<p>Now that Romney is out, will McCain pick him as a VP? Or will he say that I want Romney to be in my cabinet as SOT? Or appt him as Fed Chair?</p>
<p>I hope there is a place for Romney, I really do.</p>
<p>I would be comfortable with Romney, but as I posted on another thread, perhaps an outside the box candidate might be Michael Steele.</p>
<p>“I would be comfortable with Romney, but as I posted on another thread, perhaps an outside the box candidate might be Michael Steele.”</p>
<p>I like Michael Steele a lot.</p>
<p>I am with you Michael Steele is a great pick, I also like Jane Swift</p>
<p>I also think Michael Steele would be a great choice.</p>
<p>McCain will pick Romney when certain subterranean places common in mythology and religious doctrine freeze over.</p>
<p>If he wanted to pick someone with religious baggage, wouldn’t Huckabee make more sense?</p>
<p>I’m a dem so I don’t even belong at this party. But for those who listen carefully from the viewpoint of marginalized or independent people who “might” become Republican voters, Romney is oblivious to differences and won’t help McCain pick up anyone new. </p>
<p>I just listened to his speech in front of the conservative assembly. Obviously, it was a sypathetic crowd.</p>
<p>But he says, “Most of our ancestors were immigrants…” and moves on from there? Bye-bye to possible African American voters for McCain. A better speechwriter would have added in the AA experience of coming to America, with just a phrase, and STILL made the point he was making in that same sentence. Makes me think he doesn’t care about their votes. </p>
<p>Then, I can’t recall exactly so won’t use quotation marks, but: Without a father at home, the family/children are lost…</p>
<p>Bye-bye any single or divorced moms who might have voted for McCain.</p>
<p>I think his lack of heart will come out again and again in stump speeches and lose new voters every day for McCain if he were the VP candidate.</p>
<p>If McCain chooses Romney, wouldn’t that just be an easy path to make peace with the conservative base he is missing? And will that make that base happy or will they sit out the election unless their every wish is granted on every position?</p>
<p>Just saw McCain and Michael Steele on fox, I like both of them. Steele is also a great orator…Go McCain/Steele</p>
<p>Steele has a lot of history to overcome. He would a surprise.</p>
<p>“Steele has a lot of history to overcome.”</p>
<p>I’m not sure what that history might be. My recollection was that he ran for the Senate in 2006 in a very blue state. In an otherwise disastrous election year for the Republicans, Steele gave his opponent a real run for the money. Must be that his history is not that bad. If anyone can come away with a “win” by losing, Steele comes pretty close.</p>
<p>Enlighten us</p>
<p>Yes please.</p>
<p><a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_S._Steele[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_S._Steele</a></p>
<p>I stand corrected, for the most part. I think I had him confused with someone else.</p>
<p>That being said, I can see why you like him. But I don’t see where he helps the ticket. He won 44% of the vote for the Senate seat. That’s giving the opponent " a run for this money"? That doesn’t sound like a guy who can deliver Maryland, much less any of the swing states.</p>
<p>My recollection was that his race was “too close to call” well into the evening and that he was considered quite a surprise. Apparently some key precincts came in late that swamped him (although, it would be interesting to see by what percent the Dem senators from Maryland normally win by.)</p>
<p>Steele’s a good guy but here in New York the scuttlebutt is that McCain will pick Mayor Bloomberg.</p>
<p>That would be a real knee to the groin of conservatives. Somehow I doubt that he would be that dumb.</p>
<p>If Obama gets the Democratic nomination, a really good case could be made for the Republican nominee picking an African-American running mate (such as Michael Steele). If Clinton wins, a similarly good case could be made for a female running mate. In either case, the Republican VP candidate would sort of dilute the novelty of the person at the top of the Democratic ticket.</p>
<p>Conveniently, the Republican convention will be held after the Democratic one this year. This means that even if the Democrats go into their convention without a predetermined nominee – as some people have predicted might happen – the Republican nominee is going to know who he’s running against when the time comes for him to make a final decision on a running mate. Somehow, I doubt he will make the decision before the Democrats have a nominee because you would pick different people depending on whether you’re running against Clinton or Obama.</p>
<p>Marian,</p>
<p>I see it the opposite. I think that if you want to play the game of politics that the R’s should go after the “shafted” voting block. If the Dems go with Hillary, the R’s counter with a black VP candidate; if the dems go with Obama you counter with a woman. If you counter with a veep candidate that is the same race/gender of the Dem’s presidential candidate, anyone who makes their decision based on that factor will go Dem.</p>