Clinton/Warren (D) vs. Trump/Webb (R)

[IceSpear]

NO ONE CARES ABOUT JIM WEBB ANYMORE

Did anyone ever care? Except for a few days in 2006 when his race decided Senate control.

[IceSpear]

Also, movement conservatives are already extremely skeptical of Trump. How do you think they'd react to him choosing a pro-choice Democrat with a liberal voting record who supported Obamacare and endorsed/campaigned for Obama twice? This would be worse than Hillary picking Joe Lieberman.

[IceSpear]

Webb wouldnt win VA for Trump or even be close, he never really had a deep connection with voters the way Warner and Kaine do.

Interesting fact about Webb: he only won the Democratic primary in 2006 by 6 points, against some random lobbyist dude I've never heard of named "Harris N. Miller"

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?fips=51&year=2006&f=0&off=3&elect=1

[IceSpear]

Are we still pretending VP choices change the map? Or that large swathes of voters will know Jim Webb's name and political ideology besides "That guy who talked about killing Viet Cong on a debate stage"?

They'll probably more likely remember him as "that guy that defeated that guy who used that racist slur" in Virginia. Nationally it would be more like "who?"

[IceSpear]

OK simple question: If Webb is such a game changer why wasn't he able to poll even above the margin of error?

He didn't have the platform because he showed up at the wrong debate. He'd be the perfect foil for Trump - experience in elected office, service under Reagan and outstanding military record. They're both mainline Protestant, share populist ideology, have foreign-born wives and have cross-party appeal. At the very least, he'd make a fine surrogate.

Republicans would've liked this?

pro-choice Democrat with a liberal voting record who supported Obamacare and endorsed/campaigned for Obama twice?

[IceSpear]

OK simple question: If Webb is such a game changer why wasn't he able to poll even above the margin of error?

He didn't have the platform because he showed up at the wrong debate. He'd be the perfect foil for Trump - experience in elected office, service under Reagan and outstanding military record. They're both mainline Protestant, share populist ideology, have foreign-born wives and have cross-party appeal. At the very least, he'd make a fine surrogate.

Republicans would've liked this?

pro-choice Democrat with a liberal voting record who supported Obamacare and endorsed/campaigned for Obama twice?

If they are willing to forgive and overlook Donald Trump's many lapses from conservative orthodoxy just so they can stick it to 'The Establishment', why not Jim Webb's?  

Some of them are. There's heavy resistance to Trump among the movement conservatives, evangelicals, the establishment, etc. for that very reason. Picking Webb as a VP would alienate them even further. And if Webb ran as a Republican to begin with, Trump would've already sucked up all that oxygen anyway.

Besides, let's not forget that Trump got his fame among Republicans for his birtherism. He might've been a liberal at certain points, but that pales in comparison to voting for Obamacare or outright endorsing the communist Muslim twice.