The Trump VP Pick: A High-Stakes Game of Power, Loyalty, and Identity
The 2024 presidential election is shaping up to be a tight race, with few voters shifting their allegiances. One big question remains, however: who will Donald Trump choose as his running mate? This decision could have a significant impact on the campaign, the outcome of the election, and the future of the Republican Party itself.
Key Takeaways:
- It’s High Stakes: This vice presidential pick is especially consequential due to Trump’s age and the potential for his successor to take over mid-term. Additionally, the choice will reveal whether Trump wants to double down on his MAGA base or broaden his appeal to independents.
- More Than Just Politics: Trump’s decision may be less about electoral strategy and more about finding someone he trusts and who will not challenge his authority.
- Unpredictable Dynamics: While Trump might be tempted to choose a "yes man" like Doug Burgum or Elise Stefanik, he could also opt for someone who appeals to broader demographics, like Marco Rubio or Nikki Haley.
- A Reflection of the Future: The choice will signal how the Republican Party will evolve post-Trump, with options ranging from Reagan Republicanism to aggressive populism.
- An Election on the Margins: While the V.P. pick might not drastically alter the outcome, it could sway voters in key swing states, particularly in the case of J.D. Vance or Tim Scott.
The Stakes are High, the Choices are Many
The New York Times hosted a panel discussion featuring prominent opinion columnists, including Ross Douthat, David French, Michelle Goldberg, and Bret Stephens, to dissect the potential vice-presidential picks and their potential implications.
Bret Stephens argued that the choice will show whether Trump intends to solidify his base or appeal to moderates. Ross Douthat highlighted the unique power of the vice presidential pick in a Trump campaign, as they could potentially begin their own presidential run early, given Trump’s term limits.
David French explored the broader implications of Trump’s choice for the future of the Republican Party. He suggested that selecting Tom Cotton would signal a return to normalcy, while picking J.D. Vance would indicate a more radical shift towards populism.
Michelle Goldberg focused on Vance and questioned his suitability given his history of making controversial statements, including comparing Trump to “America’s Hitler." She believes that his lack of independent political base makes him a perfect candidate for Trump, who thrives on loyalty and control.
Bret Stephens echoed this concern, emphasizing Trump’s instinctive nature and potential prioritization of outward appearances over political strategy.
Multiple Candidates, Multiple Perspectives
The discussion explored the strengths and weaknesses of various potential candidates. Tom Cotton was deemed too hawkish and out of alignment with Trump’s foreign policy. Elise Stefanik was ruled out for her perceived lack of physical appeal, showcasing the superficiality of Trump’s decision-making process.
Nikki Haley was considered too independent and potentially threatening to Trump’s ego. Tim Scott was discussed as a potential outreach pick to African American voters, but skepticism surrounded his effectiveness and potential for pandering.
Ross Douthat highlighted the importance of considering the V.P. pick’s electoral appeal. He suggested that J.D. Vance could resonate with voters in key swing states like Pennsylvania, while Marco Rubio could increase Trump’s reach among Hispanic voters, particularly in Florida.
David French countered that Tim Scott and Nikki Haley could prove more helpful to Trump, potentially appealing to swing voters and Black voters, respectively.
The Trump Factor: Loyalty, Ego, and the Future of the Party
The panel emphasized the unpredictability of Trump’s decision-making. While he might consider conventional political strategy, his own personal biases, including a desire for unquestioning loyalty, a penchant for physical attraction, and an inflated ego, will likely play a significant role.
Ross Douthat pointed out that Trump’s previous choice of Mike Pence revealed a calculated political move, suggesting that his upcoming pick will also have a strategic component.
However, he also suggested that Trump’s confidence in his chances could influence his choice, potentially leading him towards a loyalist like Burgum or an ideologue like Vance.
The Future of the Republican Party:
The discussion explored the potential implications of the V.P. choice for the Republican Party’s future. David French argued that a selection like Tom Cotton would indicate a return to a more traditional Republicanism, while J.D. Vance would signify a continued embrace of populism and a break from the party’s past.
Ross Douthat noted the challenges of any Republican politician hoping to succeed Trump, given the unprecedented nature of his presidency.
Michelle Goldberg argued that the choice will reveal whether Trump is willing to abandon his extremist rhetoric and policies, or if he intends to continue pushing the boundaries of American politics, potentially endangering democracy itself.
The panel concluded that, regardless of the final choice, the Trump VP selection will be a significant event with far-reaching consequences. It will shape the 2024 election, influence the future of the Republican Party, and offer a glimpse into the potential for a second Trump presidency – a prospect that many find deeply unsettling.
