Comments on: Veep Beat: Another Week, Still No VP

By: Harry Light

Harry Light — Fri, 03 Aug 2012 16:21:04 +0000

Sarah Palin is on the short list!

By: Prognosticating Pete

Prognosticating Pete — Fri, 03 Aug 2012 14:05:48 +0000

Jonnie, You have a point about the incumbent being guilty of political foolery and the need for leadership and backbone in the WH. Sadly I wonder if even the best VP choice can give us the GOP ticket the country needs. We need less culture wars and application of solid economic theory. It troubles me that Mitt as flipped on so many issues. Perhaps a VP with a Phd in economics and gaffe free record in recent politics is out there, but I don’t see him on the short list.

By: D. Harper

D. Harper — Fri, 03 Aug 2012 13:58:19 +0000

What is the urgency that causes the MSM to be in such a ‘tizzy’?

Has Obama ‘assured’ the nation that his V.P. will remain Joe(Foot-in-Mouth)Biden? Where is the MSM on this one or has the ‘annointed one’ designated that that is one more area that is verbotten.

I’m old enough to remember when the presidential nominating process was determined by the delegates at the convention and many times it required 2-10 votes – the V.P. was also determined by the same process.

Now the ‘party’ determines the candidates from a group that the DNC and RNC deem electable, eventually choosing one of them thru this process called ‘debates’ (a phony definition) and then the eventual nominee picks his ‘running mate’ with little or no in-put by the people – its all done by a committee of vetting persons hoping to select a person who is pure as the driven snow and who can carry the ‘battleground states’.

The battleground states are classified as the states with the greatest number of electoral votes meaning smply if you can carry NY, CA, ILL, PA, Ohio, TX and perhaps 2-3 others you win which in essence makes the remaining irrelevant – great system it has become.

VT, NH, RI, NM, WY, MT, IA, N & SDK, etc are not really relevant – the heck with the opinions of these ‘liitle people.’

We are no longer a “government of the people, by the people and for the people” – we have become a “government of the politician, by the politician and for the politician” which in essence is for the “party.”

It has a very foul aroma.

By: jonnie

jonnie — Fri, 03 Aug 2012 13:44:53 +0000

Perplexed, the theory of choosing a running mate early is so the press (MSM) can have their field day early and the bloody goring of the new VP candidate will have that behind him/her before the Republican convention at the end of August and weeks before election. That’s the theory anyway that I’ve heard.

Pete, speaking of transparency, have you read the latest about the WH sneaking off the premises to meet with the pharmaceutical lobbyists? You remember the lobbyists that Obama was going to kick butt away from the WH, don’t you? We need a leader, not a whiner in the WH.

By: Prognosticating Pete

Prognosticating Pete — Fri, 03 Aug 2012 13:31:24 +0000

The speculation will continue for now. Mitt Romney will have to pick a VP at some point, just as he will have to release his tax returns. Of course he could continue to not to pick a VP, just as he could continue to not release his returns, but both decisions are required for a serious run at the presidency.

By: Perplexed

Perplexed — Fri, 03 Aug 2012 13:00:36 +0000

Excuse me, MSM, is there some deadline for this decision? I am not aware that it makes any difference whether he makes a decision this week or at the convention. Have you some information that indicates that if he doesn’t make that decision this week that the sun will not rise in the east and set in the west as a result.