When looking into the last time a serving member of a US cabinet, or any party, won the nomination, it seems the last time this happened was 1908, William Taft. Hillary Clinton of course had been out of cabinet for over 3 years by the time she won the Democrat nomination. Herbert Hoover is someone who left cabinet, won the nomination close to the election date. Hoover had become one of the more popular Republicans in the country because in his role as commerce secretary. He had come into cabinet as this very rich man who had performed extraordinary humanitarian work post WW1. He transformed the Department of Commerce, in a way that impacted many Americans (jobs)m then he stood up to the challenge of the Great Mississippi Flood. I'm wondering about the ways Rubio and Hegseth have positively impacted American people's lives. Hegseth will still be up to his armpits in a messy war, and the human consequences of that. Rubio; America's international relations are a mess, and even if they are good, it doesn't really impact Americans in a way that they feel positive. That changes if Rubio flounces, and becomes the anti-Trump candidate, perhaps following some disaster that can be laid at the feet of Trump-Hegseth or Trump-Bessent. If Vance wants to run, he's got the nomination. That doesn't mean he would win an election. If the Republicans do badly in the coming elections, the argument could be either "We lost because Trump didn't go far enough, not because he went too far" or "Trumpism was right, but Trump himself is the problem" or "Trump changed the party, but we need a Republican who can actually win back independents and suburban voters." The first argument favours Vance, possibly Hegseth, Noem (she would say this wouldn't have happened if she had been around) and then Donald Jr. The second is Rubio, Cruz, Cotton, Hawley. The third is more likely a non-cabinet member, Youngkin, Kemp, DeSantis and Scott. But ultimately, Iran will cook the prospects for Hegseth or Rubio. How are they going to win in Iran? The original objective was to overthrow the Mullahs, and have millions of liberated people in the streets of Tehran cheering in a new democratic and secular government. Not going to happen. Instead, the closest the US will get to a victory is beating Iran to a bloody, surly pulp, likely generating millions of refugees, some of which with revenge in their hearts. Vance; I suppose his role on the negotiating teams means he could say he tried, but had one hand tied behind his back, thanks to a the clown of a Trump son in law having a say in negotiations, and the clown in WD dropping bombs. I'm favouring one of the governors securing the nomination, but not DeSantis. So Youngkin, Kemp. They can still be very strongly anti-Iran, but can offer the best solution to ending it all, in a Nixon-esque way. Of course, if the President endorses Don Jr..... That could help Vance. Vance can't be sacked. He can argue he was elected be he shared the same agenda that Trump campaigned for (cue supporting the common man, his story as a Hillbilly), but Trump <deleted> up with all these sycophantic incompetents in cabinet. A wild suggestion; Vance reaches out to Tucker Carlson, who been quite anti-war, but otherwise MAGA, and a quite eloquent individual. None of this I support, just what I think will happen.
Create an account or sign in to comment