So, on CNN today I heard someone say: "The VP pick is not really important ... "

[Tx4obama]

... as to winning the election or something BS like that.
This isn't the first time I've heard folks on TV saying various things about the importance of the VP candidate.

All I can say is BULLSHIT !!!

Considering a VP is one heart beat away from becoming president - I think it IS one of the most important things in the election campaign process.

In my opinion even MORE importance should be given to the VP candidates that are running on the tickets then there is now.

There should be MORE time for the public to vent VP candidates - three months is NOT enough.

There should be no VP candidates placed on a ticket that are not completely ready to be president on 'day one'.

There should be many MORE Vice-Presidential debates between the two parties than the current tradition of having only 'one'.


Thanks for listening, I had to vent

[bigdarryl]

1. Its not important

[Politicalboi]

2. I agree

And I think there should also be essay tests that are taken live on TV. Involves writing, reading comprehension, math, and US History.

Doctors, lawyers, nurses, cops all take tests. It should be a requirement to hold office.

[NRaleighLiberal]

3. little is less important than CNN

[oldhippydude]

4. Palin with launch codes?...n/t

[WI_DEM]

5. It is important and those who say it isn't are wrong.

It's the most important decision the nominee makes.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

6. The process is important.

A running mate is not likely to change the outcome of an election, but the basis for making that decision tells you a lot about the candidate and the campaign. Case in point: McCain's choice of Palin - the scarcely-vetted, narcissistic, barely literate half-governor of Alaska, over the far more qualified but very boring Tim Pawlenty. She was not even slightly qualified (in fact, she turned out to be even less qualified than anyone thought), but choosing her proved that the campaign was desperate to acquire some pizzazz, or something.

If Mittens chooses Ryan, for example, this will strongly suggest that the teabag wing of the party is calling the shots. If he chooses Portman or Pawlenty it will indicate that Mittens wants to play it safe. If he picks Chris Christie you can bet he's decided he needs an attack dog and he's not so worried about the teabaggers.

None of these people will make or break Mittens' candidacy, but the choice will tell you a lot about the campaign's state of mind.

[Tx4obama]

8. BUT ...

... a BAD running mate SHOULD change the outcome of an election.

I think the American people SHOULD put more importance on the VP pick.

Both people on the ticket should get the same amount of 'importance'.

Let's say that on the day of the inauguration 'the president' has a heart attack and dies in the evening while attending the inauguration balls - then we are stuck with the VP as president! And that person would be someone that would have had only three months of vetting and only participated in ONE debate.

In my opinion we currently just do not put the VP candidates thru the wringer enough.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

10. I agree. Sarah Palin is Exhibit A.

McCain picked her because he wanted somebody who could "energize" his campaign. In other words, he made that choice solely because he thought she'd help him win (not then realizing - because she had never been properly vetted - that she was a fraud, a grifter and dumb as a box of hammers). That totally backfired when people started to see how unqualified and generally awful she was, which also meant that McCain's judgment was faulty. He should have chosen someone who could be at least a mediocre president, not a disastrous one.

[chollybocker]

7. What they mean is, "It doesn't matter who the VP pick is."

"Mitt's gonna get his magic undies kicked in November."

[madamesilverspurs]

9. Back in 2008, after the GOP convention,

I did some buttons with this picture, captioned "The running mate DOES matter."
They went fast.




-

[Floyd_Gondolli]

14. LBJ

Here's some food for thought: was LBJ the last VP pick that benefited a nominee in a meaningful way politically? He may have been the difference in 1960. I'm having trouble thinking of another one that had that kind of impact since then.

[FSogol]

11. LOL, they are already trying to spin Romney's poor vp selection.

[Tx4obama]

12. Now that we know that Romney is going to pick Ryan, I think the OP is now even more relevant. n/t

[Tx4obama]

13. So, I was just now watching the rerun on MSNBC regarding Ryan - and here's another example

of what's wrong.

They said that Ryan's 'foreign experience' and his 'ability to answer foreign policy questions' during the VP debate is not as important as if he were at the top of the ticket.

Well, it sure as damn should be !!! Grrr

[Cosmocat]

15. This shiite varies depending on what the Rs want

Ryan is a STAR (as are countless other Rs).

Four years ago to this day, for two months, Obama was derided for being a star.

If the Rs say foreign policy experience is not important for the VP, then that is what the "liberal" media will tell people.