Robert Portman for VP?

[pkbites]

He's more conservative than Romney, which will round out the ticket. He appears to be popular in Ohio which may help win this crucial swing state. He's not Catholic like Ryan, though I'm not sure why some people find this to be an issue. And more personable than Tim Pawlenty.

What would some negatives be for Portman as compared to Pawlenty, Ryan, or Daniels?

[greenslime1951]

Rats, I misread this and thought you said Natalie Portman for VP. We missed the chance to elect a hot babe for veep last time around, and this time, the hot babe would be smarter than a walnut.

[Qin Shi Huangdi]

I think he's overall one of the better VP picks-although it may be nice to hire someone with foreign policy experience. Although OTOH the ticket will be a bit dry maybe its a good thing after 2008.

[Marley23]

He's said to be one of the finalists along with Pawlenty. (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/us/politics/romney-vice-presidential-search-began-months-ago.html?hp) I don't know much about him. I think Daniels is out of the running, or dropped out, because he agreed to become president of Purdue next year. It's not an unbreakable commitment but he probably would not have made it if he expected to be considered for a place on the ticket (or wanted to be considered).

[kaylasdad99]

I think he's overall one of the better VP picks-although it may be nice to hire someone with foreign policy experience. Although OTOH the ticket will be a bit dry maybe its a good thing after 2008.As long as it loses, the country wins.

[Twoflower]

W's budget director for VP? Would Mitt really go there?

[Jas09]

W's budget director for VP? Would Mitt really go there?That's really the only obvious negative (besides the blandness). Portman was inextricably tied to both Presidents Bush.

The aforementioned lack of FP experience doesn't help, but I'm not sure how much it hurts. Romney can't really use FP as a weapon in the campaign anyways (unless something flares up between now and Nov).

[Elendil's Heir]

Despite having easily won election to the Senate in 2010 over a tired old Dem, Portman's still not all that well-known here. He might make a little difference in carrying Ohio, but couldn't deliver the state, as such. He is pretty bland. He also would already (as would just about any public officeholder these days) have released a lot more of his past taxes than Romney has, which will (I hope) lead to the question, "Why do we know more about your running mate's taxes than we do about yours, Mr. Romney?"

[Ambivalid]

Who?



All I know about this guy is that his last name contains in it the name of a type of red wine (which I do not personally care for). So based on this limited amount of knowledge; I'd never vote for the guy and don't much like him.

[Lord Feldon]

He appears to be popular in Ohio which may help win this crucial swing state.

I wouldn't say he's popular. I mean, he's not unpopular either, but people just have no idea who he is (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/06/obama-lead-in-ohio-down-to-3.html):

Rob Portman continues to be at the center of Vice Presidential buzz but that's not doing much to raise his profile in his home state. Only 63% of Ohio voters have an opinion about him with 32% approving and 31% disapproving. PPP's polled on almost every Senator in the country and there isn't any other one who fewer people have an opinion about in their home states. If Portman was added to the ticket it would have basically no impact on the overall numbers, with Obama leading a Romney/Portman ticket 47-43.

He won by a large margin in 2010, but beating Lee Fisher isn't exactly a huge accomplishment. Lots of people have done it.

[BlackKnight]

... and this time, the hot babe would be smarter than a walnut.
Quite a bit smarter!


As a student, Portman co-authored two research papers that were published in scientific journals. Her 1998 high school paper, "A Simple Method to Demonstrate the Enzymatic Production of Hydrogen from Sugar", co-authored with scientists Ian Hurley and Jonathan Woodward, was entered in the Intel Science Talent Search.[42] In 2002, she contributed to a study on memory called "Frontal Lobe Activation during Object Permanence: Data from Near-Infrared Spectroscopy" during her psychology studies at Harvard.[43][44]

[Elendil's Heir]

For those who want to know more about Sen. Portman: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Portman

[BwanaBob]

Nothing like having a near unknown being a heart-beat away....good thinking.

[Czarcasm]

For those who want to know more about Sen. Portman: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_PortmanPortman acquired a reputation as "one of the few Republicans who regularly form alliances with important Democrats to get legislation enacted." Get a few Democrats to say in strategically placed ads that they could work with him because he is willing to cooperate with them, and the Teapers will have a shit fit.

[Simplicio]

Nothing like having a near unknown being a heart-beat away....good thinking.

The guy's been in one political office or another since the first Bush administration. Ohio voters may not be terribly familiar with his record, but he has a pretty long record to find out about if people are interested (as they presumably will be if he is the VP nom). He's hardly an "unknown".

[Ruby Slippers]

The guy's been in one political office or another since the first Bush administration. Ohio voters may not be terribly familiar with his record, but he has a pretty long record to find out about if people are interested (as they presumably will be if he is the VP nom). He's hardly an "unknown".

No, he's not unknown. But even here in Ohio, he's hardly a household name. So if part of the strategy of picking him is the hope of picking up a significant number of Ohio votes, I don't see him being a big plus.

[pkbites]

No, he's not unknown. But even here in Ohio, he's hardly a household name. So if part of the strategy of picking him is the hope of picking up a significant number of Ohio votes, I don't see him being a big plus.


People in Ohio don't know who their United States Senator is?

[IceQube]

I'd like to see a Jindal/Romney ticket, but that's just me.

I think that lots of people don't know who their US Senators are - I, for one, don't know who my two representatives are. Not that they merit attention for whatever sleaziness they have probably been up to ...

[pkbites]

I'd like to see a Jindal/Romney ticket, but that's just me.

I think that lots of people don't know who their US Senators are - I, for one, don't know who my two representatives are. Not that they merit attention for whatever sleaziness they have probably been up to ...

How could you have 2 Representatives?:confused: Or did you mean senators?

[Ruby Slippers]

People in Ohio don't know who their United States Senator is?

I'm sure some do. I'm also sure many don't. I used to work on Capitol Hill (for an earlier Senator from Ohio), and when I met non-Hillies, I was often surprised to discover how little they knew or cared about their representatives in Congress. That was more than 25 years ago, but I doubt it's changed that much. We hear a lot of noise from strong partisans on both sides, but they're really just a loud minority. It's the quiet, mostly apathetic majority that everyone's trying to reach.

[Jas09]

Lots and lots and lots of people don't know who their Senators are. I'm sure my wife doesn't. I had to just think really hard to remember which old white man replaced the other old white man in 2010 here in MO (it was Roy Blunt replacing Kit Bond - gets confusing because we just got rid of Matt Blunt). Many Senators are imminently forgettable.

[IceQube]

How could you have 2 Representatives?:confused: Or did you mean senators?

Of course I meant Senators. I in fact mentioned "Senators" earlier in the sentence and later only referred to them as "representatives." I initially understood that this may cause confusion so I inserted "2" as a subtle hint.

[Ruby Slippers]

Of course I meant Senators. I in fact mentioned "Senators" earlier in the sentence and later only referred to them as "representatives." I initially understood that this may cause confusion so I inserted "2" as a subtle hint.

Nitpick -- if you use the generic term "representatives," you have 3 representatives in Congress -- one in the House and two in the Senate. That's probably the source of the confusion.

[The wind of my soul]

He's more conservative than Romney, which will round out the ticket. He appears to be popular in Ohio which may help win this crucial swing state. He's not Catholic like Ryan, though I'm not sure why some people find this to be an issue. And more personable than Tim Pawlenty.

What would some negatives be for Portman as compared to Pawlenty, Ryan, or Daniels?

You say he’s more personable than Pawlenty. Is there a consensus on this, or just personal opinion? I’m only asking because I don’t find him to be any more personable than Pawlenty.

I see two negatives for Portman as compared to Pawlenty, and both are pretty negligent: One is that Portman was a senator, which does not give him the same executive experience that Pawlenty has. Since Romney was a governor, I think a lot of people will overlook this, since a VP is typically thought of as someone to round out a ticket. I find this line of thinking kind of flawed, since the VP is not simply meant to be a right-hand man, but also the successor to the president, so you should want both candidates to be well-rounded. Anyways, the other negative for Portman is that Pawlenty has spent some time in the spotlight as a candidate already. As a result, any skeletons in Pawlenty’s closet would have likely come out by now, whereas with Portman there’s a little more risk that something could crop up.

I see more negatives when comparing Portman to Ryan. Perhaps I should say that the main negative I see is more significant. Ryan is popular with the tea party, popular enough to excite the base and maybe get more volunteers working on the campaign and more people out on voting day. In addition to already being popular, I personally find him much more interesting/exciting than Portman, and I think he’d have a greater capacity to draw people in. He’s also younger and prettier.

Negatives as compared to Mitch Daniels: none come to mind. The big thing that stands out in my mind about Mitch Daniels was his suggestion that we focus on the economy for this election, rather than arguing over social issues. Since the people who focus on social issues are the people Romney is struggling to reach, Daniels would not be a good asset to the Romney campaign.

[Enkel]

Nothing like having a near unknown being a heart-beat away....good thinking.

It worked with Palin... er...

[Elendil's Heir]

...Negatives as compared to Mitch Daniels: none come to mind. The big thing that stands out in my mind about Mitch Daniels was his suggestion that we focus on the economy for this election, rather than arguing over social issues. Since the people who focus on social issues are the people Romney is struggling to reach, Daniels would not be a good asset to the Romney campaign.

I tend to agree. Also, although Obama narrowly carried Daniels's Indiana four years ago, he's pretty unlikely to this time around, while Portman's Ohio is considered more of a swing state.

[Enkel]

People in Ohio don't know who their United States Senator is?

Portman is the guy who's not Sharrod Brown. Sharrod Brown has much higher visibility. Portman is routinely called a dufus on all of his Facebook posts. (he does have his "oh, thank your for sticking up for us" followers, but that is the exent of their postings. OTOH, the anti-teaparty followers are usually quick to discredit what ever Portman decides to post (which really isn't much, he goes in spurts).

[gamerunknown]

I don't understand anti-Tea Party Republicans. Is their only bugbear market protectionism and appreciation of Wall Street intricacies?

[Elendil's Heir]

Portman is the guy who's not Sharrod Brown. Sharrod Brown has much higher visibility....

Nitpick: It's "Sherrod."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherrod_Brown