>> right. >> it turns out, there wouldn't have been as much discussion of the ryan plan if you picked portman or pawlenty or someone else who wasn't associated with it. >> right. i do think you've got to ask yourself, they knew all of this, right? they knew they'd be discussing the ryan budget, but they obviously thought the risks were worth it. why would you take on that risk if you were in a position of strength? they're looking at the same research that everyone else is. they're look at the dramatic decline in romney's favorability rating, the lack of confidence in him as a leader, and they needed to change the dynamic. really, this is a redux of the sarah palin pick. and that didn't work then, it's not working now. but, of course, they thought they could avoid the sarah palin trap, because here was someone who could do the policy wonkish stuff that the think tanks love. which is where paul ryan came from. that's not going to change the dynamic. you've got to win this, in your own right, as the top of the ticket, and this doesn't answer the questions about mitt romney. what is his budget? where are his tax returns?