Which experts are those?
Probably the idiots Carville and Axelrod.
Here’s one article I saw:
There are others experts, including Carville, and political scientists in my next link, who say that veeps do not deliver their state. Due to the small sample size, I question how much science there is in this poly sci judgment. My main point was in response to the idea that Kelly clearly makes thr most sense. IMHO, it isn’t clear.
What emoji should I have used to indicate I was being whimsical? (I did say it was a fantasy.)
Sorry, post glitch, then edit failure. To correct/finish what I was saying:
Matt Gaetz could be a creepy guy who preyed on underage girls and likely trafficked them and keep full GOP support. He only lost support when he led the ouster of McCarthy from the Speakership.
No just no to Shapiro.
I would be thrilled with Mark Kelly as VP
I like the first two, but I had to look up Walz, and he is also a solid choice.
Military, Former Gov of Minnesota, etc. I still like Kelly a bit more, however.
I see you Dolly and raise you Tom Hanks. 
.
Why “no” to Shapiro?
First off Silver revisits the home state VP issue today and downplays it:
In 2016 he estimated a liked sitting Senator or governor to bring 3 points, give or take, more smaller state, less larger one.
Or paradoxically might help! Having him on the ticket may give her more room to be more strongly vocal in her criticism of Israeli actions. That strong expression from her is what matters most, while Shapiro being behind it is akin to Nixon going to China.
FWIW she may just end up going with the one of the short list she feels the best rapport for. Who thinks would be a good perspective to have to consider, maybe even to challenge her assumptions some …
This would be nice but she has to be very careful: it has to be in the context of a general Biden admin adjustment, because she can’t undermine or implicitly attack her own president. There is a miniscule needle to thread here.
I didn’t hear his remarks, but I think he’s taking about as a VP pick, they need to be younger.
Just thought, could also be that with Harris the top of the ticket, it would be better optics for a younger VP to help the image of the woman as the primary. Those same subtle unconscious sexist cues could be undercut with a clearly older woman leading a younger man. “Mom”, of you will.
Not saying I care, I like the Kelly choice, but it could be something that plays with some independents or iffy R’s.
Plus, sets up 8 years better. Don’t have a 68 yr old candidate then, have a 58 yr old candidate.
Geez, this Whitmire stuff is getting as ridiculous as the Michelle Obama crap. She has been very clear she is not interested in VP.
Shapiro will cause problems with the Arab population in Michigan so he is not a good choice.
Kelly may not be able to deliver AZ since VP choice doesn’t always translate to carrying their home state. BUT, he does add a lot of gravitas on the border and immigration issues. And he’s a former astronaut and ex-military. Unless there are some problems that come up on checking his background he is the strongest choice.
ETA: Carville has a lot of nerve saying a 60 year old is too old. Using his “DUMP BIDEN” logic, at 79 he’s such an old goat I don’t have a clue why anyone should bother listening to what he has to say about anything.
Bloomberg reports that the current short list is Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz.
I tend to opine in favor of a boring Christian SWM, but I think getting along with the frontrunner should also be a major factor. The evidence that a VP makes much of a difference in general is rather weak (you have to go back to the 1960s for a clear example), except insofar as the VP was poorly vetted (as with Palin and Quayle). I think an effective pit-bull would be a plus, but we haven’t had that since Johnson and Agnew. Maybe Cheney.
I honestly know very little except very broad biographical sketches of the 3 front runners. Kevin Drum suggests 2 criteria: “Harris should pick someone who (a) she already knows and likes, and (b) would make a plausibly good president if she got run over by a bus. That’s what I’d do. Since it doesn’t really affect the election one way or the other, why not just choose someone whose advice she genuinely values?”
How well does Harris know the 3 short listed candidates?
It is helped by the fact that she has been that voice within the administration and the other day speaking as part of the administration ramped up her position that the suffering being caused in Gaza is unacceptable. I don’t think that level of implied criticism of Biden’s softer hand on Israel will go badly as it is clear that Biden has no love of Bibi either. He could even come out being a bit less no limit to what is acceptable. Again those positions softened by having Shapiro as part of that team expressing that this is still criticism between friends.
Can someone summarize the advantages of Shapiro?
Senator Kelly’s resume is pretty impressive, he seems like a great choice.
Governor Whitmer was my first choice, but she appears to have nixed this herself.
I hadn’t really thought along these lines before, but: if the goal is to look as good as possible compared to Vance, is Kelly the apples-to-apples guy? Like, with Walz, Vance can try to play the I’m A Senator card — which may or may not work, but which is useless against Kelly. Playing the I Served In The Military card may or may not work against Shapiro — but it’s useless against Kelly. Is he the only one who doesn’t start off playing catch-up in a debate?
Stewart Stevens was in charge of Romney’s winning strategy, correct? If fact, he was also in charge of Romney’s efforts to connect with voters. How did that turn out? It seems a little weird that anyone would be listening too closely to this … expert.
Shapiro is a very popular governor of a critical swing state [PA]. He’s also a very talented speaker and communicator, with comparisons to Obama (I’ve heard him called “the Jewish Obama”).
EDIT: Apparently putting “PA” in parentheses just makes the paragraph sign ¶.
Thank you, I’ll have to check some of his speeches.
I’m surprised a year and a half is long enough for the Governor position to mean much.
He’s unseasoned religious conservative with ambition and a brand of bravado that is off putting. Self serving with a
Dose of trickle
Down economics.