Republican Vice-President

[highnote]

Who do you think will be the Republican Vice-President?

Bettors currently make Kasich the favorite.

[Dave Schwartz]

Try these guys - they're deadly. (https://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/graphs/graph_RCONV16.cfm)

ANd here's the Dem side (https://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/graphs/graph_DCONV16.cfm)


Oops. You said VICE-President. Sorry.

[zico20]

Who do you think will be the Republican Vice-President?

Bettors currently make Kasich the favorite.

It won't be Kasich. This has already been discussed. He doesn't want it and says he would be horrible as the VP. I don't think it will be anyone who ran for president. Everyone is calling everyone a liar. That would be easy pickings for the democratic candidate to use in TV commercials.

[highnote]

Does anyone have a prediction on who will be the Republican running mate?

[ReplayRandall]

Does anyone have a prediction on who will be the Republican running mate?

SC Gov. Nikki Haley.....

[zico20]

I know who I would like to see as the VP. None other than the current governor of the great state of Nevada. Brian Sandoval. He is very popular there and is obviously pro gambling. :jump:

[dkithore]

How about Paul Ryan? There is your establishment and deal making angle. Trump would benefit more by a woman who may be black (e.g. C. Rice) and or Hispanic to consolidate voting base. just a thought.

[dkithore]

SC Gov. Nikki Haley.....
She kicked Trump in the teeth the other day.

[barahona44]

How about Paul Ryan? There is your establishment and deal making angle. Trump would benefit more by a woman who may be black (e.g. C. Rice) and or Hispanic to consolidate voting base. just a thought.
Ryan's already been to this rodeo.A lot of this depends on who the nominee is.Trump, if it's him, will pick some safe,bland governor, who looks reassuring on TV.Donald, is after all the star of the show and no one is allowed to upstage him. If it's one of the traditional candidates like Rubio or Kasich, they may go in a different direction and pick someone less connected with the Establishment

[_______]

The last time Republican's chose a non-establishment nominee, the VP choice was a undistinguished six term congressman no one outside his district ever heard of before the choice.

William Miller was the first, and until Paul Ryan, only Catholic nominee for the executive branch by the Republican Party.

I would be surprised if any "name" Republican agrees to play second fiddle to a loose cannon. I know others here think ambition will overcome any hesitation they might feel but that comes from a viewpoint that the Trump candidacy isn't going to be a disaster. I don't share that point of view and I think anyone interested in running for President in 2020 won't want the albatross of having to agree with everything Trump says between now and November around their neck.

[Marshall Bennett]

SC Gov. Nikki Haley.....
You're joking right? :lol:

[barahona44]

The last time Republican's chose a non-establishment nominee, the VP choice was a undistinguished six term congressman no one outside his district ever heard of before the choice.

William Miller was the first, and until Paul Ryan, only Catholic nominee for the executive branch by the Republican Party.

I would be surprised if any "name" Republican agrees to play second fiddle to a loose cannon. I know others here think ambition will overcome any hesitation they might feel but that comes from a viewpoint that the Trump candidacy isn't going to be a disaster. I don't share that point of view and I think anyone interested in running for President in 2020 won't want the albatross of having to agree with everything Trump says between now and November around their neck.
Well put,especially the part about those candidates with 2020 vision. :) As I said earlier, he will pick someone reassuring as Trump is the most polarizing legitimate candidate in many moons.
As for William Miller, his daughter Stephanie hosts a syndicated radio show and ironically,given her father's connection to Goldwater, she's quite far left as you could possibly be on national broadcasting.

[reckless]

I will again offer the two best and logical GOP choices for Vice President -- Rick Perry of Texas, and Scott Walker of Wisconsin. Of course, Perry is out if Ted Cruz wins, but a Cruz win seems unlikely at this time.

Both Perry and Walker are strong leaders and successful governors, and just like Trump, proven winners. Perry is the most successful governor in Texas history, and Walker took on the left-wing lunatics in Wisconsin and beat their butts each and every time.

Finally, each also offer a perfect balance off-setting both Donald Trump's liberal views and New York residence.

[xtb]

In an interview with George Snuffaluffagus last year, Trump said that Oprah would be a "perfect fit" as his running mate

[fast4522]

I will again offer the two best and logical GOP choices for Vice President -- Rick Perry of Texas, and Scott Walker of Wisconsin. Of course, Perry is out if Ted Cruz wins, but a Cruz win seems unlikely at this time.

Both Perry and Walker are strong leaders and successful governors, and just like Trump, proven winners. Perry is the most successful governor in Texas history, and Walker took on the left-wing lunatics in Wisconsin and beat their butts each and every time.

Finally, each also offer a perfect balance off-setting both Donald Trump's liberal views and New York residence.

How I see it are there are two scenarios:

A.) The brokered convention
B.) The clear winner, mandated criteria.

As ReplayRandall noted in another thread all six leaving SC intact headed to the SEC contests would favor scenario A.) with those good as any personality's, or scenario B.) someone brings something to the table and was selected because they got close to the nomination and just lost, or is a younger good pick or both.

[fast4522]

In an interview with George Snuffaluffagus last year, Trump said that Oprah would be a "perfect fit" as his running mate

More like he was lowering expectations for the effect of his roll out.

[reckless]

How I see it are there are two scenarios:

A.) The brokered convention
B.) The clear winner, mandated criteria.

As ReplayRandall noted in another thread all six leaving SC intact headed to the SEC contests would favor scenario A.) with those good as any personality's, or scenario B.) someone brings something to the table and was selected because they got close to the nomination and just lost, or is a younger good pick or both.

I am not so sure the GOP candidates all leave SC intact. While it is probable that some candidates should drop out after SC they probably won't. (Bush, Kasich, Carson come to mind.)

I see the Top 4 in SC primary as Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Bush.

Of the Top 4 Jeb Bush almost needs to be 1-2. If not, he should go.

While finishing 2nd is basically OK, Ted Cruz just might need to win outright. And if he's worse than 2nd... that could prove disastrous for him.

Marco Rubio could probably gain the most in SC, following his horrible week in NH. A close 2nd or 3rd helps Rubio more than almost any other candidate. But a bad 3rd, or worst, finish could doom him too.

Rubio could also be a VP pick for Trump.... The Donald could sell him as a smart young guy who would benefit by being Veep while learning a thing or two on the national scene. I do think that Walker and Perry helps Trump more then they do any other GOP contender.

That said, I do not think the current field is VP material. The winner should pick someone not in the fray. After all the nasty debates, a face not bruised and bloodied will be most welcomed.

[Racey]

votes for the bottom of the ticket.....it really has little factor with the outcome.

[highnote]

votes for the bottom of the ticket.....it really has little factor with the outcome.


Sarah Palin might be the exception to your statement.

[fast4522]

I am not so sure the GOP candidates all leave SC intact. While it is probable that some candidates should drop out after SC they probably won't. (Bush, Kasich, Carson come to mind.)

I see the Top 4 in SC primary as Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Bush.

Of the Top 4 Jeb Bush almost needs to be 1-2. If not, he should go.

While finishing 2nd is basically OK, Ted Cruz just might need to win outright. And if he's worse than 2nd... that could prove disastrous for him.

Marco Rubio could probably gain the most in SC, following his horrible week in NH. A close 2nd or 3rd helps Rubio more than almost any other candidate. But a bad 3rd, or worst, finish could doom him too.

Rubio could also be a VP pick for Trump.... The Donald could sell him as a smart young guy who would benefit by being Veep while learning a thing or two on the national scene. I do think that Walker and Perry helps Trump more then they do any other GOP contender.

That said, I do not think the current field is VP material. The winner should pick someone not in the fray. After all the nasty debates, a face not bruised and bloodied will be most welcomed.


I tend to lean with Racey, the top of the ticket are who gets the votes. Because of that Nikki Haley would make a fine VP, and I could agree with ReplayRandall at the same time. Unless Marco Rubio starts winning and just gets beat and becomes a complement to the ticket as in history past.

[Racey]

McCain had no shot against Obama......

[Marshall Bennett]

Christie would be my choice. Whether or not it would help Trumps chances at getting elected are shaky. Of the remainders, I'm not sure any of them would be anymore favorable if forced to take over as president.

[highnote]

Christie would be my choice. Whether or not it would help Trumps chances at getting elected are shaky. Of the remainders, I'm not sure any of them would be anymore favorable if forced to take over as president.


Christie is a liability. He is not popular enough.

If Rubio somehow wins the nomination he will pick Haley. That's probably why Haley threw her support his way and why she did not endorse Bush. She knew Bush was dead.

The key to the presidency is Ohio.

Kasich of Ohio will get serious consideration as VP and it's why he's the favorite to become VP in the betting markets.

Democrat Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio could also be a choice of Clinton or Sanders.

Ohio is a must win. Putting an Ohio politician on the ticket would increase the chances of winning.

[don]

I see where they say that Bush's followers will go to Rubio because he's also a Floridian.

Isn't that going against what Bush wanted? Didn't he always try to prove that Rubio didn't do his job as Senator?

Boy! Trump sure made it look easy last night.

[highnote]

How about Newt Gingrich as Trump's running mate?

[PaceAdvantage]

How about Newt Gingrich as Trump's running mate?How about no chance in hell?

[highnote]

How about no chance in hell?


Newt seems to like Trump. He's been tweeting positive things about him. What would be bad about Newt as a running mate?

I think Kasich would be better, but Newt knows his way around D.C. Maybe Newt is angling for a cabinet position?

[PaceAdvantage]

Newt seems to like Trump. He's been tweeting positive things about him. What would be bad about Newt as a running mate?

I think Kasich would be better, but Newt knows his way around D.C. Maybe Newt is angling for a cabinet position?If you're positioning yourself as the "anti-establishment" outsider...you couldn't pick anybody more inside and more connected than Gingrich as a running mate. I don't think it would sit too well with Trump's base of supporters.

Makes a nice balance, you would think...but...and then there's the fact that a lot of people don't like Gingrich, and Trump apparently has some likability issues himself... :lol:

He needs somebody more conservative...likable...and a somewhat outside but not too far outside the inner-circle of Washington. Probably a governor. Kasich would be perfect except he's not conservative enough.

Paul Ryan would probably be a decent pick, but he's already proven he's a bit of a bore and he lost last time...and he's really not outside at all.

I'm not too sure who might fit the bill I just set forth.

[barahona44]

If you're positioning yourself as the "anti-establishment" outsider...you couldn't pick anybody more inside and more connected than Gingrich as a running mate. I don't think it would sit too well with Trump's base of supporters.

Makes a nice balance, you would think...but...and then there's the fact that a lot of people don't like Gingrich, and Trump apparently has some likability issues himself... :lol:

He needs somebody more conservative...likable...and a somewhat outside but not too far outside the inner-circle of Washington. Probably a governor. Kasich would be perfect except he's not conservative enough.

Paul Ryan would probably be a decent pick, but he's already proven he's a bit of a bore and he lost last time...and he's really not outside at all.

I'm not too sure who might fit the bill I just set forth.
Mitch Daniels, the former governor of Indiana, would be a good fit for Trump He has a solid conservative record, is blandly reassuring on TV and doesn't seem to harbor future presedential plans as he seemed to a few years back. (I think anyone with future GOP Prez ambitions will steer clear of being the Donald's coat holder).The problem with Daniels is that he currently is president of Purdue University and he seems to have little interest in leaving that job.

[Stillriledup]

If you're positioning yourself as the "anti-establishment" outsider...you couldn't pick anybody more inside and more connected than Gingrich as a running mate. I don't think it would sit too well with Trump's base of supporters.

Makes a nice balance, you would think...but...and then there's the fact that a lot of people don't like Gingrich, and Trump apparently has some likability issues himself... :lol:

He needs somebody more conservative...likable...and a somewhat outside but not too far outside the inner-circle of Washington. Probably a governor. Kasich would be perfect except he's not conservative enough.

Paul Ryan would probably be a decent pick, but he's already proven he's a bit of a bore and he lost last time...and he's really not outside at all.

I'm not too sure who might fit the bill I just set forth.

Cory booker. ;)

[rastajenk]

I sort of remember seeing something about Newt being Chief of Staff.

[HuggingTheRail]

I'll go off the board.....Pete Rose :lol:

[Redboard]

She kicked Trump in the teeth the other day.

I don't think that will matter. The GOP is going to see the writing on the wall and realize that Trump is the peoples choice and they can't do anything about it without spliting tbe part in half.
They will have a great kumbaiya, let bygones be byegones, and all band together to defeat hillary, the great evil. You'll hear statements like "Donald is a little vulgar but so was Andrew Jackson." yada yada yada. And Trump will compromise in the back rooms with them, anybody would.
Haley is my pick.

[azeri98]

If its Trump it will be Christie, if its Cruz, its Perry. Kasich and Rubio, not sure.

[zico20]

If its Trump it will be Christie, if its Cruz, its Perry. Kasich and Rubio, not sure.

You do realize that if Cruz picks Perry he loses Texas, don't you? Two people from the same state forfeit that states electoral votes. That is why Cheney had to switch to Wyoming to be Bush's running mate.

[horses4courses]

Y'all hate government, and are in awe of brash celebrities.
Make it the true daily double......clowns in stereo.
You know you want to.......

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CdEUsgQXIAAPnpp.jpg

[_______]

You do realize that if Cruz picks Perry he loses Texas, don't you? Two people from the same state forfeit that states electoral votes. That is why Cheney had to switch to Wyoming to be Bush's running mate.

The constitutional requirement that electors cannot vote for two candidates from their own state means that they could vote for one or the other.

They could cast their electoral vote for President but not Vice President, or vice versa, or some could vote for President and others for Vice President.

Unless the electoral vote were very close, this is unlikely to matter.

[betovernetcapper]

After much hand wringing, I'm betting on Cruz. I'm going outside the box for this one, but Michelle Malkin would be a world class VP. I just saw her CPAC speech and it was awesome.

http://michellemalkin.com/

Link to her speech

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJrfLJEB4ns

[Tom]

So horsey, you are against holding elected officials accountable?

[_______]

The constitutional requirement that electors cannot vote for two candidates from their own state means that they could vote for one or the other.

They could cast their electoral vote for President but not Vice President, or vice versa, or some could vote for President and others for Vice President.

Unless the electoral vote were very close, this is unlikely to matter.

I'm adding nothing additional to this conversation but I'm just really unhappy with the structure of my first sentence.

What I meant to say was..."The constitutional prohibition against electors casting votes for two candidates from their own state doesn't rule out their voting for one or the other."

There. Now I feel better.

[horses4courses]

So horsey, you are against holding elected officials accountable?

Next question.

Mr. Ramos.....Univision.....yes, you sir!

[Redboard]

Paddy Power

Wednesday, March 09, 2016

Chris Christie 9/4
John Kasich 9/4
Nikki Haley 7/2
Marco Rubio 4/1
Ted Cruz 8/1
Carly Fiorina 9/1
Newt Gingrich 10/1
Rob Portman 12/1
Lindsey Graham 12/1
Ben Carson 12/1
Joe Scarborough 16/1
John Thune 16/1
Mike Pence 18/1
Paul Ryan 20/1
Sarah Palin 20/1
Rudy Giuliani 20/1
Susana Martinez 25/1
Condoleezza Rice 25/1
Rand Paul 33/1
Mitt Romney 33/1
Scott Walker 33/1
Bobby Jindal 40/1
Donald Trump 40/1

Looks like a lot of people agree with me on Haley. I don’t see Trump picking an old white guy. The negative tv ads recently have affected his standing with women, so I would say that either Ben Carson or one of the females listed here would be it. Rice and Palin are too much republican establishment.

[johnhannibalsmith]

...I would say that either Ben Carson ...

I've been leaning this way myself. He covers a lot of bases for Trump. Black, evangelical, soft-spoken but undoubtedly conservative - the right contrast for a guy that takes knocks on all those fronts. And for the final kicker he's also an 'outsider' and won't alienate those that are on the Trump train for that very reason. I'd take 12-1.

[dkithore]

RED! so is HALEY - establishment.

[Stillriledup]

Paul Ryan seems like an ok price for A small bet. Donald mentioned him in yesterday's speech saying he called Paul and they had a nice conversation.

You want to try and get someone that will help you win a state like NY or Calif. is there anyone who can get Trump over the hump in either of those states?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

The issue is really who helps the candidates the most where they need it. You want someone who gives the ticket some heft, but not someone who overshadows the main candidate. Christie gives Trump no advantage in any of the potential swing states. It's essentially two guys from the same place. Perry gives Cruz no advantage, and frankly Perry couldn't keep up with Trump. Nikki Haley had already rejected Trump in South Carolina, but even considering all is forgotten when it is politically expedient, it's not a great match. I expect anybody who is considering making a run in 2020 may not want to be attached to Trump, Cruz or Hillary - that alone would probably take out Nikki Haley, Brian Sandoval, Susana Martinez, Elizabeth Warren, Rubio, Corey Booker, Paul Ryan, Andrew Cuomo, and some others.

In more modern times Vice-presidents have not fared well trying to move up. Yes, Poppy Bush did it, but Michael Dukakis was not the most powerful candidate. Nixon, Humphrey, Mondale, Gore all got beat. I don't think you can count Truman or Johnson since they were President when they ran for the office.

Bernie isn't getting the nomination, but he's making a helluva name for himself and will likely get a good spot at the convention. And for all the talk about Hillary being indicted, it's not going to happen. For Hillary I'd lead toward someone like Joaquin Castro. He's popular among the Democrats and being from Texas can't hurt. No governor jumps to mind - well maybe Malloy from Connecticut. Summer is stuck in the Senate and I can't see him helping Hillary in the general. For Trump or Cruz perhaps someone like Rick Scott or Scott Walker. Mike Pence and Asa Hutchinson also might be good choices from the current crop of governors. Considering Cruz does not have a lot of friends in the Senate, I'm not sure you can count on many choices there, but I think Mike Lee would fit with Cruz well.

It could also be an out of nowhere pick like Sarah Paiin was. Or Admiral Stockdale.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Paul Ryan seems like an ok price for A small bet. Donald mentioned him in yesterday's speech saying he called Paul and they had a nice conversation.

You want to try and get someone that will help you win a state like NY or Calif. is there anyone who can get Trump over the hump in either of those states?
Ryan is third in line for the presidency no matter who is elected, unless the house turns, and he's already tasted the bitter pill of defeat as VP candidate. He's already got enormous power. I can't imagine he accepts a nomination. I'll make him no better than 49-1 and that might be an overlay.

I've been in the room for some of those nice conversations. You never get to hear what was said after they hung up.

The Dems are already 3/5 to win California and New York. Trump would be smarter to pick someone who would help in the critical swing states like PA, OH, FL.

[reckless]

Paul Ryan seems like an ok price for A small bet. Donald mentioned him in yesterday's speech saying he called Paul and they had a nice conversation.

You want to try and get someone that will help you win a state like NY or Calif. is there anyone who can get Trump over the hump in either of those states?

Yes, SRU there's someone out there -- his name is Donald Trump.! :)

[reckless]

I am still sticking with my original two that I feel will be idea VP running mates for Donald Trump:

Rick Perry of Texas, and Scott Walker of Wisconsin.

Both proved to be two of the most successful governors in the history of their state. Perry gives Trump some ooomphf in winning Texas. And Walker makes winning Wisconsin a whole lot easier for Trump. He'll also be the soft sell to Trump's hard sell.

Trump will make points by giving the job to Perry in managing the building of the wall on the southern border. Great PR and great politics.

Walker turned back the liberal creeps in Wisconsin three times and Perry is the highest vote getter in the history of Texas. To me, and probably to me only, either of these two are obvious selections for Veep.

Once again, I need to remind people that Trump does not need Kasich to win Ohio, nor Rubio to win Florida. Nor Carly to win women voters, nor Dr. Carson for the black vote.

Nikki Haley has shown that she's simply a nitwit and not a winner. And, Trump proved big time that he doesn't need Haley, Lindsay Graham, Tim Scott or Tray Goudy to win SC. :lol:

[reckless]

Paul Ryan seems like an ok price for A small bet. Donald mentioned him in yesterday's speech saying he called Paul and they had a nice conversation.

You want to try and get someone that will help you win a state like NY or Calif. is there anyone who can get Trump over the hump in either of those states?

SRU, save your money and ignore Ryan.

Ryan was taken apart and made to look the fool in his debate with Joe Biden in 2012. If a dope such as Biden wins a debate against you, what does that make Ryan?

[Stillriledup]

SRU, save your money and ignore Ryan.

Ryan was taken apart and made to look the fool in his debate with Joe Biden in 2012. If a dope such as Biden wins a debate against you, what does that make Ryan?
Um, a fool? :D

[Stillriledup]

Ryan is third in line for the presidency no matter who is elected, unless the house turns, and he's already tasted the bitter pill of defeat as VP candidate. He's already got enormous power. I can't imagine he accepts a nomination. I'll make him no better than 49-1 and that might be an overlay.

I've been in the room for some of those nice conversations. You never get to hear what was said after they hung up.

The Dems are already 3/5 to win California and New York. Trump would be smarter to pick someone who would help in the critical swing states like PA, OH, FL.

#halvonhockey

#halvonpolitics


That makes sense to try and win swing states. Hillary didnt do so well in Michigan so you have to think Trump has a shot in Ohio because of this.

[ElKabong]

I am still sticking with my original two that I feel will be idea VP running mates for Donald Trump:

Rick Perry of Texas, and Scott Walker of Wisconsin.

Both proved to be two of the most successful governors in the history of their state. Perry gives Trump some ooomphf in winning Texas. And Walker makes winning Wisconsin a whole lot easier for Trump. He'll also be the soft sell to Trump's hard sell.

Trump will make points by giving the job to Perry in managing the building of the wall on the southern border. Great PR and great politics.

Walker turned back the liberal creeps in Wisconsin three times and Perry is the highest vote getter in the history of Texas. To me, and probably to me only, either of these two are obvious selections for Veep.

Once again, I need to remind people that Trump does not need Kasich to win Ohio, nor Rubio to win Florida. Nor Carly to win women voters, nor Dr. Carson for the black vote.

Nikki Haley has shown that she's simply a nitwit and not a winner. And, Trump proved big time that he doesn't need Haley, Lindsay Graham, Tim Scott or Tray Goudy to win SC. :lol:

Perry would get ripped in debates. Suicide choice (with Trump being a moron, go for it)

Walker is too smart to trust his career with Ladonna. Look elsewhere.

[barahona44]

The issue is really who helps the candidates the most where they need it. You want someone who gives the ticket some heft, but not someone who overshadows the main candidate. Christie gives Trump no advantage in any of the potential swing states. It's essentially two guys from the same place. Perry gives Cruz no advantage, and frankly Perry couldn't keep up with Trump. Nikki Haley had already rejected Trump in South Carolina, but even considering all is forgotten when it is politically expedient, it's not a great match. I expect anybody who is considering making a run in 2020 may not want to be attached to Trump, Cruz or Hillary - that alone would probably take out Nikki Haley, Brian Sandoval, Susana Martinez, Elizabeth Warren, Rubio, Corey Booker, Paul Ryan, Andrew Cuomo, and some others.

In more modern times Vice-presidents have not fared well trying to move up. Yes, Poppy Bush did it, but Michael Dukakis was not the most powerful candidate. Nixon, Humphrey, Mondale, Gore all got beat. I don't think you can count Truman or Johnson since they were President when they ran for the office.

Bernie isn't getting the nomination, but he's making a helluva name for himself and will likely get a good spot at the convention. And for all the talk about Hillary being indicted, it's not going to happen. For Hillary I'd lead toward someone like Joaquin Castro. He's popular among the Democrats and being from Texas can't hurt. No governor jumps to mind - well maybe Malloy from Connecticut. Summer is stuck in the Senate and I can't see him helping Hillary in the general. For Trump or Cruz perhaps someone like Rick Scott or Scott Walker. Mike Pence and Asa Hutchinson also might be good choices from the current crop of governors. Considering Cruz does not have a lot of friends in the Senate, I'm not sure you can count on many choices there, but I think Mike Lee would fit with Cruz well.

It could also be an out of nowhere pick like Sarah Paiin was. Or Admiral Stockdale.
And losing VP candidates have even a tougher time, FDR was the only losing Veep candidate (1920) to get elected President.Which supports your statement about those with White House ambitions casting a wary eye on accepting the number 2 slot.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

#halvonhockey

#halvonpolitics


That makes sense to try and win swing states. Hillary didnt do so well in Michigan so you have to think Trump has a shot in Ohio because of this.
I don't advertise it, but I worked for politicians for 18 years before I retired. And as far as hockey goes, I don't know that I've talked about it here other than mentioning an anecdote that included hockey. I did love playing though.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

And losing VP candidates have even a tougher time, FDR was the only losing Veep candidate (1920) to get elected President.Which supports your statement about those with White House ambitions casting a wary eye on accepting the number 2 slot.
You can sort of count Nixon. He was VP to Ike, lost to Kennedy in 1960 and rose like the Phoenix in '68.

[barahona44]

You can sort of count Nixon. He was VP to Ike, lost to Kennedy in 1960 and rose like the Phoenix in '68.I meant candidates who lost while running for vice president, such as Paul Ryan, Sarah Palin, John Edwards, etc.Nixon lost as a Presidential candidate but he never lost when he ran for vice president.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

I am still sticking with my original two that I feel will be idea VP running mates for Donald Trump:

Rick Perry of Texas, and Scott Walker of Wisconsin.

Both proved to be two of the most successful governors in the history of their state. Perry gives Trump some ooomphf in winning Texas. And Walker makes winning Wisconsin a whole lot easier for Trump. He'll also be the soft sell to Trump's hard sell.

Trump will make points by giving the job to Perry in managing the building of the wall on the southern border. Great PR and great politics.

Walker turned back the liberal creeps in Wisconsin three times and Perry is the highest vote getter in the history of Texas. To me, and probably to me only, either of these two are obvious selections for Veep.

Once again, I need to remind people that Trump does not need Kasich to win Ohio, nor Rubio to win Florida. Nor Carly to win women voters, nor Dr. Carson for the black vote.

Nikki Haley has shown that she's simply a nitwit and not a winner. And, Trump proved big time that he doesn't need Haley, Lindsay Graham, Tim Scott or Tray Goudy to win SC. :lol:
I think Trump wins Texas with or without Perry. It's reliably red in presidential elections. And it doesn't matter if a candidate wins a state by one vote or a million - they get all the electoral votes. As Al Gore found out, winning the popular vote doesn't mean jack. Perry doesn't help Trump in the big swing states - FL, PA, OH. The liberal creeps that Scott Walker turned back were primarily union teachers, but other unions aligned with them. Trump needs what are often referred to as "Reagan Democrats," generally white, working class folks, and Walker has alienated the unionist portion of that group. After Walker's flop of a presidential run, his approval ratings dropped below 40%, and in fact were lower than Obama's approval ratings in Wisconsin. I think Walker repels the blue collar in Midwestern swing states. I'm not saying you're wrong, but to win the general election you have to appeal to enough of the fence sitters to turn the swing states your way. You can be wildly popular with the base left or right, but you had those people from the get go. About 90% of the people reliably vote one way or the other, so it's that 10% between the two sides that will likely decide the election. For every person who would rather jump off a tall building than vote for Hillary, there's one on the other side who feels the same way about Trump. That's just the way it is. The Dems start with 217 electoral votes in reliably blue states, and the Reps start with 191 in reliably red states. The swing states are NV, CO, IA, WI, OH, PA, VA, NC, FL, and NH. I'm just not seeing either Perry or Walker as the strategic choice. Ryan (popular in Wisconsin) didn't help Romney enough in the swing states - I can't see Walker pulling Trump up any better.

[zico20]

I think Trump wins Texas with or without Perry. It's reliably red in presidential elections. And it doesn't matter if a candidate wins a state by one vote or a million - they get all the electoral votes. As Al Gore found out, winning the popular vote doesn't mean jack. Perry doesn't help Trump in the big swing states - FL, PA, OH. The liberal creeps that Scott Walker turned back were primarily union teachers, but other unions aligned with them. Trump needs what are often referred to as "Reagan Democrats," generally white, working class folks, and Walker has alienated the unionist portion of that group. After Walker's flop of a presidential run, his approval ratings dropped below 40%, and in fact were lower than Obama's approval ratings in Wisconsin. I think Walker repels the blue collar in Midwestern swing states. I'm not saying you're wrong, but to win the general election you have to appeal to enough of the fence sitters to turn the swing states your way. You can be wildly popular with the base left or right, but you had those people from the get go. About 90% of the people reliably vote one way or the other, so it's that 10% between the two sides that will likely decide the election. For every person who would rather jump off a tall building than vote for Hillary, there's one on the other side who feels the same way about Trump. That's just the way it is. The Dems start with 217 electoral votes in reliably blue states, and the Reps start with 191 in reliably red states. The swing states are NV, CO, IA, WI, OH, PA, VA, NC, FL, and NH. I'm just not seeing either Perry or Walker as the strategic choice. Ryan (popular in Wisconsin) didn't help Romney enough in the swing states - I can't see Walker pulling Trump up any better.

Great post. I do not think Perry or Walker would help Trump one bit. The one thing I would add is that the nominee has to turn out his/her base in strong numbers besides winning the majority of the 10 percent of the fence sitters. I worry that Trump has pissed off so many Rubio and Cruz supporters that they will sit this one out, and that will kill Trumps chances at winning in November. The personal attacks, especially in Rubios case, could really hurt Trump. He needs to make amends with Cruz and Rubio once the primaries are over.

Trump did say today that he will consider Rubio as his VP.

[betovernetcapper]

Given the campaign, Rubio would be committing political suicide to run as Trump's VP. I'd lose all respect for Rubio, and given Trump's tirades about Rubio my trust for Trump would go from a four to a two. For prospective my trust level for Clinton is about a three.

[Stillriledup]

I don't advertise it, but I worked for politicians for 18 years before I retired. And as far as hockey goes, I don't know that I've talked about it here other than mentioning an anecdote that included hockey. I did love playing though.

You mentioned something Chicago hockey in another thread, youre a jack of all trades. I really enjoy reading your political posts. :ThmbUp:

[HalvOnHorseracing]

You mentioned something Chicago hockey in another thread, youre a jack of all trades. I really enjoy reading your political posts. :ThmbUp:
Thanks. Chicago has been a tough town for me. First time I was there someone tried (unsuccessfully) to mug me. Second time I was there was when I was playing in that hockey tournament and dislocated my shoulder. Since then I've been there a half dozen times with no problem other than delays at O'Hare.

[barahona44]

Great post. I do not think Perry or Walker would help Trump one bit. The one thing I would add is that the nominee has to turn out his/her base in strong numbers besides winning the majority of the 10 percent of the fence sitters. I worry that Trump has pissed off so many Rubio and Cruz supporters that they will sit this one out, and that will kill Trumps chances at winning in November. The personal attacks, especially in Rubios case, could really hurt Trump. He needs to make amends with Cruz and Rubio once the primaries are over.

Trump did say today that he will consider Rubio as his VP.
You will note that the Hill has not made any demeaning, personal attacks on the Sandman.She has too many negatives going in without alienating a good chunk of her base.

[lamboguy]

my guess if Trump gets the nomination is he will pick the governor from Florida because the senator from that place is a lightweight stiff.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

You will note that the Hill has not made any demeaning, personal attacks on the Sandman.She has too many negatives going in without alienating a good chunk of her base.
If she gets the nomination the PAC commercials will attack Trump. Theoretically she isn't supposed to have input into what they air.

[barahona44]

If she gets the nomination the PAC commercials will attack Trump. Theoretically she isn't supposed to have input into what they air.
It's easier within the confines of PAC laws to attack the other candidate.If a PAC ad outlines what its candidates platform is, they could be accused of collusion.Most of these attack ads are usually quoting either people's opinions or bringing up past history, information which is usually already available.The John Kerry swift boat ads were done by a PAC, not the Bush campaign.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

It used to be that anyone who wanted to run for president needed to make the decision by about the time they turn 16. And then they better not step too far off the line before they throw their hat in the ring. Although if Trump has accomplished anything it is to change that paradigm. Apparently flawed human beings do have a shot after all.

[Stillriledup]

Gloria Borger of cnn suggested Cruz might be VP

[rastajenk]

It used to be that anyone who wanted to run for president needed to make the decision by about the time they turn 16. And then they better not step too far off the line before they throw their hat in the ring. Although if Trump has accomplished anything it is to change that paradigm. Apparently flawed human beings do have a shot after all.
Well, I read this week that Lincoln owned slaves before turning towards emancipation, so maybe you're right. :eek:

[Redboard]

It used to be that anyone who wanted to run for president needed to make the decision by about the time they turn 16. And then they better not step too far off the line before they throw their hat in the ring. Although if Trump has accomplished anything it is to change that paradigm. Apparently flawed human beings do have a shot after all.

I’m not so sure. Trump hasn’t won 50% or more of the votes in any of the republican primaries so far. Usually a candidate needs some kind of financial support from his followers but he doesn't and is using his own money, that’s a huge advantage. He’s appealed to old white men who aren’t as discriminating as women in areas like that.