Is Bachmann Angling to Be Romney’s Veep?

[oberliner]

Michele Bachmann abruptly canceled scheduled events in Iowa on Tuesday to do nine conservative and Christian radio programs. Her No. 1 topic? Newt Gingrich’s soft stance on immigration. Which candidate does this most help? Mitt Romney.

Throughout the summer and fall, Romney has hardly needed to attack any of his rivals; Bachmann has done it for him. When Rick Perry was rising in the polls, it was Bachmann who went after him for supporting an HPV-vaccine mandate. When Herman Cain was on the ascent it was Bachmann who shot down his “9-9-9″ plan and his “inconsistencies.”

Sure, the Minnesota Congresswoman has taken an occasional dig at Romney. On Nov. 9 she called him a “frugal socialist.” But in debates and in comparison with the vehemence with which she’s attacked other rivals, she’s gone easy on Romney. In fact, the two seem to have a pact of mutual nonaggression. Remember that roundtable debate last month when Romney lobbed that softball question to Bachmann about her jobs program?

If Bachmann’s former campaign manager Ed Rollins is to be believed, she’s gunning to be Romney’s No. 2. Why would Romney pick Bachmann – who is undisciplined, bombastic and controversial – to be his running mate? The appeal is actually greater than it might seem at first blush.

http://swampland.time.com/2011/11/29/is-bachmann-angling-to-be-romneys-veep/#ixzz1fC5SrBDT

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Palin redux.

A GOP presidential candidate with a history that the wingnuts find "too liberal." Desperate to court the loony-toon base, the candidate selects an appealing female running mate who is very conservative and therefore attractive to the base, but who is uninformed and gaffe-prone.

It's deja vu all over again.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

3. The GOP hasn't met a bad idea yet

that they don't want to keep trying to shove down our throats over and over again. :eyes:

[WI_DEM]

2. I don't see him selecting her.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

4. Me either

If I had to guess, I'm betting that the GOP is going to try a Latino "hook" this time around (i.e. Rubio) to try and siphon some of those votes away from President Obama in states like Florida. Hopefully, it would be about as *successful* at drawing latino voters to the GOP as Palin was at drawing women in 2008. :eyes:

[Douglas Carpenter]

5. I doubt it would be Bachmann, - but I think he may want a real fundamentalist Christian as his V.P.

to balance out the "Mormon thing" and to fire up the less than enthusiastic base - should he become the nominee.

[Cognitive_Resonance]

6. She can dream on. Leading contenders now are McDonnell (VA) and Pawlenty. nt

[oberliner]

7. I don't think he would pick Pawlenty

I think he will go with someone further right that will "motivate the base" so to speak.

[Cognitive_Resonance]

9. Right. The strategist will push for a more red meat conservative. Pawlenty has fundie credentials,

though and he is obviously going overboard to demonstrate his loyalty to Romney's nomination. Might be a tough call for Mitt if he actually wins the nomination. Less and less certain Mitt can find the primary/caucus votes to get it done.

[oberliner]

10. Who do you see winning the nomination if not Mitt?

Doesn't seem like there is a viable challenger out there.

[Douglas Carpenter]

11. you were one of the first to predict Newt's meteoric rise -- you do not think he is a viable

contender for the Republican nomination? Granted things can change. But I don't think the GOP base is going to be turned off by some new revelation - given that pretty much all the dirt about Newt has been known for years and years -- and even though unfavorable information is hitting the media again - he seems to keep rising in the polls.

I know Intrade is not necessarily a good tool months in advance - still there has been a dramatic increase in their ratings on Newt from the lower single digits only a month ago to 31% now.
http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/contract/?contractId=654836

Although admittedly they are rating Romney's chances at 53%
http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/contract/?contractId=652757


But all of that aside - the GOP base seems to be demanding a fire breathing right-winger to be their nominee. As far as they are concerned they lost in 2008 because McCain was too liberal. It seems that Gingrich is the far right candidate left standing - and as time runs out - the base appears to be settling on him.

[oberliner]

12. Thanks for the props!

I think he is the anti-Romney right now but I don't think he is viable.

[Cognitive_Resonance]

13. Newt could flame out (again) perhaps with help from the GOP establishment who understand

the existential risk of putting Newt at the top of the ticket. On the other hand, Newt's negatives may not deter the typical Republican primary voter. Infidelity and slimy ethical behavior is easily overlooked for one of the own. He's a credible debater (at least compared to the rest of the losers), and as Krugman observed he's what a stupid person thinks a smart person sounds like. What's more likely to sink him among the Republican base is his ego driven mouth contradicting the RW orthodoxy of the day(mandates, amnesty, etc.).

The RW/TP/GOP base are for the most part lemmings. What they are told to think by Fox, Rush, Hannity, etc. over the weeks and months ahead will determine the nominee.

[Douglas Carpenter]

14. I like that quote from Krugman about Gingrich, "He is what a stupid person thinks a smart person

sounds like." Yeah that sums up Newt very well. I think though that this is a year in which the true believer grassroots activist core of the Republican Party is not going to settle for anything less than someone who represents them. I hate to make the comparison to the Democratic Party of 1972 - because George McGovern is a great man, a kindly man and a brilliant thinker and a life long personal hero of mine. But there is no denying that in 1972 he was the true believers' true believer - the real thing - in a year in which the true believers' grassroots activist core were not going to settle for anything less. That seems to be the frame of mind dominating the Republican Party as we head into this presidential election year. By process of elimination the grassroots activist core of the Republican Party is going to have to coalesce around someone. Mitt Romney is less acceptable to them this year than Humphrey or Muskie was in to the grassroots activist core of the Democratic Party of 1972. Of course, we don't know what will happen. I for one certainly hope Newt manages to pull it off. I do not believe he is electable (I hope to God I am right about that) His nomination would make a relatively boring race a lot more entertaining. And I think, - I hope I am right - it would set the stage for a Democratic landslide - probably not 1964 levels - but a very convincing landslide nonetheless.

[madinmaryland]

15. In other words, someone like...

Jeb Bush???

[AlinPA]

8. It won't be Romney. Newt will pick Rubio.