By: David Winston

About six months ago, it became increasingly clear who would win the bid for the Republican nomination in the 2012 presidential elections: Mitt Romney. While many of the other contenders have surged in the polls intermittently, Michele Bachmann earlier this year, then Rick Perry, then Herman Cain, and now Newt Gingrich, Romney’s rating has been relatively constant. If you leave aside poll ratings and look at scholars’ articles and statistics with regards to Republican nominations in past elections, a pattern starts to emerge: Republican nominations are really predictable. I’m not saying it’s absolutely guaranteed, but I’d certainly be surprised if it turned out differently. The real question, though, is who will receive the vice president nomination.

Speculations suggest that because of the enormous failure of the McCain/Palin ticket back in 2008, more than likely Michele Bachmann will not receive the vice presidential bid. The coupling of midlife-crisis, tea-party leaning woman whose modes of thinking revolve around reactionary, antiquated principles framed by hypocritical and overly-conservative talking points with a somewhat decorated politician that generally knows what he’s talking about doesn’t sound all that appealing once again.

Herman Cain’s recent suspension for the presidential bid denotes a general quieting of his influence in the Republican vice-presidential bid, and so we’ll probably only see him as a new Sarah-Palin, Ann-Coulter-like conservative pundit on Fox News giving his input that will be ignored overall, though he’ll think it’s helpful.

And then there’s Donald Trump, an enigma thus far within the entire Republican nominations for the 2012 elections. With this resurgence of his presence in the Dec. 27 Republican debates, it looks as if he’s trying to make a comeback in possibly going for the vice president bid. But, overall, I think it would be an effort expended too little too late, and wouldn’t consider his presence anything other than farcical at best.

The real question will be between Rick Perry, Ron Paul, and Newt Gingrich, three players in the Republican nominations that have remained relatively visible these past few months, spiking in the polls in alternate months. These three names will be the biggest contenders in who will be the running mate on the Mitt Romney Republican ticket in 2012.

Rick Perry’s faults lie on that he looks, though isn’t entirely, like a replica of Bush, which I believe will put him off to many Republicans considering how low Bush’s approval rating was when he left office. He’ll also have to contend with the fact that he endorsed mandatory HPV vaccines for young women in Texas which looks precariously like government involving itself in the individual’s right to choose, i.e. big government, which Republicans seem so against. Also, there is his infamous ‘Oops’ moment, suggesting that he might not be the best public speaker. As evidenced by Palin’s many, many ‘Oops’ moments that made her look less than flattering, it is important that the vice president compliments the presidential candidate by not making them look bad with public speaking faux pas.

Then there’s Ron Paul. Personally, I think he might make a great presidential candidate and exemplifies the spirit of the GOP better than Romney, but lacks in his overall presence to convince more than enough of the American public that he’s presidential quality. While smart and knowledgeable, more than any of the other candidates at least, Paul’s faults lie in his uncompromising positions with regards to same-sex marriage, legalization, or decriminalization, of drugs, and a laissez-faire attitude with respects to Israel, the Middle East, and the European financial crisis. Such libertarian aspects of Paul’s principles, while attractive and at times logical, will not make him attractive to enough Republican supporters who are against gay rights or any decriminalization of drugs. While the GOP is the party of less government, it doesn’t mean that they don’t want to be un-involved in too many aspects of the individual.

I believe the best candidate, as of right now, for the vice presidential candidacy is Newt Gingrich. He’s been around long enough to be knowledgeable of how presidential elections operate, he’s maintained a relatively staunch Republican stance on most issues, and he’s not overbearingly intelligent and comes across as relatable to the generic GOP voter. Obviously there would be hurdles for him to overcome, such as his past infidelities, the amount of money he’s received from Freddie Mac, and the stanch bigoted positions he maintained during the Civil Rights Movement as a Georgia Representative in Congress, among many other things. But he’s been relatively congenial towards Romney and has been able to maintain his spotlight for a couple of weeks now, so the potential looks promising.

But this is of course perhaps all negligible, since sometimes those in the spotlight during the run for a presidential bid are too big for the britches of vice president. It’s like two inflated egos trying to fit a pair of pants way too small. Perhaps there will be a lesser known personality in the GOP that will take the position. Romney, if nominated, which is more than likely, has spoken highly in consideration of Bob McDonnell, current Governor of Virginia, Marco Rubio, a Senator from Florida, and current Governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie, who is perhaps a favorite in potential trio.

If you have a differing opinion, please be my guest to express who you would put money on for the GOP nominations for president/vice president candidates.