Who do you like for VP?
An informal discussion.
Assuming no shenanigans occur with the election (yes, a BIG assumption indeed), Donald Trump is on a very promising track to secure his second term as POTUS.
I have great concerns about the whole election integrity ordeal, and it’s hard to imagine that the power drunk maniacs in control will relinquish power to their sworn enemies. But hey, we are being ruled over by an idiocracy, so who knows, maybe they’ll slip up and we’ll see the MAGA man take the reins back at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
The president is said to be making the decision for who he will pick as his vice presidential candidate in the coming weeks and months. Contrary to the opinions of most pundits, I believe that the VP under a Trump term two will have tremendous authority to shape policy, given that the president seems to be more in his element making the charismatic case for big picture issues. Not only that, Donald Trump is no longer a spring chicken, and he needs to bring someone on board who can be ready to step into the position.
With those two things in mind, let’s take a closer look at the field of VP candidates, via PredictIt, an online prediction market.
According to PredictIt and other betting markets in the space, the race is wide open. And President Trump has remained tight lipped on the process. Only Nikki Haley has been officially ruled out via Truth Social post.
Here’s my quick pros and cons for some of the top candidates and what they can bring to a Trump campaign and presidency:
Sen Tim Scott (R-SC):
Pros: Lots of money attached to him, specifically from Oracle founder Larry Ellison, who financed his short-lived presidential campaign. If you’re seeking progressive diversity points (probably not the best strategy for a GOP campaign), Sen Scott is your guy.
Cons: He is a Uniparty man through and through. He will bring Trump in the direction of the establishment. He’s Pfizer’s favorite man in the Senate.
Gov Doug Burgum (R-ND):
Pros: He’s a billionaire who can bring lots of cash to the campaign
Cons: Like Scott, he doesn’t really believe in anything and is subservient to the establishment blob. He’s a little too friendly with one of his mentors, Bill “Bugman” Gates
Sen J.D. Vance (R-OH)
Pros: He’s great on policy, brings a fantastic domestic and foreign policy record from his time in the Senate, and is well positioned to step into the big chair should something happen to the president. He has a well publicized background and humble upbringing that captures the meaning of the American dream.
*He’s my top pick for VP.*
Cons: Unclear how much he could bring to the table from a fundraising perspective.
Sen Marco Rubio (R-FL)
Pros: Backed by Big Sugar, which means there’s a lot of money behind him.
Cons: Backed by Big Sugar. A long, long record of subservience to the D.C. blob.
Rep Elise Stefanik (R-NY)
Pros: Has managed to build a reputation as a hard working, honorable congresswoman, who has fought time and again for the president and his supporters.
Cons: New York isn’t a winnable state. She’s a bit of a squish.
Tulsi Gabbard
Pros: She’s refreshingly honest. A very likable person. Maintains an independent streak.
Cons: Unclear what she actually believes in.
Gov Sarah H Sanders (R-AR)
Pros: Has a rockstar reputation in Arkansas.
Cons: Hasn’t seen much of the national spotlight since she was the president’s press secretary. Arkansas is already in the bag.
Vivek Ramaswamy
Pros: Quick on his feet. Very fast learner. Improving instincts. An enemy of the D.C. Uniparty if there ever was one.
Cons: Severe lack of experience. Doesn’t understand how D.C. functions
I’ll leave it at that for now. Let me know your thoughts/preferences in the comments! I’ll make sure to reply to as many as I can.
It's not even a question, J.D. Vance. He has proven himself through legislation and actions to be a reliable populist and someone who makes good political decisions. I honestly see him as the more competent heir to Trumpism without the drama or the inconsistency of Trump as well as someone with more intellectual heft. Someone like him at Trump's side guiding him would make a huge difference in any potential administration and there is little chance of Vance stabbing Trump in the back on behalf of the party establishment. Honestly, Vance strikes me as someone who would have been a normal Republican or Democrat in the 60's or early 70's before neoliberalism and neoconservatism changed the parties completely. Another important thing to consider is what happens after Trump is gone. He may not be Joe Biden but he is still an old man. I would rather the torch be carried forward by someone young and competent than have it end up falling apart to grifters and neocons. That is why he is my choice.
I lean to Tulsi because I think the sane people who were formerly on the left and now politically homeless will decide the election. Tulsi articulates very well why it's "ok" for them to vote red. As much as I like Vivek, I don't think he adds as many votes as Tulsi does.