Jennifer,
As per your question about why Thompson would want Romney: Money,
and managerial competence. As part of a ticket, Romney could
presumably continue to finance a large part of the campaign.
Meanwhile, one of the biggest knocks on Thompson, as per National
Review, is his lack of any executive or serious managerial
experience. That is Romney's biggest selling point. Also, Romney
helps Thompson excape the "regional candidate" image, and Romney's
base of Mormons nationwide can be a large organizational help.
Finally, the one thing THompson needs right now more than anything
is attention and a sense of momentum. It seems to be South Carolina
or Die for him, and to win South Carolina, he must shake up the
race. Nothing would shake up the race more than an unprecedented
move such as naming a running mate so early in the process. What
Thompson needs is drama, and this would create it in abundance.
Plus, of course, if he takes even three-quarters of Romney's voters
in South Carolina, those extra voters alone would help vault him
far closer to the top.
Also, your analogy to the Reagan/Ford thing is not apt. First of
all, all of that talk started AFTER Reagan was the sure nominee, as
part of a last-minute idea at the convention to unify the party --
NOT to win primary votes. Second, it was a different model: Ford
specifically was demanding a co-presidency, with himself (NOT
Reagan) having primacy over foreign affairs. The Thompson thing
follows more along the lines of a business model, with Thompson
clearly in charge of policy decisions but Romney in charge of
implementation. In short, Romney would clearly be subordinate;
Ford, as a former president, wanted to be co-equal.
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.