (Ron's not REALLY an 'establishment" type, after all), and he is most definitely pro-life, so it would be easier for the religious nutters to dismiss the fact Romney is a "cultist"...the only people who would be pissed about it are the neo-con's who think Tehran needs to be turned into a cinder crater...I personally don't think Romney's team is that smart (or ballsy) though....

The disclaimer here is that I am NOT a Paulite to any extent, other than I think weed should probably be de-criminalized at a national level....

[freshwest]

66. The Koch family is funding all these brands. Check this out here:

Thom Hartmann: Conservative Millennials, Boomers & Libertarians all being Conned

Multigenerational political influence by a very narrow special interest group is rare, but we're seeing it played out right now in front of us. A billionaire family - the Kochs - have gone from influencing my father's generation, to my generation, to my kids' generation - and very few Americans realize it. Daddy Koch - Fred - made his first millions palling around with Joe Stalin in the Soviet Union in the 1920s and 1930s. As the fascists rose to power in Europe in the 1930s, he was an enthusiastic supporter of Italian dictator Benito Mussolini, who invented the word "fascist," meaning essentially the takeover of democratic governments by big business interests. Mussolini went so far as to dissolve the Italian parliament, and replace elected politicians with representatives of each district's largest corporations. Fred Koch and Mussolini both particularly hated the trade unionists and their sometimes allies, the communists. So after Mussolini, along with his ally Hitler, lost World War II against America, Fred Koch brought the anti-communist pro-business-running-goverment - what some would call "facist" - torch to America big time, helping start the John Birch Society.

Two of their biggest efforts are pretty well known. After the Supreme Court ruled, in 1954, in the Brown versus Board of Education case, that segregation in schools was unconstitutional, the John Birch Society put up billboards all across America calling for the impeachment of the Chief Justice of the Court, Earl Warren. Daddy Fred Koch was very concerned about the integration of our schools - in fact, he wrote, "The colored man looms large in the Communist plan to take over America." With JFK's election, Fred Koch's John Birch Society went off again - this time against JFK. Using rhetoric not that different from the "secret Muslim" plots the Tea Party promotes about Obama, in a 1963 speech Fred said that " infiltrate the highest offices of government in the U.S. until the President is a Communist, unknown to the rest of us.”

When JFK was scheduled to come to Dallas that year, the JBS distributed flyers saying, "Wanted, for Treason" all around the town two days before his arrival. On the day JFK was assassinated, large ads ran in the Dallas newspapers attacking Kennedy as being soft on Castro, among other things. That was my dad's generation. Daddy Koch died, and his sons Charles and David took over the family business of promoting the business and billionaire takeover of our American government.

They're doing it with a two-pronged attack. For people over forty, they're funding the Tea Party through a variety of groups, most notably Americans for Prosperity and Freedomworks. And for people under forty, they're funding Libertarian think tanks, like the Charles Koch Foundation (which was renamed as the Cato Institute), and the Reason Foundation, where David Koch is a trustee, which happily embraces a new generation of young people with the idea that "freedom" means the "freedom" to buy politicians and the "freedom" to pollute. For the young people, of course, the Libertarians throw in the "freedom" to smoke dope and hire a hooker, but those are just bones being cynically tossed to young potheads and young protoge's of Dick Morris.

But the Koch's have been inside the Libertarian movement from its beginning - 32 years ago this year, David Koch was the Libertarian Party's official candidate for Vice President of the United States. It's really pretty incredible, but it's all true. The main agenda of the Koch's John Birch Society was to enhance the power and control of our government by big business and billionaires, while fighting organized labor and people like me who were protesting the Vietnam War. The main agenda of the Koch's Tea Party is to get millionaires elected to Congress and have them cut taxes and regulations for Koch Industries and other polluting corporations, while fighting organized labor and people like me who were protesting the Iraq War.

And the main agenda of the Koch's Libertarians - again, funded and trained by the Koch Brothers - is to keep intact the power of big money over our government, cut taxes and regulations on billionaires and polluting industries, while fighting organized labor and people like me who are protesting the corporate takeover of the United States of America. Three generations of Americans, all duped by the same billionaire family. Three generations buying into the idea that "what's best for industry and billionaires is best for America" - and that government is our "enemy" rather than something that our nation's founders fought and died to create for all of "We The People" And, increasingly, it's not just the Koch family. The Walton family - whose combined wealth is greater than 40 percent of all Americans - funded a covert campaign to rename the estate tax as the "death tax" and lobbied so hard they got the estate tax eliminated entirely in 2010.

Senator Bernie Sanders pointed out yesterday that - so far - we know of 26 billionaires - worth over $146 billion - who have already "invested" or committed to invest over $561 million dollars in this election cycle - most of it to defeat Democrats who want to raise their taxes. The good news is that young people are waking up and realizing that the Libertarian hustle the billionaires are feeding them is just that - a hustle. Just like Tea Partiers are waking up to their having been had by billionaires who want to privatize their Social Security. Hopefully, soon, America will regain its sanity and we'll go back to viewing cranky billionaires the way my Dad's generation did - as Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower did - when Eisenhower referred to their ilk as "small in number and stupid" They're not stupid any more, and if we really value American traditions, we really must push back on this kind of power and influence in American politics. Go to move to amend.org.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101744227

And now the Koches are coming out into the light, unafraid, after making all these brands out of the GOP to delude the public. Ron Paul ran on the Libertarian party ticket and is a diversion. The Tea Party was funded by the Koches and is likewise a diversion.

The Libertarian party is the friendly face of an anti-democratic group that wants fascism. They've kept the folks busy with high sounding words too long. I have a particular animus for Libertarians and the followers of Ayn Rand and don't hide it. Consider these words, which it is faster for me to post than to compose myself, that I hope you'll take the time to read:


How Freedom Became Tyranny
by George Monbiot

http://www.monbiot.com/2011/12/19/how-freedom-became-tyranny/

Just a few paragraphs to read, from others and while I'm not into the 'isms', I'm sure you can glean the basics being discussed:

Now, the Libertarian Party, is a *capitalist* party. It's in favor of what *I* would regard a *particular form* of authoritarian control. Namely, the kind that comes through private ownership and control, which is an *extremely* rigid system of domination -- people have to... people can survive, by renting themselves to it, and basically in no other way... I do disagree with them *very* sharply, and I think that they are not..understanding the *fundamental* doctrine, that you should be free from domination and control, including the control of the manager and the owner.

~ Noam Chomsky

There isn't much point arguing about the word "libertarian." It would make about as much sense to argue with an unreconstructed Stalinist about the word "democracy" -- recall that they called what they'd constructed "peoples' democracies." The weird offshoot of ultra-right individualist anarchism that is called "libertarian" here happens to amount to advocacy of perhaps the worst kind of imaginable tyranny, namely unaccountable private tyranny. If they want to call that "libertarian," fine; after all, Stalin called his system "democratic." But why bother arguing about it?

~ 
Noam Chomsky

Anarcho-capitalists are against the State simply because they are capitalists first and foremost. Their critique of the State ultimately rests on a liberal interpretation of liberty as the inviolable rights to and of private property. They are not concerned with the social consequences of capitalism for the weak, powerless and ignorant. Their claim that all would benefit from a free exchange in the market is by no means certain; any unfettered market system would most likely sponsor a reversion to an unequal society with defense associations perpetuating exploitation and privilege. If anything, anarcho-capitalism is merely a free-for-all in which only the rich and cunning would benefit. It is tailor-made for 'rugged individualists' who do not care about the damage to others or to the environment which they leave in their wake. The forces of the market cannot provide genuine conditions for freedom any more than the powers of the State. The victims of both are equally enslaved, alienated and oppressed. 


~ Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism

[AllyCat]

36. Coming from a PO'd Wisconsinite, we'd be happy to get rid of him.

But is it out of the frying pan, into the fire? Not if the ticket loses as they should.

[Summer Hathaway]

5. I think you are exactly right.

No one with any future political ambitions wants to jump on the Titanic - which, for all intents and purposes, has already struck the iceberg and is going down.

It's now a matter of which GOPer, with no ambitions and no desire for elected office, will be asked to take one for the team by signing on as the VP [s]hopeful[/s] hopeless.

My guess is it will be someone older, a recognizable 'name' in GOP circles, who will announce his/her retirement from public life immediately after the election - having taken a bullet for the good of the party one last time.

[NNN0LHI]

6. They need a Bob Dole type

[RZM]

7. I kind of doubt that

There's a lot of ambition in Washington. The VP slot, win or lose, often sets up the ambitious for a run of their own next time. H-Dub and Gore got their turns after being VP. Both Lieberman and Edwards lost as running mates, but both ran for president the next time around. I don't think losing damaged their brands much at all (they both eventually damaged their brands on their own).

I would also argue that getting the VP slot made Palin's career. Without it, she probably would never have become a national figure. Now she is. She may not have a future in elected office, but would she have had one if she was still an obscure (former) governor? Now she's making bank and has some clout in the party. I'd say it worked out pretty well for her, actually.

[karynnj]

12. I agree with you

Expanding on your examples, Lieberman had NEVER been on the list of people potentially running for President in the future. As to Edwards, he had opted not to run for re-election in North Carolina even though he could legally do both. He was not secure enough in his seat to be able to spend the time running in the primaries and come back to run for Senate if he lost. Had he not been picked, by 2008, he would have been a mediocre one term Senator who was not well remembered from 2004.

You are right that Palin became a "star" through the VP nomination.

[Tx4obama]

15. Yeah BUT ...

Whoever is Romney's VP pick will have to defend Mitt on the issues of Bain, not releasing tax returns, off-shore accounts, 100 million dollars in his IRA, not supporting women's rights, and a whole lot more crap.

Palin had ZERO chance of ever staying in politics after the 2008 election.
Most of the names that are being tossed around this time are NOT going to be able to lose and then go off and become a reality star.

I think any 'serious' person will not want to be tied to Romney on the GOP ticket.

[MrModerate]

37. No future in politics doesn't mean . . .

No future as a spokeshill for Fux News which, last I heard, pays very well.

Not bad as a second career for some otherwise Peter-Principled Pol.

[libodem]

8. Obama is Destined to Win

Destined. And they know it, too. Yes, there is no link.

[Kablooie]

20. Assuming Romney is the nominee. Everything could change at the convention.

[MrModerate]

39. Well, I suppose. But don't forget . . .

That Romney exceeded the performance of every other potential Republican candidate this year. Who's going to replace him and do better? Santorum? Gingrich? Huntsman? J. Bush? Christie?

They've got a really feeble candidate and he's the best they could find. It's going to be Obama vs Romney, and let the chips fall where they may.

Myself, I'm feeling comfortable with the matchup, but I want to be sure everyone is also paying attention to downticket races, because Obama is still going to need to be able to govern in his second term. And that's going to be much harder unless we see lots of changes in the House and Senate (and don't forget statehouses and governors' offices).

[Kablooie]

49. I think that since they are so fanatically determined to get rid of Obama ...

that if Romney isn't likely to get the job done, they will find a way to force a new candidate into the convention.
They've stated that eliminating Obama is their number one priority, that's what all the money is for. Theyve invested too much to be content with Romney if he continues to drop in the polls.

I predict that there will be a huge upset at the convention and a new nominee will come out of it. Many of the tea people will be so relieved that anyone other than Romney is running that it might inspire more of them to vote in November.

[Volaris]

55. The "Establishment" won't let that happen, methinks....

They KNOW it would be seen as a circus show put on by a bunch of incompetents, and the result will be national humiliation, party self-immolation and relegation to the political wilderness for a generation. They KNOW that if they want Jebbie to have a shot in '16, they have to lose this one, they have to do it with as much grace as they can manage, and the Tea Party and Yertle the Turtle be damned.

[Jim Lane]

60. Whom do you mean by "they"?

Your post is probably accurate in describing the views of many Republicans. But the "they" who could pick a new candidate is the Convention delegates, and a solid majority of them will be Romney loyalists.

The extent of the speculation about a non-Romney nominee is a measure of the depth of the dissatisfaction with him -- but, in terms of any practical effect, this talk is nothing more than venting.

[HiPointDem]

48. yes, the gop running a lousy candidate is a factor in that 'destiny' as the economic situation

typically foretells the winner.

and as the economic situation is lousy currently for 80% of the population...

[cali]

52. codswallop. romney has a shitload more money than Obama

and despite his horrible summer is not nearly far enough behind in the polls to be comfortable. That it's this close with that poor a candidate should be the big clue.

[Tx4obama]

9. We were talkng about this issue at dinner tonight.

The consensus at dinner was that anyone that wants to stay in politics and be taken seriously won't accept Romney's offer.

Then a little while ago I came across this article regarding Portman over at CNN: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/08/portman-i-think-ill-end-up-being-in-the-senate/

I think Portman realizes that Romney won't win and being on a ticket with him would not be an asset in the future.

Makes ya wonder what 'idiot' will end up accepting Mitt's offer to be on the ticket with him.

[onenote]

10. I doubt that very much.

And its not taking any longer than other recent efforts. Very few people, and I doubt anyone here is among them, actually know how far along the process is.

[emilyg]

43. Correct. My feeling is

he'll announce by Monday.

[Canuckistanian]

14. More apropos...

Who wants to be the First Mate on the Titanic with foreknowledge of the looming iceberg?

[madinmaryland]

16. Heh! Even Sarah Palin doesn't want to be Mitten's Veep!

[amandabeech]

44. Not even Rmoney would pick Palin.

There is absolutely no way that Mrs. Romney would put up with the Palins. Her MS might come out of remission if she had to deal with them--far too much stress.

The Palins are low rent with lots of cash. Not exactly the Rmoney cup of tea.

[npk]

17. It's OK Mitt. I'll be your running mate

For the right price.

Signed,
Herman Cain.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

18. Jindal would.

So would Paul Ryan, Pawlentry and Portman. That's just naming a few.

Never underestimate the local power a politician can evoke from that appointment.

Yes, even if they lose. They may never go on to be president, but most politicians don't.

[cr8tvlde]

22. The Sacrificial Lamb...or the National Nobody who needs a political "Leg up"

Jindal, perhaps.

[amandabeech]

45. Rmoney will not name an "exotic."

Rmoney has to energize his base, and Jindal will not help except maybe with the Paulites.

Jindal auditioned a couple of years ago with the R response to the state of the union message, and it was a disaster.

No one will seriously look at Jindal after that.

It's Pawlenty or Portman. Rmoney may be pursuing a "Great Lakes" strategy. He'll be going for Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin. He has Indiana. Minnesota is very iffy, so I'd put my money on Portman.

[cr8tvlde]

56. I was struggling for the "right" word to describe

Jindal's skin color...darker than Obama. Thanks.

I know these other guys names are floating around, but would either risk their reputation, naturally assuming that Mitt has so many skeletons and low approval rating that he can't win the election? This is Sarah Palin in reverse.

[amandabeech]

65. I can't claim authorship on "exotics."

I heard it from an old-time Texas politician when I worked down there in the early '80s. He didn't mean it in any prejoritive sense, and neither do I, but it seems a good word to describe a small, relatively new minority group's first big pol. It won't be long before we see many more from other than Hispanic immigrant groups, and the term will not be appropriate then.

Some folks have been able to make hay from being the veep in a failed campaign. It helps an obscure candidate get to know important pols from around the country, and that really helps in getting a candidate started, at least these days. So obscure candidates become known candidates. Edwards and Palin show recent trends, for better or for worse. Mostly worse.

[HiPointDem]

23. few serious politicians want to participate in a sham, is why.

[Initech]

24. Who wants to be the other half of a losing ticket?

[corkhead]

25. Some grifter like Guilliani or Gingrich willing to whore themselves for future speaking fees

they all know it is like being parachuted in to take the job of first mate on the Titanic, after it hit the iceberg

[Rowdyboy]

26. There's serious money to be made even by the junior member of a losing team....

It can be parleyed into books, television/radio shows and is a good way for a nobody to ingratiate himself to prominent wealthy sleazebags like the Kochs and Sheldon Adelson. These bozos Romney is considering need any exposure they can get if they're going up against media darlings like Jeb Bush, Chris Christie and Marco Rubio in 2016. I doubt Romney would have to twist the arms of Pawlenty, Jindal, Ryan or Portman very hard to get them on board.

Just think about the money to be made.

[patrice]

27. Even a completely benighted fool of a loser like SP walked away from it with millions.

[TeamPooka]

28. i agree

[coalition_unwilling]

30. Paging Admiral James Stockdale. (Little inside joke for you

fans of the 1992 campaign

[NNN0LHI]

57. I had nearly forgot about that

[Octafish]

31. Joe Lieberman would do it.

He'll try anything once.

[hay rick]

32. One of the few that could actually cost Romney votes.

My list of possible 2016 candidates who might prefer to avoid the ticket this year:
Petraeus
Jeb Bush
Condi Rice
Christie
Rubio

Of these, I think Christie will crash and burn early in 2016. Rubio might go for the vp slot this time just to up his national recognition.

[chollybocker]

33. Interesting.

But Rmoney is still only the *presumptive* R nominee.

Can a *not-really-nominee-yet* make the selection of a candidate for VP?

The VP race is the only thing interesting about Rmoney's failure of a campaign, so it'll drag on til the convention. The convention, LOL.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

34. Don't forget, the Republican Convention could become a riot thanks to Ron Paul supporters.

[chollybocker]

38. 'Dr. Paul's Caesarian Section.'

Replete with knives in backs, lol.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

41. Good one!

[zeemike]

40. I think Allen West would like to be a Palin.

Then he could get into the right wing book market and maybe a TV show on Fox...and some big time speaking fees and tea party rallies.
The Teabagers love when democrats are called communists.,,,and West is the chief source of jingoism.

[dogknob]

42. BREAKING: WE HAVE A WINNER! (pic)

[renate]

53. cute!

[Kalidurga]

46. I don't think anyone wants it either.

Being associated with McCain isn't such a bad thing. Most people don't seem to hate him even if they disagree with him. Sure his foreign and domestic policies would suck, but he doesn't seem to be a grifter, just someone who is misguided. Romney on the other hand the more he talks and the more he is out there the more people he alienates, he is quickly becoming toxic and anyone even Republicans who are paying attention is noticing this.

The nominee will be who ever they can get the most dirt on. Not the kind of dirt that matters to us mind you, like shady dealings. The kind that matters to the their base and would end their career in the Republican party.

[Nye Bevan]

47. Ridiculous. Almost nobody would turn him down.

All those egotists think they deserve to be President someday, and this would be the best stepping stone in that direction.

[JI7]

50. They would because of the Attention they would Get

if they actually end up being impressive even if Romney loses they can run in the future. they would get a head start just because of the name recognition they would have. even if they aren't impressive they can get a lot of money for some shitty speech.

[cbdo2007]

59. Depends on how Mitt ends up....if the tax issue sinks him and he loses worse than McCain did....

then it would be bad for anyone to be associated with Romney, especially someone who wants to run for Pres in the future.

Just being on a ticket isn't necessarily good, if they are plagued by scandal and questionable ethics and are actually doing more damage than good for the party.

[cali]

51. `Pawlenty sure as hell does. So does Ryan and Portman.

Portman and Pawlenty have been auditioning like crazy. And Don, anyone who doesn't recognize that rMoney could win- yes win- is deceiving themselves badly.

[MineralMan]

58. Not so. Tim Pawlenty is wetting his pants,

he wants the job so much. Like an eager puppy, he's wiggling like crazy and peeing himself in hopes that he'll be the one.

[hifiguy]

61. Rats don't swim towards a sinking ship. nt

[Miami4Obama]

62. Just wondering why Mika does not defend Obama

Today on Scarborough's show, the Newton was vomiting blood against obama and
I did not see Mika defending Obama, or for that matter, noone there did, can someone
please explain why they let this piece of crap old bastard Newt say whatever crap he wants to say about our President and noone fights him back? I am really boiling over this.

[NNN0LHI]

68. Mika is an anti-union Reaganite

We have some posters just like her posting here at DU too.

Don

[Miami4Obama]

69. Geez!

But Don, I thought she was a democrat? or isn't she? Again, seems like everybody in the Scarab show jump all over her and never let her speak and she lets them to do that. Wow

[NNN0LHI]

70. You need to enter the words"mika brzezinski+media matters" into Google to find the truth about her

Just click on the first page or two of links after the results come up from your search and that should be enough to let you know what she is politically.

Toodle loo.



Don

[Miami4Obama]

71. I will do that right now, Don

Thanks for your explanation, now I will find out the answer to my inquiry. THanks again pal!

[FSogol]

63. VA Gov Bob McDonnell ran ads promoting himself despite not being in any upcoming election

and not even being eligible to run again in VA. He'd love to be Mitt's lapdog. (And I think he will be, gawd help us.)

[TheKentuckian]

64. Mittens, we have Fred Thompson on line one for you.