All in the Family featured the curmudgeonly Archie Bunker. Archie was television’s most famous grouch, blunt, blustering, straightforward and untouched by the PC crowd. He was the archetype of the conservative male. Michael desprately tried to reeducate him, but he persisted in his breviloquence.

Looking back at the last 40 years, we realize: ARCHIE WAS RIGHT!


Trumping VP

I've seen a couple of stories proclaiming that Chris Christie is lining up to be Trumps running mate.  I'm surprised by this.  I have some doubts about this as a practical course of action.

Donald Trump's tendency to come off as brash, and abrasive is one of his biggest negative attributes with Republican voters.  I'm not as prone to place style over substance.

The majority of Republican voters do place a high value on the style and presentation of ideas.  Conservatives like a more refined way of doing things.  Donald Trump comes off as a stereotypical New Yorker.  If you are from the North East United States or the West Coast, that probably isn't a problem for you.  If you are from the Midwest, South or West, New Yorker ways don't generate warm fuzzy feelings.

Chris Christie is from New Jersey.  In flyover country, New Jersey is Gomorrah to New York's Sodom. If Trump was to pair up with Christie his ticket would lose appeal for many traditional Republicans.  That's not an argument based on what kind of job Christie would do, its a style over substance evaluation.  Republican voters are likely to make that kind of evaluation.

Who should Trump pick as his running mate?

From a purely electability point of view, it should be someone who helps balance out Trump's negatives.  What are Trump's negatives?  Despite the media's bombardment on the subject, it isn't the ideas or policies that Trump advocates.  Trump's biggest negative with Republican voters is his abrasiveness.  Right behind that is a perception that Trump might not be as strong in the religious value department as some would like.

To balance that out, Trump should pick a VP that is viewed in a positive manor by the evangelical voter and as a gentleman by the social conservative.  The VP has to fit in one other way as well.  The VP has to be a political outsider who is adamantly against the status quo, because that is how Trump has fashioned his campaign.  Preferably, this person would also bring a following of voters in the general election.

The most practical name that comes to my mind is Dr. Ben Carson.  Dr. Carson comes across in a respectable manor.  He is known to have a strong life long marriage.  He is viewed as religiously conservative.  He was speaking out against the evils of political correctness years before he ran for president. He also ran as an anti-establishment candidate.  As his own candidate he was pulling 3-5% of primary voters.  That isn't too bad considering the number of candidates that started the race.  Along with that, Ben Carson is black.

As a group blacks have a strong sense of racial identity.  Blacks vote for blacks.  Between 13% and 15% of the total population is black.  If Trump wins the nomination some establishment republicans have vowed to go over to Hillary.  Nobody has solid figure on that number but the black voter will more than make up for it. 

Chris Christie doesn't bring as much to the ticket as someone like Carson.  Christie may very well end up with a cabinet level job, but it would be a mistake to put him on the ticket, there are better choices that will resonate with voters in the general election.


  1. WaterBoy2:31 PM

    Great analysis, and you have made a good case for Carson.

    Time will tell if Trump agrees.

  2. Susan9:57 AM

    Those pushing Christie are deliberately ignoring some basic realities. One is while we like Trump as our choice, 1 candidate from that neck of the woods is plenty.
    There is not much likable about Christie. Trump would spend all his time hanging on to the leash, and that would interfere with what the nation would rather he be doing.
    I have seen a LOT of different comments though from people who think his personality just might be a good fit for DOJ. That is, if he will keep to Trump's agenda. We don't need another 4 years of somebody who plays politics.

    From what I have read about Christie, people may not like his political leanings when he runs for office, but when he is in prosecutor mode, there isn't much better than he is. That might be what Trump promised him.

    To devoted readers like me who gobble up the political minutia of the day, Trump has already said he would pick somebody exactly for reasons YOU stated here. Somebody who would fill in his blanks. That way, they would complement each other and be a whole team, not just two guys because it is the politically right choice to make.

    Trump has finally picked somebody who should be able to head off the thefts of delegates from Trump's slate, so I am interested in watching that. The guy worked for both Ford and Reagan, both successfully elected.

    Still not wild about Carson as a VP. He would be great as an ambassador to the UN, or even to head the cleanup of HHS.

  3. I'm not sure who Trump will eventually pick. I suspect he will have that man on hand for the convention, but we probably wont know until then. If he did pick Carson, he might leak that info prior to the convention, but that's pure speculation.

    I think that if anyone other than Trump wins the nomination, it will split the party. Which isn't a bad thing. We may very well be better off as a country if the Republican Party was replaced by something more in line with America's interests.

    1. Susan4:46 PM

      As nice a guy as Carson is, I just don't see where he fills any missing qualifications for Trump. Trump would fill Carson's better than the vice versa.

      But Carson is a good man who would be a great addition to his Administration in a cabinet position.

    2. Susan4:51 PM

      Since the country prospered after the republicans replaced the Whig party, I would agree with you. I think we voters have just needed the proper person to coalesce around and form that party.

      That was the problem with the TP imo. Good concept, but refusal to accept any kind of leadership on a national level allowed the moderate GOPE to infiltrate and totally destroy the credibility of that whole movement.

      Sort of the same thing they did with the term Conservative. With all the moderate cuckservatives hijacking the word, it now means next to nothing.

  4. WaterBoy11:15 AM

    "I think that if anyone other than Trump wins the nomination, it will split the party. Which isn't a bad thing."

    It is if it means continuous rule by the Democrats, instead....

    1. Maybe. I agree that the Dems will hasten our decline. Unless its enough of a wakeup call to cause the Reps to grow a pair and oppose them in the Congress. Not that we had any of that in the last 8 years.

      The Dems will destroy the rule of law in the courts, and finish bankrupting us. They'll probably get us involved in a couple of wars in an attempt to distract us from their failures at home..

      I'm hoping Trump shifts some of the pain from Americans and onto the BureauWonks where it belongs. I'm afraid that's about the best we can hope for.

    2. Susan4:58 PM

      It isn't just the dems anymore Res. The GOPE have formed what appears to be a sort of Uniparty with the democrats and so we have a one party thing going on in congress. They are ALL in it to fill their pockets, both sides.

      This budget that Boehner cobbled together before he toddled off into the drunken sunset? Besides being the first budget ever past under Obama his entire presidency, the GOPE under Ryan gave the democrats and Obama MORE than they even had requested. That really surprised the democrats too.

  5. Anonymous8:33 PM

    The prince of the power of the air rides on the currents of congress.

  6. Res, the party is already split, and beyond repair. I for one, care not who Trump would pick. I won't vote for him. Looks like third party again.

    1. I've been writing in a candidate for at least the last 3 presidential elections. So I hear ya.

      IF and that's a big IF, Trump gets in, AND he governs the way he is saying he will, AND a Republican Congress does the job of enacting major changes in the way DC runs, then the Republican Party has a chance of reversing the damage of the last 8 years and putting the country back on the right track.

      That's a lot of IF's and AND's. Experience tells me its not likely to happen. Getting the nomination and then getting the job done are two different things. My hope is that a brash, hard headed, arrogant SOB with a vision of what America was once, might actually be able to buck the establishment enough to do some good.

  7. Thing is, I don't buy what Trump is selling. He's talking the talk, but he's never walked the walk to match it. Would I like to be proven wrong? Sure, who wouldn't in a case like this. I just don't see it.