Tim Scott Is The Leading Trump VP Contender
57:42 Share

You're a podcast listener, and this is a podcast ad. Reach great listeners like yourself with podcast advertising from Lipson Ads. Choose from hundreds of top podcasts offering host endorsements, or run a reproduced ad like this one across thousands of shows to reach your target audience with Lipson Ads. Go to LipsonAds.com now. That's L-I-B-S-Y-N-Ads.com. Okay, question. Would you eat a pigeon? Would you eat a New York pigeon?

No. What? Would you? No. No. Like, no, but like people eat pigeon, you know, right? Who? I don't know. Like, it's a pretty common thing. Like, English people several hundred years ago. And also, it's like in a lot of- It's pretty common somewhere else. 700 years ago. Are people eating pigeons in New York City? Probably. Probably.

Hello and welcome to the FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast. I'm Galen Druk, and happy Eclipse Day. I know that by the time you're listening to this, the great North American eclipse has already happened, but we are still in the pre-eclipse era, so we hope you enjoy our eager anticipation nonetheless. In fact, we've got a special Guess What Americans Think About the Solar Eclipse segment planned for you today. What percentage of Americans plan to see the eclipse?

and how many think it's overrated. I guess I fall into the former category for the sake of transparency. We are recording this episode extra early today because I'm going to hit the road as soon as we're done to go see the eclipse. It turns out that election data nerd and solar eclipse nerd, the Venn diagram of the two is, well, itself overrated.

An eclipse. We are also going to do our first Republican VP draft since the primaries were settled. Tim Scott has been picked first in every draft we've done on either the podcast or the website so far this cycle. So will he keep his crown or will, say, Kristi Noem, Elise Stefanik or Marco Rubio supplant him?

And we're going to introduce FiveThirtyEight's Swing-O-Matic. Our new feature on the website allows you to shift preferences and turnout of different demographic groups to see how it would shape who wins in 2024. So say the youth vote drops by 10% in terms of turnout, and there's a slight shift towards independence. Well, Trump would win that election narrowly, but shift the senior vote or the white vote a couple points to the left, and suddenly it's a Biden-elected

So here with me to discuss it all is AP politics reporter Leah Escaranam. Welcome to the podcast, Leah. Hello. Happy Eclipse Day. That is the sound of enthusiasm if I have ever heard it. Leah, are you excited for the eclipse? You know, I am. I don't think I don't think I'm as excited as some other people on this call, but like I'm I'm into it.

Also here with us today is Director of Data Analytics, Elliot Morris. Welcome, Elliot. Hey, thanks, Galen. And was that some shade? No, it was an observation. Oh, my gosh. Oh, some shade. Oh, yeah. Yeah, didn't get the joke. Didn't get the joke, Leah. I'm not part of the group. You're throwing all of the shade but not picking up the jokes. Not in the Venn diagram circle.

of election. Yeah, not in the eclipse, not literally in the eclipse, but I know somebody who is, which is FiveThirtyEight researcher and copy editor Cooper Burton. Welcome to the podcast, Cooper. Thank you, Galen. Good morning. Happy Great American Eclipse Day Part Two.

Indeed, the last time you were on the podcast, you joined us as a Gen Z correspondent. And if I understand correctly, Gen Z's predilection for astrology means that the eclipse is a very important event in your community. Is that correct? I would say that's a fair characterization, yes. Although, importantly, astrology and astronomy are different. I feel like I have to put that out as a... I wasn't going to call him out, but thanks, Cooper. Yeah, good. Okay. Yeah.

But I know enough millennial people into astrology to know that the eclipse also means something for people who are into astrology. I would assume it does. That's what I understand from the Internet. So to answer your question, Leah, yes, Cooper and I both plan on seeing the eclipse today. Leah and Elliot, you guys are down in D.C. You're not even close. Sorry. We get like 89 percent or something.

It's pretty good. You do? Are you going to go watch it? Well, I'm going to look outside my window or go outside, perhaps. Do you have your eclipse classes? Well, okay. Yeah, be careful. Don't look at the sun. No, but I think the coolest part is... Oh, the model's already done. You don't need my eyes anymore.

No, but I think the coolest part is seeing how dark it gets, right? It's like seeing the sky, not the sun itself. That's why I like, that's why I would travel to see this is to see like, I hear it's like looking into outer space instead of looking at the sky, which I hear is, which would be very cool because I don't actually, I don't ever see myself going into outer space personally. You know, we talk a lot about the sun and the solar eclipse, but I think we should all pause for a second. Sure.

Shut up about the sun. I think we should, some people will get that reference. I do think we need to give the moon some more credit here. The solar eclipse would not be possible without Earth's best friend, the moon. Moon gets so much credit. Lunar eclipses get their own event. Well, right, but- This is a solar eclipse. But the moon is responsible for both of them. The star of the lunar eclipse is the moon. The star of the lunar eclipse is the sun? The star?

Y'all need to do some shakes here. You need to brush up on your chemistry. Anyway, today is the first time since 2017 a total solar eclipse will be visible from North America. And since this won't happen for another 20 years, we're going to mark the occasion with a special segment of Guess What Americans Think. So get your pen and paper ready. First question, courtesy of YouGov. What percentage of Americans intend to catch a glimpse of

of today's eclipse. I can't believe we're starting with a quiz. Yo, we're starting with a quiz. This is a good round number. Let's use this one. All right. Three, two, one. Reveal. 83. 70. 53.

Okay. So, um, Cooper, I don't know if this is fair. You are one of our polling researchers at five 38. Have you seen this poll?

I don't know what poll you're looking at. I have seen some polls about the eclipse. Okay, because it is 53%. So maybe we actually can't play this game with Cooper. Look, I wrote 53 and then I deleted it. And then I crossed it out. Because 100 minus 47 is 53. And then I was like, okay, I'm not going to do the 47 thing because it's going to be annoying. We should have. Well, you know...

Moral of the story. I was hoping that I could just make myself look really smart and intelligent. But I called you out, you know? Did you Google it, Cooper? No, I didn't. I swear I didn't look at any polls. Did you load up the polls database on the call? It is my job to look at polls all day, so. I think he stays in. I think it's a better challenge this way. Also, I got it too before I didn't get it because I was trying to fit in.

I also got it in the way that I didn't actually get it. Okay, so one unfairly earned point for Cooper, zero for Elliot and Leah. Next question. What percentage of Americans are traveling to see the eclipse or say they are traveling to see the eclipse? Is it from the same poll? From the same poll. Thanks.

What poll is this? But hopefully Cooper isn't reading that many YouGov polls that he also saw this. There's like a, there's at least one in three chance that Cooper entered that poll into our database. That's not, that's not a question. We don't collect cross tab data on who's seeing the eclipse. You're telling me you open that 100 page YouGov PDF and you don't go perusing, you don't go surfing for some, for some information.

All right, three, two, one, reveal. 31. 13. 12%. Okay, Leah gets it. It is 4% of Americans who plan on traveling. I have dramatically overestimated. I think we're on the same wavelength, Leah.

Yeah. Although if we were to pull this podcast, it is 50% of this podcast, which I think means that, as I said, eclipse nerds are overrepresented in the election data nerd. I'm traveling outside 75%. You're walking out. I guess. Yeah, yeah, yeah. That counts, actually. So we'll have to reconsider. So Cooper won. Leah won. What percentage of Americans just aren't interested in seeing the eclipse?

And are eager to say so in a poll. Three, two, one, reveal. 40. 31. 47. Okay, no one really gets it, but Cooper gets it. The answer was 14%. What? Which really sort of shows us what kind of... Well, I guess we're overestimating how unenthusiastic people are about the eclipse.

is what we just did there. We are underestimating the somewhat interested middle of America. Or at least I was. As usual. Y'all did fine. Okay. Next one. This is from a new poll, which hopefully Cooper was not entering into our database because I can't imagine that they were actually doing head-to-head election polling as well because it's the Ohio State Wexner Medical Center.

What percentage of Americans don't know that looking directly into a solar eclipse without proper eye protection can cause permanent eye damage? What percentage do not know this? What percentage of Americans will be staring straight at the sun today? Three, two, one, reveal. 21. 20. 15. Wow, everyone's pretty close. We got 20, 21, and 15 from Leah Cooper.

You get it. God, Cooper, come on, man. You get it, but you all underestimated. 30% of Americans do not know that they should not be staring directly into the sun today, according to the Ohio State Western Medical Center. Elliot, this is my job. 21. This is what I get. I get paid to know these things. Okay, so Cooper...

Three, Leah, one. Elliot, zero. Okay, last quiz question for the day before we move on to our swing-o-matic.

What percentage of Americans believe an eclipse can cause natural disasters, sleep problems, and mental health issues? Ooh, that's a good one. I mean, I hate it still. From the same medical center. They believe that an eclipse can cause all of these things or any of these things? Any of these things. And this is the same poll that said that 30% didn't know that it could cause permanent damage to look straight at the sun. It's important. Yes. So it's a good number to guess around. Mm-hmm.

Three, two, one, reveal. 42. 47. Oh, man. 22. Okay. Y'all are just guessing the same freaking number every time. The answer is 10%. What? So, Elliot, you get it. Let's go! Oh, yeah. We have good luck out. Did you guess? Like, the majority of Americans are like, well, expect another earthquake today.

Well, but like, like, well, you already knew the answer. Come on. When there's like a, like a full moon, like kids go crazy. Right. Like, that's what I would always hear in school. Like my teacher would be like, oh, it's a full moon. You guys are like insane today. So like, I feel like it's like kind of normal for people to think that like the moon can affect your life.

behavior a little bit. I don't know, maybe that's too astrology, Gen Z astrology, but I feel like that's kind of a normal thing to think, even if it's not backed up by science. Well, half of the human race does follow the lunar cycle. So I think there's some scientific basis there. Give yourself some more credit. Well, I just say, I don't know the science behind it, so I don't want to spread misinformation on the politics podcast.

As a non-credited astrologer, I don't want to be perceived to be spreading misinformation. Okay, Cooper, nonetheless, congratulations. You won. Big surprise. The Gen Zer on the podcast wins the segment about the solar eclipse. Leah Elliott, your consolation prize is in the mail. Doubt it. Let's move on to FiveThirtyEight's Swing-O-Matic.

Today's podcast is brought to you by Shopify. Ready to make the smartest choice for your business? Say hello to Shopify, the global commerce platform that makes selling a breeze.

Whether you're starting your online shop, opening your first physical store, or hitting a million orders, Shopify is your growth partner. Sell everywhere with Shopify's all-in-one e-commerce platform and in-person POS system. Turn browsers into buyers with Shopify's best converting checkout, 36% better than other platforms. Effortlessly sell more with Shopify Magic, your AI-powered all-star.

Did you know Shopify powers 10% of all e-commerce in the U.S. and supports global brands like Allbirds, Rothy's, and Brooklinen? Join millions of successful entrepreneurs across 175 countries, backed by Shopify's extensive support and help resources.

Because businesses that grow, grow with Shopify. Start your success story today. Sign up for a $1 per month trial period at shopify.com slash 538. That's the numbers, not the letters. Shopify.com slash 538.

Today's podcast is brought to you by GiveWell. You're a details person. You want to understand how things really work. So when you're giving to charity, you should look at GiveWell, an independent resource for rigorous, transparent research about great giving opportunities whose website will leave even the most detail-oriented reader stunned.

Busy. GiveWell has now spent over 17 years researching charitable organizations and only directs funding to a few of the highest impact opportunities they've found. Over 100,000 donors have used GiveWell to donate more than 2 billion dollars.

Rigorous evidence suggests that these donations will save over 200,000 lives and improve the lives of millions more. GiveWell wants as many donors as possible to make informed decisions about high-impact giving. You can find all their research and recommendations on their site for free, and you can make tax-deductible donations to their recommended funds or charities, and GiveWell doesn't take a cut.

Go to GiveWell.org to find out more or make a donation. Select podcast and enter 538 politics at checkout to make sure they know you heard about them from us. Again, that's GiveWell.org to donate or find out more.

What would it take to turn blue states red or red states blue? That is a question for FiveThirtyEight's Swing-O-Matic. The Swing-O-Matic shows what could happen in the 2024 election if key demographic groups have swings in party preference or turnout. The indicators we looked at include age, race, income,

income, education, and sex. And I should say, before we get into it, I encourage everyone to head over to FiveThirtyEight.com to check this feature out themselves. You can play around with it. You can spend much too much time imagining different electoral scenarios. But let's begin with you, Elliot. You did the data work behind this. How would you explain the idea behind this?

the swing-o-matic? Why did we create this? What does it show us? There's a data answer and an editorial answer. Like many things, 530, it does. Editorially, I think there's just, you know, there's obvious interest in covering demographic groups. There's a contingent, of course, of online election watchers who will, like, take crosstabs and try to glean electoral futures based off of swings in subgroups. And editorially, right at the end of the day, like when we're talking about whether or not

the winner of the popular vote or the electoral college is going to change that is based on demographics in certain states or america-wide data-wise it's a really interesting data problem because you have to marry up two or three sources of data we of course have census data on the types of people who live in different places and we have polling data on how those people uh or

would vote if an election were today or have voted previously. So you get to do some cool modeling to match those things up. Yeah, I think the result is a pretty powerful tool. Like what's going to happen? What could happen if RFK Jr. wins 10% of the vote as polls suggest? Well, the swing of a man can tell you.

Yeah. And I should say here that it doesn't show, I mean, it does show the national popular vote, but the main thing we're looking at here is the electoral college. And so, like you said, you have to really look at the demographic makeup of places like Wisconsin or Arizona, Pennsylvania, Georgia, in order to say how much a shift amongst any particular demographic would change things, right? You know,

You change the senior vote a little bit and all of a sudden Florida is in play because it has so large of a senior population. And so changes will affect different states differently, of course, which is an interesting thing to see on this feature. Cooper and Leah, I know you've had some time to play around with this. What were your broad takeaways from playing around, Leah?

I find that Swing-O-Matic kind of represents the way that I think about elections and think about, like, especially putting my analyst hat on. Like, we're asked often, you know, do you think it'll be Trump or Biden? But, like, this is really how I think most analysts think about it, which is less, like, will it be Trump-Biden and more, well, will it be high youth turnout? How many third-party votes are going to come from youth turnout?

All of these kinds of questions, looking at different scenarios instead of just kind of a 50-50 what turns out to be kind of like a guess, right? It's a helpful way, even if you're just kind of playing around with it, to kind of practice, right?

what it's like to kind of handicap races. But in terms of like what I actually learned from the data, I was kind of struck by how many paths Trump has to the presidency. And I know that, like we said, it's not that I was surprised that Trump was competitive. It's just that looking at 2016, when Trump had such a narrow path and kind of hit gold, and that's how he managed to make it to the presidency by getting that like kind of walking on a tightrope. And that's

that getting him enough electoral college votes, we're now looking at multiple scenarios where Trump could end up winning. And it says a lot about the changing electorate and about the changing Republican Party and about how Americans view Trump and Trumpism now versus eight years ago.

Yeah, it's interesting when viewing these shifts because, I mean, we've seen trends in the polling data that point to some groups moving distinctly right, distinctly left, usually kind of furthering trends that we've seen in the last few election cycles. But I think where this interactive really shines is

illustrating how different the results can be if you take these swings in isolation or in combination with other swings. Because like the examples you mentioned at the top, if you just shift white voters and older voters left, Biden wins by even bigger than he did in 2020. And if you just shift

non-white voters and non-college educated voters to the right, Trump wins. But those aren't going to be happening on their own with everybody else kind of staying the same. So I just played around with it. And if you do both of those things at the same time, Biden wins by even bigger than he did in 2020. He actually picks up North Carolina. So I think it just shows how

You're going to see movement among every single demographic group, among age groups and between genders. And even beyond that, you're going to see turnout differential from 2020 to 2024. This year is probably going to be a little bit of a lower turnout election since there's two...

on popular candidates and people are not really excited about that prospect. But all of that is just to say that when you hear, you know, pundits like us or just other political commentators talk about... Oh my God, are you calling us pundits, Cooper? Get out of here. You're gone. Bye.

I should rephrase. Political analysts, how about? Okay, okay, okay. We'll accept it. Political analysts talk about these shifts. A lot of times they're kind of discussed in isolation. Are non-white voters going to vote for Trump at a higher margin or vote for Biden at a lower margin, I guess, is more accurate. But they're not the only group that's changing. So I think it's just...

really helpful to see in this interactive how easily or how difficult it could be to kind of cancel out swings in different demographic groups. Cooper, I think that's a really important point. And I think one of the things folks will realize if they play around with the swing-o-matic is

is just how influential, for example, the white vote is. I mean, we talk a lot about different parts of the electorate, but white voters still make up 70% of the electorate for reasons that include

You know, it's an older population, so a larger percent of white people in America are of age to vote in an election. Citizenship rates are extremely high. So while white people may make up 60 percent of the public, they make up more like 70 percent of voters. And so, you know, we talk about, OK, this big swing amongst white.

this significantly smaller group of voters, it will have an effect. But like we said at the top, if you shift sort of white voters or senior voters or whatever, just a couple percentage points, you get big shifts in the overall outcomes. Whereas if you're moving, you know, young voters or black or Hispanic voters, even sometimes large amounts, you see smaller shifts in the electorate. And I think Democrats in particular focus on this sort of

what has been described as sometimes a hemorrhaging of voters of color or whatever. The thing that Biden did that other Democrats might not have been able to do in 2020 was increase his performance, Democratic performance with white voters and independents in particular, which swung the election. Now, if you look at the polls today, though, he's holding steady with white voters, not improving his lot. And if he does hold steady with white voters while losing support amongst voters of color, then...

as we also mentioned as a scenario in the swing-o-matic, he could lose. Elliot, were there any other big takeaways that you had from playing around with the levers? I think Leah is good to point out just how close the election is along the Trump improving axis. But you can also get to a really close election if you just hold...

Democratic and Republican loyalty the same and like make everyone a little bit more likely to vote for a third party candidate. And that's the type of scenario you get when there's actually a supply of third party candidates, which we didn't have in 2020. Just to like really put the point on this, if third party vote share increases to 5% of all votes cast,

So where it was in 2016, then according to the swing-o-matic, Trump would have won if all other voting behavior was the same as in 2020. And he wins while losing the popular vote by three percentage points. So there's like two layers here. One, third party vote takes a pretty good amount of support away from Democrats in places that really matter, like Wisconsin, Arizona, Georgia.

And two, there's still a very large electoral college divide that advantages Republicans, at least according to the swing of magic. Now, this is all hypothetical. It's based off of 2020 voting behavior. So the exact electoral college divide, the exact way people are going to break down is going to be different. And we can update that later on with new polling data. But at least this is the best guess we have right now.

I think the way that you just phrased that, Elliot, kind of the supply of third party candidates is really spot on. Because as much as we kind of think about third party candidates in terms of how strong they are as candidates or whether they're, you know, too outlandish for the general population, the fact that they're there and an option on the ballot is...

a big deal, right? Like that's the fact that there's more than one, that there's like another name that is recognizable or even not that recognizable.

could decide who's going to be the next president. Yeah, those options just become vote sinks for people who are dissatisfied. Those happen to be lots of young, lots of lower information voters. In an election that's decided by just a couple of 10,000 votes, every percentage point can make the difference in who's going to be the leader over the next four years.

Especially when one of the third party candidates has one of the most recognizable names in American politics. Indeed. And the money to boot. All right. I think we're going to move on to our next segment because there's actually no real way to represent how cool this is in audio, unfortunately. So folks really do have to just go to FiveThirtyEight.com and play around with this themselves. You should absolutely do it.

And I'm sure we'll be using this in our coverage as we go forward because it takes away a lot of the sort of guessing and punditry that Cooper pointed out when we can actually, you know, use this tool and say, OK, youth vote drops by this much or Hispanic voters shift towards Trump by this much. Go play with it. We're going to move on to our VP draft.

You're a podcast listener, and this is a podcast ad. Reach great listeners like yourself with podcast advertising from Lipson Ads. Choose from hundreds of top podcasts offering host endorsements, or run a reproduced ad like this one across thousands of shows to reach your target audience with Lipson Ads. Go to LipsonAds.com now. That's L-I-B-S-Y-N-Ads.com.

The 2024 election is a rerun of the 2020 election at the top of the ticket. So Americans won't be spending much time getting acquainted with new faces, except for one, and that is Trump's VP pick. According to a recent analysis by our colleague Nathaniel Rakich, based on history, we should expect Trump to announce his pick the week before the Republican convention in July. So think somewhere around the second week of July.

July. A little background before we begin our draft. FiveThirtyEight has done three VP drafts in the past year, one on this podcast, two on the website. As I mentioned, Tim Scott was drafted first in all three rounds. Along with Scott, Kristi Noem and Elise Stefanik appear to be frontrunners. They both were picked in the first rounds of the November 2023 and March 2024 drafts. They also are consensus favorites across the political press.

Nikki Haley was once a top pick, but today not so much. So Haley went number two in August 2023 and number five even as late as November 2023. But in last month's draft, she was not picked. Reporting also suggests that she is not on Trump's VP shortlist.

Some hopefuls have also never been drafted. So the list of possibilities, according to Politico, which changes periodically, include Byron Donald and Doug Burgum, who no one has ever picked at 538. So let's see if any of that changes this time around. We're going to do a snake draft as usual. And the order has been chosen by random.org because we believe in fairness here on the 538 Politics podcast. So...

without further ado, the drafting order will be Leah, Cooper, Elliot, and then me. So, Leah, take us away with Tim Scott. Tim Scott! Shut up!

No one could have guessed that. I mean, I'm not going to go for some messaging, some symbolic, like, I'm going to say, I don't know, I'm going to say Don Bacon because I want to get across the importance of the suburbs. Nope. Nope. Tim Scott, I'm so glad I'm first.

Hit that high probability answer. And to be clear, this doesn't have to do with any of my, like, I don't have any intel. This isn't from, like, personal reporting. This is just from reading the tea leaves and the news. I think that if anything, like, the fact that

Scott has remained on Trump's good side throughout this entire thing, including when he was actually running as a candidate, when Tim Scott was running as a candidate. Bodes well for him. I think the fact that he's so popular in the Senate and a lot of people are going to be telling Trump how great Tim Scott is and why Trump should choose him, I think that will be influential. I think that

The fact that Republicans see an opening specifically among black male voters and men of color in general is a major motivator for him. And I think that if we're talking about I think like the the alternative would be theoretically like he would choose kind of a woman to get the vote.

suburban woman support. I don't think Trump has ever really seemed that interested in pursuing that course. I don't think his messaging is showing that he is wildly interested in trying to get suburban women to vote for him. I think Trump needs to lose less among men of color, people of color, but especially men. And I think Tim Scott could help him do that.

Leah, the other thing is choosing Tim Scott is potentially also a message for suburban women or other more moderate swing voters, which is what I think we're getting at when we say suburban women. Because Tim Scott is more of a happy warrior type, he's more even keeled, it may sort of

help Trump try to mitigate accusations of racism or the kinds of attacks that probably help turn off more moderate voters, things like that. So Tim Scott may be a play for men of color, but Tim Scott may also be a play for more moderate voters. Even though his politics are quite conservative, he comes off as a little more genteel.

Yeah, I see your point. I don't disagree. I just think that because Tim Scott is— I'm trying to help you here, Leah. I'm making your case. No, I'm helping myself, too. But because Tim Scott is so conservative and because he has taken extremely conservative stances on abortion, I think that's where it's kind of like—especially in 2024. If Republicans are afraid of messaging on abortion, I do think that—

choosing a woman in particular, it's a more obvious way at getting at the problem. I don't know if it's more effective, but it's a more obvious kind of strategy. Here, I think that by nominating or by choosing somebody who's pretty conservative on abortion, probably more conservative than Trump is on abortion. Well, especially given that today Trump said that he believes that abortion should be left to the states. I guess that's kind of breaking news.

Good thing we're mentioning it. He's been toying with the idea of a 15-week or 16-week national abortion ban. And today he said no national ban. It's left to the states. And let's see what he says later because Trump says lots of things about abortion.

So, you know, I think that I wouldn't be surprised if this is one of many breaking news items throughout the cycle, throughout the next few months with Trump's position on abortion. So, yes, breaking news, but also, you know, who knows? But I just think that it's a clear play at men. So, yeah, that's I got to go first. Good first pick. Yeah. Nice. Cooper, number two.

Well, you know, the last time I did this, I went a little bit outside the box. I was trying to pick people that... Who was it? Who did you choose? I was trying to pick people. Well, I chose Tulsi Gabbard and I chose Kevin McCarthy, which I know is not happening, but I didn't want to say a name that we've read 40 times in every other... Oh, he's being a hipster. He's just trying to, you know, pick some interesting, interesting, different and cool. I was trying to be different and cool. Yes. Yes.

I am not doing that this time. You know, Leah kind of knocked that approach at the top of her pick. No, I'm not knocking it. If I wasn't able to go first, I would totally go for symbolic because I'd be like, throw it out. Well, I'm not doing that this time. I'm in it to win it. So I'm going to pick Kristi Noem. She's the governor of South Dakota. Bad pass. Thanks, Caitlin.

She's the governor of South Dakota. She is a woman. I know that's stellar political analysis, but she is not a white man, which a lot of people are suspecting and encouraging Trump to pick somebody who's not a white man, like Leah said. I think that she is well-liked in Trump world and among Republicans. She's kind of been visibly gunning for this job for like four years now. She's kind of

more well-known for wanting to be his VP than for being the governor of a state. But I think she's probably the most solid all-around pick. She is very poised and put together in a way that Trump is sometimes not, I think, and that can appeal to moderates or just people who are kind of turned off by Trump's personality. I think that she could

help reassure them a little bit. I think she does come with a little bit of baggage. She can be a little odd sometimes. I don't know if you saw these kind of bizarre infomercials that she filmed about this dentist place in Texas. Spot con. Yeah. And so she can just, you know, stuff like that is a little odd, but that's very online, and I'm sure that most people did not hear about that. So...

Well, do you think that baggage is heavier than some of the scandals she's facing in her own state of South Dakota? Probably not. No. But I think it's things like that that can...

put cracks in her kind of very put together image and kind of make people second guess her judgment. I mean, but you're right. She's facing some scandals in her home state that are a little bit like kind of localized and specific to South Dakota. But she, I think, is a strong overall pick. And she is extremely loyal to Trump, which he really prizes over almost anything else.

Yeah, playing the draft game, I would have also picked Kristi Noem second. I think she's probably about as likely as Tim Scott to win. All these things are low probability events. I don't think she necessarily has as strong a case. And I think this is perhaps evidenced by Trump really embracing Tim Scott as a campaign surrogate after he withdrew from the presidential race.

you know, she's got these scandals. She's not necessarily been nationally vetted. Like you said, these scandals have been localized to North Dakota so far. What happens when they sort of escape that? And Elliot, I just want to add details to that so people aren't like confused about what we're talking about. The local scandals are that her daughter got preferential treatment getting licensed as a real estate appraiser, her use of a state airplane to attend personal and political events, and her alleged affair with Trump staffer Corey Lewandowski. So,

So that is what we are talking about.

you know you have to consider that on balance with like what she brings to the table and like leah alluded to uh in an election year where abortion is going to be important again having a woman on the ballot could be really useful for republicans then again if they want to take a moderate stance publicly and go for more conservative voters behind the scenes someone like tim scott who is a little more conservative has some evangelical christian bona fides might be able to do something give trump a higher return there

It's all a toss-up, though, right? It's all the same probability. These are good draft picks. If you're thinking, like, strategically, like, the way, like, you consider how, I mean, the key word with these picks is balance, right? So you have, like, geographic balance, and you have ideological balance, and you have, you know, kind of personality balance. And in a lot of those ways, or I think maybe in one or two, like, Kristi Noem, I think, probably gives Trump,

something that like, I mean, Trump doesn't need help with evangelicals anymore, right? Like that's, he doesn't need that from Tim Scott.

And I will also say that I think that internal in-state scandals are not usually a huge barrier for presidential candidates or for potential vice presidential candidates if that were the case. Like Mike Pence wasn't the most popular governor when he was chosen. And having a woman on the ballot to say like I'm a mother and especially talking about IVF I think would probably be helpful. All that said –

I just don't think that's how Trump chooses. Yeah. Similarly, I think a woman is a good pick. So stuck in third place for this draft, I'd pick Elise Stefanik. I think it's... Thanks, Galen. Okay. I think this joke maybe predates everyone on this podcast except for me. Oh, okay. But like historically during drafts,

Every time somebody picks someone, you just say bad pick. Bad pick. Oh, okay. No, I don't think it's a very high likelihood, but given the options I have. She's obviously been a really strong surrogate for Trump over the last couple years. She defended his first impeachment very prominently on media. She is just the type of Republican you would expect to have the public persona that satisfies Trump.

Trump and the people around him who are weighing in on the VP pick while providing something else in an election year that's close and probably decided by moderates. So she's a little bit more moderate compared to other Republicans in Congress. I think actually she's more moderate than like nine out of 10 other Republicans in the House.

So that gives her some wiggle room when she's trying to appeal to the types of voters that the Trump campaign might want to go after in the suburbs. I also think there's somewhat of a galaxy brain play with Willie Stefanik, which is every vote counts in a presidential election if what you're trying to do is like

send a message that you are the most dominant presidential candidate ever to run and you are like conditioning on winning already. And if you're like Trump and you're trying to adopt that mindset, having someone to take away votes in a very democratic place that has recently swung to the right, New York, could provide you some like additional bragging rights if you win the election and you have 80 million votes or whatever he wants to say. So there is like a potential media angle to picking up.

and really Stefanik as well. - I think that's a great pick. Like you said, she has more of a moderate voting record, but she's not necessarily a moderate in her rhetoric. She has kind of been a very vocal Trump defender, and so she can kind of play best of both worlds. - I mean, the House of Representatives, I think, is probably just a good place to look for potential VP picks because

So much of, and there was a Washington Post story, I think over the weekend or this morning, about some of the dissatisfaction among Republicans in Congress and why that's caused some of them to retire or resign. I mean, in a lot of ways, like the House has become for a lot of, not every Republican member, but for some of them has become kind of an audition to be kind of the Trump loyalist and to

prove how much you like Trump and prove how much Trumpism is the kind of Republican you, like Republican Party you're aiming for. And so with that kind of just very outward display of affection to Trump, I think if there are people who start becoming kind of household names because of their loyalty to Trump in the House, then keep an eye out for VP picks.

But it'll be Tim Scott, probably. I don't know. All right. Because this is a snake draft, I am picking two people. And I think... Oh, my gosh. A snake draft. I thought it was over. Sorry. We might already be... I was talking so much. I'm sorry. You gotta have another pick. You gotta get... Yeah. You gotta prepare, Leah. Leah wants to get out of here. Sorry, everyone. We might already be at the place where...

It's time to choose messaging options, but I'm not quite sure. Oh, you pick bragging rights candidates now, Galen. You got a real one and you got a bragging right candidate. You're in the snake position. So I would say that a lot of people talk about loyalty to Trump. I think that obviously Trump will want loyalty and a VP candidate. Of course, that's what every president always wants.

loyalty that extends to a second January 6th style incident. One, he won't be able to run again. But two, even if he wants to ensure that a Republican wins after him, I mean, he could still try to pressure the VP to do something along those lines. I think right now his focus is on winning the 2024 election because that's obviously the most immediate thing for both being able to affect policy and also running

So I think from the perspective of who will help you win the election most, I'm going to pick somebody who's not really on the list, but is Joni Ernst. So Joni Ernst is like a Mike Pence style pick, which is that the biggest criticisms against Joni Ernst are the ones that are most popular.

Trump from people who doubt his ability to do the job are that he is corrupt and dangerous. Joni Ernst is known for being an extremely... She's in Senate leadership. She's won statewide elections. She's from the Midwest. She is known as being the adult in the room. She's relatively moderate as far as some of the big ticket issues like abortion are concerned. She's suggested an abortion ban at...

five months of pregnancy, you know, not like a Tim Scott who suggested that basically all abortions, I mean, not in the post-Roe world, but that previously has suggested that basically all abortions should be illegal. And she gives adult in the room. She will be able to challenge attacks against the ticket that they'll be unstable, unsteady. And so I think,

She provides everything that Mike Pence provided, except it's not a play for evangelicals. It's a play for moderate voters who feel like, I don't know, his behavior is a little sporadic and potentially dangerous. Decent pick. I think that makes a good amount of sense. Yeah. Well, thank you. Okay. So for my next pick, and I will say, like, I get the whole Elise Stefano-Christie Noem

But even if I had gone earlier, I don't know. Maybe I would have picked Kristi Noem. I'm not sure, but probably not Elise Stefanik because I don't think they give him anything. I think that people don't feel as though Elise Stefanik or Kristi Noem will be a steady hand in a potentially chaotic administration.

I think they have the exact same thing to offer the public that Trump already has to offer, which is a lot of sort of red meat and bombast. And I think that the reason Tim Scott is a good pick is that in addition to being an identity play, he is...

a steady hand. He is known for being a quote-unquote adult-in-the-room type character, and he is a happy warrior. And that's just not what Elise Stefanik or Kristi Noem provide to a Trump ticket. And also...

Christine Noem and Elise Stefanik won it so badly that I think that Trump might even be annoyed by their presence as a running mate, whereas somebody like Joni Ernst is more of a state presence. Okay, so next pick, I'm choosing between Sarah Huckabee Sanders and J.D. Vance. And... Pick right. The other one's mine. I am going to pick...

Okay, I've already made... I've already picked this duo in a past draft, but I'm going to pick Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Um...

Thank you. You're welcome. And it's basically for the same reasons as Joni Ernst, except that I think Sarah Huckabee Sanders would be more likely to take the job. I don't know that Joni Ernst wants the job or would take it or is vying for it in any way. Sarah Huckabee Sanders has proved her loyalty during some of the most heated moments of the first Trump presidency where she was doing battle with the press daily. And I think that's something that Trump obviously values.

She's one statewide. She's a mother. She's a woman, obviously, and can talk about some of these issues like IVF or abortion from a more personal perspective. That's like very sort of trite analysis by now, but I think is also checks the box of being a more staid and steady presence of.

being both the governor of a state and like not somebody who's trying to make news all the time by getting like Da Vinci veneers from someplace in Texas, you know, it's just kind of doing her job. Do you see her scandal about the, about what is it? Podium gate is what they called it. No, no,

about the podium she paid she she paid like fifteen thousand dollars for this podium it was like somehow she expensed it i guess i'm not totally read up on it but it was like a big deal in arkansas how is this always a thing i feel like this was a plot line in veep too um except it was a like a wooden box that she was standing on that was steel reinforced uh

Yeah. So that's who I'm picking. What a deep cut Galen. I've seen that too many times. Anyone want to tell me I picked poorly? No, I think it's a great pick. It was going to be my pick, so I'm just kind of a little pissed. But, um...

i think sarah huckabee sanders has like the loyalty earned my place sort of card she can play she was in the trump administration before and pretty much never faltered to support you say she's a woman i think you know she has she doesn't have a terribly long record of executive service and i could see trump not picking her because of his relationship with her father but

Again, if you're trying to speculate about that sort of thing, you can come up with any reason why any of these people are low probability picks. So should I pick the other one then? Let's go. J.D. Vance. I think J.D. Vance is a decent pick for the draft. I'm not sure how good a pick he would actually be for vice president for Trump and that I'm not sure if he buys him much. But here's the theory. OK, OK.

Previously, right, for the Elise Stefanik pick, like you'd pick an Elise Stefanik if you want someone who can speak to the types of moderate voters who you can't speak to. Trump recently, however, has been trying to pick some more moderate policy positions, especially on abortion over the weekend. And he says he'll leave it up to the states and that he supports some notable exceptions for life of the mother. It's questionable whether or not he'd still push for a six week ban. I guess we'll find out in the next couple hours.

So if he is going to be the guy to seek the moderate middle on something like abortion, again, moderate here is in quotes, by the way, don't cancel me. Then a J.D. Vance speaks to the other side, and you'd pick a J.D. Vance who has lots of conservative bona fides, who kind of wrote the book on Trumpism in middle America and the appeal that it has. The

The real sticking point for Vance, of course, would be that he just entered the Senate last cycle. He's got a pretty long career public service probably in Ohio as a Republican ahead of him. He could be VP and go back to that, of course. But yeah, would he actually take the job? Maybe not. And there's also this thing that you bring up, which I think is the biggest weakness with all these people, especially Tim Scott, is like, will Trump pick an a**?

an ass kisser and if not then JD Vance is probably the first one of the first people to to cross off your list

Bad pick. I mean, good. But it's a play at sort of original Trumpism. And I think that while you're suggesting that he would appeal to conservatives, while Trump could potentially appeal to more moderates, I don't actually think that's what it is. I think Trump is currently appealing to the more conservative side of the spectrum. Abortion positioning be damned. I think J.D. Vance would be more a reinvigoration of the 2016 election.

striking gold, as Leah suggested, which is like, hey, we're all ancestral Democrats here, but we're voting for Trump because Democrats have gone so far astray and they don't actually sort of serve working people anymore. They're globalists. They're corrupt. But like, hey, we're salt of the earth again, in quotation marks. And

you know, we're going to win back the upper Midwest, which like that's what Trump really needs. Like Trump has got to win some combination of Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan, because if he just wins Arizona, Georgia and Florida and North Carolina, he's still not winning the election. So that's why I would have picked him. And also there is evidence in the scholarly research that

balancing on a VP ticket is in many ways a fool's errand. There are basically no examples of a VP candidate that

helping a presidential candidate who otherwise would have lost win. And the biggest way in which voters perceive the benefits of a VP candidate is do they think that the presidential candidate made a good pick? Was it a responsible choice as your first big choice as a presidential candidate? Maybe for Trump, this matters less because he's already been president. So they're not sort

sort of judging his first big decision because he's made a lot of big decisions. But if on the axis of identity, geography and ideology, we see any area where a VP pick can make a difference, it's more along the axis of ideology than identity or geography. And when it comes to ideology, I think J.D. Vance has the kind of ideology that you might want to pitch to win the upper Midwest.

This is like a really galaxy brain thing that I'm about to do. So in the event that Trump wins the presidency and J.D. Vance is his running mate, his vice president, and then there's a special election to fill his Senate seat. And let's say Sherrod Brown has lost the Ohio Senate race from this year. And then he runs in a special election with Trump on the ballot running

after like his first like kind of, you know, it's a better environment for Democrats when the Republicans at the top of the ticket, then what if Sherrod Brown wins back the Democratic majority? Well,

We'll meet back here. We'll meet back here if that happens, Liam. Well, you, uh, you were served the one last thing I was going to say on Vance, which is, uh, we do find, you know, we do find VP home state effects for presidential elections. If, if you want to like game that out, maybe there's a three point or something difference on margin in Ohio, making it a little bit redder and the presidential race, like, okay, split ticket voting is lower than it used to be. So maybe you'd pick a JD Vance to, uh,

give a Republican nominee in the Ohio Senate race a slightly higher chance of a victory if there's some sort of bleed. Yeah, Bernie Marino. So pick Vance to elect Marino. To elect Marino. Yeah. More galaxy brain thinking here. Okay. We got two more picks. Let's motor Cooper.

I think I was going to say Doug Burgum, but I don't want to anymore. There you go, Allie. I'm not going to. I'm going to say Marco Rubio, even though I have big question marks about him, I guess. Big question marks. Um.

I'm just thinking of the little Marco. That is... Big questions about little Marco. Oh, my gosh. My biggest hesitancy with picking him, the 12th Amendment prohibits electors from voting for candidates from the same state for president and vice president. So either Trump or Rubio would have to move or change residency. I don't see Trump doing that. What's a little constitutional crisis to start your presidential campaign?

It'll be fun. Well, right. And I mean, I guess Trump's not necessarily opposed to causing one of those. As you've seen. I was going to say. So I think in this situation, Rubio would have to be the one who moves. And then I just don't know how likely that is because he is a sitting senator. I think he has that Senate seat for pretty much as long as he wants it.

and he's not up for reelection this year. So if he... 12th Amendment aside, if he was the VP pick and ran with Trump and they lost, he could stay in the Senate. But if he has to move out of the state to do so, then, you know, he has to give up his Senate seat too, and I just don't see him really wanting to do that. But there are things going in his favor. You know, he's...

well-liked among moderates and stuff, especially from his 2016 presidential run. That was kind of his lane that he staked out. He, you know, could appeal to Latino and Hispanic voters, seeing that he is

part of that community. And he's just well-spoken and he's kind of been seen as a rising star, at least in the past in the party. So I think that he could be a moderating force for Trump, not necessarily in terms of policy or ideology, but in terms of public perception of the ticket. But again, that residency question is a big question mark for me. All right, Leah, take us away. Final pick.

All right. I mean, first off, prefacing this with whatever. Yeah. I'm going to go with Texas Gov. Greg Abbott.

This is good. I was kind of wondering why no one picked my home state governor. I mean, number one, he's Elliott's home state governor. That's number one reason. The most important factor. I should also preface this with he said on 60 Minutes that he would not want to be vice president. But I never really put much stake in any politician saying what they're going to do in the future until the qualifying deadline passes. I'm just...

Throwing that out there. Choosing a governor means that Trump doesn't have to mess with the Senate, which if Trump does win the presidency, he probably has a narrow Senate majority. Republicans probably have a narrow Senate majority. So he just doesn't have to deal with that in special elections that could occur from bringing a senator on board. Trump's going to go really hard on immigration and Greg Abbott, obviously,

It's been one of the, if not the kind of moments

main voice nationally on the Republican side about immigration and has taken a really hard line, which you can also see in that same 60 Minutes interview. I think vibes-wise, I can see him kind of with a 2016 Mike Pence vibe-ish. When I say vibe, I mean kind of, I don't know, talks and looks like a...

politician I don't know and that's all I got that's why I would say that oh and actually I think they'd probably get along that's the other thing I think they'd probably get along hmm

Okay, so we have Leah, you chose Tim Scott and Greg Abbott. Cooper, you chose Kristi Noem and Marco Rubio. Elliot, Elise Stefanik and JD Vance. And I chose Joni Ernst and Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Listeners, feel free to decide for yourselves who won. But that is it for today. Thank you, Leah, Cooper and Elliot. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you, thank you.

Alright, that's it for today. Enjoy the eclipse, everyone. Or I hope you already enjoyed the eclipse, since you're listening to this at the end of the day, or...

Whenever news breaks...

We are here in Israel, a nation at war after that brutal surprise attack by Hamas. On the ground in Ukraine. Reporting from Lewiston, Maine. The scene of a horrific mass shooting. ABC News Live is right there everywhere. From the scene of that deadly missile strike in Dnieper, Ukraine. Reporting from the earthquake in Turkey. In Rolling Fork. This tornado tore through this little town. From the most devastating disaster in Hawaii. From Charleston, South Carolina.

on the 2024 campaign trail in Iceland. Let's go. Traveling with the president in Mexico City. Wherever the story. From the front lines from southern Israel. Outside the Gaza Strip. In Beirut. From the FBI. Reporting with the nurses on the picket line. Here at 10 Downing Street in London. Streaming live to you. Wherever the story is. Wherever the story is. Wherever the story is. We're going to take you there. You're streaming ABC News Live. ABC News Live.

We're streaming ABC News Live. ABC News Live, streaming free everywhere. America's number one streaming news.