Anything can happen in politics, but Charlie Crist is the odds on favorite of these three for McCain as Crist is a very popular moderate governor in a key state in the South. He has a national reputation. He has executive experience that McCain lacks. He also appears to lack any negative baggage that anyone connected with supporting the Bush administration and during his election as governor even chose to appear with John McCain and not George Bush at his campaign events. He is a Methodist and former state attorney general and a good campaign fund raiser. He is the "safe" choice.

Mitt Romney has shown how poorly he campaigns on the national level even with a ton of money. He would almost certainly hurt McCain (unfortunately and unfairly) with some of the Christian fundamentalists within the Republican party base - particularly in his party's strongholds in the South and Mid-West. Beyond that, they are miles apart in their views on immigration which should be largely a non-issue among the two Presidential candidates. Meeting with Romney is a tip of the hat to him and plea for party unity from his supporters, not a realistic job interview.

Piyush "Bobby" Jindal is the youngest governor in the nation (at 36), the very bright son of Punjabi Indian immigrants and the first non-White governor of Louisiana since reconstruction. He is a Catholic and conservatives in his party like him - particularly in his opposition to abortion - and this could put more emphasis on this issue during the campaign. His selection would indeed make this a more interesting and historic race, but might effectively eliminate the issue of Obama's lack of experience and fitness for the office. Would he help deliver anything essential for McCain? Might even hurt the ticket as he is relatively unknown outside of his state and has never campaigned nationally? Long shot.

I will bet 5 to 1 odds with the money going to charity it isn't going to be Christ.

McCain says he supports enforcement before any path to citizenship plans, which is different from his past position. That is pretty much the Romney position, yes?

You don't think he will pick Huckabee do you?

Brian,

I will take the bet: $20 to the charity of your choice if it is not Crist or $100 to the charity of mine if it is!

In answer to your first question:

During the Republican primaries, nativists like Senator Tom Tancredo and opportunists who own and operate many talk radio stations, purposely struck a harsh tone on current immigrant groups, their native languages and the culture they bring here under the pretext of immigration reform. In fact, it was really about building support for their personal agendas or ratings and diffusing attention from the war and failing economy. To their credit, McCain and Huckabee were the only Republican candidates who did not join this chorus. Instead they courageously chose to look beyond legal status and include larger human issues in their positions which were very similar to President Bush and the Democrats. Interestingly, they emerged as the two most popular candidates in Republican primaries. The nomination assured and politics being what it is, McCain needed money raised from the party's nativist elements and support over the airwaves from the talk radio babblers. So, McCain changed his tune. My guess: he will change it back during the the election campaign or risks loosing states some or all of the 17 states with large foreign born populations - including Florida where Crist's popularity could help prevent the loss of the important state.

Beyond that, Romney is not a good running mate for McCain: Romney's gross incompetence on the campaign trail will rule him out as a choice. (McCain commits enough gaffes of his own without needing any help from Romney!) There is also a terrible prejudice against Romney's personal religious beliefs within some large religious blocks in the Republican party that could lose votes and dollars that element. This intolerance by a significant number within his party, will force McCain to find a running mate with much wider acceptance.

As far as Romney's hard-nosed position on immigration, I find it ironic. His own father, George W. Romney, (a very capable and popular corporate executive and governor) campaigned unsuccessfully for the Presidency during my younger days, but was himself an immigrant born in Mexico and therefore - under our Constitution - not even qualified by birth to be elected to the office.

The answer to the second question is simpler:

I believe Huckabee will not be the running mate for a more basic reason: his ego. He is used to having the pulpit to himself and I find it difficult to believe he could march in step to the cadence that McCain would be calling for very long. The temptation and opportunities to upstage would be too tempting even for a preacher! Beyond that, I am not sure McCain would be comfortable with a running mate who tells voters that he believes the verdict is still out on the usefulness in understanding the world by means of the scientific method.

Huckabee is not a moderate on immigration any longer:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/12/11/huckabee_picks_up_minuteman_fo.html

The latest polls in Ca show Obama beating McCain like a drum come November in California! I guess we don't want to stay in Iraq for a 100 years like McCain does!

That comes as no surprise, given the blueness of the State. Obama's going to have to win a lot more than California to take this thing though.

McCain finally rejected Hagee in total. First it was anti-Catholic statements. Then anti-gay statements. Even stuff about God unleashing terrorists against us if we asked Israel to compromise.

But finally with his talk about Hitler being part of God's plan to create Israel McCain realized this was looking really bad.

Mongo maybe McCain can run on keeping us in Iraq for a 100 years. I think Obama will beat McCain in the biggest landslide in American history thanks to George Bush!

Think again, Not Owen. You're simply feeding off the energy and enthusiasm of a friendly primary season for Obama. Believe me, it's not going to be the same in the general election.

He is now going to have to appeal to a broader cross-section of the electorate, including states like Mississippi, Kentucky, Alabama, Minnesota, Nebraska, etc. None of the polls are predicting landslide either, my friend. They're all showing a very close race, which it will be, with McCain coming out on top in the end.

BTW, you're mis-characterizing McCain's comments on Iraq. The "100 years" comment was a rhetorical statement made in response to a bunch of reporters who were hounding him about how long exactly we would be in Iraq if he was elected president. His response was "100 years, if necessary..." A very similar response to what you'd tell your kids if they were plaguing you with the question - "Are we there yet?"

Mongo,

The model for Iraq's occupation that John McCain wants to use in Germany or Japan after World War II. He does envision troops in Iraq even after the fighting is done.

How is that not a fair way of looking at what he said?

Brian, if I recall his comments correctly, the comparison to Japan and Germany was presented not so much as a model, but as a worst case scenario. I think the quote was something to the effect of, "We were in Germany a full seven years after World War II ended."

That's not to say we would be in Iraq for that long after the fighting ended but was just used as an example of what it took in that situation, as a reference point or point of illustration. In actuality, I think he's looking at a much shorter timeframe. 2013 was the year he mentioned in his last speech on the issue as our final withdrawal date.

So Mongo, is it true McCain wants Hagee as his VP?

Mongo is right!!!!

Of course, none of the polls are predicting landslide in November.

Why? Because political polls don't do that; they only calculate the participant's opinions at the time the poll is being taken.

As true as it is that Obama wants Wright as his...

McCain again called today for a "Path to Citizenship" for illegals. While I agree with him, I doubt it will get him any votes with the neocons and if they stay home it will just make it a bigger landslide for Obama and Dems nationally.

The problem with McCain's remarks have little to do with any plans he may have but lots to do about the erratic nature of the candidate. His embracing of X-treme religious fundamentalists, his shoot-from-the-hip inanities about Iraq, his admission of not understanding the Economy...these are all part of a pattern of conduct that scares voters who have had enough of the Bush Dynasty to last generations.

There's almost no chance the GOP can make the electoral votes add up to a win this cycle and McCain's over-the-top performances makes it impossible.

McCain 35%- Obama 65%

Obama's lack of experience, poor judgment (Rev. Wright, Tony Rezko, & Louis Farrakhan associations), lack of understanding of foreign relations (agreeing to unconditional meetings with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Raul Castro), non-specific policy positions, etc., will be his undoing as a candidate.

McCain wipes up the floor with him on all of the above issues. Obama will be playing to a much larger stage than he was during the primary election. Now he has to appeal to Bubba in Mississippi and Joe in Minnesota, in addition to black America.

McCain - 55%
Obama - 45%

McCain will try and push the same conservative hot buttons that President G.W. Bush pushed. The dangerous part about that strategy is McCain could sound too much like G.W. Bush.

McCain can say he is a different Republican but that just turns off the VCRCC culture.

McCain can say he is honest but McCain has admitted to lying to get votes. How does that fly with the values people?

His "straight talk" pitch is a high curve-ball. I wouldn't recommend he throws that pitch. It is easily hit out of the park.

Mongo,

No, McCain is not talking about a final withdraw date, he is talking about reducing America's involvement in the war. He isn't talking about removing ALL of the troops, just large numbers of troops.

He wants to keep many troops in Iraq like we have in Germany and Japan.

He wants to occupy Iraq but with far less troops.

But you are right, he has now called for many troops to be home by 2013. He has shifted his position.

Brian,

Have you noticed Obama has shifted his position on his time table for ending the war in Iraq as well? He started out by saying he would have the troops home by 2009. He is now pushing that date back to 2010 or 2011, depending on what the military leaders advise, based on how it's going on the ground.

Again, he's now realizing he's playing to a larger audience, as he prepares to enter the general election. Admittedly, McCain is moving more towards the center as well. That's just politics, Brian. It's how the game is played.

Mongo, Don't you know drugs are illegal? You must be on drugs if you think McCain will win in November. He will have his butt kicked even harder than Bob Dole did in 96! People are fed up with the GOP and the way they have tried to destroy our economy and Constitution! The cost of gas keeps going up because the GOP has told the oil companies they need a ton of money for November to even keep a few Republicans in November, every time you fill up folks that is the reason you are paying so much! Obama 65%, McCain 25%, Barr 10%, take it to the bank!

Not Owen, the price of gas has nothing to do with Bush or Republicans. In fact, it has far more to do with the Democrat Party and its unwillingness to allow for more oil exploration, drilling, and production to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and the whims of OPEC.

Let me reiterate, so it's clear for you hard-headed liberarls:

McCain - 55%
Obama - 43%
Barr - 2%

Electorally, this could be a very close election.

Obama will win the popular vote but the election will still be contested because of the Republics stranglehold on our Southern cousins.

I think Obama might be able to wrest Virginia with a Webb nomination, but I also think the Democrats could lose a state like Michigan to McCain/Romney.

It's gonna be closer than you think.

In California, Obama blowout.

Obama 55%
McCain 42%
Nader 1%
Barr 1%

Nationally,

Obama 52%
McCain 47%
Others 1%

Obama will move the country in a direction to rid us of the influence of oil. Crude oil will still be part of the mix, but the only way to bring down the price of gas is to create competition in the market. The oil companies have no competion for our transportation dollar, that is why prices can be raised as if by whim and not by the law of supply and demand.

I was watching an interesting interview with T. Boone Pickens, well-known Texas oil man, the other day on CNN and he put the issue in pretty clear terms.

The world's requirements for oil is 87 million barrels per day. The world produces 83 million barrels per day. It is clear we have a supply and demand problem. When the supply doesn't meet the demand, guess what happens with prices? They go up, folks!

T. Boone Pickens is a fraud and a thief. He is a poster boy for all that is wrong about our economy. He earned most of his fortune through leveraged buyouts of his competion, thus reducing competion and opening the path toward the kind of wild speculation we are seeing in the energy markets today.

The United States is the third lagest producer of crude oil in the world behind the Saudis and the Russians. The problem of course is that we consume far more than we produce. However, if the largest consumer in the world reduces demand, as the united States is doing, doesn't it stand to reason that supply would increase and prices drop?

Well, no, it's more complicated than that you say. You say we don't have the refining capacity to meet the demand. Wrong again! Oil refineries are currently running at 80-85% capacity. While 80% might earn a "B" in economics class, what it really means is that supply and demand are manipulated by the oil companies rather than as a response to market-driven forces.

The American consumer is being screwed again by folks like good 'ol T. Boone who has no real interest in what is good for the country but rather what is good for T. Boone Pickens.

Wow, R.J., it sounds like you have a big issue with the concept of free enterprise. Your resentment over someone making a few bucks in our open market economy is obvious.

Without true competion, the free market is not free. The energy market is far from an open market. It is rigged for the mega-rich (not someone making a few bucks) and large corporations.

Kenneth Lay died for your sins.

R.J.

Why do you even respond to Mongo? He rarely says anything other than "I like this ..." or "I believe this ..." or "(Somebody) said this ..." or he personally attacks as when he accused you of harboring resentment and tried to rub it by writing that your resentment (which I did not see) is obvious. In the end. he's a caricature.

You're so right, SimiDad. I'm a caricature. A caricature of everything you disdain.

I use my wit and entertaining personality to brighten up this dreary blog (sorry, Brian, but it is sometimes) and provoke discussion of the issues and get people thinking about both sides of the topic.

Without me, this blog would be a stream of endless self-congratulatory comments and people agreeing with each other ad nauseum.

Now, someone dive in and take my bait. I freakin' love this stuff!!!

Listen up everyone, don't disturb Mongo while he's ************ uh - saving us from boredom.

Give it up RJ. Republicans on this blog all have Stockholm syndrome. They have been beaten so badly by their overlords in the GOP they now bend over gladly and scream "Please sir, may I have another!?" Remember Needlemeyer RJ in Animal House? That is what guys like Mongo are like in real life! lol!

Isn't it hilarious how this little p****, Mongo's Daddy, never has anything intelligent to say? His sole mission in life is to attack me and try and discredit my (often brilliant) comments and observations.

He is a complete fool without the mental capacity to make a reasoned argument, or, in fact, accept any challenges or mental riddles that I've posed for him time and again on this blog. I've even served him up s few softballs and he's proceeded to pop them up behind home plate...

So much for all those liberals who talk about tolerance and diversity. I guess their version of diversity is choosing between Obama or Clinton, and tolerance is only extended to those who agree with them.

Don't sweat it Mongo, you hold your own just fine.

Mongo and Bubba, the Beavis and Butthead of this blog. You can almost hear them screaming "Please sir, may I have another" in unison! I honestly believe Bush could burn the Constitution on National TV and the next day they would both blog about what a great thing Bush did. But hey, thanks to clowns like Mongo and Bubba, the Dems now have a 4,000 member lead in VC, when Bubba Kidd first started blogging on this site the Republicans had a 10,000 member lead. Keep blogging boneheads! LOL!

Well, there goes Mongo's Daddy again with more inane ramblings of a highly personal nature. A tribute to his lack of knowledge on political issues. Just a little yelping lap dog for his own personal, liberal, hate agenda.

For all the lack of substance of his comments, I think he'd be much better suited to a blog dealing with Brittany Spear's latest meltdown, or Paris Hilton's latest encounter with the law.

What was this thread supposed to be about again? Oh yeah, how much McCain is going to trounce Obama in the general. Well, I've made my prediction, as have several others. Anyone else want to venture a guess?

Don't pay any attention to him Mongo. He's just a flea on a dog's behind that pretends he's the dog.

Bubba Kidd has his head up the dogs behind and Mango has head up Bubba's behind. I want you to both keep blogging, in fact, I command it! You guys blog and the Dems pick up more voters in VC because they see what total losers you GOP lemmings really are. The GOP was once something to be proud of, but since the time of Reagan the party has been hijacked by the extremists in the Country and locally the VCRCC, all extremists and wack jobs. Mango and Bubba are just lap dogs to Osborn.

Did you say something butt flea?

I hear a buzzing at my behind. Oh, never mind, it's just Bubba's Daddy...

Mongo and Bubba, great news today for you two. A new field poll shows 52% of Californian's now support gays getting married. I'm not saying you two want to get married, but if you do, and who knows, you have the support of most Californian's to be who you two want to be.

Last I heard it was 54% opposed. Mongo & Bubba's Daddy must be reading the liberal rags again.

Funny how some liberals around here routinely accuse conservatives of being homophobes, yet those same individuals repeatedly engage in gay baiting and dragging homosexuality into every discussion.

Bubba,

I don't think it is the same liberals.

Mongo,

It was the most respected group, the field poll.

Brian, there was also a poll published over the weekend that was conducted by the L.A. Times/KTLA that showed 54% favoring the November ballot measure overturning the court's ruling and 35% opposing it (presumably, 11% was undecided).

So, pick your poll. I think the one I'm quoting was just as reputable though.

Mongo,

You are siding with the LA Times. Glad you have trust them. I think it is a great paper.

The Times is OK most of the time, although, I must admit, during the last presidential election I was referring to it as the "Kerry Times".

The Field Poll Mango showed 52% support for Gay marriage. Once again you are proved wrong. KTLA is also a very conservative station and I always doubt their polling. I saw Scott McClellan on the Today Show this morning talking about all the lies of the Bush Administration and the GOP, must make you feel good Mango. If you want more of Bush and 4$ gas vote for McCain.

Wrong again, Mongo's Little Girl. The L.A. Times/KTLA poll showed 54% favoring the November ballot measure overturning the State Supreme Court's recent decision, as I stated previously. Look it up!

You can doubt the usually liberal L.A. Times all you want, but their polling results are no less valid than the Field Poll you're quoting. Pick your poll. They're equally valid.

Mongo, you are so consistent in twisting and ignoring facts.

First, rather than just tell us to look it up, why not give us an internet address?

Second, I did "look it up" at http://www.calendarlive.com/media/acrobat/2008-05/39166886.pdf
and I found that the results of the question about a possible November ballot measure banning same sex marriages INCLUDED LEANERS. I also noted that none of the many other results/questions for the LA Times/KTLA survey included leaners. That should put into serious question the results for this question and take the wind out of your sails on this issue. Note that I wrote "should," I have no expectation that it will actually take any wind (kindly read that as "hot air") out of your comments.