ConfirmThem

Thanks for getting us permission to read it. Let's hope McCain reads it too, and heeds Brendan Miniter's advice. Cox is a conservative superstar in waiting.

Cox is a conservative superstar now. Allow me to add my voice to the murmuring. Chairman Cox would be an absolute top notch VP pick. He's a true conservative that is respected across the aisle, and his credibility and knowlege on economic issues would be a huge asset to McCain. I understand a case can be made for several other possibilities, but, for my money, McCain couldn't do any better than Chris Cox.

but John Bolton would be better.

To be sure, I'd be very happy with Cox. But Bolton would bring legal and foreign policy gravitas and most important, a courage to fight. When Cox ran for the speakership against Hastert, he got virtually no support from his colleagues and withdrew. I've always found that one interesting because first, his peers just didn't consider him remotely plausible as a speaker and second, that Cox was so clueless about his lack of support.

He's a good B plus pick, but not outstanding.

And you think Bolton would have the support?? His presence on the ticket would singlehandedly turn off all moderates and independents and lose the election after the media finished disparaging him, as they did before to him.

The media? Moderates? C'mon. Bolton is someone who took on the UN. This is going to hurt him with whom? Not the Reagan Democrats. McCain will do just fine with moderates. And Bolton will appeal to many independents of the Perot stripe. The media did not block Bolton's confirmation. Leftists did, abetted by Chafee and Cry Me a River Voinovich.

Bolton is a blue collar guy who went on scholarship to Yale and went on to serve his country with distinction. His selection would energize the GOP and his selection as Veep would emphasize McCain's edge in experience and judgment.

Bolton was a punching bag for the Dems as U.N. Ambassador. McCain would be giving Hillary or Obama a huge amount of ammunition to use against him if he chose Bolton as a running-mate. Bolton would poison the ticket. Cox is a far better choice, especially concerning financial policy.

I admire your devotion to John Bolten, but let's get serious here. John Bolten, while a good national security conservative, would be a disaster for John McCain. Much like Newt, he's been branded as totally unacceptable by the media. That may not matter to you and me, but it will certainly mattter to the people who will decide this election, the moderates.

I wouldn't worry too much about Chris Cox's defeat for the Speakership either. Dennis Hastert was a Tom Delay guy and we all know Delay ran the House. Hastert was basically a figurehead Speaker. Delay kept the House in line with brusque tactics and Cox, although in the leadership, never stood a chance. Delay made all of the decisions and many, in retrospect, weren't good.

It's no secret that I think Cox is the best conservative choice for VP. Unfortunately, I don't think McCain will pick him. It would be an out of the box pick and McCain is an extremely conventional candidate. Since securing the nomination, his campaign has been a true bore. I look for him to pick a boring governor like Crist or Pawlenty. Neither stokes my juices though.

I don't have the link, but John McCain was questioned about Chris Cox today. He praised him and sidestepped the VP issue. If you google Chris Cox and click on the google news link, you can find the story.

The idea that Bolton can't hold his own against the MSM is refuted by the record. And as the UN ambassador, Bolton did the punching, not the other way around.

As I said, I'd be happy with Cox. I just don't think he's ever the shown that he knows how to fight a political fight. He represented a safe congressional district and he's been appointed to some positions. And the fact that DeLay supported Hastert is beside the point. The point is that after many years in the House leadership, Cox had zero followership.

The danger with Cox is that he's never shown he can take a punch. I'd contrast that with Cheney's years in the House. Cheney was never considered a firebrand, but he was going to be the next leader after Bob Michel until the John Tower fiasco intervened and took Cheney to the Pentagon (Newt got the vacancy). Cheney had the respect and support of the whole caucus.

After all his years in the House, Cox was not regarded as a heavyweight leader by his peers. And he certainlt hasn't shown an interest in the kind of turf warfare that you need to be an effective member of the executive branch. We may not be able to get a Veep like Cheney who can fight the battle against the leftist tendencies of the multifold federal bureaucracies, but I would prefer we try to get one.

John Bolten for VP means President Obama.

Just the mustache alone would lose the election for McCain.

I'm not sure I "get" the hype with Chris Cox from an electoral point of view.

I understand that he is a great guy, but he needs to be more than what he's been (preferably a governor or a senator) to get a really serious look as a VP candidate.

Again, while he's a great guy, I doubt he could carry California for McCain so I don't see an advantage there.

I think it would be a mistake to choose a VP because that person can deliver a state. In fact, I don't think there's a person out there who could deliver a state for McCain. People just don't vote on a the VP nominee (see Quayle). Name recognition, in the era of the internet, is overrated.

Given that the VP choice doesn't mean that much to the overall outcome, many people support Chris Cox because he is a true conservative who we can imagine as the leader of the conservative movement and as a president. He may not have name recognition, but he has far fewer flaws than some of the governors and senators who have been mentioned.

Do Pawlenty, Crist, Sanford, or Kay Bailey Hutchison stoke your fire? Would you, as a conservative, be excited if any of those names went on to become president? At least with Cox, or Rob Portman for that matter, we could feel confident that a true conservative is waiting in the batter's box.

No one who isn't a political junkie knows Cox.

Minnesotans and Wisconseners (two states that were close to being ours in 2004) know who Pawlenty is and like him. Real, average people.

So yeah, I think he can either deliver or add comfort to voting for McCain in those two states.

Romney would likely deliver Michigan (thanks to the Dems bad management) plus he has $100 million and a good fundraising network. neither are things to sneeze at.

Bolton gets an emphatic NO. Not that there is anything wrong with him as far as who he is and what he stands for, but he is already branded as a horrible person, according to the MSM. Any undecided voter will automatically be persuaded to go the other direction. Red Oakster, it's not about whether he can go toe-to-toe with the MSM. It's about public perception, and that's through the basement.

Cox is a yes, although maybe not a big one. I don't think any VP candidate will make much of a difference in a positive way, only in a negative way (see Bolton, John). But win or lose, having him as VP nominee improves his name recognition in the general public. Even if McCain loses, Cox becomes better known, allowing for future Senate, governor or Presidency runs.

Condi Rice and Mitt Romney have been getting a lot of buzz lately. The murmurs for Condi have been pretty steady the past two weeks.

Sean Hannity reports that when he gives speeches to conservative crowds, they let him know by their enthusiasm that they'd like to see it be Romney. Plus, Drudge had a picture with McCain and Romney yucking it up on an airplane. One picture doth not a nomination make, but it does at least give the appearance of the hatchet(s) being buried.

Yes, Romney could deliver Michigan (wouldn't it be great if McCain had it worked out so Michigan puts him over the top at the convention) and could help in such states as Nev., Colo., New Mexico, possibly NH, and elsewhere. Yes, he'd be great ballast on the economic side.

On the other hand, as much as I'd love to see Romney be the veep nominee I have real trouble seeing it becoming a reality (maybe I shoulda been a Cubs fan!). My guess is that it will be someone safe like Pawlenty, who could perhaps solidify IA as well, and help with Catholics throughout the country. (I write that as an Evangelical).

I agree that it would be better if Cox had some more executive experience than what he's currently having. And, hasn't he gone off the reservation a time or two in his current position? On the other hand, is he Catholic? If so, again that would be helpful in one of the top voter categories. Bush won the Catholic vote of the Mississippi Valley in 04.