Right now everyone wants to get on the record with their analyses for and against each option, laying out the reasons why each might be chosen and why each might be avoided, pro and con all down the line, so whenever the actual choice is made the opinionators can say they were right, no matter who it is. From now until the announcement, there’s nothing but noise, and I’ve checked out.
This is kind of why I want Kelly to be the VP pick. It will show military strength, gun control, border control and fence sitters on having a VP that can continue, if some bullshit impeachment happens.
/semi-hijack
That would be ironic, since the one consistent critique against Hillary among many liberal voters over the years was that she was too war-hawkish. (In 2003, I marched in NYC holding a banner “Hillary - your pro-Iraq-war vote disappoints us”)
Do folk feel Harris is taking too long or an appropriate amount of time making the choice? Is the discussion around it good or bad press?
It’s just noise, but in my view, it’s marginally productive noise because it prevents Trump from attracting the cameras to himself.
It’s what news outlets and internet forums do when news is coming soon. I think mostly it’s good for the campaign, because in general, any free exposure is good. They can’t milk that indefinitely, but due to the filing deadlines (and the upcoming convention, for that matter) there’s no risk of that.
Anyway, i want the Harris campaign to take the time to vet the candidates carefully and make the best decision they can.
Yes, the fewer X surprises or skeletons the Harris campaign has to fight off the better. I don’t envy the turnaround the staffers have had to do from Biden to Harris.
The “normal” thing in recent memory is to announce the VP candidate choice very close to the convention, by days. So she’s within the normal time frame in that, if slightly skewed by the mistrust of someone trying to relitigate the Ohio deadlines thing.
Someone else mentioned she must have already had all along her own preliminary list for in-case-of-worst, but that’s nowhere near the exercise being done right now, and the precedent in that matter is that the pinch-hitter VP you need to get through Congress does not have to be the same as the proper election VP candidate you need to get through the convention and the nationwide vote (Ford/Rockefeller → Ford/Dole).
They continue to mostly control possession of the news cycle with nothing negative to them.
I’m on record expecting an announcement likely tomorrow and certainly before the weekend is up as this cannot hold attention longer and they want a week of the choice being the news until the virtual roll call itself is the news.
What and when do you think?
Not to mention time to roll out merchandising and such.
I saw Pete on The Daily Show last night. Gov. Walz and Beshear are all over twitter. I think the auditions are still going on.
I wish we were smart enough to elect Pete. He’s so smart.
I like Walz, Beshear and Kelly and would be happy with any of the three.
the more i see walz, the more i like him. as a former teacher he knows how to deal with bullies. he hasn’t been on my radar, but seeing him with jen psaki, twice now, i really like him. he has empathy, a great way of distilling information, and good humour.
i am now walz first, kelly second.
He’s 42 I think, and now lives in MI. Smart, center left, charismatic, unflappable. He has time to minimally get a House seat, if not Senator, or possibly as future governor. And from there he’s a future leading contender for top of the ticket, even against a sitting VP! I think his time will come.
Governor makes sense for Buttigieg, especially if he has presidential aspirations. Whitmer is term-limited, so he could run in 2026.
He’s too young and inexperienced for VP, imo.
I would just like to point out that I was the first person to mention Walz in this thread.
Please send me a piece of cake for my foresight. 
I think your analysis and suspected time schedule makes sense. I agree, that it is a mildly positive buzz, reaffirming the several good choices - emphasizing the strength of the Dems’ “bench.” And juxtaposes nicely with the steady lack of great news about Vance. And ZERO from TFG. So, yeah, it ends up as a positive.
Hell, Biden withdrew <2 weeks ago, so it really would be stupid to suggest she is unnecessarily dithering. (Not that the media/commentators/politicians have allowed the fear of appearing stupid to dictate their remarks.). Would only get into trouble area if it got close to some BS deadline (which I’ve ceased keeping track of.)
What you say makes sense. Enjoy 1 week of Kamala rounding up support, then 1 week discussing potential veeps, then one week discussing the choice, then 1 week of convention. Really sounds like a way to have sustained positive press. At the same time, the Olympics support multinationalism, international cooperation, and multiculturalism - generally more consistent with Dem values/policies than Rep.
Getting beyond this thread (apologies mods - I’ll stop) I’ve been wondering what the admin could do to keep the positive press train going. Probably an impossible lift, but would be nice to see an Isr/Pal ceasefire announced at some crucial moment…
Just so hopeful to see positive news/commentary, instead of, “Is he too old?!” So impressed at the positivity and energy I’ve sensed from so many folk (admittedly, mostly libs and in our solidly blue state.)
Walz is witty enough that he could credibly deliver a Lloyd-Bentsen-like zinger against J.D. Vance in a debate. And in the Social Media Era vs. 1988, it could have 100x the salience.
Here is a pretty compelling Guardian op-ed laying out the case for Walz. TLDR: Folksy Midwestern white guy, great on the stump, compelling backstory, impressive record in office.
Highlights:
(During Walz’ term as Governor,)
“Democrats codified abortion rights, paid family and medical leave, sick leave, transgender rights protections, drivers licenses for undocumented residents, restoration of voting rights for people when they are released from prison or jail, wider voting access, one-time rebates, a tax credit aimed at low-income parents with kids, and a $1bn investment in affordable housing including for rental assistance.”
Also adopted were background checks for private gun transfers and a red-flag warning system to take guns from people deemed by a judge to be a threat to themselves or others. DFL lawmakers banned conversion therapy for LGBTQ people, legalized recreational marijuana, expanded education funding, required a carbon-free electric grid by 2040, adopted a new reading curricula based on phonics, passed a massive $2.58bn capital construction package and, at the insistence of Republicans, a $300m emergency infusion of money to nursing homes.”
Democrats can have Tim Walz on the ticket, who called the anti-war, pro-Palestinian ‘uncommitted’ movement “civically engaged” and praised them for “asking for a change in course” and “for more pressure to be put on” the White House, or they can have Josh Shapiro, who called for a crackdown on anti-war, pro-Palestinian college protesters and even compared them to the KKK.
They can have Walz on the ticket, who has reportedly “emerged among labor unions as a popular pick” after signing “into law a series of measures viewed as pro-worker” including banning non-compete agreements and expanding protections for Amazon warehouse workers, or they can have Mark Kelly, who opposed the pro-labor Pro Act in the Senate.
They can have Walz, who guaranteed students in Minnesota not just free breakfasts but free lunches, or Shapiro, who has courted controversy in Pennsylvania with his support for school vouchers.
They can have Walz, who calls his Republican opponents “weird” and extreme, or Kelly, who calls his Republican opponents “good people” who are “working really hard”.
Has anybody in this thread asked about any of these candidates’ fund raising chops? The money they attract to the campaign may be more important than the relatively small number of added voters they bring.
FWIW that does lay out the compare and contrast of what Harris wants to accomplish as a brand message with the choice.
Walz would excite the base more.
Shapiro would calm the center more.
Which is the tack she wants to take?
My WAG is she will think that she will be enough to excite the base all by herself and that the need is to calm the center.