Perry-Palin 2012. Sick, but true.

[Honeycombe8]

Perry and Palin have been buds ever since she was VP nominee on the McCain ticket. That relationship continues to this day. They defend each other against imagined attacks.

He is gov of Texas. She has just bought a home in the southwest, as well (Arizona). They both look like what people think Republican politicians should look like.

If Perry gets in the race, I see a Perry-Palin ticket around the horizon.

Good thing or bad thing? I would think it would be good for the Democrats, but then again, who would've thought Bush would've won?

[Pisces]

1. More like Perry/Bachman

[Honeycombe8]

6. Hmmm. You might be right about that. Palin will be upset, though. nt

[tomm2thumbs]

22. how about Perry/Como... love that music

(of course I'm kidding)

[calimary]

23. LOVE IT!!! LOL!!!

But seriously folks -

I don't think palin would accept second place on any ticket from here on. Her ego just wouldn't have it. And it feels like this round of GOP contenders is all about ego. When is it ever otherwise, though?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

31. hahaha.....Loved him.

[CakeGrrl]

2. If all these combinations are remotely possible, it'll be a major dogfight.

Romney seems to be the one to beat.

What would make Perry the favorite if he jumped in?

What would Bachmann do to get on a ticket instead of Palin?

Who would Romney pick if he got the nom?

[RedSpartan]

3. Romney/Rubio

[Honeycombe8]

5. I think Rubio sees himself as a #1 man. nt

[karynnj]

33. I think he does too, but I suspect that MOST people likely to ever run for President,

see themselves that way. Look how many VP candidates, whether the ticket wins or not, run for President.

Here, Rubio is positioned a lot like John Edwards. A party and media favorite, who has really not done anything. Getting on the ticket gave Edwards - and would give Rubio, more visibility and more credibility in a future race. The downside is that Rubio could be as vain as Edwards and, even as VP, look out more for how he looks than what is best for the ticket. (Another similarity is that while Republicans talk of this as a good chance to win, the odds are in Obama's favor.)

Rubio is actually in a better position than Edwards, he is not up for re-election. (Edwards opted not to run for his Senate seat when he started his Presidential race.) If he loses, he returns to the Senate. Given the right wing bias of the Republicans, I assume Romney would get all the blame and Rubio would simply get increased stature in the party.

[DrDan]

15. yep - that is the way I see it as well - Rubio will bring those teabagger votes

[TheWraith]

4. No way Palin takes the number 2 slot again, I think.

Her ego's grown way too much for that.

[TlalocW]

18. Agreed

But I honestly think that she realizes she's too polarizing a figure to be president. I think she's going try to be a king-maker this year - or in the case of Romney who she really doesn't like, a spoiler - with the ultimate goal being getting a cabinet position if the person who wins "owes her."

TlalocW

[TheWraith]

19. She certainly can't get elected president. But she could probably get nominated.

Her base is loyal to the point of fanaticism, and that could very well be enough to pull her through the Republican primaries, particularly with an otherwise fractured and unimpressive field.

I just think that she's too full of herself, and believes too much of her own propaganda, to accept anything but the top slot.

[nxylas]

29. "Her base is loyal to the point of fanaticism"

So is Ron Paul's. The question is whether that base is quite the political force that the M$M makes it out to be.

[Whisp]

21. agreed, she's going for Queen now, anything less is out of the question

[Faryn Balyncd]

7. Perry is positioning himself to be Romney's "legitimizer" to the religious right

Perry's alliance with the lunatic fringe (New Apostolic Reformation/Kansas City Prophets/Joel's Army dominionists)with his Reliant Stadium seance makes absolutely so sense if he has his eyes on the presidential nomination.....It only makes sense if he is trying to cement his credentials with the extreme religious right so that he will become the vehicle for Romney to gain "legitimacy" in the eyes of the insane Republican base, by choosing Perry as his VP nominee.



Perry prove over and over again that he is a shameless opportunist who will pose as anything.

[polichick]

9. This seems likely.

[southernyankeebelle]

8. Dishanfranchising democrats accross this country will let these 2 holy rollers win. I am so

tired that Obama is a weak president along with those sorry democrats. I am at a point of staying home for the next election. It doesn't matter who is in. They all only care of lining their own pockets and fuck the working people. Enough is enough. Until I see a real grassroots like WI going on in Washington DC I will sit it out. Am old and tired.

[sellitman]

11. I am with you

Just as disgusted. However doing so only makes things worse. Think of a Supreme Court with more RW loonies.

Now get over yourself and get out and make sure that never happens.

No matter how disappointed I am with Obama , he is worlds better than the trash on the right.

[calimary]

24. It absolutely DOES matter who gets in! Supreme Court appointments are just part of it!

A substantial and significant part of this involves who they bring in WITH THEM. It's the anti-choice crowd that's closer than ever to denying women the final say on what happens to their own bodies, personally. It's the gay-haters who'll use a GOP'er's coattails to make sure gays NEVER get the right to marry or serve honestly, as who they are, in the military. And whatever rights have been fought for and hard-won over decades will be systematically rolled back, whether it's the right to choose, the right to marry, the right to collective bargaining, the right to vote, and on and on and on!

The anti-choice crowd tends not to hang with the Democrats. The gay-haters tend not to hang with the Democrats. The people trying and in some cases succeeding in taking workers rights away aren't hangin' with the Democrats. The people focused on rolling back voting rights tend NOT to be with the Democrats. The people who tend to resent the fact that there's a black guy in the Oval Office and he isn't the janitor tend NOT to be Democrats, and don't gravitate toward Democrats with their activism, donations, or votes.

BELIEVE ME, PEOPLE!!! There is an UNGODLY HUGE difference in which party gets into the White House. It DOES TOO matter!!!! You'd rather have john mcsame picking justices? I shudder to think whose names would be presented to him on the list of pre-vetted and highly-recommended candidates - and who's researching and recommending them, and what their agendas are. You want to have to live by THEIR litmus tests? GOOD GOD!!!! If nothing else, consider how Al Gore would have run things instead of dubya. Do you suppose we'd still be in Iraq? Would we even have gone in there to begin with? Would 9/11 even have happened? Would Gore have dropped the ball on the warnings in those Presidential Daily Briefs - especially that one that set some 9/11 commission's panelists' hair on fire when they heard? Would he have surrounded himself with wall-to-wall PNAC'ers who yearn for "multiple wars on multiple fronts" to protect oil interests and all ravenously arguing and lobbying in favor of more American adventurism? Who would he have advising him on energy policy? Environmental policy? Education policy? Public health policy? WHAT THE HELL?????

I think sometimes people forget something. You don't just elect the candidate. You elect ALL THE BAGGAGE and ALL THE ASSISTANTS and ALL THE ADVISORS and ALL THE STAFFERS and ALL THE POSITION-PAPER RESEARCHERS AND AUTHORS - great numbers of whom usually move up from the victorious candidate's campaign directly into the White House itself. And you elect the agendas they bring in with them. They're what has the successful candidate's back. THAT is the wind behind his/her back, and let there be no doubt in which direction that wind is blowing. And I daresay these people sometimes wield more actual power and influence than the winning candidate they work for, especially since most of 'em can operate below the radar.

[emulatorloo]

Why should I be punished by President Perry because you are too tired to vote?

I understand your frustration, but I don't understand your logic.

[AlinPA]

10. If Perry wins the nomination, it's Perry/Rubio. Rubio is on any ticket.

[GSLevel9]

26. I don't see Rubio accepting the slot.

Either he takes a spot on a ticket that's doomed to fail... or he waits 4 more years and runs for POTUS himself. By 2016 Rubio has 6 years in the Senate... and probably a committee Chair or two. Rubio probably is POTUS in 2016.

[AlinPA]

27. Rubio on any ticket would make it very hard to beat.

[karynnj]

34. He can do both -

Be on the 2012 ticket as VP, get good media (which he very likely will) and be the 1016 candidate. He does not have to leave the Senate to be VP - he is not up for re-election. Like Obama, if Rubio runs in 2016, he will be running as a freshman Senator. Obama had the spectacular introduction to Democrats with his 2004 keynote speech. Even if he does not run as the VP, he could well get the keynote speech at the Republican convention. Either would set him above a typical freshman Senator.

He can't do that by having a prestigious chair (or ranking member status). The Senate runs on seniority. He only will have 4 years seniority when the 2015/2016 Congress is formed. Neither 4 or 6 years is enough to get a committee chair. (Consider Hillary never had one.) He could chair a sub committee. ( NO ONE is chair of two committees. (Remember that Dodd took Banking and would have had to give it up to take either SFRC or HELP, where with Biden's becoming VP and Teddy's passing, he had the seniority over Kerry and Harkin. )

There is one thing to consider. In 2016, Rubio is up for re-election. That could complicate his decision. Some states - ie Massachusetts - do not let you run for both.

[madamesilverspurs]

12. Palin's bloated ego

will demand that she be at the top of the ticket, no way she'll run for veep again. But the combo of Perry/Palin, in any order, you just can't get more Stepford than that.


-

[ImNotTed]

13. Perry/Palin???

:rofl:

[AtomicKitten]

14. Good lord that ticket is a double dose of crazy.

My money is on Romney (because he's next on deck and the GOP just can't help themselves) and Rubio for VP (in an attempt to entice the Hispanic vote).

[Arkana]

16. Not gonna happen.

Palin's a millstone around the legs of any nominee.

[warrior1]

17. never gonna

happen.

[kick-ass-bob]

20. Palin cannot be #2 again. That would be suicide for them. But..

I can imagine her being SecState with her international relations background. :eyes:

[Laura PourMeADrink]

32. LOL !!!

[GSLevel9]

25. nah... that's not it.

A candidate always looks for a Veep that nullifies an argument. Obama picked Biden because he's OLD and knows every square inch of DC.

Perry would NOT pick Palin or Bachmann.

Perry would chose a Pawlenty or a pub from the "more sane than not" wing of the party. Toxic Sarah won't be asked by anyone to run as Veep.

Bachmann nullifies Romney's uneasy support from TeaParty and fundies.

[win_in_06]

28. Flip it.

Palin-Perry. Perhaps.

[Skittles]

30. aw PLEASE, not again

I put up with that dumb-as-fuck bush as governor and "president" - don't make me relive the same scenario :(

[OwnedByFerrets]

35. Sounds like PP to me

:evilgrin:

[Splinter Cell]

36. Not gonna happen.

Not possible.