Posted on 06/01/2012 6:52:16 AM PDT by SharpRightTurn
One mark against Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) being Mitt Romney’s vice-presidential choice may be that Portman’s not sufficiently polarized.
If the speculation Portman will become Mitt Romney’s vice-presidential pick proves true, he could complicate the presidential race in an unexpected way: he has a legitimate record of bipartisanship and is well-regarded even by a number of Democrats on Capitol Hill.
Portman is currently stirring more vice-presidential talk among Beltway insiders by taking a trip to Israel, where he held a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday.
The Ohioan has faced criticism for his supposed grayness but he pushed back against that during an interview with CNN immediately following the Netanyahu meeting.
Asked by anchor Gloria Borger whether a perceived lack of “pizzazz” would hinder him, Portman responded:
“I think what people are looking for right now is not the kind of pizzazz and pop that perhaps we thought we got in 2008 — certainly President Obama offered that. What they want now is someone who can work closely with Congress and get things done. We have a paralysis in Washington.”
Should Portman get the nod from Romney, President Obama's team will undoubtedly focus on his work for the administration of President George W. Bush. He served as U.S. Trade Representative and, later, director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) during Bush’s second term. He served a little over a year in each position.
But his service during the Bush years, and his conservative positions on social issues (he backed a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, for example), may not displace the broader sense that he is more willing than most to reach out for common ground.
When he left the OMB, and the Bush administration, in 2007, then Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) called him “one of the finest public servants with whom I have served in the House” and praised his “willingness to work with members on both sides of the aisle.”
Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) called him “a person of credibility and decency.”
The liking for Portman goes beyond pro-forma warm words. His close and constructive relationship with Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) dates back more than a decade to when, as House members, they worked together on legislation that they said would have simplified and strengthened the pension system.
He is said to be friendly on a social basis with Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.), the two men having apparently bonded over their love of outdoor activities. Portman, a keen kayaker, is even reputed to practice his rolls in the congressional swimming pool.
Running for election to the Senate in 2010, Portman saw the benefits of highlighting his bipartisanship too. During a debate with his Democratic opponent, Lee Fisher, Portman stated: “I often joke in front of Republican crowds, and probably people are [made] a little nervous by the fact, that 12 of my bills were signed by President Clinton.”
An investigation of the claim by Politifact found the claim “mostly true” saying that while “it depends on how you count the bills”, the claim was “more or less” accurate.
Among the more intriguing partnerships Portman forged was with the late Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-Ohio), with whom he sponsored a bill to guarantee federal funding for the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center in Cincinnati. Tubbs Jones once said of him: “Compared to other Republicans, [he[ is pleasant and good to work with.”
During his time in the Senate, Portman has worked with Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark) on regulatory issues, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) on energy efficiency, and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) on seniors’ health.
Still, if personal liking for Portman is in relatively abundant supply, some Democrats caution that this should not be mistaken for ideological centrism.
“He is very likable, a gentleman, but he is far more conservative than the demeanor would indicate,” Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.) told The Hill. “He’s not acerbic, that’s for sure. But he’s very conservative.”
But Republican Rep. Kevin Brady (Texas), who served alongside Portman on the House Ways and Means committee, spoke up for his friend’s willingness to compromise. Calling himself a “big fan of Rob Portman’s”, Brady said the he “did work with Dems on saving issues, especially.”
Susan Schwab, who succeeded Portman as U.S. Trade Representative, also weighed in emphatically on his side, lambasting reporters “who write about him as a boring white guy, and who obviously have never met him or worked with him.”
Schwab added that anyone seeking to demonize Portman would face a difficult task.
“It would be hard to caricature him because he’s not a caricature,” she said. “There is a tendency in politics now to present people as two-dimensional all the time. But he’s got such a proven record that you couldn’t make him seem two-dimensional. You couldn’t get away with that with Rob Portman.”
:: It seems Portman is being touted more and more as the VP pick for Romney. ::
Yes, it does appear that the media has decoded that Romney should choose Portman.
Romney and the RNC better start telling the media jackasses to go p*ss up a rope!
Mitt Toast picks Milk Toast?
“Everyone knows the worst thing in the world is to be known as a ‘boring white guy’.”
Right. Much better to have a jive, incompetent minority guy who will take the country over the edge of the cliff.
“Hey Susan, instead of simply accepting the characterization why not take exception to a disgusting racial slur?”
Susan apparently is under the same hypnosis that most public figures suffer from: if a racial slight is aimed at whitey it’s fair game; all other racial slights are off limit.
Romney picking a conservative is more than a slim possibility, IMO. He has no firm principles (neither conservative nor liberal) and will care only about winning. He may well recognize, as did McLame, that he needs to do what he can to reconcile conservatives to his candidacy.
That’s funny
If a lot of conservatives stay home we'll get...
Zer0 for a second term.
Romney wasn't my 1st choice, 2nd, 3rd, or even 4th, but he is waaaaaay better than Zer0.
Therefore I plan to vote for him. Sent him some money today too.
I swallowed my idealism and looked at the pragmatic side.
If Zer0 has another term, what will the Country be like for my kids, grandkids, great-grandkids.
“Romney will probably go with someone he likes, someone he is comfortable with, and that means he may pick a Democrat.”
You may be right. I heard that Romney was considering LIEberman as Sec. of State.
“The lucky boy or girl will have to fill in a few blanks, like adding color to the ticket, and/or sexual diversity, something like a black dyke, lover of at least on Hollywood actress. She will need to be a vegan, and look natural in a “Free Trayvon” shirt. Most importantly, Romney’s VP pick will have to speak fluent Spanish, and have at least 1/5 Cherokee blood in her.”
Such a pick would certainly quell any “just another boring white guy” talk.
“What Romney should really look for is someone with more intelligence than Biden.”
That will likely bring us back to another boring white guy.
You make conservatism weak and give the victory to the socialists.
I could probably find an issue that Sarah Palin (my first choice) and I don’t agree on. But I’d vote for her in a heartbeat.
I’m looking at the bigger picture.
There will likely be 2-3 Supreme Court Justices to be replaced, many lower court judges.
If Zer0 gets in we KNOW what kind of judges he will nominate. Romney at least gives us a chance.
By the coattail effect the Presidential winner may very well determine the makeup of Congress.
Standing on ideals has its limits. At some point practical considerations have to kick in.
We didn’t get the good conservative nominee we wanted but we did get someone a darn sight better than what’s in there now.
If we don’t get behind Romney, this time next year we’ll be sitting here watching our Country go down the tube, guaranteed.
It may anyway, but Zer0 again will ensure it.
That’s the same thing you said about McCain, Bush, Bush, Dole.....
Have you noticed? It’s not working.
Better than Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Obama. I voted the PALIN/what’shisname ticket last time.
So what are you going to do, stay home Nov 4 ? Write in Ron Paul?
Just face the truth. Mitt is no different than Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Obama. It’s time to vote for good, not lesser evil.
I’ll tell you what I’m going to do, not vote for this:
Mitt quote: ...gay couples raising kids. That’s the American way...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.