It would appeal to the establishment GOP and it would appeal to the Tea Party. Would it win the WH?
A little to close to the GOP’s failed 2008 strategy.
I must disagree. Bachmann is heads and shoulders above Palin in intellecct and in experience. I think it could happen and the ticket could be very formidable, IMHO.
I think it’d be an excellent choice for the GOP. If the economy stays in the pits, they’re in.
Intellect wise, credentials and experience wise, Romney is way ahead of McCain.
The same with Bachmann and Palin. Bachmann, in spite of all the right wing, fundamentalist crazy she brings, is intelligent enough, and well educated enough, to run a large business or organization. She’s a credible manager in a way that Palin never could be.
I think you lose more independents than you gain otherwise disaffected social conservatives. The only reason to pick someone like Bachmann is to energize the base, and that only makes sense if the base outnumbers the independents you might alienate by picking an extremist. After the primaries, it’s a race for the middle.
Well Bachmann is anywhere but the middle.
My point, exactly.
But if Romney woke up and stopped bashing his own health care stuff and started to move toward the center, then Bachmann is a possibility (as much as it terrifies me) to bring the base back into the race.
Personally, I hope they never let this woman anywhere near the White House, not even as a guest, let alone ‘one heartbeat away’.
You play to the base during the primaries, then shift towards the middle for the general election. This is the conventional wisdom, and there’s good reason for it. The fact that the Maverick tried to buck this wisdom, and got soundly defeated, is just one more reason to trust it.
It’s not completely illogical, all things being equal, to try to motivate your base during the general election. The problem is that all things aren’t equal. Two points in particular: First, each member of your base only counts for one vote: They might vote for you, and they might sit out or vote for an irrelevant third-party candidate, but they’re never going to vote for your rival. But the folks in the center are effectively worth two votes each: If you alienate one of them, you lose one vote and your rival gains one vote. So you need to energize twice as many voters in your base as you alienate in the middle, to break even.
Second, energizing your base will also, to some extent, energize the other side’s base, since they’ll turn out to vote against you. In fact, a first-order approximation would be that the other side will be just as energized as yours by a move to the extremes. Between this and the undecided middle, it’s really, really hard to get any benefit out of extremism in the general election.
I’d be very hesitant to pick Bachmann as my running mate. If they’re down in the polls, I’d wonder if Bachmann might have already conceded the election in her mind and she’d be planning her career as a Fox commentator after the election. Bachmann might wander a bit more off message and get more attention than Romney.
But there is also something of a tried and true of picking someone closer to the base, or the existing order, when picking a running mate.
But as per what you’ve said, Chronos, it will be interesting to watch Romney eat his legacy for breakfast trying to pander to the base. Then should he win the nomination, he’s kinda boned if he ever wants to push the same plan in any way, shape or form.
Beyond him, I don’t see any of these people who can successfully ‘play to the middle’ given their records and their rhetoric.
Hell, the propaganda is overwhelming. Everyone of their base screams about Obama the Socialist, wrecking the country, when the man damn near governs as a Republican. I kinda wonder how boxed in they’ll find themselves with their own base if any one of them attempts to act more centrist during the final push.
Well, after last night’s debate I’d say a Romney/Bachman ticket is more likely than a Republican ticket with the work “Pawlenty” anywhere on it.
And that is a good thing.
So is the average Realtor.
Michelle Bachmann says the most serious issue facing our country is gay marriage. She thinks the answer to economic issues is to abolish the EPA. And of course she’s a creationist, denies global warming, and is even tied up with the cranks who think immunizations cause autism.
Anyone who thinks she’s a creditable candidate is in the same state of deep denial as she is about real problems and real solutions.
I guess if she’s a serious candidate it shows how far the GOP has fallen and how much their base has fallen, to the point where they don’t even want somebody who talks sense.
Romney can’t pick her. He’ll need a winger to pacify the base, but it can’t be her. She has too many negatives. She’s batshit crazy, for one and she’s a pathological liar for another. This is a woman who said that FEMA was setting up “re-education camps.” That’s all fun and games when she’s just a bomb throwing Congresswoman, but she’s too much of a liability to attach to a Presidential ticket, Too much risk she’ll say something batshit crazy and swallow news cycles. She makes Biden look thoughtful and reserved.
Romney will need a winger to pacify the base, but it won’t be Bachmann. I’m thinking somebody like T-Paw would be more likely. Pawlenty has no actual ideology or principles or sincere religious beliefs to get in his way. He’s a pure careerist (like Romney), and will play whatever role he’s asked without risk of going off the reservation and talking about the rapture or the birth certificate or something the way that Bachmann is likely to do.
Unlikely.
The only way I see it happening is if you have a brokered convention. Romney has more delegates, but needs Bachman’s support to go over the top. Unlike the Democrats, the GOP doesn’t have “Superdelegates” that can break ties.
And at that point, if you’re Bachmann, you don’t want to spoil your brand name by tying yourself to Romney and he loses.
Of course, if we are still in Double Dip territory, she might jump because Obama is going down.
If we make something of a recovery, then Romney will lose, and the crazy wing of the GOP can insist it was because he wasn’t a “real” conservative.
Bachmann will be too easy to bait. All it takes is for reporters to ask “What did you mean when you said [crazy statement]?” to elicit an even crazier statement from her. And since crazy is always entertaining, she’ll get lots of coverage.
Michelle Bachmann is the dumbest woman alive. Besides, Yahweh himself told her to run for president! VP wouldn’t satisfy her ego, but it would give her the chance to read the constitution and the bible for the very first time. :rolleyes:
If history is any indicator (& this might sound sexist), America will not vote for a ticket with a woman running as VP (ex. Mondale/Ferraro & McCain/Palin). JMO