Re: Thompson-Romney. If Romney loses Michigan (which is the predicate for the whole scenario), his goose is cooked. Totally. And because the other candidates clearly dislike him, and because he clearly adds NOTHING to any of the other candidates as part of a ticket, he will have spent something like $15-$20 million of his own money only to be relegated to oblivion. But he is young enough to be Veep for four or eight years and still to serve as president. being Veep, or the Veep nominee, is still the best ticket to a presidential nomination. His one last chance could be to be THE GUY who brought Thompson back from the dead. Romney is a practical man. If it doesn’t work, well, Romney would have wasted three days of an endorsement, with the rest of his life to recover. But if it somehow does work, it is his ticket to continuing political relevancy.
As for Thompson, again, we are talking practical politics here. If he wants to be president, he needs to move quickly. And his animus against Romney doesn’t seem anywhere near as strong as Giuliani’s, McCain’s, or Huck’s (Huck’s being a combination of personal animus and anti-Mormon bigotry, as evidenced by his NY Times comments). For that matter, Thompson’s animus against Romney isn’t anywhere near as strong as was Reagan’s against Bush in 1980, or as was the Kennedy-Johnson animus in 1960.
(I swear, the problem with people trained mostly as journalists is that they don’t think enough like creative politicians. Politics isn’t all about money and polls. It’s not all science. It’s art combined with logic, instinct, and skillful gamesmanship. That’s why the Huckster is doing so well. That’s why Obama is doing so well. That’s especialy why Bill Clinton did so well: He knows how to CHANGE THE NARRATIVE if the narrative is not going his way. If Romney loses Michigan, and if he and Thompson are creative enough to want to change the narrative, this is one big way to do it. Not the only way, but one way…. with literally nothing to lose.)