Nicolle Wallace Asks Trump: Would You Ever Pick Sanders As A Running Mate?

[TomCADem]

Source: Real Clear Politics

"Would you take a few minutes to talk to him and consider him as your running mate?" she asked on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" Friday.

"Wow that's a great question," Trump said. "The one thing that Bernie Sanders and I have in common --and I do have much bigger crowds than him-- I actually do, Joe and Mika know that. He is second, I will say that. But I will say this: We have one thing very strongly in common. We know that the U.S. is being taken advantage of horribly on trade deals. The difference between Bernie and myself is, I know how to make those deals fantastic and he has no idea."

"But as your number two he could watch and learn from you?" Wallace suggested.

"He's got a lot of other things in the bag, I will tell you Nicolle and I mean this 100%. You saw that in many of the primaries. If Bernie loses --which he will because the primary is rigged-- If Bernie loses to Hillary he should run as an independent. Bernie should definitely run as an independent," Trump said. "[If he doesn't], big percentages of the Bernie people are going to vote for Trump."

Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/05/20/nicolle_wallace_asks_trump_would_you_ever_pick_sanders_as_a_running_mate.html

[SheilaT]

1. Huh?

That makes no sense at all. Bernie Sanders would no more accept a VP offer from Trump than I'd become Queen of England. Keep in mind that Bernie long ago ruled out an Independent run. And has affirmed that more than once since.

It's also beyond unlikely that Hillary would ask him to be her VP, were she to get the nomination, and even less likely that he'd accept, were she to offer.

Of course, Trump is a fucking idiot, and I cannot begin to fathom why he gets all this coverage

[billhicks76]

3. Stupid Question...I actually Misread Headline Thinking About Hillary Asking Him.

Trump belongs in the gutter and nowhere else.

[billhicks76]

2. Is Clinton Really Backing Out Of CA Debate She Agreed To????

As far as VP...there is a reason Obama didnt choose her for that. She should pick Bernie. Reagan picked Bush....bad move on his part though. No Hillary will not try to heal the party...she will pick a Lieberman type.

[ReRe]

6. There sure are a ton...

... of folks sucking up to her. The "don't rock the boat, go-along-to-get-along, playin' the game" Democrats. Have you seen that long list? It's about the saddest thing I ever saw. All of them thinking only of themselves and maintaining their office, and possibly getting a cabinet seat. Shame on every single one of those people. They're not representing their constituents, their representing themselves. They want to climb the "Corporate/Government ladder."

Hill will have to pick among that list. I know Bernie won't want anything to do with her. How on God's earth would he want to be HRC's Veep? Same for Elizabeth Warren.

[billhicks76]

9. Will Democrats Really Select Someone That Will Lose To Trump Like Hillary?

Are they so all in and have their egos on the line that they could pick someone losing in the polls over someone winning? Talk about a lack of pragmatism...their whole self-identity has been wrapped up in the idea of sacrificing perfection for pragmatism and the greater good but now they are actually contradicting themselves because theirs no pragmatism in losing.

[ReRe]

12. Some folks just can't see things clearly.

... Winning is all there is to some people. They'll do anything, say anything, to get elected. I wouldn't want that guy/gal as my rep, senator or POTUS. I don't see lying as a virtue. And I don't know what makes people vote for certain people, bill. I certainly don't vote according to "polls." For me it's definitely the character of the individual and the policies they support. That person is Bernie Sanders in this Primary. I can't even bring myself to think about having to vote for HRC in November. Not yet. The Primary ain't over till it's over.

[SmittynMo]

24. I am in 100% agreement

November is a long way away still and a lot can happen.

I'm still waiting for the large lady to sing a victory song for Bernie.

This is the year of the outsiders, and the staunch dems will not accept that.

And in about 7 months, we're gonna see how that worked out.

I think I'd fire my strategist.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

17. They're too busy "measuring the curtains"....

You just KNOW she's told certain superdeligates they'll be her Secretary of WHCD. (Whatever Her Committee Decides).

Betcha the Ambassador to the Bahamas post is already filled.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

15. A lot of them are 90's era celebrities hoping for a comeback....

Including Rush Limbaugh.

[A Simple Game]

28. It does seem that the one thing Hillary may be good at is

playing into the fears and ambitions of the people she needs to use.

[ReRe]

41. That's right...

... and when she doesn't need them anymore, kkkerplunk... under the bus. That personality trait is keen in people like DW-S, Rahm Emanuel, KKKarl Rove, Lee Atwater.

[Plucketeer]

31. The "Fall in line" gang

is THE MOST despicable example of boot-licking I can recall in modern times. Of course, there have been many examples through history - so many infamous despots who carried their own sets of fleas. But for my lifetime (other than the current debacle), I can only think of Jim Jones and his delusional followers. They literally "drank the Kool-aid" and reaped the "benefits".

[ReRe]

42. That was so sad, wasn't it?

But that's the way they are. She is the DNC's "presumptive nominee". It has been so disrespectful of them to go after Bernie because he was an Independent. before. There's a whole lot of people right now wondering what the hell party they belong. I swear, not just on DU, but out here in the hinterlands, people don't know what party they belong in. They know they are not Repulicans, but can't exactly call themselves Democrats after this election debacle! But they do know one thing... they are voting for Democrat Bernie Sanders!

[davidpdx]

7. I don't foresee any more debates

Clinton has nothing to lose by avoiding them. Her and her supporters will do nothing to reach out to Sanders supporters because they are classless. I really hope someday the whole behind the scenes story comes out in an accurate way.

As for a VP you want to hear who would truly be the worst pick Clinton could make? Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.

[billhicks76]

10. She Agreed To Have Them...Just Another Lie and Broken Promise???

The only reason she has declared herself the winner is to avoid that debate and losing in CA...its going to backfire. The 5th largest economy in the WORLD wants a say in who the nominee is.

[Scootaloo]

4. Trump does a good job of making Clinton look well-collected by comparison.

What was that gibberish?

[Agnosticsherbet]

5. Trump doesn't want to get rid of the TPP. He wants to renegotiate the TPP to what he thinks

is a good deal for Trump.
Whatever that is.

And Sanders would never accept a VP slot with trump.

[pampango]

23. That's not what he says but, of course, his words mean nothing - they are all "suggestions".

Bernie is the one who promises to 'renegotiate' NAFTA, WTO and other trade agreements. Him I trust. Trump's promise to 'rip them up' means nothing.

He claims to only want bilateral agreements. That way the US is always (except perhaps in negotiations with the EU or China) the stronger negotiator so more likely to get a favorable deal.

And Sanders would never accept a VP slot with trump.

No way. But Trump knows that discussing the idea promotes dissension among his opponents. He is good at all kinds of negative tactics.

[tomm2thumbs]

8. the tabloid-ization of TV news has been confirmed by repeated calls to Trump with Q&A's

Nicolle Wallace is a joke, but Elisabeth Hasselbeck was already busy so you get what you get

full clip for nonsense context

[SheilaT]

11. Keep in mind, Nicolle Wallace is an idiot.

I read one of her novels, and was astonished that she'd present the first female President as a Republican, which qualifies as alternate history. And then, the President in question had a philandering husband, but the people totally forgave when SHE forgave him. Oh, and she promotes her press secretary to Secretary of State, indicating Wallace hasn't a clue how anything works.

So her sussing Sanders as running mate for Trump simply indicates once again what an idiot she is.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

13. Part of the media nonsense that Bernie supporters also support Trump.

[a la izquierda]

20. Thank you nt

[pepperbear]

32. plus he is advocating for bernie to run as a 3rd party candidate.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

38. Note that Trump said he would run as an independent too....

Good thing the Republicans have degenerated to where he doesn't need too.

I feel Republicans are going to lose for a long time to come due to their tossing their County Western fans under the bus.

[tandem5]

14. It may be a silly question, but it does allow him to respond strategically...

1. "The one thing that Bernie Sanders and I have in common --and I do have much bigger crowds than him-- I actually do"

It's an appeal to those voters that are interested in the populist and disruptive aspects of the Sanders and Trump campaigns without caring about what each actually stands for. It is not a large percentage of the electorate and they usually don't vote at all during a normal cycle, but it could be significant enough.

2. The comment on trade is directed at those independents that have never identified themselves as liberal or conservative and fancy themselves practical (but really they are just quasi libertarian idiots). These are the undecided voters that you see every cycle that sit on TV panels the day before the election pondering their choice like a juror on a murder one case.

3. "If Bernie loses --which he will because the primary is rigged-- If Bernie loses to Hillary he should run as an independent."

This is just a poke in the eye at Democrats knowing the current acrimony within our party. He's directing at those that support Sanders on substance. He's saying too bad the establishment aced out your guy, but hey look on the bright side you can still vote for him as an independent. What's that? It's too late? Sanders said he won't. Ah Bummer. Guess you'll have to vote for Clinton (or not).

It's not gibberish. Think of it more like wise-guy talk.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

18. I think of it as blabbermouth talk.

[mdbl]

21. spot on!

He opens his mouth and his brains fall out.

[C Moon]

16. silliness

[scottie55]

19. Trump Has Been Smoking Crack Again It Appears

Not one single Bernie Supporter I know would even consider voting for Trump.

Not a single one.

Zero chance.

Some may not vote for Hillary, but compared to Trump she is a goddess.

They will probably write in Bernie, or someone else.

[riderinthestorm]

22. Tabloid journalism designed for a sensational headline.

Typical un-serious question.

[valerief]

25. This is what the media has been doing for months--aligning Sanders with that asshole. nt

[blackspade]

26. What the fuck?

There is only one reason why Wallace would ask such a stupid ass question.
And that is to continue the bullshit narrative that Sanders supporters are also tRump supporters.
Sanders as tRump's vp? Idiotic.

Fuck you MSNBC. What a journalistic cess pool.

[Mike Nelson]

27. She's going overboard...

...on the media's anti-Hillary narrative. Morning Joe is a big pro-Trump, anti-Hillary outlet. That's the foundation of this question. Memo to Joe, Mika, Nicolle and the others - Hillary will win and you taxes will go UP!

[sulphurdunn]

29. Whose interests are served

by asking a question like that? Whose are not? I doubt it was asked out of simple curiosity.

[bucolic_frolic]

30. Trump is all bluster and deception

and manipulation

And what a crooked question

It's like asking HRC if she would consider Ted Cruz

Trump is using every opportunity, with the aid of the MSM media,
to BLUR the differences and grab voters.

One really must ask if this wasn't a put up question, that is Trump
made up the question, and she asked it.

[Shandris]

33. I saw that floated on 4chan too. But the consensus from the RW'ers was...

...actually the same as mine. Trump would never do it because he'd be practically guaranteed to get assassinated. He can't have a VP more popular than he is.

[lark]

34. Delusional asshole

Anyone Bernie supporter than votes for Trump obviously knows nothing at all about Sanders, cares nothing about the US and is just saying he voted for him as the anti-HRC thing to do.

[ucrdem]

35. '"Bernie should definitely run as an independent," Trump said.'

Try it:

[Blue_In_AK]

36. I think it's hilarious

that The Donald thinks Bernie supporters would switch their allegiance to him. Almost everyone I know supports Bernie and I can't think of a one of them that would vote for Trump. So silly, Nicolle.

[happyslug]

37. Watch yourself, when I suggested a Trump-Sanders ticket it was banned.

n/t. They have a lot in common on issues of economics while miles aparts on Social issues.

[Oneironaut]

40. Yuck! Trump doesn't belong on any ballot, period!

Please explain yourself, as I'm genuinely interested. Trump has shown himself to be nothing more than a sideshow clown whose sole claim to fame is acting like a reality TV host. Why in the world would he be a worthy President?

[happyslug]

46. As I said, my post on that subject was banned, but here it is if you want to look at it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027785766

[TomCADem]

44. "They (Trump and Sanders) have a lot in common on issues of economics..."? No. Just No.

Trump is proposing a huge tax cut that would make Romney blush.

http://taxfoundation.org/comparing-2016-presidential-tax-reform-proposals

For example, here is a summary of each candidate's tax plans:

Bernie Sanders: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/analysis-senator-bernie-sanderss-tax-and-transfer-proposals

Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders proposes significant tax increases that would raise $15.3 trillion over the next decade. All income groups would pay more tax, but most would come from high-income households, particularly those with very high incomes. Sanders would also implement new government benefits—notably government-financed single-payer health care, long-term services and supports, college, and family leave benefits—and expand Social Security benefits. TPC finds the new government benefits would more than offset new taxes for 95% of households but the combined tax and transfer plan would increase federal budget deficits by more than $18 trillion over the next decade.

Donald Trump: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/analysis-donald-trumps-tax-plan

His plan would significantly reduce marginal tax rates on individuals and businesses, increase standard deduction amounts to nearly four times current levels, and curtail many tax expenditures. His proposal would cut taxes at all income levels, although the largest benefits, in dollar and percentage terms, would go to the highest-income households. The plan would reduce federal revenues by $9.5 trillion over its first decade before accounting for added interest costs or considering macroeconomic feedback effects. The plan would improve incentives to work, save, and invest. However, unless it is accompanied by very large spending cuts, it could increase the national debt by nearly 80 percent of gross domestic product by 2036, offsetting some or all of the incentive effects of the tax cuts.

[happyslug]

45. And Trump has advocating increases taxes on the rich...

Trump says what he thinks people want to hear, thus he has advocated both tax cuts for the rich, and tax increases on the rich. Trump has even said he supports a "Wealth Tax" as oppose to an Income tax. The "Wealth Tax" would be based on how much you owe at present, much like personal property taxes popular in some States (But Trump would exempt anything under a million dollars, thus most people will not have to pay anything).

Thus has said he will both increase taxes, and cut taxes. Sanders and Trump has other agreements and difference, I went into detail on the post that was banned, here is that post, if you want to see my actual comment you have to type on "Show Post". Since it was banned by a 4-3 vote, I will NOT repeat it here, just make a reference where you can find it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027785766

[TomCADem]

47. NPR - "Reality Check: What Donald Trump Has Said About Taxes And The Wealthy"

The possibility that Donald Trump might be willing to raise taxes from his $9.5 trillion tax cut to, let's say, $7 trillion, does not mean that he is "increasing taxes on the rich." This means that he is open to making his insane tax cut just a little less crazy.

"I'm not talking raise from where they are now. I'm talking raise from my low proposal." — Fox Business Network, May 9

Starting Monday, Trump sought to clarify his remarks, with interviews in The Wall Street Journal and on Fox Business Network, among others.

Trump said he absolutely does not favor raising taxes on the wealthy, or anyone else for that matter.

But he acknowledged that in negotiations with Congress, he would almost certainly have to concede on some points, and his plan might have to be scaled back a bit. The rich would still get a tax cut, but it wouldn't be as big as he first proposed.

[happyslug]

48. Trump changes what he is for all the time, that is one of the reason he won the GOP Nomination

Thus he has been BOTH for and against tax increases and tax cuts and to someone like FOX he will always says he is for tax cut for the rich for that is what FOX and the Wall Street Journal wants to hear. In front of his actual supporters he has come out for Tax Increases for that is what they want to hear. Since Trump has NEVER held elected office (he was a registered Democrat till 2009), he is an open book on that subject (and Open book filled with blank pages, as the old saying goes). Thus you can find comments both for and against taxing the Rich.

One of my favorite stories that I read was about the 1936 election where the Republicans were attacking FDR for NOT fulfilling any of his promises he made in a Speech in Pittsburgh during the 1932 campaign. FDR told his staff to find that speech and write a new speech showing how he kept every promise he made in that speech. The Staff did and came back with the only way to address what FDR had mad in that speech was to say "That you never gave that speech". FDR had NOT kept any of his promises in that Speech, including a balance budget. FDR LOST Pennsylvania in 1932, and after being attacked for NOT keeping his promises he made in 1932, Pennsylvania voted him back into office in the 1936 landslide.

I bring up FDR 1936 election to point out, what a politician says is often unimportant, you are better looking at what he had done in the past (Which is what Voters did to FDR in 1936, they liked what FDR had done since 1932, NOT what he said he would do in 1932). Trump can say both things and his supporters will hear what they want. The 1% want to hear Trump is for cutting taxes for the rich, and many of Trump's supporters believe Trump wil INCREASE those same taxes. Right now, Trump can say both things and get away with it. This permits Trump to attack Hillary from the left as while as the right.

To attack Trump successfully, you have to go after his image as someone who can get things done, NOT on what he says he will do or not do. Thus attacking Trump's tax policy will have no affect on this campaign (It may make some people who oppose Trump, happy, but such people will never vote for trump, so catering to their fears will have no affect on this election).

The same can be said about attacking Trump's taxes, all Trump has to say as to any such attack is he is using all the legal means to pay the least taxes, and that is all permitted by the law. Trump has been accused not paying taxes, but he position is he did, but the "warrants" and other tax collection actions were part of his plan to pay the least taxes. Sometimes it is cheaper to take a tax penalty then to pay what the Government says you should pay (THis related to the old saying, that when you file your Income Tax with the Federal Government, that is just your first offer and if the Government does nothing, they accepted your offer of how much tax you owe).

Back to Trump, if you want him defeated, you have to attack his image as a successful business tycoon. You have to concentrate on his failures, and most are public record. You have to show why it failed and that the failure was tied in with Trump NOT some other reason (which trump will come up with). You have to hit Trump hard on that and keep hitting him on it for it is the only public record we have for Trump.

In many ways Trump is a modern Demigod, he has managed to project an image that he is the perfect leader, we on the left may HATE the image he is projecting, but it has won him the GOP nomination and all he needs is some Democrats and Independents to vote for him for Trump to win in November. We have to attack that image and so far the left, like the GOP hierarchy, has been unable and unwilling to do so.

[TomCADem]

49. Again, Trump Is Not For A Tax Increase. He Is Pushing a Huge Tax Cut

He explained that he was talking about moving off of his own proposed tax giveaway to the rich. His website still lists a proposed top tax rate of 25%: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/tax-reform

[Oneironaut]

39. Dumpf*** would love for Bernie to run as I. Only way he can win, in fact.

[rockfordfile]

43. Maybe their supporters are alike

How embarrassing for Sen.Sanders. To say a bigot and un-American racist like Trump.

"But as your number two he could watch and learn from you?" Wallace suggested. "