"Is there someone out there that can simultaneously 1) help McCain carry a swing state, 2) bolster his conservative credentials, 3) complement the “Ready on Day One” message?"

I can only think of three. Rob Portman, Eric Cantor, and Carly Fiorina. Out of the two congressman, Portman is the more prominent in terms of resume, but both lack media exposure. Where Fiorina lacks in political experience, she makes up in being the glass ceiling shattering former CEO business experience. Plus, there are not many Republicans who are better in front of a camera/audience than her.

If these three are considered unsuitable, Pawlenty's the next closest thing McCain will get. After Pawlenty, it really boils down to Rudy, Jindal, and Romney, in that order.

No surprise to hear the Bushies slamming someone who has actually conducted a military operation that was not a cluster___k.

My own reservation isn't with Romney ca. 2007-2008. It's with Romney ca. 2000-2006, and it has nothing to do with his LDS faith. Combining a centrist, moderate, maverick almost-RINO (McCain) with a former RINO (Romney) who's only recently found his conservative faith doesn't ring any Reaganesque chords with me. I doubt that McCain can ever bond with him to the point of actually delegating significant authority to him. (By contrast, I think once Palin overcomes McCain's ridiculous position on ANWR, the two of them might bond quite well.) But as I said earlier, Romney's been more thoroughly vetted.

That said, it's only appropriate to recognize that some voters will have a problem with Romney's LDS faith, just like some will have a problem with the color of Obama's skin (and some, presumably, with the color of McCain's skin, too). I don't think it's likely to be so many as to disqualify him from Veep consideration. But the same John McCain who was stubborn enough to refuse a plane ticket home from Hanoi before his longer-imprisoned comrades there is unlikely to pick Mitt Romney IMHO.

a candidate betting the ranch on national security expertise.

Wesley Clark is doing a nice job deconstructing McCain's national security credentials. He would make a great choice for Obama.

Or failing that, Missouri, or Florida ...

For the record, I'm a woman, non-evangelical and a six figure salary Manhattan corporate attorney. And I think Huckabee is the best choice.

So please keep your "non-starter" opinions to yourself unless you really have something intelligent to state.

Romney is obviously the best choice for McCain for a host of reasons. That's why he's winning most polls, and why all the pundits and party leaders are pressuring McCain to choose him. McCain also said last week that "No one is representing me better than Romney".

Romney hits every category McCain needs. Help in key toss-ups like MI, CO, NV and more, fund raising, integrity, experience, intelligence, economic cred, leadership, work ethic, success in both gov and business, character, great family, squeaky clean record, and morals. He's unflappable on the campaign trail and in interviews and appearances. He never goes off message and won't let anything stupid fly like the Huckster so often does. And he's the only one talking about how great America is - we need that!

I actually can't think of a downside to Romney, unless you want to count the small group of bigots within the evangelical community who cannot stomach a Mormon in the White House, and I don't think they amount to a hill of beans when it comes to numbers.

Palin and Jindal are interesting choices but make no sense for a candidate betting the ranch on national security expertise.

I don't understand this sentence. McCain's own strength is national security. The conventional wisdom is that you pick a VP for complementary strengths, not to reinforce the candidate's own long suit.

Substantively, what McCain lacks are domestic policy and executive experience, which suggests he ought to pick a governor. Stylistically, he lacks youth and charisma, qualities Obama has in excess.

Of the available governors, Pawlenty would be a conventional and safe choice; I'm unconvinced that he can deliver even his home state, though, and he doesn't add much charisma to the ticket. Crist is another conventional choice; McCain could certainly do worse.

Romney has been vetted more thoroughly than the others. His conservative bona fides remain in doubt, but again, McCain could certainly do worse.

I'd rather see McCain swing for the fences, though, with an unconventional choice that would definitely resonate in more than one state. I'm a Jindal fan, but I'm even more enthusiastic about Sarah Palin, who has a lot more going for her than her gender and looks (and neither of those hurt).

Answer: Alaska Gov Sarah Palin

Tim Pawlenty (who I have always heard of as being on McCain's shortlist) would do at least 1 and 2.

Agreed all around on Nunn. It's unlikely Obama picks a fellow 40-something but I'd be surprised if he went with someone much older than 55.

IMO neither but he seems to be working pretty darned hard on the latter.

First, he's been out of active politics for some time—an eternity in absent-minded modern America. Basically, he's an unknown. Second, the very qualities I like in him are probably qualities that will cause Democratic activists to oppose his nomination bitterly. But, most importantly, he's 70 years old. It would be pretty darned hard to run against McCain because of his age and have McCain's contemporary as your running mate.