I've been thinking seriously about this for a while. Trump needs a VP who will: (1) Be loyal and agree with him, while being supportive and with a natural chemistry; (2) Help him pass his policies in Congress; (3) Facilitate party unity and (4) help him expand his base to win the election. Here is my breakdown: Sessions (1+2); Gingrich (1+2); Ernst (4?); Christie (1); Fallin (1+3); Kasich (2+3+4); Carson (1); Corker (2+3); Brown (1+2+3+4); Cotton (nothing); Ayotte (3+4); Cruz (3); Blackburn (1+3+4); Martinez (3); Who should he pick and why? It is such a tough choice! What do you think?
>Gingrich
>1
>>78372955
I dont get why u murricans puts so much faith in trump. Just another jewish puppet. Why it's so difficult for all of you to see that?
It needs to be somebody that is just as anti establishment as Trump is if not more otherwise they'll knock trump off to put the VP in power.
/pol/
Yes and no. Yes, I see that angle. At the same time, he is antiwar, very nationalist on trade and immigration, and is hated by Jews on both the right and left (neocons, media). He is a better alternative than Clinton in the minds of many.
>>78375519
Oh you murricans are so naive.
All presidential candidates boast of being anti war.
When the time came, they encouraged the war, obeying orders as usual.
Not necessarily; Obama lobbied for the Iran deal; pulled out of Iraq; let others bomb Libya (no troops on the ground); let others bomb Syria (no troops on the ground). Obama is more of a peacemaker than McCain or Romney would have been. Granted, that is a low standard. Trump will be the same way - he won't be bullied, as Obama was not bullied.
He needs to pick someone the GOP elites hate, but someone who they can't really disagree with either. Also someone who the GOP would rather not take over in the event of an assassination.
I would go with Ron or Rand Paul for Trump's VP!
>>78379596
Obama peace maker.
Yeah, 23,144 bombs dropped in 2015.
Yes. He was the best candidate for peace since Jimmy Carter. Reagan facilitated the Iran/Iraq war by selling arms and providing intelligence to both sides; Bush I did the Gulf War; Clinton enforced the sanctions and supported the Palestinian looting of Russia; obviously Bush II attacked Iraq and Afghanistan and would have attacked Syrian, Iran, North Korea etc. if he could.
Obama, by contrast, made peace with Iran; again, no boots on the ground in Libya or Syria. By American standards, he is a saint on this issue. I say this being no fan of Obama's sodomy, reverse-racism, Wall Street bailout, $1 trillion deficit and health care corruption policies.
NO Republican OR Democrat would have been better on the peace/antiwar issues than Obama has been.
>>78372955
Nigel Farage
Either Paul would be ideal, but Ron isn't super active in politics and Rand needs to be in the Senate. I vote Jim Webb
