iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Al Eisele

GET UPDATES FROM Al Eisele
 

Romney's VP Choice? It's Rob Portman

Posted: 08/10/2012 3:30 pm

Okay, Mitt Romney's gotten enough mileage out of all the speculation about his choice of a running mate so let's end the suspense by telling you who he's going to pick. I can tell you he's decided he wants Ohio Sen. Rob Portman at his side when he accepts the Republican presidential nomination in Tampa next month.

How do I know? Because the same anonymous source who told Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that Romney didn't pay any taxes for ten years told me. No, not really. Then it must be that I have a crystal ball? No, not that either, as I made clear in a recent post about Theodore H. White warning political reporters against predicting the unpredictable.

It's because of this simple fact: No Republican has been elected president without carrying Ohio. Simply put, if Romney loses the Buckeye State and its 18 electoral votes, he loses the election, just as President Obama must win Ohio to stay in the White House. In fact, Obama knows that the last Democrat to win without Ohio was John F. Kennedy in 1960, which no doubt is why Obama's been there nine times this year, more than any other state besides his next door neighbors Maryland and Virginia, and why Romney is returning there for the umpteenth time next week.

Romney, whose campaign aides say he'll announce his choice in the next few days, is widely reported to have narrowed his choice to three people -- Portman, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty and Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan.

But I'm sorry T-Paw, as much as I'd like to see my home state burnish its reputation as the Mother of Vice Presidents -- see Hubert Humphrey and Walter Mondale -- and as much as I'm frightened by the prospect of having Ayn Rand disciple Ryan a heartbeat away from the presidency, it's simply not in the cards for either of you.

The reason I'm betting the whole banana stand on Portman is not only that he virtually assures Romney of carrying Ohio but that he has it all -- he's intelligent, well-spoken and the right age (56 to Romney's 65); he's solidly conservative (though obviously not enough to satisfy GOP neanderthals); he has no skeletons in his closet (at least none that surfaced after running for office seven times and being vetted as George W. Bush's budget and international trade chief); he's dealt with key economic issues at the highest level (again, it's the economy stupid, which will be the key issue for voters in November), and he won't raise doubts about his readiness for prime time (unlike Sarah Palin and Dan Quayle).

In addition, having Portman on the presidential ticket would boost Republican hopes of taking control of the Senate by helping defeat Ohio's embattled senior Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown. And Republicans would almost certainly keep Portman's seat if he's elected to higher office.

The case against Portman is that he's not exciting and not conservative enough, although certainly more so on both counts than Pawlenty, whose state hasn't voted for a GOP presidential candidate since Richard Nixon in 1972. But he doesn't have be exciting to help Romney; he just has to convince enough swing voters that he would help Romney make good on his promise to promote economic growth. And he doesn't have to be a Paul Ryan conservative since they certainly aren't going to vote for Obama.

And what if, in the extremely unlikely event that I'm wrong? No problem. I'll just remind people of what President Franklin Roosevelt told his press secretary Steve Early when Early asked how he should respond to reporters' question about some controversial comments Roosevelt had just made in a speech in Pittsburgh.

"Steve," FDR said, "Tell them I've never been to Pittsburgh."

 
FOLLOW POLITICS
 
 
  • Comments
  • 16
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
glzgowlass
You talk loud not saying much.
12:12 AM on 08/11/2012
My first question to whoever he picks would be, "how many years of your tax returns did you have to provide the campaign to be considered for VP?"
11:55 PM on 08/10/2012
It's like Sodom and Gomora all over again. Portman is a practicing homosexual.

Romney is picking Portman solely to pick up the considerable homosexual vote. Jesus is not pleased and will surely show his anger.
08:18 PM on 08/10/2012
I highly doubt that picking Senator Portman will guarantee Romney Ohio's 23 Electoral Votes. I have never considered a candidates running mate when voting. I'm not sure on the actual data, but I find it hard to believe that Portman is popular among people who support Obama anyways. Independents don't seem to fancy Portman and I hear that even some Republicans think he's too liberal. If anything, this choice would be a neutral pick, a common theme in this Romney Campaign.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jose3
07:45 PM on 08/10/2012
If Rob Portman supports medical marijuana then it will help. If he doesn't it will hurt. Stop strategizing state by state and look at the bigger picture. Romney is out of touch with common people and he needs the marijuana vote to win. It's the only issue that Obama is vulnerable.
07:39 PM on 08/10/2012
Rep. Paul Ryan is more likely in recent days. Just look at the interview that Mitt Romney had with Chuck Todd last night. The language that Romney used when saying what he was looking at in choosing a vp was one who "has a vision for the country". Romney also said that "this will be a "defining election for the country" and that "we will decide what kind of America we're gonna have". That language sounds an awful lot like what Paul Ryan said in his speech at the 2012 CPAC. Romney doesn't need Portman to win Ohio; he needs some one who is bold and will help him frame the debate in this election. That man is Paul Ryan.
06:47 PM on 08/10/2012
A VP pick cannot save a campaign. The running mate plays the role of a wingman. Like a good wingman, the running mate's job is to sell the presidential candidate to voters. However, at the end of the day, the success of the ticket will be completely determined by the quality of the lead candidate.

Consider the following analogy: if you are a obese middle-aged man with no job, a short-temper and a receding hairline, your chances of dating an attractive woman does not suddenly improve by choosing George Clooney to be your wingman. Sure, if George is good sport, he will send a lot of women your way but only you can close deal. But lets get real; having George next to you will just remind everyone that they can do better.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jose3
09:33 PM on 08/10/2012
If Romney picked a pro-legalization marijuana VP, he could save his campaign in the hopes that Romney could keel over.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
crazyface
my microbio is empty for a reason
05:40 PM on 08/10/2012
portman's a smart guy, with all the charisma of velveeta, but he won't hurt romney. ryan, i think, would have been a major liability. the problem for romney and his whole campaign is how often the candidate hurts himself.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Danny Rollins
05:27 PM on 08/10/2012
I don't understand when by virtue of winning one state you are guaranteed the WH, regardless of which state. Are these valid statements? We seem to hear them frequently from the cable pundits and some credible news sources.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jose3
09:35 PM on 08/10/2012
These number games are used to get Republicans to make bad decisions time after time. If it works once, they think it will always work.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Danny Rollins
11:39 PM on 08/10/2012
Good point
05:21 PM on 08/10/2012
Eisele may be right, and he has good reasons for choosing Portman. But I disagree that Obama needs to carry Ohio to win. By my reckoning, there are 8 states that could realistically go either way: Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, Iowa, and New Hampshire. Of these, Obama needs 23 electoral votes' worth to win. This could be done with (a) Florida alone, (b) North Carolina and Virginia, (c) Virginia and 2 other states, or (d) Colorado, Nevada, Iowa, and New Hampshire. In contrast, Romney's options without Ohio are much more limited, as he could only afford to also lose New Hampshire. So Ohio means very different things to the two candidates.

In my opinion, it would take a new issue that crosses state lines in order for Romney to win at this point. Portman could help, but would not at all be sufficient for Romney's campaign.
04:48 PM on 08/10/2012
I don't agree that Portman "virtually guarantees Romney wins Ohio". I have NEVER considered the running mate when voting for president. I don't think I know anyone who made their choice based on the vice presidential candidate.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:55 PM on 08/10/2012
In 2004 I didn't hear much about the VPs, but in 2008 I knew quite a few people that were on the fence right up until Palin. She scared the hell out of them.
11:24 PM on 08/10/2012
Good point. And Portman does NOT get Romney Ohio automatically. That's total crap. Rubio, however, could help him get Florida and maybe a point of two more of the Hispanic vote which could help in places like New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada where the races will probably be very close.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
crazyface
my microbio is empty for a reason
04:34 PM on 08/10/2012
has portman shown romney his taxes?