I prefer Cruz as President. I do not think this is his year and I do not think Cruz helps Trump electorally like Carson does. Carson has the potential to alter that 95/5 black vote for the Democrat significantly, putting far more states in play than Cruz could do. After Carson, Rubio may be the next most helpful electoral choice, although an argument could be made for Fiorina (unless you agree with me that her Russian statements paint her as too reckless). Perhaps Gov. Martinez could help more out West. Then there is Gov. Christie who might, with Trump, alter the NY/NJ equation enough to put a few states in play (NH, NJ, PA). A dark horse VP would be Bush to mimic Reagan/Bush in the public mind. It only makes sense if Bush endures and gets second place in delegates.
I want you to remember that Bush did not carry on Reagan’s legacy. In no small measure, he started dismantling it.
He was the first president to refuse to implement the new tougher 1986 Immigration laws. He and future presidents brought us to where we are today, with OPEN BORDERS.
I realize it is common for conventional thinkers to think balancing out a ticket is a great idea. I don’t share that view.
Right now Trump is winning a lot of support by hawking Conservatism. Let’s look at just one of his platform ideas.
He wants to crack down on illegal immigration. He has gotten kudos for this. Folks want that same thing.
Would it strengthen that support for him to pick a person who did not want to crack down on immigration? Of course not. People would immediately think Trump was not committed to his own platform.
There’s your answer right there. You pick someone who shares your views. This causes folks to know you’re dead serious about achieving your goals.
I am certain that Reagan was talked into “balancing” his ticket. It’s probably one of the biggest mistakes he made.
I do not urge that on Trump.