I'm reading "Trump search for a VP candidate narrows, with senators dominating list/At least eight people have been asked to provide documents to the campaign" (WaPo).
I'm betting on J.D. Vance, because I like Vance best as the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination in 2028. As soon as Trump wins the election — if he wins — he will be a lame duck and the 2028 campaign will have begun. Trump should want someone who can carry forward his approach to governing. Isn't that Vance?
On rejecting Nikki Haley:
“She’s a very disloyal person,” Trump said, according to attendees [at a recent fundraiser]. He then complained that she backed Marco Rubio in 2016 even after he asked for her endorsement and that she had been disloyal repeatedly to him since. “You have to like the person you’re running with, and I don’t like her. I don’t like her.
Trump said he was not worried about her voters leaving him, according to attendees. “All those people are going to come vote for us anyway. Who are they going to vote for? … I think if I picked Nikki Haley, it would look like such a weak decision.”
Posts
111 comments:
It would look desperate.
Haley, unlike Desantis, ruined her political career by continuing the sham campaign. Hoping for the democrat lawfare to put her in. She’s gone.
I believe Trump is going to pick a Carson or some other obvious number 2 supporting type character. Similar to Pence.
This time he will choose for loyalty rather than trying to make deals with the traitorous Romney wing.
If he picks an obvious alpha like Vivek then we know who has the inside track in 2028.
I believe he wants 2028 to be an open race and the succession to be wholly dependent on who he endorses.
Isn't that Vance?
Yes he is my favorite as well, only because Tom Cotton will do better as SecDef. Both are very presidential and pro-America.
If memory serves, JD flails at the first sign of criticism.
Trump should pick Tulsi Gabbard. I don't care that she's historically had socialist and anti-gun positions. She'd be easy on many independents and undecideds, as well as being easy on the eyes.
Tulsi Tusli, has some flair
Trump and Tulsi, what a pair
Tulsi Gabbard I adore
Trump & Tulsi 2024
Dude1394 said...
Haley, unlike Desantis, ruined her political career by continuing the sham campaign. Hoping for the democrat lawfare to put her in. She’s gone.
You are pretending that the Listless Vessels don't think Desantis's entire campaign was relying on the lawfare too.
Desantis just figured out it wouldn't work a few weeks sooner.
Why is Rubio on the list, he and Trump both live in Florida and because of electoral college rules the prez and VP kinda/sorts have to be from different states. The electors have to vote for two people, and at least one who doesn't live in their state. It might be fun, though. Trump wins, Florida's elector's vote for Trump but then can't vote for Rubio, so what do they do? Would we end up with Trump and Kamala?
Picking Gabbard would make it almost irresistable for the Democrats to arrange an assassination should Trump surprise us all and win in November.
You need someone who can think on their feet while speaking and dealing with the slimy press lizards. Can Vance do that? I don't know- the truth is that I haven't spent much time watching him do interviews and such- seen a few speeches where he comes across as strong and eloquent but those things are rehearsed heavily I imagine.
I agree with Ann. It will be JD Vance.
Burgum to Sec. of Energy.
I hope there is a place for Vivek.
Pompeo will go back to State.
If Trump chose Haley, he should hire a food taster.
Rubio can potentially get around 12 amendment by doing a Cheney move, but I don't like the lawfare that would result with some corrupt judge ruling that Florida electors cannot vote for Rubio.
What if DT came out and said, partly in response to the "he'll never leave" crap, that he only intends to be in office 2-3 years, to get the deep state clean started, pardon those unfairly targeted, get our foreign policy stuff straightened out, and fix DOJ and FBI. He intends to resign early so that his successor can get a fresh start. That he doesn't want to be President at Biden's advanced age.
In some ways this would frame things as Vance versus Harris, which has to be a blowout, and blow a hole in all the last election / dictator rhetoric. Plus, successor could fully Pardon Trump so he doesn't have to do it to himself.
I like Vance best as the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination in 2028.
Do you want him as the 2028 nominee or as 2029-2033 president?
I agree that vp gives him a leg up for nominee.
It pretty well kills his chances to be president.
Unless you are thinking that pdjt dies in office.
Why do so many otherwise smart people, and you are very smart Ann, think that the vice presidency is a logical stepping stone for the presidency?
Why do so many smart people think that someone who has never actually run anything eg a typical senator can be qualified to run the country?
Senators almost never do well as president.
See Brandon, Obama, Ford, nixon, lbj, jfk, truman and so on.
The chief executive of the us should have executive experience.
John Henry
Caution: This story was printed in the Washington Post
>RideSpaceMountain said...
Trump should pick Tulsi Gabbard. I don't care that she's historically had socialist and anti-gun positions. She'd be easy on many independents and undecideds...<
That is precisely the argument for Haley, you know. And with Haley you get a conservative instead of a lefty.
I'm not a Haley fan at all - just making more reasonable the point that you thought you were making. Talk by conservatives of Tulsi as Trump's VP is the height of foolishness.
Vance is my #1 choice too, then Rubio. Burgum is just another version of Mike Pence. I hope he doesn't go there. I suspect Vance will be the most skilled at cutting out the rot in our government.
Trump will move to New Jersey if it's Rubio. That won't be difficult.
That is not to say that a senator is a bad pick for vp. The vp has no executive function. They are not "assistant president" or anything like.
Their only constitutional role is legislative, as president of the senate*. If they decided to be active in that role, as LBJ was as majority leader, they could be very interesting.
*also as presidential backup. But so are the speaker and sec agriculture along with many others.
John Henry
I'd rather an executive too, but good governor's with the ability to cut to the chase are in short supply. Only Sarah Huckabee Sanders qualifies besides RDS and Achilles is still raging against him. Dumb.
RideSpaceMountain said...
Trump should pick Tulsi Gabbard. I don't care that she's historically had socialist and anti-gun positions. She'd be easy on many independents and undecideds, as well as being easy on the eyes.
I agree with Tulsi. She has the added benefit of not being a serious contender for the 2028 nomination as well.
Carson is my favorite.
Rubio is not really in the running. This member of the Gang of Eight was one of the first chameleons to remove the mask. I don't believe a serious person would trust him.
Birches said...
I'd rather an executive too, but good governor's with the ability to cut to the chase are in short supply. Only Sarah Huckabee Sanders qualifies besides RDS and Achilles is still raging against him. Dumb.
He called us Listless Vessels. He hired Jeff Roe.
He hired the same people to run his campaign as Mitt Romney. He graduated from the same schools.
Most importantly when Desantis was in the House of Representatives he helped Paul Ryan keep Trump from building the wall and he helped form the egregious budget the "Republicans" in the house forced Trump to sign.
You call people who have better arguments and better reasoning than you dumb.
What does that make you?
I'm skeptical that serving as Trump's VP will be a steppingstone to anything. It's very hard to maintain a long-term relationship with Trump, because he is both narcissistic (so he demands absolute loyalty) and mercurial (so his goals change minute to minute). You will have trouble naming very many long-term retainers or aides. Put another way, how many high-level people from the first Trump administration are likely to come back for a second?
I don't see the attraction of JD Vance. He's glib, but I think he lacks depth, gravitas. Better as a Senator, I think.
Not sure who would be Trump's best pick, but I think whomever it is, needs to have a compelling appeal with women voters.
If Ronald Reagan can pick George HW Bush as his VP running mate, Trump can pick Nicki Haley.
It will probably turn out just as well in the short run and (unfortunately) in the long run.
I like Tulsi or Vance. Tulsi is coming along position-wise, but most important she is strongly outspoken about the evil Democrat elite. Vance is a strong, articulate candidate from the midwest who is a tougher target than Trump.
If the mediaswine started to smear Tulsi, Trump might get some female protest votes.
Ice Nine said...
>RideSpaceMountain said...
Trump should pick Tulsi Gabbard. I don't care that she's historically had socialist and anti-gun positions. She'd be easy on many independents and undecideds...<
That is precisely the argument for Haley, you know. And with Haley you get a conservative instead of a lefty.
Haley is a Conservative just like Bush was a Conservative.
We don't want a Conservative. Americans First is more important.
At this point we need some very Non-Conservative shit done to the biggest Corporations in our country.
One of the most important actions to be done right now is the breakup of Google, Facebook and Blackrock and many other megacorps.
I would trust gabbards to handle that way more than someone who just got rich by joining the Board of Boeing.
It's not going to matter who the VP is. Anyone selected is going to be Hitler Junior, which means Trump can pick whoever he likes.
But the power remains with the President, and the VP can simply be shunted aside like Kamala. So while Trump is likely to pick for loyalty, which rules out Haley and DeSantis, he's not going to observably worry the MIC by picking Tulsi.
The upside of Vance is that he appears to be quite popular in his home state and can virtually assure Trump wins Ohio. The downside is that Vance’s seat is not a safe Republican seat. Trump will need every senator he can get if he wants his legislative agenda passed.
I second that. From what I have seen of Senator Vance, I like the cut of his jib. Has Rubio been as front and center about the lawfare issue?
I can understand him not wanting Haley, who is a political opponent in a sense that most of the others aren't. But there's something odd about expecting loyalty from a political opponent.
My support for a Tulsi pick is somewhat tongue-in-cheek...I have personal affinities for such a choice if you know what I mean.
Politically, I don't entirely trust Tulsi either, but she's also no friend to democrats, at least anymore. They trust her less than I trust her, and I don't trust her very much. I do think she would bring in a lot of women and independent voters. I also think a lot of independents/undecideds would view her as someone who could temper Trump's bombast.
She would also serve somewhat as a lightning rod, diverting some of the negative attention on Trump to her. Let Trump deal with other issues while Tulsi fights the AWFLs...good 'ol cat fight.
The only consideration is who can step in as president, if necessary, and carry on the MAGA movement after Trump. That is Vance, IMHO.
I would have like to see Glenn Youngkin as a prospect, but I guess that's not going to happen.
The last VP to be a successful Presidential candidate, running as VP*, was the first George Bush in 1992 and he was VP to a very popular, successful President (Reagan) but only lasted one term on his own.
Donald Trump is almost 80 years old and while in better shape than the current President, that can change very quickly at this age. Whoever he picks may need to be President well before January 20, 2029.
*I'm not counting Biden because he'd been out of office for 4 years. Hopefully, however, he will suffer the same fate as the first George Bush and be a one term President only.
Of course, come Nov 1st, they'll tell us that Trump is Constitutionally ineligible run for President, since he's Already won the election twice (2016 and 2020)..
Oh..
And it will be TOO LATE to put anyone else on the ballot; so Biden will be selected by default.. Again
Sally327 said..
the last VP to be a successful Presidential candidate, running as VP*, was the first George Bush in 1992
and before him was Martin Van Buren.. Anyone care to name ANY Other sitting VP that became Pres?
I don't think Rubio would be it. There is a lot to be said for the old school politics of picking a VP that brings you a state. Florida is solid for Trump whether he lived their or not, then the afore mentioned 12th Amendment issue.
Doug Burgum is another billionaire. Not sure that would play well with voters, and his name is hardly a household one. He does bring a different state, but I don't think North Dakota going to go Biden.
Ohio is an important state for the GOP, so I see the JD Vance nod. I think he would fit well with Trump. I don't know if he is ready for 2028, but the large field looked rather lackluster this year against Trump.
Haley? Take her behind the barn...
Tim Scott is still a contender worth considering. He needs a bit more name recognition, but he'd probably get it quick. Not sure where Scott is better served as a foil to Graham, as a Senator or VP. VP would have a bit more power to smack Graham.
If wanting to pick a woman, I'd go Huckabee Sanders over Gabbard. The left may not like Gabbard, but they'd probably impeach Trump in a heart beat to get Gabbard in the office. I'm sure they'll try to impeach Trump anyway, but they may not want a Huckabee Sanders as the first woman President (unless Harris gets there first).
"Trump will move to New Jersey if it's Rubio. That won't be difficult."
Just in time to get indicted in New Jersey for an illegal relocation to affect an election.
Just in time to get indicted in New Jersey for an illegal relocation to affect an election.
This very real consideration side, I would dearly love to see Trump move back to Queens.
Wouldn't that be a hoot!
who-knew said...
Why is Rubio on the list, he and Trump both live in Florida and because of electoral college rules the prez and VP kinda/sorts have to be from different states.
Judge Merchan to the rescue! By the election Trump will be living in a prison in New York, so problem solved.
I wasn’t impressed by Vance’s senate campaign—he said too many of those silly things people say when they don’t believe what they’re saying but feel they need to say it because the polls tell them so. I also think it’s too soon for him.
Rubio’s a lightweight who gets squishy when things get tough.
My first choice would be DeSantis, but I know that’s not going to happen. My second choice is someone like Tim Scott, who can accelerate the Republican shift in the black community. If the black vote is really put in play, the Democrats may as well fold up shop and dissolve as a party.
Vance has become a very competent surrogate for Trump on the trail, and he more than holds his own against the idiot liberal hosts of news shows. He has a way of seeming more calm than anyone who is arguing with him. He's persuasive and he's among the Big Eight in the Senate who have signed the letter vowing to sink any Biden legislation of nominees for the rest of his term.
Vivek will be in charge of dismantling the behemoth overgrown executive branch and shrinking the permanent employee pool. Dept of Energy produces no energy, and so it goes for Education, Justice, the illegally formed FBI...
You have to like the person you’re running with
I do not think Biden likes Harris. And vice versa.
Blogger Sally327 said...
The last VP to be a successful Presidential candidate, running as VP*, was the first George Bush in 1992 and he was VP to a very popular, successful President (Reagan) but only lasted one term on his own.
And before that you have to go back another 150 years to Van Buren in 1836
And 2 former VPs, Nixon and Brandon, have been elected. Not very good examples for those who think VPs make good presidents.
Coolidge is pretty much the only exception in 212 years (since the 12th Amendment)
Some might add T Roosevelt
What did both have in common? Executive experience.
Bush also had a career of executive experience. Only 4 yrs in the House.
John Henry
Tulsi. It’s gotta to be a woman this time around.
I’m sorry I voted for Vance for Ohio Senate. The only reason I did is because his opponent was so bad and I thought he might improve once in office. Unfortunately I was wrong and has been worse than I thought. It will be the last time I vote for him or any ticket he is on. If he is VP nominee, I will vote for some 3rd party like I did in 2016.
I'm betting on J.D. Vance, because I like Vance best as the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination in 2028
It's been pretty clear that AA has gone increasingly Trumpist. Which would be 180 degrees uncharacteristic of her.
So, do we have a Drudge situation here?
Look, if it is still the two presumptive nominees come November, it is highly likely that whoever wins will not serve the entirety of his term, if not because of age/health, then some other reason. So a vote for VP is a vote for president.
If he really wants to shake up the race, he should go with Fetterman. :-)
It would be ironic if Trump got to choose Rubio because Judge Merchan changes Trump's residence back to NY by putting him in prison.
“It will be the last time I vote for him or any ticket he is on. If he is VP nominee, I will vote for some 3rd party like I did in 2016.“
Well how special?
You’re so very special!
Thinking a bit more on Vance, I think he might be a good VP. not just because he is well qualified for the position.
The VP is not term limited. Vance could serve this term under PDJT then could be Vivek's VP in 28 and 32. And for that matter, someone else's in 36, 40 and so on. He's just 40, he could conceivably serve as VP for 40-50 years.
That could give the continuity of the MAGA program way into the future.
Vance would have to take the nomination on the clear understanding that he was not to run for Prez in 28. Since he would lose, that would give the opposite of continuity.
I can see the billboards now:
"VANCE FOR PERMANENT VP. KEEP MAGA ALIVE"
John Henry
I'm sure hes being sincere, honestly,
who at Bezos has any inkling of Trump's thinking?
"Tulsi. It’s gotta to be a woman this time around."
The vitriol that will be spewed by the cat-lady electorate at her will be something to see. Remember Sarah Palin? They will attack her viciously, especially because she's attractive.
Picking a senator is risky, since the Senate is always so close. Republican senatorial candidates seem to be either weak echoes of Democrats or batshit crazy.
Also, picking Vance as VP only makes him the heir in name only. Policy-wise, it sidelines him and leaves him with four years of probably few accomplishments.
Besides, I think it's risky for Trump to pick a VP to please his base. You can see from the comments today; Trump's committed voters are going to despise any VP choice as weak and traitorous. Vance also does little to expand Trump's appeal to swing voters. Rubio, on the other hand, might.
Vivek will get to be Secretary of one of the agencies he wants to abolish.
Tom T. @11:42 AM, I was just going to post the same thing.
Vivek should start at the Dept. of Education.
Vance would shore up Ohio even though it might not be necessary.
I like what I see of Donald but there's the Florida problem.
Give Vivek the job of taking a blowtorch to the federal government.
Dismantle it piece by piece, starting with the FBI and IRS.
Every other consideration aside, Vance would be the only one who could garner the GOPe-repulsed vote. And that's the only way any (nominally) Republican wins.
'She'd be easy on many independents and undecideds, as well as being easy on the eyes.'
I have never understood the 'Tulsi is hot' crowd.
She's a Walmart 7 on a good day.
Job 1 is kneecapping the Beltway Uniparty, bringing the warmongering intelligence agencies and military-industrial complex to heel, eliminating the corrupt partisan lawfare of the Justice Department, and attacking the one-sided censorship of the Silicon Valley tech moguls. All other good things from a second Trump presidency flow from that.
Therefore, while my heart tells me Vance is the best choice, my head tells me Tulsi Gabbard is the way to go. She’s had some shitty left-wing ideas in the past, but I don’t question her patriotism, honesty, or devotion to clean government. I think she could bring quite a few independents and country-club Republicans on board, and even a fair number of Democrats who are fed up with the way things are going.
“Just win, baby”. That’s what we’ve got to do, with the VP pick as with so much else.
>Darkisland said...
Vance would have to take the nomination on the clear understanding that he was not to run for Prez in 28.<
What, would he have to cross his heart and hope to die, or what exactly?
Yeah, that would work - until he decides to run in '28, of course.
Maybe it should be MTG. No one would impeach Trump again if she were VP.
(Ya I doubt she’s one of the finalists….)
I like Vance and his bootstrap story. Super intelligent, well spoken and deeply understands the underclass. Also a good move to choose a white presumably cisgender male No tokens.
"I have never understood the 'Tulsi is hot' crowd.
She's a Walmart 7 on a good day."
Careful bub. My wife looks a lot like Tulsi. I'm biased of course, but a Walmart 7 Tulsi is not.
I hope Trump doesn't pick a relative unknown like Burgum.
Remember when George HW Bush proudly announced Dan Quayle as his VP running mate?
America collectively wondered: "Who the hell is HE?"
Like Pence, he was from Indiana.
And of course the press savaged Quayle during his entire term in office.
"Senators almost never do well as president.
See Brandon, Obama, Ford, nixon, lbj, jfk, truman and so on."
Ford was never a senator. As for the others, putting aside whether they were all, in fact, bad presidents, I certainly disagree in the cases of Nixon, LBJ, JFK, and Truman that their having been senators played a role in making them bad presidents.
Also, let's look at some other examples. Lincoln had no executive experience but was a great president.
Wilson had tons of executive experience but was a lousy president.
Overall, I think the success or failure of presidents primarily turns on (a) their policies, (b) their political skills and acumen, including skills of persuasion, and (c) their character or lack thereof Executive experience is a plus, all things held equal, but is hardly outcome-determinative.
It will be Nikki Haley
He will be giving the right leaning Trump haters someone to vote for.
Trump is pretending to keep his 'hatred' for Haley on the front burner.
Never-Trumpers can then rationalize that their vote is for Haley not Trump.
"According to people familiar with his remarks"
Note that the qualifier does not say "people familiar with his remarks about the potential Vice Presidents"
I suspect it's just Democrat Activists who are familiar with everything Trump says, as part of their oppo research.
Vance would be my pick as well.
On Rubio:
Think about this hypothetical- Trump wins in November and the Democrats control the House on January 6th 2025 or are only a handful of votes short of control. Even if Trump moves to NJ, this could be treated as a fake relocation and the Democrats with the aid of a couple of GOP traitors challenge both candidates throwing the election into the House when who knows what would happen.
Minimize the chances of a "seemingly" legitimate challenge- go outside of Florida.
'Careful bub. My wife looks a lot like Tulsi. I'm biased of course, but a Walmart 7 Tulsi is not.'
We all have a type.
"So, do we have a Drudge situation here?"
We could ask the same question about you, Mark.
Tom T at 1135 had it right.
Trump can pick a Floridian because he's anticipating relocating to a gated community in New York State later this summer.
Byron Donalds is the man. He grew up in Brooklyn and had the sense to move to Florida before the rest of NY did.
To call Althouse a "trumpist" is ludicrous. She is just appalled at what the Democrat party has become.As we all are or should be.
maybe Willie Brown
let the debate begin
Dogma,
Good catch on Ford. I knew that and should have said. OTOH, for my point, senator or rep, it doesn't make much difference.
I would agree that executive experience, in govt, business, military is not necessarily any guarantee of good results. Plenty of bad execs out there in all fields.
I would also agree that lack of it is not necessarily a guarantee of bad results.
But all else being equal, it is the way I would bet.
I take your point about JFK et al. Having been senators (and rep) is not what made them bad presidents. What made them bad was, to some extent, the lack of other, executive, experience.
John Henry
Blogger Michael said...
I like Vance and his bootstrap story. Super intelligent, well spoken and deeply understands the underclass. Also a good move to choose a white presumably cisgender male No tokens.
I agree. Choosing Scott would be helpful with black voters but I'm not sure he would be more than token.
Yancey W-
In your scenario, it does not matter which party controls the House. The president is not elected by majority vote of House members. Each state delegation gets one vote, so the determining factor is how many state delegations are controlled be either party. IIRC, currently Rs have 26 states and that is unlikely to change.
Trump should want someone who can carry forward his approach to governing.
Congratulations for writing that with a straight face.
I disagree that Truman was a "bad president." He was a Democrat and that showed in domestic policy. Democrats were not as corrupt as they are now. As far as I am concerned, he was an improvement on Roosevelt.
Trump needs to pick a vp who is hated by democrats more than Trump is, if possible. That way it is no benefit to murder Trump.
"I'm betting on J.D. Vance because I like Vance best as the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination in 2028."
Recently, Vance has sought to dramatically reinvent himself as "all in" for Trump while embracing a Republican message of economic populism. In 2016, Vance said “I’m a Never Trump guy. I never liked him.” Even when nicer language got Nikki Haley excluded her from the VP job because Trump said “She is not presidential timber.” But what he meant was that she would not withdraw from the primary.
But the missing element for politician-without-substance J.D. Vance is that Trump requires Vance (or anyone else) as his VP to play sycophant for four years, which will not garner a single vote as a presidential candidate in 2028. So Trump dies in office should he win; otherwise his VP lives through Hell for four years.
I’d go for Stefanik. Personable, articulate. She offends batshit crazy progs but not normies. Would make a pleasing match up with Kamala.
Strictly the 12th Amendment thing of not having a President and VP from the same state can be got round by naming a Slate of Electors for Florida who are inhabitants of South Carolina. That way they can vote as Florida Electors for 2 Floridians as they’re not inhabitants of the same state.
But Rubio would be a bad choice so not worth the bother.
I disagree that Truman was a "bad president." He was a Democrat and that showed in domestic policy.
He was certainly viewed as a terrible president in the 40s and 50s. Approvals in the 30-40% range. Disapproval in the 50s and 60% range
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/harry-s-truman-public-approval
Democrats were not as corrupt as they are now. As far as I am concerned, he was an improvement on Roosevelt.
I think they were just as corrupt then as today. Perhaps even moreso. They had a sympathetic press, largely, and we had no other sources so they looked better.
Among other things, Truman imposed loyalty oaths starting in 1947
Executive Order 9835 "Loyalty Order" (1947)
On March 21, 1947, concerned with Soviet subversive penetration and infiltration into the United States government by American citizens who held oaths of allegiance to a foreign power during wartime, President Harry S Truman instituted a Loyalty Program by signing Executive Order 9835, also known as the "Loyalty Order." It required loyalty oaths and background investigations on persons deemed suspect of holding party membership in organizations that advocated violent and anti-democratic programs.
John Henry
I mean better than Wallace, who was an actual soviet agent, could Dewey have won in 1944, that seems unlikely, since he barely lost in 48, Truman had an animus toward the Marines, and a certain anticorporate bias, not as much as FDR son of China clipper fortune,
Am less interested in the VP pick and more interested in who he picks for AG.
Blogger Joe Smith said...
"I have never understood the 'Tulsi is hot' crowd.
She's a Walmart 7 on a good day."
Ms. Gabbard is not hot. She is conventionally attractive. There IS a difference. Books have been written about this.
the soviet apparat had gotten enmeshed in government and media, over the previous 15 years, going all the way up to Wallace Hiss Remington et al, of course the Venona transcripts would have shown this more clearly, but they were not released in part, because classified info, even though an army sgt weisband in the Signals Corps had told the Soviets, they existed,
'Am less interested in the VP pick and more interested in who he picks for AG.'
Yes.
Am hoping it's Stephen Miller.
'Ms. Gabbard is not hot. She is conventionally attractive. There IS a difference. Books have been written about this.'
Yes.
When WaPo or NYTs publishes an article about Trump and includes the phrase "someone familiar with his...", it means they are just making up bullshit in order to create a column and pretend they know what they are talking about. They do this in order to form opinions and then gauge how well they did by the feedback received. Notice they don't say "someone who has spoken to the former President on the issue". They can't. No one who is close to Trump will give them the time of day.
Not that it matters qualification-wise, of course, but the "hot" Tulsi subject was broached. So, what Joe Bar said. And, just for a kicker, pizza face is not generally considered to be "hot."
Joe Rogan was quite smitten with Tulsi.
Plot twist!
Judge Merchan notifies parties in NYC Trump case of Facebook comment boasting of conviction before verdict. Apparently someone posted to the FB page on the day before the jury's verdict that their cousin was on the jury and Trump WOULD be convicted. A mistrial should have been declared immediately.
Tulsi is, indeed, hot in the league she plays in. The bar is not very high.
What is funny to me is one week past "TRUMP IS A FELON!" and everyone is back to speculating on his VP pick as if the New York trial never happened. That is how important anyone actually sees that trial as.
"In your scenario, it does not matter which party controls the House. The president is not elected by majority vote of House members. Each state delegation gets one vote, so the determining factor is how many state delegations are controlled be either party. IIRC, currently Rs have 26 states and that is unlikely to change."
I understood how it works when it goes to the House, but if you have a few turncoats in a closely divided delegation, it can mean the Democrats can come up with a majority, and they get it anyway with the election.
'Judge Merchan notifies parties in NYC Trump case of Facebook comment boasting of conviction before verdict. Apparently someone posted to the FB page on the day before the jury's verdict that their cousin was on the jury and Trump WOULD be convicted. A mistrial should have been declared immediately.'
Looks like pure bullshit to me...
J.D. Vance is much more valuable as a Senator than as a VP. So, eliminate him as a possible VP choice. Nikki and Di Santis are disloyal and really eGOP Bush'ers so eliminate them. Tim Scott is a boat anchor this year; he probably couldn't carry North Carolina in November. Huckabee Sanders doesn't have enough weight for a national election. Gabbard might help, but she's really a D. So is Ford. Pompeo is better as SoS; also need a great AG for DoJ.
I suggest a smart, wise and tough House Rep who can hold the reins of the Senate and campaign strongly. It's time to stop tokenising the VP. No more women, blacks, or other vaporous minorities. No more DIE. Only merit counts in the Executive Branch.
"No more DIE. Only merit counts in the Executive Branch."
Byron Donalds seems pretty sharp and has a financial background.
And he's young.
Don't know how the Florida thing would shake out...
John Henry
Nixon was a Senator??? Who knew??
Patrick,
You got me. I had to go look.
But I did know. According to Wikipedia, nixon was a us senator from dec 50 to Jan 53
John Henry
Whoever is chosen for VP, you can bet the Democrats and their lackeys in the press will immediately start rumors of Trump’s forgetfulness, unfitness for office. They will prey upon the ambitions of the VP and start to tempt him/her to undermine Trump. Which is why my choice for VP is Ric Grenell. Loyal, smart, with (I think) a lot of support from the good guys/gals within the DC bureaucracy. And with no Presidential ambitions. Not sure how many votes Grenell brings to the campaign but I don’t know how much Pence helped in 2016 or 2020.
John Henry,
Bzzzzzzt! Foul!!!
Two penalty turns...
You are usually more careful that this -- The President is commander-in-chief of the armed forces, and head of the Executive Branch of the federal government...
But he does not, Not, NOT "run the country"! Good Lord...
Byron Donald's. He's articulate (not to mention clean!), he might help with black voters, and he's MAGA enough to serve as assassination insurance. Haley and DeSantis are disloyal GOPe suck ups (so disappointed in DeSantis); Burgum, Scott, and Rubio are GOPe suck ups too, just less obvious; Vance is needed in the Senate; Tulsa is good on some issues, but if I were Trump I would not count on her as serving as effective assassination insurance; Noem lied in her memoir about meeting the NK dictator and is a dog murderer to boot; Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Stefanik, and Cotton might by okay. Carson is too quiet. Did I miss anyone?
How did we get from this on May 24th:
CNN
—
Former President Donald Trump said Thursday he believes Nikki Haley will be “on our team in some form,” weighing in for the first time on the former South Carolina governor’s announcement a day earlier that she’d be voting for him.
Asked by a News 12 reporter at his Bronx rally whether there is “room for her on your team, or better yet, your ticket,” Trump replied, “I think she’s gonna be on our team, because we have a lot of the same ideas, the same thoughts. I appreciated what she said, you know, we had a nasty campaign. It was pretty nasty, but she’s a very capable person, and I’m sure she’s going to be on our team in some form. Absolutely.”
To this:
“She’s a very disloyal person,” Trump said, according to attendees [at a recent fundraiser]. He then complained that she backed Marco Rubio in 2016 even after he asked for her endorsement and that she had been disloyal repeatedly to him since. “You have to like the person you’re running with, and I don’t like her. I don’t like her.
@Gadfly
I've pointed out numerous times in various contexts that the first person to label Ronald Reagan's supply-side tax cut proposals 'voodoo economics' in 1980 was George HW Bush. He then went on to serve eight years as Reagan's VP and likely owes his (and W's) elevation to the Presidency to standing on Reagan's shoulders.
Donald Trump may bluster and hyperbole but his views and actions as President would not have been out of place at a meeting of the Democrat Leadership Council in the 1990s.
The only mental illness in evidence around here is your Trump Derangement Syndrome.
What this really calls out, for is an Althouse Online Poll, the VP Sweepstakes!
Candidates:
JD Vance
Elise Stefanik
Doug Burgum
Tulsi Gabbard
Tim Scott
Sarah Huckabee Sanders
Vivek Ramaswamy
Nikki Haley
Rick Grenell
Marco Rubio
None of the Above
Vance is too far to the right. He’s very divisive here in Ohio. Think Charles Lindberg, but less masculine, more bitter, and propped up by wealthy donors.
I don’t think Trump would pick Vance. That would just galvanize the opposition, and might not even help deliver Ohio.
paulr said...
Vance is too far to the right. He’s very divisive here in Ohio.
--
There's a former pol in Ohio whose Dad was a mail-zir!
Post a Comment