Uh . . . he was the Governor of New York.
Discussing Harris is kind of like discussing the new Star Wars trilogy: there are legit issues to talk about, but it’s hard when one side tends to gather the misogynistic racists.
As he aspired to be.
My complete flubbing of history notwithstanding, the point remains that Roosevelt, the reformer, was viewed as more harmless if he was serving as Vice President.
It’s just not a position that invites accomplishments.
Agnew was on the ticket in both the 1968 and 1972 elections. He resigned in 1973.
But TR was also re-elected in 1904, winning 56% of the popular vote. He was the first person who ascended to the presidency upon the death of his predecessor to win a full term in his own right. In 1924, Calvin Coolidge did the same.
It may not matter because you may see a whole new democratic ticket in 2024. Biden is looking and acting very old. Pritzker is giving signs that he may vie for the nomination, which means there is doubt that Biden will even seek a 2nd term. If that is the case, the new nominee would name his own VP running mate.
Sure! I doubt that Harris will be watching the campaign from the sidelines, though.
Agreed! Having been VP for 4 years gives her the pedigree to run for the top office.
The question in that scenario is what the Democratic primary would look like if Biden declines to run. Would it be similar to 1968, with Harris beating a small field like Hubert Humphrey did as the VP to a POTUS who decided not to run for re-election? Or would it look more like the 2016 Republican or 2020 Democratic primaries, with a larger field? IMHO the latter would be a better scenario than the former. The 1968 Hubert Humphrey scenario would possibly be even worse than Biden running again. IMHO the perception would be that Biden is selecting the nominee ahead of time (if he endorses Harris) or implicitly saying he made a mistake by going with Harris in the first place if he doesn’t support her. The entire storyline in that scenario will be about what Biden thinks about Harris rather than what the voters think of her.
To be fair, for the bulk of the history of the US (including the McKinley administration) the Vice President was used for his constitutional duties (presiding over and breaking ties in the Senate, and as a spare President) and nothing else - this was John Nance Gardner’s role that he deprecated so memorably. Consider also how far out of the loop Truman was when he assumed the presidency upon FDR’s death. Truman’s experience here informed his support for giving the Vice President a seat on the National Security Council, so that a future VP wouldn’t be blindsided at a crucial point the way he was when he succeeded to the Presidency.
Since Carter’s election, the Vice President has typically had other executive-branch or legislative-liason duties delegated to him or her by the sitting President. Mondale was in many ways the prototypical modern VP and all his successors in the office have been given some degree of oversight or authority in the executive branch.
Of course, the President is more likely to assign to the VP those areas which are politically hazardous or fraught with difficulties, so as you say, it’s “not a position that invites accomplishments.”
I haven’t seen much of her. Not that I’ve been looking. So I don’t know if that’s my bias, media bias in coverage, or her office or the president’s office not putting her forward. I feel like JB had more visibility as VP but maybe that’s just my memories of Uncle Joey memes.
I live in Illinois and haven’t picked up on this.
IMO he’s done well as governor but I don’t see him – another white billionaire with most of his wealth inherited – as presidential material.
It was on ABC 7 news a couple of days ago, but he denies it, if that actually means anything. LOL
Not doubting you, just curious: Was it some reporter’s speculation, or actual noise from Pritzker’s camp?
I mean, he’s running for re-election, and while he’ll probably win it’s no lock. It would be a really stupid time to do or say anything about having higher political ambitions.
My personal belief is that it was speculation designed to arouse interest and increase ratings, but I tend to be rather negative about such things. 
Me, too. I never watch the local news.
Part of the problem is that is it is only in a relatively specific set of circumstances that a VP can slide into the office. Namely you need to have had a 2-term president followed by the same party being elected to a third consecutive term. In the modern era this is difficult since usually after 8 years under the same party the country is feeling a desire for change.
Not that that is the only way (see Nixon) but in terms of the standard idea of how to utilize the vice presidency as a stepping stone, that is usually what people are thinking of.