Election 2012

Milquetoast Guaranteed

The not-entirely-surprising revelation today that Marco Rubio may not be considered by the Romney campaign for vice president after all also revealed that the VP short-list has been narrowed down to all boring white guys.

Marco Rubio represented the best hope for token ethnic diversity for Mitt Romney, and according to one Romney adviser, it's unlikely they'll nominate another woman. Why? Because of Sarah Palin.

In particular, few women except for New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte – a freshman lawmaker from New England with only scant federal experience – are thought to be under consideration by Romney.

"I think unfortunately, Palin poisoned the well on that," said one informal Romney adviser, fretting that any woman selected as VP would draw inevitable comparisons to the former Alaska governor. "I would guess if I were inside the Romney mind that they're worried that any woman chosen will be subjected to a higher level of scrutiny. "

Because the Republicans decided to nominate a raging idiot for vice president during the last presidential election, a woman who was chosen for no reason other than the cynical, sexist assumption that she would draw former Hillary Clinton supporters to John McCain's side, the Republicans are now hesitant to nominate another woman because they're afraid she might be another Sarah Palin.

That would seem to be both an admission that Palin was chosen for token diversity and that the Republicans really do believe all women are idiots. Why else would you be afraid that the next woman you nominate will be compared to Sarah Palin?

The McCain campaign literally found Sarah Palin on Google. She was barely vetted at all. Does the Romney campaign really believe they can't find a woman who isn't just like Palin? Because that's what this implies.

  • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

    “….a woman who was chosen for no reason other than the cynical, sexist assumption that she would draw former Hillary Clinton supporters to John McCain’s side based on the fact that she had a vagina, the Republicans are now hesitant to nominate another woman because they’re afraid she might be another Sarah Palin, a Republican’s wet dream–a vagina without a brain attached.”

    Fixed it for ya! I always consult my vagina when voting. What do you say ladies? ;)

  • deacrick

    Mormons are extremely patriarchal; Mitt would never go for the chance that a woman would lead.

    • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

      Yes BUT they would be very good at pretending to let her lead…in reality, she wouldn’t be allowed to do anything…..I am surrounded by Mormons in AZ and I see this all the time.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Nathan-Schell/1138091422 Nathan Schell

    I agree, Bob (may I call you Bob?). Except for this sentence: “Why else would you be afraid that the next woman you nominate will be compared to Sarah Palin?”
    Maybe just the word ‘compared.’ The Republicans could nominate Madeleine Albright and she would be compared to Sarah Palin. That’s just the idiot news.
    They’re afraid that she’ll be like Palin, and that’s misogynistic and obvious.
    So, as I said, I agree.

  • JMAshby

    I think it could be Tim Pawlenty. He’s the only person I can think of who is even more boring than Mitt. Anyone else would overshadow and distract from Mitt.

    • D_C_Wilson

      Huntsman is just as boring, but there’s no way they’d run a Mormon double-bill.

    • nathkatun7

      I think the Grover Norquist faction and the Koch Brothers probably would prefer Paul Ryan or Chris Christie. But then again you may be right that the “bully” Christie might overshadow Willard. The same may be the case with Ryan and his Ryan budget. My prediction is that Romney will select Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio because he desperately needs to win Ohio if he has a chance, at all, of winning the election. I don’t think selecting Tim Pawlenty would do him any good because President Obama looks strong in Minnesota.

      Having said that, I am just not that convinced that a VP selection means a whole lot in modern elections. I am not at all convinced that John McCain lost because of Sarah Palin. If George H. W. Bush could win with “potato head” Don Quayle, over Michael Dukakis and the heavy weight Sen. Lloyd Bentsen, McCain should have been able to do the same with Palin. Bottom line: As far as I am concerned, it really doesn’t matter who Romney chooses to be his VP candidate. If Romney can’t impress the voters that he has what it takes to be President his VP candidate choice will amount to absolutely nothing. Besides, I don’t know of any of the GOP’s VP candidates being discussed who could match the experience and gravitas of Vice President Joe Biden.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/T2IELIWG6SK7JTYIRTOFZS7AIM Former Repub

    I would not be surprised if Rubio is out precisely because he was vetted and there are some slime-covered skeletons in his closet.
    Rubio makes all Latinos (like myself) look bad. He is part of the painfully ignorant, disingenuous and embarrassing group of Cuban Americans in Congress.

    • eljefejeff

      in theory, his name on the ticket would be Romney’s best hope. I’m scared it will be him. Romney denied Rubio isn’t being vetted. As for the women, like some have pointed out, they don’t have any qualified women. They’re all nuts like Sarah Palin, precisely because any woman would have to be nuts to be in the anti-woman party

      • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

        I honestly am not worried about Rubio, on or off the ticket. The Cubans have been a pretty solid Republican voting bloc but there simply isn’t enough of them to make a difference. Just like women, Hispanics would see through the cynical, token nature of a Rubio pick for VP.

  • MrDHalen

    Face it; Republicans don’t have many qualified women to choose from. I’m guessing most of the women who claim to be Republicans believe in a submissive female role which doesn’t always translate well into politics. Also, I don’t think Republican men really trust Republican women politicians. Afraid her motherly empathy may rear its pretty head when the men are trying to pass some good ol fashioned evil legislation.

    Sarah Palin was a Hail Mary pass in the face of overwhelming odds. Your partly leader has just presided over a crashed economy and your base is demoralized. Sarah was the cynical pick to try and pull women’s votes, but most women hate when men try to display empty headed characters as representative of them as a whole.

    • D_C_Wilson

      The problem is, republican women come in two flavors, batshit crazy (Bachmann) and too moderate for the base (Olympia Snowe).

      Snowe would actually be a good choice, but the base could revolt.

      • i_a_c

        If I were in the position to choose a Republican woman for VP, it would be Kay Bailey Hutchison.

        • nathkatun7

          Interesting. I am not so sure I would choose a woman who couldn’t defeat the Idiot Rick Perry to be governor of Texas. Had she won the governorship, I would probably agree with you.

      • MrDHalen

        Yep, Olympia Snowe is done; she got caught giving a few dollars to a homeless woman in DC so the GOP said it was time to go.

    • http://mdblanche.myopenid.com/ mdblanche

      They don’t have many qualified men either.

      • MrDHalen

        Touché mdblanche, touché!!!

    • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

      “Afraid her motherly empathy may rear its pretty head…”

      Yep, the presence of a vagina definitely means (at least to Rethugs) that a woman simply cannot control her baser nature (i.e., empathy, reason, fairness). Those kinds of feelings are clearly a threat to our Galtian overlords.

  • Username1016

    Honey, they’re afraid they can’t find a TEA-PARTY REPUBLICAN woman who isn’t just like Palin. And they’re probably right.

    • nathkatun7

      You totally nailed it!

  • GrafZeppelin127

    “I would guess if I were inside the Romney mind that they’re worried that any woman chosen will be subjected to a higher level of scrutiny.”

    I don’t know; I read this as more in line with the GOP and its fans’ Palin persecution fantasies, viz., they’re saying that a woman would be savaged and abused by the “librul media” with their gotcha questions about reading newspapers and stuff, and making fun of her for, you know, not knowing anything about anything. Maybe it’s me; I just find it hard to believe any Republican or anyone connected with a Republican campaign would frame anything in a way that does not cast them as perpetual victims of unfairness and malfeasance by mean, nasty, omnipotent liberals.

    • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

      Graf, that’s how I perceived it too…that they were playing the victim card again. Even wealthy GOP donors are not immune from the siren call of victimhood. I heard on the radio that millionaires who are writing checks to GOP “social welfare” orgs in support of Romney are being exposed in the media (i.e., having stories written about them) and are receiving threats to their safety (show me a single national political leader who doesn’t get weirdos threatening them). Somehow I don’t feel sorry for them. If they want to get into politics and play with the Big Boys they had better be prepared. Citizens United may have allowed them to get into the game in a big way, but it didn’t provide an exemption for them in regards to the political arena (thankfully).

      Oh, those poor brainless, token women and their filthy rich and put upon financiers! How they do suffer!

  • Lazarus Durden

    I think they’ll nominate another boring white guy because they’re going after the White vote. They’ll try to class it up by calling it the “Evangelical” vote but it’s the White vote. Romney is done with Hispanics. He’s not getting them in large numbers, and neither will African Americans. So the White vote it is.