ADVERTISEMENT

Trump / Newt ?

NZ Poke

Heisman Candidate
Dec 16, 2007
6,088
7,047
113
They're campaigning together soon, see Drudge.

What do you all think Newt would add / subtract to the ticket?

Newt is intellectually nimble for sure. He's 73.

I'm liking the combo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GunsOfFrankEaton
Newt would be great...but after reading about the Iowa Senator, Joni, I think she's the ticket. Can bash the whole democratic ticket without be called a sexist, women hater etc., and she has military experience something which no one hildabest is going to pick will have.
 
Newt would be great...but after reading about the Iowa Senator, Joni, I think she's the ticket. Can bash the whole democratic ticket without be called a sexist, women hater etc., and she has military experience something which no one hildabest is going to pick will have.

She may have withdrawn today, see below. I've wanted Trump to pick Ben Carson or Herman Cain for some of the reasons you said.

But Newt could be exciting for his lacerating verbal attacks, and brainpower. Does he help Trump with electoral votes though?

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/joni-ernst-trump-vice-president-225169
 
Very shortly after Trump wins the upcoming presidential election, Democrats will begin an effort to impeach him from office, thinking that they will get Republican votes because of the nature of the Trump/establishment relationship. They did this with Richard Nixon over the triviality of Watergate and succeeded. The reason they went ahead and impeached Nixon was because they would rather have lived with Gerald Ford, a milquetoast politician more palatable to them than the antagonistic Nixon was. If Trump is smart he will pick a vice president who pisses off the left more than he does, and this will safeguard him from any impeachment proceedings the Democrats may try to cook up. Gingrich would be great for this purpose. Plus, Gingrich is a very capable and articulate leader.
 
Guns: on the other hand, the GOP establishment (and donor class) has maneuvered against Trump harder than they ever have against Obama or Hillary.

If Trump picks someone too establishment (i.e. Rubio) -- he puts his life at risk.

Do you think Gingrich is an American patriot?

The GOP establishment types like Paul Ryan are 100% working for the globalists.
 
I could be wrong, but I think Gingrich helps safeguard Trump. I also believe Gingrich will backup Trump on the positions Trump has ran on and won widespread support for.
 
Friend of mine worked for Newt - was on staff during the early/mid '90s. He makes some of you guys look like Bernie Sanders he is so far right - vows never to support Newt after being inside the belly of the beast. This post and $4.95 will get you a coffee at Starbucks - so take it for what it is worth...
 
  • Like
Reactions: NZ Poke
Good article and she makes a ton of sense there. Could an establishment guy be so slimy that behind Trump's back he makes the deal to sabotage Trump (if elected), help impeach him, then become president and appoint another slimy establishment type?

So have to rethink Newt now, dam.
 
She does.

This election isn't about liberal vs conservative: it's about nationalism vs globalism. And it's completely 100% connected to Brexit.

Do we make our own laws based on what is best for the country? Or do we abide by global standards?

This is so spot on. But we are forced to watch this R v D shell game. Only an idiot thinks this is truly a liberal versus conservative thing, but there are no shortages of idiots.

The democrats are conditioned to fight the outdated cliche' 1960's republican straw man (picture Mitt Romney) because that's basically what the top of the ticket always looks like until now. Republican'ts are conditioned to believe it's only the democrats who want things like amnesty, globalism and a powerful central government with reduced state's rights.

Hillary Clinton and Paul Ryan have more in common than not. We are thrown red meat to be distracted by in the form of gay marriage, trannys in the bathroom, racism, sexism, assault rifles etc. None of those things are actual day to day problems. The whiter than white capped teeth of a Mitt Romney is what the republican establishment uses as it's beard. They just jam their hand up his ass and you see his lips move, but hear the establishment voice on demand.

Paul Ryan has a deal with Hillary. The never Trumpers (not the independents and libertarians, the GOP establishment NT's... the Bush's et. al) are not standing on principle. They are protecting the globalist agenda, and Hillary is totally on board with that, minus the obvious shell game lip service. They knew she was plan B (if not plan A) from the beginning and never counted on a self funded loudmouth to muck things up. Good or bad, Trump is Rodney Dangerfield at a Bushwood Golf Club black tie dinner, and Judge Smells is the GOP establishment.

It comes down to one thing - BIG business (not small business of course) is completely intertwined with the establishment of both parties. There is no real ideology at that level. And there are no honest men. Trump may be a disaster, but he clearly terrifies the establishment of both parties and at this point, that's enough for me to vote for the MF'er. Fellow libertarians - is Trump a globalist? I honestly don't know. He says he's not and most of his sketchy platform suggests he's not, but at worst - maybe he is and maybe he's not. You know damned well Hillary is. This is not the classic lesser of two evils conundrum for me. Hillary is straight up a new world order globalist who understands the Constitution is in the way. And now we know there is a strong possibility that foreign intelligence has her deleted emails and can leverage her. All she cares about is power, and what she does with that power is open to the highest bidder or whomever can threaten to take her power away.
 
By the way - I hate the pick of Newt. He's a tired old re-run who does nothing to excite disenfranchised Bern-outs and discouraged independents. Or 'not-voting this time' evangelicals for that matter.

Trump has all the GOP establishment types he's going to get. He needs to double down on the outsider image and bring in someone else with a background in business. Too bad he and Fiorina seem to have burned bridges because she would be a great pick.

Ben Carson, Herman Cain, The military chick (can't think of her name) that's been tossed around. All could make a splash with women, minorities etc. Newt is an albatross to the needles that actually need to move.
 
Man you know who would move the needle in the undecided category and even make some Bern-outs take notice? Tell me why I'm wrong here...

Rand Paul

Why not? Most of us on this board were rooting for him as our top choice early on in the primaries. He's just lacks the presidential gravitas to gain traction for the top job. But it would clearly signal to the libertarians, independents and fiscal conservative democrats that this is a ticket they can get behind if Rand did.

He would be my top choice as of right now. But it'll be Newt. Coulter is right, it'll be a mistake.
 
Newt could be just as influential as chief of staff. The vp should probably be an electoral play. I wish newt was president though.
 
HSH...agree, plus Trump normally mentions the Military has been hollowed out, etc etc., who better than an ex-general to put things back in order there.
So I get to choose between a statist and a military state? Awesome.

A bunch of free thinkers that loved to be ruled.
 
Ah, Adverpoke why would a guy who believes in having a strong modern military lead to a military state? Of which no one on this board or anyone I know would be in favor of.

Allegedly we are at pre-1940 personnel levels with an aging air fleet and a military who has service members with multiple tours in war zones over the last 13 years with no clear cut military objectives.

You have a recruiting pool that is shrinking due to obesity, lack of achievement in school and a general lack of ability to do anything but play with electronic gadgets. That needs to be shored up if for no other reason to project at least a sense of power....not for a military state.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT