It's fun playing the veepstakes, but the smart money in 2012 says Romney will play safe and choose 'boring' for running mate
Handicapping a presidential nominee's choices for a running mate is an amusing if pointless exercise. Really, the only emotional difference between speculation about a vice presidential pick and more pure forms of masturbation is that most people do the former in groups, and lack the appropriate amount of shame such a purely selfish endeavor should generate. (There's an unfortunate joke to be made about Sarah Palin here but I'm not going to make it.) The communal nature of VP-guessing leads to a pack mentality about the subject of the exercise, the emergence of "buzz" about particular individuals, and myopia about how much of a difference the chatter makes.
Really, if the last few successful presidential runs have suggested anything about how to pick a running mate, the idea is to pick someone people don't talk about very much.
If the "veepstakes" has any news value at all, it's as a lens through we can see how the nature of the race itself has changed, and what the "buzzy" picks say about the perceived strengths and weaknesses of the nominee. Mitt Romney's weaknesses are, pretty much, the weaknesses of the Republican party as a whole: he does not appeal to women; he does not appeal to Latinos of Mexican descent; he does not appeal to young people; he is not very exciting. Hence the loud talk just a few months ago about Mitt Romney really needing to pick someone that addresses at least a few of those deficits: Marco Rubio, he's young! He speaks Spanish! Susana Martinez seemed to address three of them at once – young, Latina, lady.
Romney also lacks "social conservative street cred" (if I can use all those words at once), something I'd argue that the GOP writ large is struggling with as well, leading some to suggest putting Rick Santorum on the ticket. It could heal the wounds of an especially divisive primary and scoop up some of the evangelical vote on which Romney has been unable to capitalize.
Almost all of those names have fallen off the radar, or at least, the buzz has become less deafening. Martinez is off the list due to one of the more graceful refusals in political history; Marco Rubio's polite demurrals have started to get less polite. And as Romney's problems with female voters become more a part of the general campaign narrative, picking a woman no longer seems like a savvy move to close a gap, so much as a gesture of blatant cynicism that will, best case, just remind people of Palin. (In this scenario, Washington Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a otherwise buzzy possibility with foreign policy chops, might find that the coincidence of also having a child with Down's syndrome is just another hurdle.)
More and more, the people who presume to know what Romney should do say that his pick will double down on Romney's strengths, rather than try to make up for his weaknesses. As one strategist I talked to put it: "he might as well go boring" – someone with a middle-of-the-road record and resume that can be spun as economy-oriented. Call the ballot Romney One and Romney Two, giving new meaning to the polling phrase "generic Republican".
Among those politicians on the national radar that rise (or sink) to those requirements, the names you'll hear the most about include Ohio Senator Rob Portman and Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell. This has less to do with their particular personal strengths than, a GOP consultant said, "the growing conviction that this [the presidential race] could come down to Ohio and Virginia." Former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty, Pat Toomey and Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan have also been mentioned, all of whom are boring enough that, one strategist says, "loyalty and chemistry will be huge factors."
Who knows, if they decide not to do anything exciting, the Romney camp might even have the luxury of choosing the person most qualified for the job.