The ONLY criteria that matters is: Does the VP choice help bring in more votes?
JDV - no
Burgum - no
Scott - maybe
VP choices that will bring in MORE votes:
Sarah Sanders
Tulsi
Vivek
Stefanik
Donalds
If we don’t win the election in November, it doesn’t matter about the VP’s ideology, administrative expertise, or grooming them for 2028.
The betting market is wide open with those 3 at the top
Next are Tulsi and Rubio 🤮
Vance has had a good week it looks like.
I agree with your sentiment about getting more votes, but I think Trump is the exception here. He was the most popular man to ever run for president in 2016, is running for a 3rd time. There is nothing else to know about the guy, I cannot imagine someone would change their vote or decide to vote for him because of a running mate. There are always some but not enough to make a difference, especially with Trump and this election.
Also agree if we don’t win then 2028 won’t matter, but Trump has to do this himself and the follow up, the VP has to be able to carry on. The left can weather a Trump storm for 4 more years as they did the last time and still unravel everything accomplished.
I guess different people have different criteria as to how to choose a running mate.
Agree, a key criterion should be, will a running mate attract new voters , and attract more support to the ticket.
But then some people bring up issues about having an attack dog running mate, and who’s going to carry MAGA forward in 2028 and beyond, and how certain prospective running mates are too liberal or RINO , and then the picture gets muddled.
Trump may surprise us all and pick someone that nobody is talking about right now.
Donald’s has a 100% Freedom Caucus score. What can be added?
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/byron-donalds-house-speaker-political-views-rcna64368
Donald’s has a 100% Freedom Caucus score. What can be added?
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/byron-donalds-house-speaker-political-views-rcna64368
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtqehXbiQ_c