1. It doesn’t expand the base at all, eg bring in some folks who may have been fence sitters
2. Vance did pretty poorly in 22, all things considered.
3. Complicates Senate math should Trump win.
4. While Vance has a compelling personal story he mucked things up in 22 (see # 2) and can’t afford to again. He is a bit Quayle like.
5. Trump could have put a mortal lock on the election by picking someone who could expand the ticket and, in an election where VP might matter a lot more than usual because of age, made the country feel like there was someone with proven good judgment who could step in. Vance’s age and relative inexperience mitigate against that.
6. But Trump’s made his choice. I just think he’s giving Biden unnecessary air.
I wouldn't be so hard on Vance. In 2016 Trump was an empty political vessel, the only president who had never held public office, appointive or elective, civil or military, so nobody knew what he would do. I think he was a good president, and I will give Vance the benefit of the doubt by assuming he reached the same conclusion. And his hardscrabble upbringing might give him some cred in the industrial states. Jim Dueholm
There were better choices for sure, but at least Vance survived Yale with his brain intact.
I think this selection is problematic.
1. It doesn’t expand the base at all, eg bring in some folks who may have been fence sitters
2. Vance did pretty poorly in 22, all things considered.
3. Complicates Senate math should Trump win.
4. While Vance has a compelling personal story he mucked things up in 22 (see # 2) and can’t afford to again. He is a bit Quayle like.
5. Trump could have put a mortal lock on the election by picking someone who could expand the ticket and, in an election where VP might matter a lot more than usual because of age, made the country feel like there was someone with proven good judgment who could step in. Vance’s age and relative inexperience mitigate against that.
6. But Trump’s made his choice. I just think he’s giving Biden unnecessary air.
I wouldn't be so hard on Vance. In 2016 Trump was an empty political vessel, the only president who had never held public office, appointive or elective, civil or military, so nobody knew what he would do. I think he was a good president, and I will give Vance the benefit of the doubt by assuming he reached the same conclusion. And his hardscrabble upbringing might give him some cred in the industrial states. Jim Dueholm
“Since free choice is granted to all, a person should always strive to do penitence and to confess verbally for his sins”. MAIMONIDES
I enjoyed his book.