The New York Times has it all wrong on Trump’s VPs

Readers, you’re going to be bombarded in the coming months with column after column of speculative fiction on who Donald Trump will tap as his running mate. Will it be Tucker Carlson? Steve Bannon? Stephen Miller? Or a member of the D-list of Republicans pretending to run for president?

Here’s but one example. I’m going to save you some time reading. Just skip The New York Times’ article of Nov. 25, “Who Would Donald Trump Pick as His Running Mate?” There are no real answers there.

The New York Times has some extraordinarily talented reporters and columnists. That’s not a great insight, obviously. But their talent just can’t imagine the type of thinking of a petty, vindictive, racist, misogynistic, narcissistic psychopath like Donald Trump. The article proffers up 19 possibilities for the VP spot. All but two are dead on arrival.

Remember the petty and vindictive nature of Donald Trump, as noted above? Well, that’s let out anyone who’s run against him in 2023: Tim Scott (who’s black, as well, making for two strikes), Nikki Haley (who’s also a woman), and Vivek Ramaswamy (his parents are from one of those s**t-hole countries). That also lets out Senator Marco Rubio, who not alone had the temerity to run against Trump in 2016, but hinted that the Big Dick had a small dick.

As for the rest of the possibilities, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Kristi Noem, Elise Stefanik, Kari Lake, Tudor Dixon, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Nancy Mace are all cursed with a vagina, which Trump thinks makes you unhinged since they “bleed from wherever.” Is it possible that Trump might overlook that in the case of MTG? Maybe, but I wouldn’t bet money on that. Byron Donalds and Wesley Hunt are both Black, so they’re nonstarters. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo once said something unflattering about Donald Trump, so he’s out of the running, as well.

So who does that leave out of the 19? Senator Tom Cotton, Senator J.D. Vance, and John Ratliffe, Trump’s director of national intelligence. Plus Tucker Carlson (more on him later). Cotton and Ratliffe are unlikely to outshine Trump, a definite requirement for a narcissist like the disgraced former president. (What do you think made Governor Mike Pence attractive to Trump? It wasn’t his religiosity, you can bet that.) Which is what makes Vance so iffy: Vance is, at heart, a Wall Street elite with a fine vocabulary and a best-selling book. Too much of a chance that he’ll soak up too much of the attention.

Is Tucker Carlson on the short list? Did the former Fox News host once cast some shade on The Donald? Yes, but since then he’s been palling around with Trump and justifying the unjustifiable on Trump’s behalf. They hate all the same people and subscribe (in Tucker’s case, perhaps only outwardly) to the same white supremacist nonsense.

On the other hand, Carlson is likely to overshadow Trump. Unlike Trump, Carlson’s not slurring his words, confusing one city for another, forgetting that World War II is behind us, or embarking on weird rants and tangents. The baby-faced darling of the Far Right does bring millions of fans with him, but aren’t these Ultra-MAGA fans likely to vote for Trump regardless? What’s in it for Trump?

I’m not sure who Trump will tap to be his second. In bygone days, he would have picked Ivanka Trump, but, these days, his baby girl is going by Ivanka Kushner and keeping her distance. But I do know who Trump won’t pick: the vast majority of those listed in The New York Times’ opinion piece.

–30–