OPINION:
Everyone seems to have an opinion about whom former President Donald Trump should select as his running mate. Some are ridiculous, such as Vivek Ramaswamy or Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. Some are inspired but pose their own challenges, like former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard.
The easiest and best answer is obvious: former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
Mr. Pompeo would immediately provide the campaign with a frisson of energy and composure and add a sense of steadiness of purpose and calmness of mind to a candidate who does not always project those qualities.
Moreover, the former CIA director is strong and clear precisely where the campaign needs strength and clarity: foreign policy, national security and the ability to articulate the case against China, Iran and other adversaries. Mr. Pompeo brings the added benefit of having served in uniform.
He also brings the sort of personal accomplishments — first in his class at West Point, Harvard Law School, small businessman, prominent lawyer, congressman, Cabinet secretary — that still define success in the United States.
For Mr. Pompeo, the benefit of being Mr. Trump’s running mate is obvious. If he chooses to run in 2028, he would start the campaign as the de facto incumbent. That conveys immediate advantages in fundraising, organization, party support, etc.
On the political side of the equation, Mr. Trump and the party he now leads have suffered substantial erosion among suburban, college-educated women.
Less obvious but more troubling is that older, college-educated men — the quietly competent people who make much of the United States run — are sometimes uncomfortable with Mr. Trump’s tone and tenor. They will not vote for President Biden, but there is a risk that they may skip voting altogether.
As a running mate, Mr. Pompeo would provide voters in both of these groups a sense of stability that would lead some of them to be more likely to vote for Mr. Trump. He may very well help Mr. Trump with suburban, college-educated voters more than any diversity hire being considered by the campaign.
The identity politics approach — oddly embraced in this instance by some of the very same people who wage war against quota hirings — dictates that Mr. Trump should select a Black or female running mate. But that approach is not likely to remedy Mr. Trump’s principal electoral weakness: that he is perceived to be erratic.
Indeed, a running mate selection wholly grounded in identity politics would be directly contrary to Mr. Trump’s expressed and well-founded concerns about the pervasive and insidious diversity, equity and inclusion movement. It would be difficult for Mr. Trump to choose a running mate because he is Black or because she is a woman and then raise questions about companies or school systems that embrace what is, at root, racial and gender-based discrimination.
Mr. Pompeo would be a selection based on merit and not identity. As such, he would confirm and embody the ethos of Mr. Trump and the campaign — that America is better off when it focuses on achievement rather than identity and grievance.
Finally, there can no doubt that Mr. Pompeo, with his range of experience and expertise, would make the next Trump administration better, just as he made the first Trump administration better.
Mr. Trump should strengthen his campaign and his subsequent administration and select Mr. Pompeo as his running mate soonest. It is the best answer for the campaign and the nation.
• Michael McKenna is a contributing editor at The Washington Times and served as deputy director in the Office of Legislative Affairs during the Trump administration.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.