A mayor of a moderately sized city and a medium ranked cabinet post?
Right.
The only big cabinet post is Sec’y of State. Maybe Defense, but …
Yeah, Gov of a solid blue state does not bring much.
It would be nice to have a VP candidate that you didn’t have to be an apologist for, re-interpreting his statements to show that he’s not really hawkish on Israel. This is what’s meant by “baggage” and Harris can do without it. I agree with the Salon article. Shapiro would be a target and a detriment to the campaign.
He’s saying we shouldn’t tolerate anti-Semitism, but clearly what he means in that context is that we shouldn’t tolerate protests against Israeli war crimes. The clear implication is that ceasefire supporters are anti-Semitic, which is going to justifiably outrage a lot of people.
I don’t think that’s what he’s saying – I think he’s saying there have been anti-semitic elements among many of the campus protests (which is factually true), and that this is a bad thing that campuses should crack down on (the anti-semitic parts).
As for Shapiro in general, he’s not my first choice, but he has positives. He has negatives too. I presume Harris and her team are very thoughtfully considering those positives and negatives, as well as those from the other possibilities.
It shouldn’t be a newsflash that all of the candidates have negatives. If there was one without any negatives, they would have been picked already.
Blindingly obvious point (one of my talents): Wherever they land, it will be buttressed by stats, facts, and analysis that we are not privy to. I would find it hard to believe that any of our concerns would be lost on them. IOW, don’t despair, whatever the choice.
But he didn’t just shut down the “anti-semitic parts” of the encampment, he shut down the ENTIRE encampment. This doesn’t suggest that he draws a distinction between legitimate human rights advocates and opportunistic anti-Semites.
Within the not so distance past campaigns have had stats, facts and analysis that we are not privy to as well as a lot more time. They still picked Palin, Quayle and Kaine.
I don’t quite put Kaine in the same category as the other two. He did nothing to hurt the campaign but he certainly wasn’t a good choice to help.
Pritzker is the darling of my college football-oriented message board - which is surprisingly liberal - because of his appearance(!) and his fairly straightforward demeanor (I’ll defer to our Illinois colleagues about any in depth analysis).
Well…I guess one man’s “mob boss” is another’s “football coach”.
Unfortunately we don’t live in that world. Whoever is the VP pick, someone will come up with something that will need explanations.
The difference is that we’re pretty sure we know what Shapiro’s biggest issue will probably be already if he’s picked.
All that being said, I see Walz as having the most upside and least downside, so he’s who I hope for at this moment.
Of course, it’s just that ISTM that Shapiro comes with more built-in liabilities than the others. If Jesus Christ himself was the VP nominee, Trump’s handlers would tell him to cite the “Cleansing of the Temple” incident where Jesus drives out merchants and money-changers from the Temple as evidence that Jesus was anti-business. And as we all know by now, even if there’s no dirt to be found on an opposition candidate, Trump will just make something up.
That might very well be true, and for that reason I am wary.
I can even picture it in my head. 
Have you seen his eyebrows, though? Someone get that guy a trimmer, stat!
I was a big believer that it would be Kelly but now I’m leaning Walz
Beshear was just in a single car crash
Never mind. It’s the candidate’s father
I think his eyebrows are fine, it’s just that they seem bushy compared to what little is on his head.
Anyway, he gives off a vibe like a sports coach from a made-for-TV movie who will take the time to sit down and find out why a kid is bummed out, then give some folksy inspirational anecdote. That’s not a bad thing for a VP.
ETA: I see him in this video and he balances likeability with the ability to be serious about a subject. He’s good.
(There is a video on that page just 1 minutes and 23 seconds long.)
Definitely. And Walz does deserve credit for making GOP weirdness a focus, now.
But Kamala deserves some credit, too:
She’s clearly been on top of this idea for a long time. (My bolding in the quote.)
Has the sexual harassment in Shapiro’s office been mentioned?
Seems like yet another attack point that I hope Harris doesn’t give the Republicans.