-
Member Statistics
45,968
Total Members1,837
Most Online
-
Posts
-
Trump walks to the beat of a different drummer so he could very likely pick a person that is on no one’s radar. Going by typical political logic, assuming that a VP pick might bring 0.5%-1% votes, who should it be? A half to one percent is not much but in a potentially razor thin election, a couple of thousand votes in a state could decide the presidency. Biden won AZ by just over 10,000 votes. The most recent Beaumont mayoral election, where almost no one votes, had over 15,000 votes cast. In GA it was 12,000 votes and Biden did not even get 50%. In WI it was 20,000 and again Biden didn’t get to 50%.  There are other states in that area of percent point difference. How important? If any two AZ, GA and WI flip, Trump would have won. So while the VP probably never matters…. can it this time? I think that it could. What then does the VP pick bring to the table? FL and SC were both won by Trump in 2020 so a favored son vote for Rubio or Scott won’t help Trump. Both are in a fairly comfortable position within the conservative community so they will neither hurt nor help with strong conservative voters.  What about the few fence riders that could and likely will determine the election by either sticking with Biden or switching from the last election? What about the people who did not vote in the last election, but may come out to vote in this one just to support the VP candidate? Could Scott sway a percentage point or two from Black support? Could Rubio help draw a percentage point or two of Hispanic support? Possibly on both counts. Like I already mentioned, they won’t help in their own states because Trump already won those in 2020. I personally think that either would actually do a good job as president (although VP picks are about the politics of being elected and not the “best” possible president) and might be the difference in a few votes but a few votes more is all that is needed.  Or…. My outlier, Tulsi Gabbard.  She had some decent support when are ran for the presidency in the Democrat primary. Could some people follow her because they support her and not necessarily the party? I’m sure that’s true for all candidates. Could she bring female support? As a strong mentally and physically person and a member of the military who was deployed into a combat zone into Iraq. Then she went to OCS and became an officer, then deployed to Kuwait. Can that military history, including deployment into a war swing some votes? As of late, she has been on a one person tirade against Biden and the Democrats. Let’s remember that Ronald Reagan was a Democrat and so was Texas governor John Connally. Connally was not only a Democrat governor in Texas but also Secretary of the Navy under JFK. Both ended up switching to the Republican Party so there is a fairly strong history of former Democrats switching parties and being successful, all the way up to the presidency. Gabbard is a pretty fiery campaigner and doesn’t mince her words. She would really be a thorn in the Democrats’ hopes and has the inside knowledge of the party. Could she potentially swing more votes than Scott or Rubio? I think so. But…. I don’t think that Trump would pick her and I’m not sure that she would accept if offered. Her odds of being Trump's pick are at about 1%.  Scott or Rubio at about 10%. Trump being Trump, will choose someone who no one has ever heard of. -
-
By LumRaiderFan · Posted
So biden's a creepy old pedophile after all...shocker! But that's where the smart votes are landing. -
-
You’re quibbling over the word “most”. I agree that the UK is our most important military ally but we have overwhelming other support from Europe through NATO.  What other support do we have in the Middle East?  What are the “most” important issues? Military strength or intelligence that might head off the need for military action? It’s certainly debatable. I honestly wouldn’t argue with any points on which if the most critical to our interests. I am sure that people can make valid arguments from different points of view. Military? The UK. Middle East intelligence? Israel. As far as Israel, SmashMouth said that they “may very well be” the most important. ”May be” is not an adamant statement but a suggestion. They might be… depending on what the discussion is about. Worrying about the word “most” (especially “may be”) seems to be the definition of trivial.Â
-
-
Topics
-
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.