Donald Trump could be considering lifelong Democrat for vice president

Here's some news.

Donald Trump could be considering a lifelong Democrat as the No. 2 on the Republican presidential ticket: retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, who once headed up the Defense Intelligence Agency and has informally advised Trump on foreign policy during the billionaire's primary campaign.

The New York Post first reported Flynn's formal vetting earlier this week. In an interview, the 57-year-old former general did not deny that he was going through the process.

"I have been honored to serve my country for the past three decades and look forward to serving in other ways now that I am retired from the U.S. Army," he told the paper. "I've been a soldier too long to refuse to entertain any request from a potential commander in chief."

According to a Washington Post report, Trump's consideration of the top military figure -- who also happens to be a vocal critic of President Obama and a proponent of stronger ties with Russia -- is part of an emerging belief that the GOP ticket could best be served with another Washington outsider. [Source]

A curveball in Trump’s Veep search: He’s seriously considering a retired general

Still, Trump remains undecided on his vice-presidential pick, the people said. While warming toward Flynn, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence and former House speaker Newt Gingrich, among several others, are being vetted, and many of his associates are urging him to go with a seasoned governor or senator who could help to unite the party.

This could get interesting. Many are saying it's to help overcome Trump's shortcomings in foreign policy. Others, that it's an attempt to steal some votes. Me, I just hope it's not that newt.

I have to agree, I hope it's not anyone within the GOP establishment like how Reagan was practically forced to take Bush sr.

I was leaning toward Rand Paul, Jeff Sessions or Ben Carson. But having a Democrat with leadership experience would be a great option as well, at least Trump is looking at options from both ends of the spectrum.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity

This could get interesting. Many are saying it's to help overcome Trump's shortcomings in foreign policy. Others, that it's an attempt to steal some votes. Me, I just hope it's not that newt.

I don't understand the sentiment that he's out to "steal some votes." Picking a Vice Presidential candidate is usually about appealing to one constituency or another. Traditionally it has been about geography. For example, Kennedy picked Johnson both for his political expertise and the fact he was from Texas, which would help pull in the South. You could say something similar about every Veep pick in history. No Veep has ever been picked who did not in some way "help the ticket," which means "pull in some votes."

So if Trump were to pick the General and I, as retired military and a "centrist" myself, had a lot of respect for the General and feel he would do a fine job as Veep, and even POTUS, if necessary, and that tipped me over the edge to vote for the Trump ticket, would my vote then be considered "stolen"?

I don't think so. I think my vote would be the result of well-considered issues and that I picked the best ticket. In terms of foreign policy I would think the General's views on it are similar to Trump's, and that he would continue the basic ideas proposed by Trump should he become President himself. To me that continuity is important. And if my fellow citizens also felt the same way, I don't think their votes would be considered "stolen" by any definition of the term, especially in light of historical tradition regarding Veep candidates.

a reply to: schuyler

Can't remember where I read that particular theory. If I find it again, I'll post it. I think they were trying to say that it would gain Trump an advantage as far as rounding out what he brings to the table as well as swing any Ds on the fence his way.

It's kind of a shame, but the VP position seems to be for the most part pretty much trivialized and underappreciated, though I'm sure that it varies behind the scenes depending on the relationship the particular P and VP have.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

I'll believe it when I see it.

This is just another example that Trump intends to make his decisions by considering what is right for the country instead of for politically motivated reasons.

I believe he will do the same thing for his cabinet choices, and others assigned by the president. He will choose those most qualified, not the most politically favored.

This will be a nice change from presidents who assign people who are not qualified just to satisfy political favors or cronyism. Like.... appointing a Secretary of State who is completely unqualified just because she backed out of a prior election and then backed her opponent.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Well, Trump hates the GOP and has worked very hard to weaken the party to the benefit of democrats. And he has a long history as a democrat.

It makes total sense he would choose a democrat over a republican. He's very loyal to the DNC.

a reply to: BlueAjah

Or...it could be that he's really a democrat. Or...it could be that he's simply maneuvering for the power play. Who knows.

Not entirely suer how the GOP would/will react to this. Haven't had the time to look yet.

And speaking of the other cabinet positions, it was actually pretty amusing when he had to be schooled on when the president picks his or her cabinet in a live radio broadcast. Amusing in a scary way, and scary as in he truly is clueless as to how our government works...even at a fundamental level.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: schuyler

It's kind of a shame, but the VP position seems to be for the most part pretty much trivialized and underappreciated, though I'm sure that it varies behind the scenes depending on the relationship the particular P and VP have.

Agreed. Indeed, people who take the job can be marginalized into a position of no power. I suspect this is why many refuse it. Ryan, for example, is in a much better position as Speaker than he would be as Veep. Being Vice President means almost nothing until you need him. Then it means everything.

To the point of Trump being clueless about how government works, that's a problem--for us. We look at someone like Trump, who is not a politician (just to take it away from Trump, the person, for a minute) and say that is good because we're tired of politicians and need some "fresh ideas" that aren't contaminated by politics. We ought to fire the politicians and get "real people" in there. But then we criticize people who are not politicians for not knowing precisely how government works because, of course, you have to be a politician before you truly understand (or a pundit journalist, who understands everything no matter what the subject.)

It's a contradiction. They're damned if they do, damned if they don't. So do we truly want non-politicians in public office, or do we just say we do, then vote for the politician anyway because he/she "has experience"? Of course with Trump himself, we have, shall we say, some serious personality issues, but I think the non-politician angle is definitely at play here. Politicians are very careful what they say and how they say it. Trump, all too obviously, simply does not have the "politician filter" in place before he speaks.

I don't know much about this general but picking someone across party lines could be what it takes to bring Congress together again. I don't think the Republicans would ever accept a non Republican on the ticket though. It's bad enough for them that Trump is a faux Republican, imagine not having one in the VP slot too. It would be like the entire party was stolen.

On the subject of being a politician, I consider anyone with military experience at a rank of General to have political experience. Maneuvering past Colonel and getting through bureaucratic messes and management pretty much requires them to play politics.

He will need this man to fix the DOD. Obama has nearly destroyed it.

a reply to: schuyler

Trump brings fresh, real-world experience that the politicians do not have, and which this country needs.

As for the other stuff, Trump is smart enough to surround himself with smart people to advise him on the things he needs to know. And he well aware that he needs help in this regard, as he has said so himself. That's why he said he wants to choose someone with political experience as VP. I think a General has that kind of experience, plus the benefit of military and foreign affairs.

a reply to: BlueAjah

This is just another example that Trump intends to make his decisions by considering what is right for the country instead of for politically motivated reasons.

Nope, it's just another Trump head game. A life long Democrat (Trump) running with another Democrat on the Republican ticket? He wasn't joking: he could stand on a street corner and shoot people and you would still support him.

Everybody knows about Trump's bipartisan past.

It is funny how almost nobody knows that Elizabeth Warren was a republican for most of her life.

Saying Trump does not have "political experience" is also a misnomer. You don't go from a borrowed million bucks to a multi-billionaire without having political experience and being political. And the General, by virtue of becoming a Lieutenant General, has political experience because at that rank, it's largely politics. But I'm not thinking that's what's meant here when people talk of Trump getting a Veep with "political experience."

Trump's political experience has been largely in the private sector, but has also had to deal with government, particularly planning departments, etc. I'll bet he knows the names and family histories of every Department Head in New York City.

The General has political experience in a large bureaucracy working within the system. The US Army is one of the largest bureaucracies there is with a whole lot of macho men scrambling to get to the top, so that definitely is political experience in spades. Out of half a million men in the US Army, 60 are Lt. General (49) or above (11).

But "political experience" the way that is being meant means experience as an elected official in government, people who have worked with Congress who know how that game is played. Examples, whether you like them or not, are Newt Gingrich (20 years in Congress), who was Speaker of the House. Joe Biden, 36 year Senator and Vice President 7 years, Lyndon Johnson, 24 years in Congress, 7 as POTUS, well-known for his political acumen, and even Bernie Sanders, 28 years in Congress. These are all career politicians who haven't really done all that much of anything else.

It's THAT kind of political experience that is meant and that Trump needs, though that begs the question of how he gets it. I don't think it absolutely must be in the Veep slot, when he can surround himself with political advisors of all sorts. The Veep slot is largely symbolic, and I wonder if this is not the real point about all this.

That is, this talk of "political experience" in the Vice Presidency is not because Trump must have it in order to succeed, bring along the GOP, steal from the Dems, etc. It's because WE need it because we want to be reassured. Despite all OUR talk about the disapproval ratings for Congress, the fact is WE keep voting the same guys back in. Congress as a whole is bad, but OUR GUY is cool. So although we SAY we're tired of politicians, when push comes to shove, WE vote for the person "with experience" time and time again. THAT'S why Trump "needs" political experience in the VP slot. It's not for him; it's for us.

Trump won't do what's best for the Republican Party, he won't do what's best for the democrtatic Party, h will do what he thinks is best for the American peoole, as a whole

This scares the establishment and hats why he's always being attacked

originally posted by: thinline
Trump won't do what's best for the Republican Party, he won't do what's best for the democrtatic Party, h will do what he thinks is best for the American peoole, as a whole

This scares the establishment and hats why he's always being attacked

His popularity comes entirely from "being attacked." It seems to me that the Establishment and media have gone out of their way to help him sell his image.

Therefore, Trump is an Establishment- and media-backed candidate. 100%.

He's playing the role he was recruited to play. Nothing more.

***
ETA: BTW, being an Establishment candidate and media-darling is NOT a good image. Trump doesn't want that image...he is getting exactly what he wants from the Establishment and media.

If he doesn't quit before.

www.nytimes.com...

a reply to: thinline

He will do what's best for Trump.

Look for a help wanted sign hanging on the door of the convention center.
Inquire within...