Could Paul/Sanford be a good ticket?

[TaftFan]

Yeah, if he had never had a scandal he would have been the best bet for sure.

 

[jtstellar]

i am not insisting on it, but why not ralph nader, should make the liberals feel safe, totally topples hillary's remaining and imaginative credentials and negates elizabeth warren as well

 

[Working Poor]

Niki Haley is republican isn't she?

 

[erowe1]

Niki Haley is republican isn't she?

Yes, and she was an ally of Sanford's when he was governor.

 

[MichaelDavis]

Susana Martinez would be hands down the top VP prospect for all Republicans. She is more on the establishment side so she would balance the ticket with Rand as the anti-establishment nominee. She is a popular Republican Governor in a Democrat leaning state (New Mexico) that could be in play and could help in Colorado, New Mexico, and nationwide.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...e-presidential-field-yes-you-read-that-right/

I agree. It is like Susana Martinez was born to be the Vice President. She's Mexican-American, female, and Catholic. These are three groups that Republicans need to improve on in order to win.

 

[Okaloosa]

The critical swing states to win for the White House are Ohio, Florida, Virginia, and one of the following (Colorado, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, New Mexico).
The best choice besides Susana Martinez that could help win Ohio would be John Kasich.

Although they are similar in terms of their political trajectories, their presidential prospects raise somewhat different considerations. A Kasich candidacy for the Republican nomination would likely suffer from his having been around the track so many times. For example, as a congressman Kasich supported the assault weapons ban passed by Congress in 1994. That same year, he helped pass a crime bill that contained restrictions on firearms.

As governor, Kasich accepted the Medicaid expansion for Ohio. He has cited his Catholic religious belief in helping poor people as the basis for this decision. Paul Ryan is sometimes called Kasich 2.0, and the similarities extend beyond the fact that both are budget hawks.

On the other hand, Kasich is the popular governor of the quintessential swing state, where he has put together a solid record of achievement. And his willingness to deviate from conservative orthodoxy might help him in a general presidential election if he were somehow to win the nomination.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...rses-a-look-at-john-kasich-and-mike-pence.php

 

[William Tell]

The critical swing states to win for the White House are Ohio, Florida, Virginia, and one of the following (Colorado, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, New Mexico).
The best choice besides Susana Martinez that could help win Ohio would be John Kasich.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...rses-a-look-at-john-kasich-and-mike-pence.php

Kasich would be insane, who is that supposed to drag along, Dick Cheney? He will be voting for Hillary no matter who Rand's VP will be. Or are you saying pick him just because he is from Ohio and hopefully some of his buds will vote for the ticket?

 

[MichaelDavis]

The critical swing states to win for the White House are Ohio, Florida, Virginia, and one of the following (Colorado, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, New Mexico).
The best choice besides Susana Martinez that could help win Ohio would be John Kasich.



http://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...rses-a-look-at-john-kasich-and-mike-pence.php

If Rand Paul choses John Kasich while Hillary Clinton choses HUD Secretary Julian Castro, Hispanics in Florida, Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico might vote for the Democratic ticket. Although Ohio has more electoral votes than New Mexico, Martinez would probably assist the ticket more than Kasich.

 

[erowe1]

Kasich would be insane, who is that supposed to drag along, Dick Cheney? He will be voting for Hillary no matter who Rand's VP will be.

I don't like Kasich, but I think he would help the ticket politically.

 

[William Tell]

I don't like Kasich, but I think he would help the ticket politically.

I suppose it is possible, but with what constituency?

 

[Christian Liberty]

The media would play up the adultery theme. I know Newt was an adulterer as well, but the media isn't exactly fair. Probably a bad PR choice. Which: I don't care about PR if PR is being broken for principled reasons. I do care if PR is being broken in order to get an adulterer on the ticket when it isn't necessary.

 

[TaftFan]

Yes, and she was an ally of Sanford's when he was governor.

They don't like each other now though. She isn't as good as he was, not even close.

 

[TaftFan]

The media would play up the adultery theme. I know Newt was an adulterer as well, but the media isn't exactly fair. Probably a bad PR choice. Which: I don't care about PR if PR is being broken for principled reasons. I do care if PR is being broken in order to get an adulterer on the ticket when it isn't necessary.

Another aspect is that Bill Clinton has a similar history.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Another aspect is that Bill Clinton has a similar history.

Yeah, and its not fair, but the media will downplay Bill Clinton's exhibitions and play up Sanford's. And really, I don't want to kill the liberty movement's political clout over this issue I'd be OK with Rand killing his political credibility because he picked someone like Tom Woods or Andrew Napolitano, and then people would get mad at him because those guys are "too extreme." But I see no reason to do so here.

 

[Crashland]

Rand's VP pick should demonstrate that he means what he says when he talks about changing the party. Sanford isn't it. I don't think it should be any of the currently prominent/well known Republicans. By the time he gets to pick his VP he doesn't have to worry about a nomination to win.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

I don't think Sanford's a good idea, but I don't buy this reasoning either. Putting a woman on the ticket is a hindrance, not a help. Women are short, have high-pitched voices, can only come across in politics as either airheads or shrews, and will never match up to the unspoken expectations people have for what constitutes a great leader, especially a military one. And those are just the ideologically neutral factors that will obtain before you take into account widespread beliefs about gender roles. Just because the Dems are shooting their own foot (twice in your prediction) doesn't mean we have to do the same.

Also, now that the color line has been broken, and that turned out horribly by all estimates but the most partisan Democrats, I don't think the electorate as a whole will be likely to see the fact that someone is an ethnic minority as much of a selling point any more either.

Obviously, Rand should publicly make people think that women and minorities are very high on his list. But when it comes to the actual decision, he shouldn't consider those factors as pluses.

You do realize if Rand wins it will be in great part because of one woman.

 

[jtstellar]

Rand's VP pick should demonstrate that he means what he says when he talks about changing the party. Sanford isn't it. I don't think it should be any of the currently prominent/well known Republicans. By the time he gets to pick his VP he doesn't have to worry about a nomination to win.

it depends on the establishment forces by then at the end of the primaries including where the 15% romney'ers go eventually.. he could essentially pick someone like rubio a vp with no teeth and it won't matter much. if grassroots activist wake up in droves by the end i would expect him to get someone from the left with some grassroots appeal

 

[erowe1]

You do realize if Rand wins it will be in great part because of one woman.

Not really. But even if that's true it doesn't lessen anything I said.

There's a very good chance that the Dems will give Rand a big advantage by nominating a female. Why neutralize that?

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Not really. But even if that's true it doesn't lessen anything I said.

There's a very good chance that the Dems will give Rand a big advantage by nominating a female. Why neutralize that?

A female candidate for the Dems is a disadvantage? It's a big advantage to them and gives them a theme to make history with. Dems are suckers for that kind of lack of substance. It's really their only card to play.

 

[69360]

Sanford would be a good VP, but is tainted now. He was lucky to get back in congress.

Martinez is the best choice for all the obvious reasons. Female, minority and Catholic. You have to think like a low information voter to win them.