I think even he’d know enough to pick someone the public likes this time around.
Again, I don’t think she has that much support with the general public, and no one would consider putting her one heartbeat away from the presidency. He needs to pick somebody popular, but not more likable than himself.
Truml doesn’t care about your polls or your memes. Those are all “fake” in his mind. The only reason he would try to dump Vance is if he thought Vance was “disloyal” to him.
Right now, in Trump’s mind, Vance is doing flawlessly - he’s praising Trump every chance he gets and being his attack dog.
I think at some point soon he may use Vance as the scapegoat for why he’s not doing better, filling up venues, etc.
What do you mean he’s not filling venues? That’s fake.
You’re thinking like a sane person. You can’t do that if you want to understand Trump.
Sure, but Greene IS popular with Trump’s base–and he’s already shown that he likes catering to the base and dislikes having to think about any other group of voters.
I’d add to your list of “popular” and “not more likable than himself”—Able to grab headlines AND turn all attention back to Trump.
If discarding Vance and choosing Greene or Gym Jordan or Marco Rubio would accomplish all that, Donald would go there. The amount of attention being paid to Donald as of today is INSUFFICIENT.
I don’t doubt that Donald manages to argue away the validity of polls he doesn’t like----but he DOES pay attention to polls. They matter a lot to him and he cares plenty about looking good in them. One data point:
He clearly knows and understands he’s not filling up venues, that’s why he obsesses over Kamala out-filling him. At some point he’ll have to blame someone.
Yeah, but literally everybody who would vote for MTG is already voting for trump. She adds nothing.
The same was true of the Vance pick, wasn’t it?
The more sinister shadow on this discussion is the GOP plan to install Donald as President via messing with the local election returns, leaving neither candidate with 270 Electoral College votes and thereby throwing the election to the House (which will vote by state delegation, meaning a GOP win).
In other words, it doesn’t matter WHO Trump’s VP pick might be.
Does he?
Again, that is not the law. There is no magic “270” number. That’s misinformation. The law is that one candidate has to get a majority of the votes, and any votes that aren’t certified lower the number needed for the majority.
To force a vote to the House, you either need a tie or for a third candidate to get enough votes nobody has the lead.
This has been brought up and debunked numerous times on this board. And it has nothing to do with the VP candidate.
What has been brought up and debunked?
Obviously my summary used “270” NOT as a “magic number” but as shorthand for ‘a majority of the Electoral College votes.’ If a supposed claim that 270 is a “magic number” is what you think you’ve “debunked,” you are wrong.
Try again. And in the meantime:
^From the Sabato article linked in my post–well worth a read.
Additionally:
For election officials to pull these shenanigans would indeed be illegal in many states as of today–but as we’ve seen with the example of Georgia, creative Republicans are finding ways around that illegality. And we see not only Trump but Mike Johnson encouraging this by spreading the lies about supposedly rampant non-citizen voting.
The Twelfth Amendment states that, “The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed. . .”
There are still unsettled question how it’s determined what constitutes “the whole number of Electors appointed.” If Congress at the January 6 electoral count rejects a state’s electors, do they still count as having been “appointed?”
But that wasn’t known at the time. He wasn’t seen as a total creep with a couch obsession, just a toadie.
He knows that’s not true. That’s him lying to his public to save face.
I don’t know that it’s worth arguing over. To prove one side or another we’d need cites from right-wing venues in which, when the pick was announced, people said things like ‘good on Trump for not going Latino or Female, he doesn’t need Those People’s votes anyway.’ Or possibly cites to mainstream pundits who noted that Trump could have attempted to broaden his coalition with a candidate that would appeal to moderates or such, but instead went with the ultra-MAGA choice (Vance).
Meh.
You’re right, we’ve wasted too many brain cells on them already.
No. They don’t.
Determination of majority.—
If the number of electors lawfully appointed by any State pursuant to a certificate of ascertainment of appointment of electors that is issued under section 5 is fewer than the number of electors to which the State is entitled under section 3, or if an objection the grounds for which are described in subsection (d)(2)(B)(ii)(I) has been sustained, the total number of electors appointed for the purpose of determining a majority of the whole number of electors appointed as required by the Twelfth Amendment to the Constitution shall be reduced by the number of electors whom the State has failed to appoint or as to whom the objection was sustained.
I’ve posted this multiple times on the board. If any votes aren’t certified they just reduce the majority.
I’m still not sure what this has to do with JD Vance or any theoretical replacement.
Yeah. (Late in the day though it is here, I think I Need Coffee…wonder where that idea came from… )
And somehow this makes a tie impossible? 
I brought this up in connection with this thread’s topic–who Trump’s VP pick is. My point was that with the GOP’s plans for throwing the election to the House, it doesn’t matter a whit whether Trump retains Vance or throws him overboard in favor of the Pharma Bro.
I would suggest we take this discussion to the thread I believe is most relevant:
(If there’s a better thread, let me know.)
I stand corrected – I see that this was one of the updates to the Electoral Count Act that were passed by Congress in 2022. You’re doing yeoman’s work in posting this multiple times on the board.