RateItAll: The Opinion Network

We've had enough of religious zealotry posing as architects of freedom and sound leadership, thank you. . .

Flip-Flopney. 'nuff said.

McCain & Romney dislike each other. Romney has changed his mind too many times and told just plain lies that he had to retract to the point he isn't trusted. McCain has a retuation for being honest. He would never choose Roney as that would go againt everything he stands for as far as honesty.

Romney's change (flip-flops) on critical social issues, including his claim to be an independent and denouncement of Reagan, when running for office in MA, turned me against him. His manner seems arrogant, and his message tailored for the setting at the time, and he doesn't "get" the plight of the average man in America. When he talked about how great the economy was in the fall, most of us were wondering how we would make ends meet. When he mentioned it was a good time to pick up cheap stocks, I cannot imagine he knew how many Americans were jobless, on the verge of losing their homes, or unable to buy sufficient groceries or fuel for their cars. I guess that kind of attitude stems from his position and wealth. Romney has chopped up more "mom and pop" shops and small businesses and sent the jobs overseas than we will ever know. He is pro-China despite their ridiculous trade advantage created by government subsidies and human rights violations. Our national security would further erode, and thousands more jobs would go to the Communists Reds if he had the power to influence policy. I'm sure he is a nice man, but he does not have the foggest notion about how to relate to the majority of the country. I could not vote for a McCain/Romney ticket.

Romney did a terrible job as governor in Massachusetts. He had such a low approval rating there was no way he'd be re-elected. He appointed a liberal judge that was an activist for abortion. He ordered judges to perform homosexual marriages even though there was no law on the books making him do so. Under his leadership, job growth was among the worst in the nation. But, to his credit, he did cut taxes. Unfortunately, he cut funding for first responders that it forced the local areas to raise their taxes. The "Tax Freedom Day" was close to 2 weeks later after only 4 years of his "leadership." If that is his form of conservatisism; I don't want any part of it.

Romney is a liberal when he needs to be and a Republican when he needs to be. I have no confidence in what his stance on the various issues will be if elected as McCains VP. Also, I have a beef with him about the propaganda he put out trying to scare people away from the FairTax. Either he has not familiarized himself with the FairTax , which would be irresponsible, or else he knows full well what the FairTax is, which would make him a liar. That sounds harsh, but that's the way I see it.

Say No to Romney. http://www.evercor.com/trueromney The media, GOP elite, and the political pundits tried to fool everyone into thinking Romney was a true conservative. Be sure to watch the video about Mitt's stance on abortion. He flip flops his political view depending on which crowd he is speaking to. Be sure to check out his approval rating in Mass as Governor. And they said he would be great with the economy. Yeah right. He can't even take care of one state. Romney has been dishonest from the beginning by spending millions on ads to lie about McCain and Huckabee. He played dirty politics. The media, GOP elite, and politcal pundits built Romney up as a true conservative. They lied to you as well. Huckabee is a man of his word and would bring the Republican party together. A McCain and Huckabee ticket would win the General Election. Putting Romney on the ticket would be committing politcal suicide for McCain. According to Rasmussen, Romney is the least liked...he ties with Hillary. forty seven percent of Americans find Romney repugnant. Huckabee and McCain are the best liked according to the Rasmussen. I think McCain needs to listen to the people instead of the elite because if he doesn't, he will lose the general election.

I don't see this happening. I liked Romney more and more as the primary season progressed but he did the right thing (unlike the Hapless Huckabee) in dropping out for the good of the party. I don't think he brings anything to the ticket and McCain venom toward him will not be assuaged until after the election.

Romney's flip-flopping on issues hurt him some in the primaries, but I don't think it would be as much of an issue when going up against the Democrats. He also would provide a young, attractive face for the cameras when he stands beside John McCain. He has the presidential look, and the importance of perception cannot be undervalued. The big problem with Romney is what MQD shared. Many people in this country will not want to support a Mormon candidate.

Update: Idono, abichara's post seems a little dated. Bush picked Dick Cheney for what? To carry Wyoming? VP candidates haven't done well carrying their home states recently. I don't consider Tennessee a battle ground state either. Much to the chagrin of John Kerry, North Carolina didn't work out. Romney would unite the Republican party, McCain would entice the moderates. Sounds like a plan to me. Reagan picked Bush 41 as VP, they weren't exactly two peas in a pod.

The economy will be an important issue, having Romney on the ticket would blunt the criticism that will be pointed at McCain.

Not going to happen. Mitt never won the trust of conservatives during the campaign, so he doesn't add much to McCain's ticket, since McCain never won the trust of conservatives either.

This would probobly be an ok move. Romney would help to ostensibly shore-up the right wing vote, but as Abichara said, maybe not.

No, I don't see this happening. Romney is certainly a competent candidate, however, he doesn't bring much to the GOP ticket. He certainly wouldn't help McCain carry Romney's home state of Massachusetts: that's already going for the Democrats anyways. In theory, picking Romney would unite the Republican party, but in reality, I don't believe he would energize conservative voters, which would be the point of picking Romney in the first place. Part of Romney's problem during the primary was that he was seen as a political chameleon, hence core conservatives never truly trusted him. He wouldn't help the ticket bring moderates to the polls either. His so called "economic credentials" won't help out either. As I've pointed out before on this site, his record as a venture capitalist might be a liability in November, especially with unemployment rates going up.

Tactically, I don't see the point of picking Romney as VP. I'm certain he's angling for the spot, but I doubt McCain will pick him. He will likely go for someone a little more closely linked to him at the end of the day.

Hey....Mitt happens.

It will be very tempting to throw the far right wing a bone by putting him on the ticket. I'll bet that the McCain pollsters are running every possible scenario to see if his level of conservativism is acceptable to the broader electorate. And they will test every aspect of his conservativism, from his politics, to his economics, to his faith, to his haircut.

I think this is the strongest choice. If you can remember the days (pre GWB) when the Republican Party was known for it's stewardship of the economy and strong foreign policy, this would be a ticket that covered those two bases well. In McCain you'd have the Hawkish but trustworthy ex soldier with deep foreign policy experience, and in Romney, you'd have a shrewd businessman. If it were my party, this is what I'd be pushing for.

Personally, I would like it. As far as the election goes, it's no secret that Romney and McCain don't get along particularly well. That hasn't mattered with certain running mates in the past (Kennedy/Johnson, Reagan/Bush), but we're dealing with a different animal these days. I'm not sure how well it would go over with the voting public today. Romney should still be considered, and it's highly likely it would end up being more of a Reagan/Bush relationship where there was some conflict to begin with but mutual respect was built. Most people don't vote for running mates, but I believe it would ease the minds of some that question McCain on certain issues.

Romney is probably the most logical choice at this point. People already know who he is, and he has a lot of supporters. He is more conservative than McCain, which I like, and I'm sure that most Republicans like as well. Whether that really translates into more votes or not is doubtful, as most Republicans will already be voting for McCain anyway, and most (although certainly not all) independents tend to be more middle of the road.

My first choice ~ I believe that Mitt has the ability to balance out the portions of McCain that some conservatives feel are too liberal. I really believe that Mitt being VP would bring in the votes that were Conservatives "on-the-fence".