Posted on 06/16/2011 3:57:34 PM PDT by Al B.
Yesterday's column on Tim Pawlenty's feebleness in criticizing Mitt Romney's version of ObamaCare prompted several readers to write with the suggestion that Pawlenty is pursuing the vice presidential nomination. We doubt it. We've met with Pawlenty twice in recent months, and he has a well-considered (if, thus far, not so well-implemented) plan to win the presidential nomination. Further, if he was sucking up to the former Massachusetts governor Monday night with a Romney-Pawlenty ticket in mind, that would represent a one-day change in strategy, since it was only Sunday morning when Pawlenty referred to "ObamneyCare."
Furthermore, if Pawlenty were angling for the subordinate spot on a Romney ticket, blurring the two men's differences would be precisely the wrong way of going about it. Pawlenty on Monday did not display any strengths to compensate for Romney's weaknesses.
[...]
Whereas the argument for Pawlenty is that he is most things to all people--that few voters have any reason to be against him--Bachmann stirs genuine enthusiasm among two of the Republican factions most wary of Romney: the Tea Party and the religious right.
[...]
As for Bachmann, her biggest advantage over Sarah Palin may be that she is now running for president. That means that if Romney were to name her a year hence, she would be a far more familiar and media-savvy politician than Palin was in 2008. She would be much less vulnerable to both smears from the partisan media and unforced errors like Palin's disastrous interview with Katie Couric, whoever that is. For those who care about such things, the presence of a woman on the ticket might serve as an excuse to vote against re-electing the first black president.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
HELL, NO !
It begins! We were right to be supiscious!
NO
No Romney!! No way!! FUMR!!
Bachman, (blank) I could support. Romney, (anything) no thanks.
I thought this site banned profanity. LOL.
Good grief. What next?
“...the presence of a woman on the ticket might serve as an excuse to vote against re-electing the first black president.”
As though anyone other than those comsumed with white guilt needs an excuse to vote against that turd.
MSM will be Romney (anyone) although I thought the WSJ would be better than this.
But Mitt has such presidential hair! /s
Yes. They’ve been smoked out early.
“...the presence of a woman on the ticket might serve as an excuse to vote against re-electing the first black president.”
How’d that work the first time around?
Idiotic.
In effect, the same thing was tried in 2008. Didn’t work then, won’t work now.
I don't care how much enthusiasm the VP stirs. The Pres is the head of the executive department. The VP is -nothing- but bait.
NO ROMNEY! NO ROMNEY! NO ROMNEY!
No way, no how.
Please make this mittens crap stop. now.
NO ROMNEY! NO ROMNEY! NO ROMNEY!
No way, no how.
Please make this mittens crap stop. now.
Ha! That is funny.
Palin/West 2012 unbeatable!!!
I agree. No Romney..he had a whack at it last time and he is democrat light..
Why should Michele take a back seat to anyone..
I think it depends on who else gets in the fight...word going around that Perry is closer to making a decision.
Screw this guy!
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.