Would Donald Trump Make a Good Vice President? (Trump Thinks So)

You're right there a lot of people with their heads buried in the sand and they are not ready for the truth. If they aren't careful they'll end up like the people of Germany, Russia and Japan before world war two.

Probably, I mean he would be better than dumb ass Biden.

I believe Trump is a great guy and turns out a good risk taker, his actions tells it all he must be in charge, if he were to become VP it would kill him to have to take orders from President Romney, and others in the cabinet.

James -- You have a good point. Like I said earlier, Trump would make an excellent President. If he were to take the huge pay cut to become VP, his character (ego) would be tested and it would only be a stepping stone to the next election cycle. Romney could learn from his advice - a good thing for America. They are BOTH business savvy and the USA has to be run like a business to be successful.

yes; just like his bankrupt casino. Let's just declare bankruptcy in the USA -- classy.

Because he isn't able to control his mouth, he would be the WORST V.P. choice!

You mean like Biden, of course if Biden were sobber he might do better.

Talk about not being able to control his mouth -- what about Biden?? LOL At least when Trump speaks, he makes sense and he thinks before he says anything. Biden, on the other hand, well .. history is history.

Ha,Ha Ha, very,very true.

Too much ego.

NO WAY - Mitt would have to put a gag on his mouth.

Fuuuuuuuucccckkkkkkkkk noooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Romney would be The Donald's puppet. No one else matters to The Donald but The Donald. Not a team player

Trump is not a serious individual worthy of consideration for any high office. He is in the Paris Hilton league not the Geoerge Washington league.

He could be an asset on the international and business end of things. Not a paperweight like most of them.

He would NOT make a good VICE PRESIDENT, but he would make a good CANDIDATE for Romney. They're both the same, if you think about it. Phony baloney on managing money, phony baloney on empathy and phony baloney on memory.

Today's Republican party's three priority agendas are first, Tax break for the 1%, second, Tax break for the 1% ,and third,Tax break for the 1% the rest of the nation dont matter.

i am poor guy, why should i vote for somebody who is going to increase my student loans and decimate department of education. Not so proud about Obama but at least he will keep my student loan rates the same.

Heck no! He's too self-centered and has no political experience or finesse.

Your point is?

Exactly. I no doubt he works for his money but he is at a stage that due to his wealth, like many in his social status that have an alter-ego. I be willing to bet those in the political arena in the white house shutter at the thought of him in the mix. You think Biden gets low exposure as VP becuz of his blunders...Trump if for some miracle were a VP he may be taken out by friendly fire from those within his security staff. Another words, Trump is a loose cannon, but then again he probably would have his whole agenda dictated to him as to what he can or cannot say...yet I wonder about Biden..who controls his words or is this some conspiracy that goes on where Biden is told say this ...Could it all be part a master scheme to make the VP look foolish so the Prez looks good? You know ...(excuse the potential racist remark) "Thank God we have a smart Black man as president and not this "white man"...All part of a scheme???If not, then maybe it can make a good movie.

He isn't just dumb and conceited. He's weird. Really weird.

LOL good picture... now we know it is not a dead squirrel up on top...

I think he would hell, why not have someone who actually knows how to make money?

Maybe because the government is not about making money....Yeah right... he was given a business and a fortune from his daddy... he bankrupted the company three times to get rid of tens of millions in debt owed to smaller businesses typical right wing businessman

His wealth was inherited from his father. He'll always be that annoying bastard known as the bosses kid.

Last time I checked, the purpose of our government was not "to make money." The purpose of our gov't is to work for its citizens and help ensure "the general good." It's people like you, who have governments confused with corporations, who are actually threatening the very survival of the U.S.

He has become a big "jester" and that is all he is. With all that money he has got, he could have done a lot of good with it, but no, he has a loud mouth that says absolutely nothing. It is all about him. What a shame!!!

He would keep trying to fire the President.
He is a loose cannon. It would be like trying to deal with Biden. Maybe even worse..

I think he's a joke.

He would bankrupt the nation like he did to 3 of his businesses and like all the Republicans are trying to do... and that comb-over... would he let that preside over the Senate in his stead?

After Bush and Obama it is going to be hard to bankrupt what is already bankrupted. Over 10 trillion dollars in dept between them. Obama is much better at it. He only took 3 years to drive up the debt that it took 8 years for Bush. I know you have an excuse for Obama. Spare me the details.

No "excuses" necessary as the facts and the truth work just fine.

Too bad that W's spending has totalled $5.07 trillion SINCE he's left office. What a coincidence that the national debt has gone up by that very amount.

And per the Wall St Journal, Obama's federal spending has gone up only 1.4%, the lowest in 60 years since Ike was the President. And before you try to deny those facts, remember who owns the WSJ? Rupert Murdoch i.e. there's no one who'd like to see Obama fail more than he would. The only excuses that need to be made are the weak ass ones excusing W for his unfunded spending for two wars, the tax cuts for the rich and the $800 billion bj to Big Pharma, Medicare part D. Sorry to throw the facts at you or as you call them "excuses".

Tedster, the right-wingers have no use for facts and truth. They live in their own cultish fantasy world where they can say anything they want to and believe it's true.

Yeah, to them when the facts aren't what they "wish" them to be then they just deny and dismiss them. This is especially ironic when they didn't even know what they were before I told them which is something else they simply ignore.

Don't be fooled by that stat. When you only increase your dept by 1 trillion dollars a year plus a percent or 2. Yes you come up with this great percentage. But the dept continues up-word by a trillion dollars plus a year.
Between Bush and Obama they added over 10 trillion dollars to the dept. That nearly triple the debt of all the other president combined. In fact by the time I finish this it may be more than triple. If you wish to blame someone take a look at the Senate which has not passed a budget in 3 years. I am not a fan of Bush just less of a fan of Obama. Both of them were and are terrible. I will say that Obama did get a break from the high cost of medicine for seniors. You are correct part D was not funded then Obama took $500 billion from medicare. Then cut payment for Social Security which is now decreased the 23 years that it was supposedly solvent for.
You are really falling for the BS that is out there.
P.S. I agree that Bush was terrible President. But he is not responsible for Obama dept increases.

Dispute the facts of what W has spend SINCE he's left office? Let me try this again and see if sinks in? W's spending totals $5.07 trillion and not coincidentally that's about what the national debt's gone up. If you divide that number by 3 yrs it averages nearly $1.78 trillion which is about .4 trillion more that the deficit annually. It's not my fault if 1. you didn't know this and 2. I know more about this than you do. I'm guessing Rush and Hannity and Beck "neglected" to mention facts which disabuse them of their viewpts.

You have neglected that Congress was control by Democrats the first two years of the Obama administration. They elected to keep everything in place. In fact they over road Bush when he wanted to make cuts. They have even elected to keep the tax cuts in place and will no doubt extend them again. You are trying to blame the spending that the Obama and Congress has done on the on Bush and that does not wash. Plus Obama ask Bush to add 350 billion dollars to his 2009 budget which he did.
I do not watch any of the programs that you have mentioned. I would say that you read the Huff and Move-on.

The tax cuts being extended was what's called "statesmanship" and was merely a quid pro quo in exchange for Obama's unemployment benefits extension and nothing more. As for the spending by the Dem congress when W was in office, any of it could've been vetoed by W and wasn't. In fact he only used his veto powers 5 TIMES IN EIGHT YEARS which is the fewest ever by a president. Had he used them and THEN been overridden you'd have a perfectly good case to make. Absent that, no.

I do not read Huffpo of Move on or Media Matters however if they have your seal of approval I may start.



.

You are correct Bush went along with their spending which I openly condemn. Just as I have said that going into Iraq was also a very bad decision. He should have taken out Bin Laden and then got out of Afghanistan.
Again you are wrong. Bush used the veto 44 times. It is Obama who has used it the least. He has only 2.

You should read the Huff and move-on and then go out and do research on what they say.