Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Trump’s VP Pick
Picking a running mate will be one of the most significant signals Donald Trump will give the electorate, and it’ll be a crucial moment to his path to victory in November. According to the Washington Post, the speculation is he’s vetting Governor Chris Christie, Newt Gingrich, and Senators Jeff and Bob Corker.
Sens. Richard Burr (N.C.), Tom Cotton (Ark.), and John Thune (S.D.) have also been bandied about in Trump Tower as options. Sen. Joni Ernst (Iowa) and Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin, who previously served in the House, are two of the leading women in the mix.
The only outright blunder would be Christie, who is wrong for many reasons, not least of which is that he’s another Northeastern bully (we need just one, thank you), he has horrifically bad political instincts (cheerleading the Dallas Cowboys in Philadelphia Eagles’ stadiums, hugging Barack Obama, overeating …), and is now widely seen as a joke and a toady.
Trump needs to reassure wavering Republicans that he’s serious and basically on their team, and could use some help with the game of inside politics and legislation. He also needs someone who will not get cold feet nor give the GOPe an incentive to impeach him so as to have “their man” (Corker?) inherit the presidency. A woman would be okay and might help a little with female voters, though it might also look weak in a way, and the two women cited aren’t exactly legislative masterminds.
Of those mentioned, I’d pick Gingrich, since he meets most of the criteria I cited. I’m sure I’m missing various aspects and possibilities. Your thoughts?
Published in General
Ann Coulter, if Sarah Palin won’t do. We need a VP example of someone who demonstrates it’s okay to abandon conservatism.
This is an overstatement. The essence of the “never crowd” (of which I am not one) is that they will not vote for Trump. That is not rewriting the rules anymore than is running a third party candidate. Attempting to supplant Trump at the convention (rewriting the rules) is the goal of some to be sure, but it not a correct characterization of the never Trumpers to whom I’ve been exposed. The real problem between the two camps is whether one buys into the “lesser of two evils” argument.
Wow! Libertarians are elitist? I haven’t heard that one before.
I just listened to a fascinating interview Sen. Jeff Sessions gave to Glenn Thrush of Politico. If you really want to know where Trump is coming from from a man who totally understands him, this is where to start. Sessions is a very effective spokesman for him and is respected in the Senate.
I’ve long thought that Condoleezza Rice would be an excellent fit for the spot. She is extremely competent and it would destroy so many media narratives being built, plus as a former Bush administration alumn it would cause all the right people’s heads to explode.
God bless Newt – a good patriot, but he’s part of the old establishment, I am hoping Trump goes with someone younger and possibly a woman or minority – no to Christie – if he wants to attract younger, more versatile voters – instead of looking like the old white guys ticket (sorry – but it won’t stand up to a two woman ticket on Democrat side) and that’s where we are, politically speaking nowadays……
Hoyacon
This is an overstatement. The essence of the “never crowd” (of which I am not one) is that they will not vote for Trump. That is not rewriting the rules anymore than is running a third party candidate. Attempting to supplant Trump at the convention (rewriting the rules) is the goal of some to be sure, but it not a correct characterization of the never Trumpers to whom I’ve been exposed. The real problem between the two camps is whether one buys into the “lesser of two evils” argument.
But it seems that many Trump fans aren’t even satisfied with people who say Trump is the lesser of two evils. We must defend him and his daily changing positions as the best ever.
Why not pick a Mexican judge, like Alberto Gonzales?
Yeah that’s an odd one.
But Trump is building a wall. He will be biased against him!
Only is the person wears a blue dress.
I could see Fallin. Woman, not too big a star to turn it down, Washington experience, executive experience, pro-life credentials, heartland background, no record of Trump criticism.
Who was John C. Fremont’s running mate in 1856?
I have no idea, and I’m not going to bother to check.
It turned not to matter too much in the grand sweep.
History grinds on, and echoing what Franco said in #20, I think the GOP establishment with its nevertrump fringe is already history.
That party, with its open border extremism, its insane advocacy of so-called free trade, and its bitter-clinger love of globalism beyond all reason or sanity, is dead dead dead.
I get the sense that the nevertrumpers think that all they have to do is hold their breath for a little while, and the nightmare will be over. They’ll help Hillary win, and then they can work together to stuff the genie back in the bottle.
Nope. As evidence, I not only note the fact that Donld Trump is the party’s nominee, or that Eric Cantor was crushed- but also that Randy Forbes lost his primary fight to a Trump-praising ex-Navy SEAL.
The GOPe is disintegrating, bit by bit, like a tree cut off from its roots- or perhaps more accurately, like a political party cutoff from its grassroots, ha ha.
It’s not coming back.
Anyway, I support Jeff Sessions for VP.
I think it is in the nature of political junkies to overestimate the importance of picking a running mate. A catastrophically bad choice does the candidate some harm, but good choices rarely seem to help. This election will be about Trump or Clinton, and no one will be looking to the lower half of either ticket for a tiebreaker of some kind.
I do think it would be interesting to see how social conservatives would feel about a Trump-Gingrich ticket. Has any presidential ticket ever sported a total of six marriages?
As a #NeverTrumper I find this whole discussion like arguing over whether aspirin, Tylenol or Ibuprofin would help ease the victim’s pain more effectively. Meanwhile we are all standing around watching Trump treat our values, our party and our country’s future like Kitty Genovese, when there is still a chance to intervene and stop him.
Absolutely. This president has overseen the biggest lurch to the left since LBJ.
I would agree that VP influence is generally overblown, but in this case it will be sending a signal. And Trump’s actions and real, irreversible signals would actually mean something. As a semi-reluctant supporter (I will explain that sometime maybe but not now) I recognize that he sends some mixed signals.
Now to the juicy part.
JFK had one wife. MLK had one wife. Denny Hastert. He had one wife too didn’t he? Bill Clinton = one wife. (it’s not really fair to include JFK and MLK here because their lives were cut short and they didn’t have the same time to descend into debauchery as Newt and Donald did)
Ronald Reagan, uh oh, two wives… getting close to unelectable!
Then it doesn’t matter at all does it? Limiting damage consists of what general strategy, Hillary Clinton? Why don’t you start trying to influence her SCOTUS picks on HuffPo? I’m sure they will give your opinions a good hearing.
In retrospect the past three Republican Presidents have each had at least one miss, so there’s that…Maybe the dartboard method is as good as any. Harriet Meirs much?
This conversation isn’t about beating Trump to death. There are plenty other places you can do that. We are discussing who we think should be his VP pick.
Once upon a time I had an aunt who had been married five times. It really annoyed me, but she tried to reassure me that it was only because she was a very moral person and didn’t believe in sex outside of marriage. I think Elizabeth Taylor made a similar remark about her seven marriages. :-)
Please go bash Trump elsewhere. There are some serious people on here who would like to have a calm discussion about the various possibilities for vice president.
So, who would you like to see as vice president?
There is a trend right now to pretty much agree with Trump on rethinking, not destroying NAFTA. Brexit is one reason NAFTA needs to have a bight light aimed at it. Even Hillary has discussed it. I would imagine all the potential vice presidents would agree on that one.
Jeff Sessions, James Mattis, and Jim Webb would make excellent VP candidates.
It’s easier to remember William Henry Harrison’s, Taylor’s, Lincoln’s, Garfield’s, McKinley’s, Harding’s, FDR’s, and JFK’s.
This is undoubtedly true of some NeverTrumpers, though even those who I know who believe Clinton will be less harmful than Trump are hardly enthusiastic. Speaking for myself, “existential dread either way” about sums up my feelings regarding next January.
You write that as if Eric Cantor’s loss were greatly bemoaned around here by us pearl-clutching #NeverTrumps. As it happens, the most recent post mentioning him was lampooning his endorsement of Jeb Bush by none other than #NeverTrump Jon Gabriel.
As for Randy Forbes, I confess I’d never heard of him until he lost the primary and I’m hardly upset about the matter. I don’t know much about Scott Taylor, other than he served his country in the armed forces and has some ideas about Trump and trade I disagree with.
More generally, I think you’re wrong that the #NeverTrump movement is comprised solely of GOPe; most of the GOPe has endorsed Trump at this point, albeit not willingly. Put it down to my bubble if you want, but I know several local Tea Party leaders who are staunchly #NeverTrump.
To be clear, I don’t deny the existence of the GOPe* or its (often) bad influence. I saw what they did to my father when he ran for Congress in 2002, and it left me with a low opinion of their exclusive, inbred little club that kept genuine talent out of office.
* Though I think it might be better to write it plural; there are several GOP establishments.
Trump called NAFTA “the worst” trade deal in U.S. history. Gingrich has (had) been a longtime NAFTA booster, and was instrumental in its passage. I’m willing to buy that Gingrich is rethinking his position, but I doubt that it’s out of principle.
Thank you. Amen.
Well said. This is what I deduced from the primaries — that they just DID NOT trust the rank and file people to carry out this battle. I’m a Cruz person, too, but I want to give the people credit for sussing things out pretty well. They really did choose the single guy who has already done more than everybody else put together. Trump hits Hillary where she’s is weakest and for some reason the other candidates were warned off this rough talk.
McCain had a free ticket to White House with that Jeremiah Wright story and I simply couldn’t believe he would throw it away and by doing so tell us that he didn’t want the job after all. He is such a foolish man in so many ways it’s hard to count them. He’s a sucker — they played him.