GOP VP thread: Palin is the pick

[GB-Hack]

Yeah, GB. See my edit.

It was a typo on his part, and I was responding to that. Doesn't change the fact that secretive government is too Orwellian for my tastes.

But at the same time, doesn't the VP need to be someone who is going to compliment the nominee on the ticket?

I know there were those who insisted Obama-Clinton would have been a dream ticket, but after the campaign they ran against each other, could it really have worked?

Same thing for McCain-Romney/Huckabee?

 

[Lyman_Bostock]

Who was the last senator to be elected president? LBJ?

Wow, you are even dumber than I thought.

He was a senator when picked for VP, was he not?

 

[old_tony]

Executive experience?

Define that, Lyman. Of course, you can't.

If you don't know what it is, you're beyond help. But we already knew that anyway, so ....

 

[Lyman_Bostock]

Yeah, GB. See my edit.

It was a typo on his part, and I was responding to that. Doesn't change the fact that secretive government is too Orwellian for my tastes.

But at the same time, doesn't the VP need to be someone who is going to compliment the nominee on the ticket?

I know there were those who insisted Obama-Clinton would have been a dream ticket, but after the campaign they ran against each other, could it really have worked?

Same thing for McCain-Romney/Huckabee?

Well, there always was Reagan-Bush. Ford-Reagan was talked up for a while, too, in '76.

 

[spnited]

Who was the last senator to be elected president? LBJ?

Wow, you are even dumber than I thought.

He was a senator when picked for VP, was he not?

That does not make him the last senator to be elected president.

He was, in fact, the President when he was re-elected President.

I hope this isn't too difficult for you to comprehend.

 

[Oz]

I think they were banking on a safe, boring pick that they could tie to Bush. Seems like they're far too worked up about who's No. 2. Particularly when that person has more executive experience than their No. 1.

I can understand why a big Republican talking point would be to say that Palin has more executive experience than Obama. The best way to try and dissuade undecided voters from going for Obama would be to compare him to the green veep candidate on the other side. I get that.

But it's comparing apples and oranges, and just because you say it enough, that doesn't make it true. Through primaries and caucus in every American state and territory, we've learned a lot about Obama's views on Iraq, Afghanistan, Darfur, Georgia, Russia, The EU, etc. He's got real world experience. Palin, however, remains a mystery on all that.

 

[GB-Hack]

The one compromise I could see would be for there still to be a vetting committee for the nominee to find candidates he/she would feel good about running with, and then putting those VP nominees to a vote at the Convention.

Although with the way names get leaked and floated out as the process is going on, I have to think they are looking at the public's reaction to different names when they appear in the media, with positive reactions boosting a VP candidate's chances.

 

[spnited]

Can anyone tell me who was the last person elected vice president?

 

[Lyman_Bostock]

Who was the last senator to be elected president? LBJ?

Wow, you are even dumber than I thought.

He was a senator when picked for VP, was he not?

That does not make him the last senator to be elected president.

He was, in fact, the President when he was re-elected President.

I hope this isn't too difficult for you to comprehend.

OK, Mr. Patrol Boy, thanks for the lesson in government. Now go fork yourself.

 

[spnited]

Brilliant response, Lyman.

 

[GB-Hack]

Can anyone tell me who was the last person elected vice president?

Would that be Estes Kefauver?

 

[Lyman_Bostock]

Brilliant response, Lyman.

Pales in comparison to most of yours, I know, but I like to keep it simple and direct.