Having almost officially sealed the GOP nomination for president, Donald Trump now faces a difficult choice regarding his choice of a running mate, and the shortlist contains some surprising names.
As it was in 2016, the ultimate goal is likely to pick someone who balances out Trump’s eccentricities and his less appealing characteristics with someone the public sees as a stabilizing influence.
Whether the list of the vanquished versus the leading “top three” can be trusted depends on how one regards a report in The Washington Times.
To that end, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Kari Lake, two often cited candidates, are also two who might compound Trump’s problems, given their own eccentricities. They are out of the running, according to conservative blogger Ryan Girdusky.
The lists below have to be considered — or not — with knowledge of the fact that Chris LaCivita, a senior advisor to the Trump campaign, is adamant in asserting that no one knows who may or may not be “on the list.”
“That is trash. Anyone who claims that they know or that they have heard is a damn liar.”
As true as that statement likely is, LaCivita would say the above under any circumstances, even if he was the inside source. But a senior member of the campaign is on record stating that the names above and below are, well, “trash,” at least with respect to this category.
Still, it does somewhat make sense that Trump would pick a candidate that brings a reassuring presence. Greene and Lake do not fit the mold.
But neither of them should feel too slighted. After all, Girdusky is thorough in his list and insists that Gov. Kristi Noem of South Dakota, Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina (who might well have been a good choice), Gov. Sarah Huckabee of Arkansas, Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida (who may be out five times over), and former opponent Nikki Haley are also not on the shortlist that is considered “trash.”
Why is this even relevant? Well, The Washington Times believes it’s worth a report and the people making this very short list do provide food for thought as to the type that might be chosen.
Girdusky assures us that the list consists of three names that will surprise nearly everyone, with the possible exception of LaCivita. Among the three are newly minted Alabama Senator Katie Britt, another newbie in Ohio Senator J.D. Vance, and the same old Senator Marco Rubio of Florida.
Without calling any of the above three people “trash,” it is hard to believe that these choices have risen to the top. Has Trump ever discussed any of the three? Marco Rubio doesn’t count because he’s always on someone’s list.
But Girdusky is confident that he is in the know. How he doesn’t look at his list and wonder how his list inspires confidence is truly a wonder. And yet, Girdusky states:
“[Trump] certainly tells a lot of people they’re on the list. But I have been told fairly confidently by very top people that they are not on the list — that the list is just those three.”
Well, he leaves himself a lot of wiggle room. Girdusky can always blame some “not-so-confident lower staffers” who may believe they know the top three but can be counted on to leak gibberish.
Still, the conversation most certainly will turn to possible running mates — and probably sooner rather than later. The campaign needs money, and adding the right name might add to the money coming in.
The three possibilities noted above provide a lot of inexperience in Britt and Vance while making up for it with the “too much experience, not necessarily good” in Rubio. One shouldn’t think of them as trash so much as an untrustworthy list.
Of all the names above, Tim Scott provides more stability, more diversity, more experience, and more firepower on the stump than the others. But my list is at least as trashy as Girdusky’s.
Clearly, Trump would benefit from having a woman as a running mate. Britt may be a good choice, but name recognition would be a problem.
Three things are clear. First, a running mate will be chosen much earlier than at any previous point in recent history, as noted above.
Second, Girdusky has every reason to assert that he is trusted by senior advisers to “know” and every reason to believe no one will remember his claim down the road.
Third, LaCivita probably has a good idea as to who has been whittled off the list but is going to call any list “trash” — no matter how accurate — until a candidate is named.
We can add a fourth. This decision matters. It matters more than usual because Trump will be busy and needs a solid second voice.
Oh, and fifth, no one will really know until Trump announces the name himself.
Editor’s note: This is an opinion column that solely reflects the opinions of the author
