Or just freeze her out, or impeach her. Same thing.
Do you know something about Amy Coney Barrett that we don’t?
Here’s a crazy idea: have the delegates at the convention select the VP.
Speaking of which, I wonder if there is going to be any sort of “grass roots” campaign to nominate somebody. If there are two or more candidates that have the support of a plurality of the delegates of at least five states, then they have to go through the roll call vote - oh, wait, this is the Republican Party we are talking about (the party that, when Mitt Romney was nominated in 2012, somehow all votes for any other candidates were mysteriously ignored by the secretary of the convention); what would probably happen is, there would be a call to suspend the rules and nominate Trump’s choice by acclamation, and of course the ayes would prevail.
A not-crazy idea:
So the crazies are out, which crosses most mentioned in this thread off the list. The only thing DJT wants his veep to be crazy about is him.
Trump is a smart man who plays a dumb one on TV. Elise is his smart pick if winning is important to him, as it is.
That does make some sense. I don’t for a minute believe Trump cares one bit about abortion beyond playing to his base. I can see how he would want to minimize the noise on abortion and drown it out with immigration. If he thinks abortion is the weakness on his side he’s not going to pick someone extreme on that issue.
Unwavering loyalty to him and winning are equally important to him. The actual issues are relatively unimportant.
[quote=“PhillyGuy, post:164, topic:996511, full:true”/]
Trump is a smart man who plays a dumb one on TV. [/quote]
Come on, what evidence of intelligence has he ever shown? His one life skill is conning the rubes. His intellect is non-existent.
I’d suggest “cunning” over “smart.”
Back on January 22 in post #16 of this thread I said:
So not really a new idea.
I’m a liberal, and and Mitt says Katie Britt’s the veep pick I’m most afraid of:
Thr one I’m most afraid of is Noem. She’s very conservative and anti-Ukraine, even by today’s GOP standards, and Trump elevating her makes high risk for her being president one day. She would slightly harm Trump’s chances in November, due to abortion extremism, but not enough to prevent him from winning.
Remember, he likes “central casting.” He’d pick the person he considers “hot” enough.
Yeah, Pence’s amorous gaze was almost smouldering.
Trump’s looksist statements are off the charts compared to anything we are going to see here in the event that DJT picks a woman for veep. And his radical disrespect for women doesn’t hurt him much.
However, Democrats get judged on a different scale. While I normally think nothing we say here influences the real world, I wonder if comments on veep looks could be an exception. IMHO, the GOP will publicize whatever Biden supporters say about a Trump pick’s looks, positive or negative. After the pick, I will not want to make such discussion even more voluminous than it will be, so I will say now – discussing the looks of female Republican candidates makes Democrats who are otherwise feminist appear to be nasty hypocrites and thus hurts our cause (besides being a mistake for normal feminist reasons).
NBC News has a story on who he won’t pick.
Here’s why Trump could pick Marjorie Taylor Greene as his running mate
I do not buy the loyalty part because can trust no one outside his family to remain loyal. As for someone like Stefanik or Scott highlighting his weaknesses by being more articulate — maybe.
If Trump is really afraid of being removed from office once back in the White House, MTG makes sense. But I think he plans to use the power of the presidency to prevent that.
Picking MTG as his running mate would guarantee a massive Biden landslide in the EC. Purely anecdotal but I know a couple dozen very conservative evangelical types in a number of states who can’t stand her and would never vote for a ticket with her on it. Not gonna happen.
I agree she would lose Trump votes. That’s why he probably will go with someone who can be sold as being no more extreme than he is.
A point of comparison is Sarah Palin:
Sarah Palin cost John McCain 2 million votes in 2008, according to a study
That is less than 2 percent. In our current polarized era, a bit less than 2 percent could easily be the margin of victory. But the way I look at the polls, he would still have a reasonable chance of victory.
Also, Trump, just by being Trump, already has lost most of the votes of those still-living among the 2 million 2008 moderate voters turned off by Palin. Despite your anecdotes, I think that Trump’s loss from having a far-far-right running mate would be less.
So if Trump is really scared of being taken out of the White House in handcuffs to go to a Georgia prison, maybe letting John Roberts know that MTG is the alternative would be worth it. Hard to say.
I think this is relevant to the thread, since Trump will not want to pick someone very conservative evangelicals cannot stand.
Is there a specific reason why they put her in a different category from Trump?
Not that I know other than for evangelicals a loudmouth female is more objectionable than a loudmouth male.
And full disclosure, several of these people have told me they voted for DJT twice but never again. I mentioned it in another thread but my brother and SIL told me they are considering RFK Jr. Because they live in TX I’m not going to argue since a vote there for RFK is a vote NOT for DJT. No clue how that translates nationally.
The word “her” is reason enough for those evangelicals who believe women are forbidden to have authority over men. Some apply that only to the church context, but others don’t think it’s so limited. The fact that that ship sailed on the civil side with women judges over 100 years ago doesn’t seem to faze them. 