Obama, running on a campaign of change, would do well to choose Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear. Beshear replaced corrupt Republican Gov. Ernie Fletcher and could be considered the poster boy for Obama’s “new politics”. He would also give the Democrats a segue into the South. While carrying Kentucky may still be a stretch, the pick could put the state in play, as well as helping Obama in other, closer, Southern states, as well as Ohio, where corruption has been a major issue of late.

Who shouldn’t they pick? Well, abortion’s the big issue, and if either one chooses a running mate who doesn’t toe his party’s line on the life issue, that could easily end the election.

Who will they pick?

Obama - Jim Webb

McCain - Jim DeMint

Like, showing up in Springfield with ALL of the possible Veep picks. That way he can stick to the line that the Veep will be with him a Springfield.

It also keeps his name atop the news cycle as people continue to wonder.

Not Mitt’s dollars per se, but those of his previous doners.

I agree with you about Sanford, but McCain has made clear that he has no interest in the guy. He wasn’t even vetted.

As for Mitt’s dollars going to 527’s instead: yeah. Not gonna happen.

Good Luck and Roses.

-AT8FATES

Should:
Rice — Yeah, yeah, I know “mildly pro-choice,” but she has never said that she embraced Roe so there is room to work there. Still loved by conservatives despite the mildly pro-choice thing.
Hutchinson — Wish she were pro-life but she may be the only choice to capture the pro-women women who aren’t complete raging liberals (and there are a lot who would just like to see a woman get SOMETHING).
Romney — can’t raise for McCain but has lots of rich friends who can give to 527s … could take michigan from Dems which means game over .. will solidify LDS turnout in Utah, Colorado, Nevada, Arizona and help keep those red.
Non-existant being known as pro-life, female governor not involved in a scandal currently — home run ..
Sanford — Forget what he wants, he’s a solid conservative tax cutter who can excite the base.
Pawlenty — I think he could swing MN and/or WI … they were VERY close in 2004.

Will:

With the polls drifting back his way a bit, I think he goes with Romney. Michigan is ripe for the taking and his rich friends can toss money to the 527s in unlimited amounts even if they can’t talk about it with Mitt.
Mitt’s fundraisers are a matter of public record and if Mitt is the VP choice then those names go on the call list for all the 527s and those guys can help Mitt out.

The main thrust of the main article seemed to create a set of conditions that presuppossed not choosing Romney by its constraints.

If he does run for a second term and lose then mitt comes back in 2016 and says “You should’ve picked me four years ago instead of McCain.”

I’m still waiting for the compilation ad that displays them at one time for all to see.

But then there’s the ‘Grumpy Old Men’ ticket problem.

At the the end of the day, I’m with Zoot, and I hope it’s Sanford - in spite of the downside which I acknowledge.

My guess - Pawlenty.

@@@@@@@@@@@

Inre the Dem pick, I’ve already spoken my piece on that (see diaries), and even at this late date, I fear that I might help scare Obama away from the one who would be the IDEAL pick - for us.

I don’t have a problem with Romney, I’m just saying, he really doesn’t ad much when compared with Pawlenty, who doesn’t open the campaign up to those attacks.

“Flip flopping” is so 2004. I’m glad Romney and McCain are moving to the right. I wish McCain would do more of it.

But, if Romney tries something like that against McCain, the voters in the GOP will shun Romney in 2012. He won’t sniff the nomination.

We need someone with blue collar appeal, like Pawlenty.