Are you mixing up Ben Shapiro with Dem Governor Josh Shapiro ?
Iran. for some of it.
Well, he is my 2nd choice so I would be good with this instead of Kelly.
I still say Shapiro is a losing choice.
Winning Pennsylvania. It’s possible people from PA will vote for their governor and winning PA is a big deal.
VP choices have little to no effect carrying their home state.
Better Shapiro stays in place and works hard on GOTV in PA.
This. If Kamala wins, I want someone here who can work with her to make PA better. If she loses, he can hopefully fight Trump’s awful ideas.
Addressed here (gift link):
She knows a few of the longer short list personally some at least: Cooper, Shapiro, and Beshear.
My cousin wants to write in Mark Cuban as VP. It would certainly be an unexpected choice.
Senators, yes. They are from an unpopular branch of government.
Also, the longer a governor is in office, the more time for them to do stuff that turns off voters. Shapiro is really still in his honeymoon here. So the small sample size of little-effect VP nominees in not indicative.
One factor perhaps not mentioned yet is – how does Harris’s possible plan to pivot to the center relate to the VP choice?
If she is planning to please her base on policy, it makes sense to make a nod-to-the-center VP pick, demonstrating, albeit in a purely symbolic way, that she is not controlled by what Trump calls the far left. That means Shapiro. But if she is planning to make a big policy move to the center – which she should if winning is priority one – she should make a pick that will first cement in her support from the base. That probably means Pete. Here is the case:
For the 1000th time, Pete would guarantee a second Trump term. Homophobia is still a major issue for too many people, including certain traditionally Democratic demographic groups.
ETA It is more important to keep Shapiro as Governor of PA for GOTV efforts and in case of any MAGA shenanigans with certifying votes.
And Pete doesn’t have the experience to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency. Give him a few more years and less homophobia and President Pete could be plausible. Not to mention he has less military experience than Vance, if that matters to anyone.
I can’t imagine it matters much at all to anyone who isn’t also a homophobe and/or a Republican.
To expand on that, I would imagine that if Vance’s (relatively brief and insignificant) military service matters to anyone at all, it will be as a dubious litmus test of masculinity and patriotism that even they don’t really adhere to. Not unlike how conservatives were falling all over themselves to defend Bush the Younger’s less than distinguished National Guard service while cheering on the swift-boating of John Kerry (who had actual combat experience and medals for heroism).
The sort of people who will support Vance might say his military service matters to them, but just watch how they don’t skip a beat trying to tear down someone like, for example, Mark Kelly if he gets the Democratic nomination for VP.
How does running for VP conflict with GOTV efforts, or prevent him as still governor until swearing in be there for those shenanigans?
That’s really it.
I would completely dismiss Vance as a factor in choosing Harris’ running mate. There are few who Vance apparently does appeal to, and those are voters unreachable to any Democratic candidate. If he stays the nominee, not a sure thing.
That’s probably true of some. That doesn’t make it right to try and tear down Vance’s military service. He voluntarily joined the Marines during wartime. He served in a combat zone. He honorably served out his enlistment contract. He then used his earned GI Bill benefits to go to college. He gets called a coward for that? He gets disparaged for “only” giving up four years of his youth to volunteer when very few do? Come on that’s ridiculous.
It would be ridiculous. If only someone actually said it.
No, he gets disparaged for being a fascist boot-licker.
Actually there have been a few posts like that in the last week on the SDMB. It is dumb when done. Though it is far from common thankfully.
Then maybe @Loach should address those people.
I didn’t mean to imply you said it. I used your post as a springboard. Others have disparaged him for not having the right MOS or only staying in for one enlistment contract (plus four years of inactive reserve time).
Because doing two jobs at once means you’re likely to do both of them less well.
I addressed the subject by quoting you. Again apologies if it looked like I was criticizing you.
I despise Vance, but not for his military service. That being said, I agree that anyone who likes Vance is in Trump’s pocket, and isn’t going to change their vote. And the VP choice should be made for reasons other than competing with Vance.