Harris decides on Tim Walz as running mate

[ThatRobGuy]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/06/politics/tim-walz-harris-vice-president/index.html

Walz emerged from the most accelerated vice presidential search in modern history from a shortlist that included half a dozen Democrats, including Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly. The vice president held in-person interviews with Walz, Shapiro and Kelly on Sunday.

While Harris and Walz did not enjoy much of a previous relationship, aides said Harris grew increasingly enthused by how Walz genuinely carried himself and found a warm chemistry with him during a final meeting Sunday at her residence at the Naval Observatory. Harris was impressed “by his authenticity,” a person close to the process told CNN.


Granted, none of us are in the DNC strategy meetings that go on behind closed doors, but I question whether or not this is the right move, strategically.

It seems like the areas where Harris is going to have the biggest uphill challenge is in purple state voters, rural voters, and among independent voters. Picking a running mate that's equally unpopular among those groups (or that a large number of people just haven't heard of) doesn't seem like the best move IMO.

Picking a guy who's popular in a very blue state (so blue, that they were literally the only one who didn't vote for Reagan, even California did that year)

...seems less advantageous that going with someone like Shapiro.

Although, I think the best choice would've been Andy Beshear

Poll: Beshear most popular Democrat governor again

With his re-election campaign finally behind him, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear has reclaimed the title of the most popular Democratic governor in the United States.

www.lanereport.com

...who was voted one of the most popular Democratic governors in the country, and is able to carry a 60%+ approval rating in the red state of Kentucky (indicating at least some measure of being able to connect with rural conservative-leaning voters)

And this little bit certainly is worth noting:

https://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article281207713.html

Is tied with Hawaii Gov. Josh Green as the most popular Democratic governor among voters who also supported former president Donald Trump in 2020, with 41% approving of his job performance Is the most popular Democratic governor among 2020 voters who backed President Joe Biden, with 93% approval


It seems like Andy Beshear would've checked all of the boxes a Democratic candidate looking to take on the GOP could've hoped for.
93% approval among Biden voters
41% approval among Trump voters (which is about as good as you're going to get for a Democratic governor among Trump voters)
60%+ favorability in a quite red state


Did Kamala bet on the wrong horse here? Or am I just missing something?

 

[public hermit]

I also thought it would be helpful for her to pick someone more to the center to help get more votes from those on the fence.

 

[mourningdove~]

Did Kamala bet on the wrong horse here? Or am I just missing something?

I like to think that she has.

Walz is sooooooooooo far left.
Left as one can get.
No longer is anyone 'hiding' the fact, that a Democratic Socialist America is what the Democrats want.
They may have pushed too far with this choice ...
unless. of course, that is what the majority of Americans also want.

Maybe it is good, to get all the cards laid out on the table.
Americans need to know who, and what, they're voting for this November.

 

[KCfromNC]

I like to think that she has.

Walz is sooooooooooo far left.

Which specific policies led you to this conclusion?

 

[mourningdove~]

Which specific policies led you to this conclusion?

Sorry. But if you have to ask, I guess you have not read many of the news threads here in the political forums.
(Maybe go thru and read some?)

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I like to think that she has.

Walz is sooooooooooo far left.
Left as one can get.
No longer is anyone 'hiding' the fact, that a Democratic Socialist America is what the Democrats want.
They may have pushed too far with this choice ...
unless. of course, that is what the majority of Americans also want.

Maybe it is good, to get all the cards laid out on the table.
Americans need to know who, and what, they're voting for this November.

Which specific policies led you to this conclusion?

How "far left" or "not far left" he is (or perceived to be)...
(worth noting, he is part of the Democratic-Labor party in the state...which is to the left of the National Democratic party, but still affiliated with them...so he probably does left-outflank a lot of democrats and the majority of moderates in the country)

...is rather secondary to the strategic aspect. If he was someone who had a lot of name recognition and popularity, despite his policies, and person can be propped up as a moderate even if they're not one, candidates do that all the time.

National polling numbers with results of "7% say they like him, 6% said they don't, and the rest say huh, who is that?" doesn't seem like the best bet.

Especially when there are people available like Andy Beshear, who polls extremely well with Biden voters, surprisingly better than expected with Trump voters, has a track record of being pretty popular even in a red state, and was rated as the most popular democratic governor in the country (meaning he has name recognition outside of just his own home state)


Picking Walz is likely going to be a popular decision in places like California and New York, but the DNC already has those states locked up.

It's that dynamic of "appeal to the crowd you want to get, not the crowd you already have locked-in", and I think that's where the 2 major parties drop the ball when they make decisions like they do.


As it currently stands, we now have two VP candidates that were largely unknowns outside of their home states, and once people do get to know them, will likely end up only appealing to voters who were already in those respective camps anyway.


I don't see Vance or Walz winning any new converts or heavily swaying any independent voters in swing states.

Vance is going to come off looking like "Trump Jr", and Walz will likely end up coming off as "White male version of Harris"

If both P candidates were just going to pick people who were carbon copies of themselves in terms of policies and appeal, then they both should've just picked broomsticks as their running mates lol.

If they're not going to fully leverage the VP position as a way to potentially fill in their gaps and weak spots in terms of perceptions and favorability (like past presidential candidates have done), then they've basically just relegated the VP position to "yeah, I'm just a seat filler in case the president kicks the bucket our gets ousted from office"

 

[Whyayeman]

just a seat filler in case the president kicks the bucket our gets ousted from office

That is the job, actually, isn't it?

I think about the two presidential candidates. One is young and energetic with a VP running mate who is an experienced politician; then there is an overweight 78 year-old with limited mobility and a political featherweight for a running mate.

It is a stark contrast.

 

[iluvatar5150]

How "far left" or "not far left" he is (or perceived to be)...
(worth noting, he is part of the Democratic-Labor party in the state...which is to the left of the National Democratic party, but still affiliated with them...so he probably does left-outflank a lot of democrats and the majority of moderates in the country)

...is rather secondary to the strategic aspect. If he was someone who had a lot of name recognition and popularity, despite his policies, and person can be propped up as a moderate even if they're not one, candidates do that all the time.

National polling numbers with results of "7% say they like him, 6% said they don't, and the rest say huh, who is that?" doesn't seem like the best bet.

Especially when there are people available like Andy Beshear, who polls extremely well with Biden voters, surprisingly better than expected with Trump voters, has a track record of being pretty popular even in a red state, and was rated as the most popular democratic governor in the country (meaning he has name recognition outside of just his own home state)


Picking Walz is likely going to be a popular decision in places like California and New York, but the DNC already has those states locked up.

It's that dynamic of "appeal to the crowd you want to get, not the crowd you already have locked-in", and I think that's where the 2 major parties drop the ball when they make decisions like they do.


As it currently stands, we now have two VP candidates that were largely unknowns outside of their home states, and once people do get to know them, will likely end up only appealing to voters who were already in those respective camps anyway.


I don't see Vance or Walz winning any new converts or heavily swaying any independent voters in swing states.

Vance is going to come off looking like "Trump Jr", and Walz will likely end up coming off as "White male version of Harris"

If both P candidates were just going to pick people who were carbon copies of themselves in terms of policies and appeal, then they both should've just picked broomsticks as their running mates lol.

If they're not going to fully leverage the VP position as a way to potentially fill in their gaps and weak spots in terms of perceptions and favorability (like past presidential candidates have done), then they've basically just relegated the VP position to "yeah, I'm just a seat filler in case the president kicks the bucket our gets ousted from office"

You haven't seen Walz speak, have you? Nobody who's seen him speak would confuse him for a white male version of Harris. Harris feels like Hillary lite whereas Walz feels like that uncle who's always trying to yuk it up at Thanksgiving. I don't mean that as an endorsement - just that, stylistically, they are extremely different.

Personally, Walz is a bit hammy for my taste - but I think his gregarious style affords him a stands a strong chance of being able to turn a lot of the right's propaganda back on themselves, and show a bunch of folks in the middle how full of it the right is, without simultaneously insulting those voters.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Again... the criticism of Walz and Harris just seems to be "they're leftists!"

Yeah? So?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

That is the job, actually, isn't it?

I think about the two presidential candidates. One is young and energetic with a VP running mate who is an experienced politician; then there is an overweight 78 year-old with limited mobility and a political featherweight for a running mate.

It is a stark contrast.

On paper, that's the job (along with being a senate tie-breaker if needed)...however, a VP candidate and be of use by filling in "weak spots" perceived by voters, as well as winning over some moderates and independents.


With regards to the contrast, the contrast (regardless of whatever topic or attribute it's on) is the problem that the candidates have to solve when it comes to winning over the voters who will actually be difference makers.

If one is perceived as being "too far XYZ", they'd want to get more moderate running mate to soften those edges.

If one is lacking support among a certain demographic, they'd want to get someone on their ticket that's popular with that demographic to gain some appeal.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

It seems like the areas where Harris is going to have the biggest uphill challenge is in purple state voters, rural voters, and among independent voters. Picking a running mate that's equally unpopular among those groups (or that a large number of people just haven't heard of) doesn't seem like the best move IMO.

Picking someone who's not well-known has its drawbacks, but it also has benefits - if people don't know much about the candidate, then the candidate has the opportunity to frame himself (or herself) advantageously.

Picking a guy who's popular in a very blue state (so blue, that they were literally the only one who didn't vote for Reagan, even California did that year)

Looking at results from 40 years ago isn't really relevant. Minnesota is still pretty blue, but not nearly as much as it once was. Biden got 52% there in 2020; Hillary got 47% in 2016. Trump pulled ~45% in both elections.

...seems less advantageous that going with someone like Shapiro.

Shapiro looks good on paper, but he has some issues. His position on Israel (he's a self-described Zionist) is unpopular with the far left, he has a couple brewing scandals, and he really, really wants to be president himself (there was worry that he'd try to undermine/upstage Harris).

Although, I think the best choice would've been Andy Beshear

Poll: Beshear most popular Democrat governor again

With his re-election campaign finally behind him, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear has reclaimed the title of the most popular Democratic governor in the United States.

www.lanereport.com

Beshear probably would have been my first choice as well, but maybe the vetting turned up something (or he didn't really want the job).

Did Kamala bet on the wrong horse here? Or am I just missing something?

I think that Walz, despite attempts to frame him as a flaming liberal, does have some cross-aisle appeal. He's folksy, former military, football coach, middle-class (retired public school teacher; parents were teachers too), and a lot of his "liberal" policies have been aimed at helping children and workers.

I think it's worth watching his speech from yesterday:

 

[civilwarbuff]

An artistic opinion of walz.....

Tim Walz in political cartoons

Illustrated history of Kamala Harris’ running mate as governor of Minnesota

www.foxnews.com

 

[eleos1954]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/06/politics/tim-walz-harris-vice-president/index.html

Walz emerged from the most accelerated vice presidential search in modern history from a shortlist that included half a dozen Democrats, including Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly. The vice president held in-person interviews with Walz, Shapiro and Kelly on Sunday.

While Harris and Walz did not enjoy much of a previous relationship, aides said Harris grew increasingly enthused by how Walz genuinely carried himself and found a warm chemistry with him during a final meeting Sunday at her residence at the Naval Observatory. Harris was impressed “by his authenticity,” a person close to the process told CNN.


Granted, none of us are in the DNC strategy meetings that go on behind closed doors, but I question whether or not this is the right move, strategically.

It seems like the areas where Harris is going to have the biggest uphill challenge is in purple state voters, rural voters, and among independent voters. Picking a running mate that's equally unpopular among those groups (or that a large number of people just haven't heard of) doesn't seem like the best move IMO.

Picking a guy who's popular in a very blue state (so blue, that they were literally the only one who didn't vote for Reagan, even California did that year)
View attachment 352902

...seems less advantageous that going with someone like Shapiro.

Although, I think the best choice would've been Andy Beshear

Poll: Beshear most popular Democrat governor again

With his re-election campaign finally behind him, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear has reclaimed the title of the most popular Democratic governor in the United States.

www.lanereport.com

...who was voted one of the most popular Democratic governors in the country, and is able to carry a 60%+ approval rating in the red state of Kentucky (indicating at least some measure of being able to connect with rural conservative-leaning voters)

And this little bit certainly is worth noting:

https://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article281207713.html

Is tied with Hawaii Gov. Josh Green as the most popular Democratic governor among voters who also supported former president Donald Trump in 2020, with 41% approving of his job performance Is the most popular Democratic governor among 2020 voters who backed President Joe Biden, with 93% approval


It seems like Andy Beshear would've checked all of the boxes a Democratic candidate looking to take on the GOP could've hoped for.
93% approval among Biden voters
41% approval among Trump voters (which is about as good as you're going to get for a Democratic governor among Trump voters)
60%+ favorability in a quite red state


Did Kamala bet on the wrong horse here? Or am I just missing something?

Obviously the democratic party didn't want a "middle of the road" VP pick. If you think it was just her decision ... think again.

We need to look at actual defined policies that are being put forth ... this is hard to discern on the left as they are quit vague regarding what their policies are and how they will be implemented ... they seem to just use flowery vague sound bites.

As the saying goes ... the devil is in the details .... where are the details on the left?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Again... the criticism of Walz and Harris just seems to be "they're leftists!"

Yeah? So?

My intention of the thread wasn't to criticize Walz...the point of the thread was to discuss why the DNC thought he'd be a better choice than someone like Andy Beshear. (who, on paper, seems to have a lot going for him in areas that Walz doesn't)

 

[BCP1928]

I like to think that she has.

Walz is sooooooooooo far left.
Left as one can get.
No longer is anyone 'hiding' the fact, that a Democratic Socialist America is what the Democrats want.
They may have pushed too far with this choice ...
unless. of course, that is what the majority of Americans also want.

Maybe it is good, to get all the cards laid out on the table.
Americans need to know who, and what, they're voting for this November.

Maybe that's the plan: a solid, articulate team to finally get the message out about "socialist" policies that actually poll pretty well already, against a team that can do little more than rant and babble.

 

[civilwarbuff]

My intention of the thread wasn't to criticize Walz...the point of the thread was to discuss why the DNC thought he'd be a better choice than someone like Andy Beshear. (who, on paper, seems to have a lot going for him in areas that Walz doesn't)

While Beshear was eyed as a genial, polished political talent by Harris’ team and easily fit the moderate white-guy profile it was looking for, he was always going to come from Kentucky, which hasn’t voted for a Democratic presidential ticket in 28 years.


Nearly all of the contenders he was up against came from electorally prized states: Arizona, North Carolina, Minnesota and Pennsylvania. It was Harris’ first big decision in a modern national political era where purple-colored geography marked by a split of Republicans and Democrats is king.


And Kentucky is piping red, clearly Donald Trump country.

MSN

Besides, Timmy 'The Torch' Walz fits the progressive leftists of a good fit to their agenda. He checks all the right boxes......

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

That is the job, actually, isn't it?

I think about the two presidential candidates. One is young and energetic with a VP running mate who is an experienced politician; then there is an overweight 78 year-old with limited mobility and a political featherweight for a running mate.

It is a stark contrast.

Um, limited mobility? Is he using a cane or wheelchair the public doesn't know about? That is a false assertion.

And Vance is more substantive and grounded than Walz, who is a far left progressive, even if he is 40 instead of 60.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Shapiro looks good on paper, but he has some issues. His position on Israel (he's a self-described Zionist) is unpopular with the far left, he has a couple brewing scandals, and he really, really wants to be president himself (there was worry that he'd try to undermine/upstage Harris).

I've heard this brought up before...but in practical terms, for Democrats, picking someone who's not as popular with the far-left isn't going to yield them any net losses.

Biden wasn't the far-left's first choice either, but they all still backed him over Trump.

It's like I said before, the exercise should be trying to get the people you don't have yet, not trying to impress the people who were already going to vote for you anyway.

There's absolutely 0 risk of Kamala not winning the deep blue states no matter who she picks as her running mate.

So why not roll the dice on someone who may be able to connect better with different types of people?

For the record, I think any of the people that were on "the short list" for VP were going to end up "upstaging" Harris to a certain degree in terms of charisma and coming across as sincere (Walz certainly comes across as more sincere that her when he's on stage)

 

[civilwarbuff]

then there is an overweight 78 year-old with limited mobility

I dunno, he got elected president in 2020 so there must have been enough voters who believed his ramblings and nonsense......

 

[ThatRobGuy]

While Beshear was eyed as a genial, polished political talent by Harris’ team and easily fit the moderate white-guy profile it was looking for, he was always going to come from Kentucky, which hasn’t voted for a Democratic presidential ticket in 28 years.


Nearly all of the contenders he was up against came from electorally prized states: Arizona, North Carolina, Minnesota and Pennsylvania. It was Harris’ first big decision in a modern national political era where purple-colored geography marked by a split of Republicans and Democrats is king.


And Kentucky is piping red, clearly Donald Trump country.

MSN

It's not about flipping Kentucky, it's about getting some moderates and independents in swing states.

FYI, Minnesota is not a swing state nor a "up for grabs state". They haven't voted for a Republican presidential ticket since 1972. They were in fact the only blue state during Reagan's landslide victory.

If Beshear was able to win a red state, has over 90% favorability among democrats (which means he's not going to alienate their base) - and has a 41% favorable rating among 2020 Trump voters (which is good all things considered), that's an indicator that he may be able to reach additional rural folks in places like Ohio, PA, Michigan, and Georgia that will likely be "states to watch" in the upcoming election.

So while Beshear in all likelihood wouldn't be able to convince enough people in Kentucky that would turn the state blue in the 2024 presidential election, it's certainly feasible that he could flip enough people in the 4 other states I mentioned.