Yes in the Fox News phone app it redirects there.
I think Shapiro as the pick is probably right.
What tipped me off was a story in the NY Times yesterday that indicated the person Harris chose to assist the VP pick in a major capacity is a diplomacy wonk who works closely with Anthony Blinken. Who has been very busy with the Israel/Gaza/West Bank etc. concerns. I think the person is intended to help the new VP pick navigate this hugely consequential and snarly issue. Which leads me to believe that Harris expects it to become an issue.
Oh, yes. Here’s the story (gift link):
Why pick the person who will most alienate the progressives?
Somebody want to start the thread explaining the difference between a “betting favorite” and a “lock”?
The only difference is the enthusiasm of the speaker.
I think they’re trying to guarantee Pennsylvania. I hope it works.
How would “first Jewish vice- president” compare to Kamala’s having been the first woman vp? A woman of color and a Jew would be a lot for a broad swath of American dumbshit voters to come to terms with. Same as if Pete was picked. Not sure the country deserves him tbh.
Me too. I hope it doesn’t kill WI.
I’ll just trust that they know what they’re doing. Maybe they get more moderates than they lose progressives.
Maybe it’s too local for me which makes me give it more weight. They just convicted the current corrupt senator from New Jersey. Shapiro was the senior advisor to the last corrupt senator from New Jersey, Robert Torricelli. I hope there is no dirt there to dig up.
I suspect that’s the calculus. Also that the older more moderate demographic are usually more reliable voters than young progressives.
I’m just not sure the old rules apply so much nowadays.
Part of me wonders if Shapiro just has the most aggressive media team of all the finalists, and they’re pushing the narrative in the press that he’s the front-runner, prompting the “leaks,” the social media buzz, etc.
If I was the Harris team I might be a little skeptical of someone who so aggressively wants it.
I think it rarely works out well for a potential pick to publicly push the person making the pick in a particular direction.
But another “tell” that made me think Harris is leaning hard toward Shapiro was the endorsement of her candidacy by a Muslim organization (mentioned somewhere on this Board but I don’t recall the particulars), which I believe was a pointed effort to push Harris away from Shapiro.
I think we’ll know on Monday morning.
He also seems to be the only one of the finalists who has a significant amount of negative press regarding his potential spot on the ticket. That has to come into consideration I would think. Women’s groups, progressives, labor, pro-Palestinian groups, young people… I’ve seen stories on all of those groups taking issue with his candidacy. The only one that comes close to his negative press would be Kelly, and it’s no where near Shapiro’s level
I think that might rule them all out. The ambivalent like Whitmer have already passed and it looks like there has been active (if publicly low-key) campaigning by the remaining candidates. Let’s face it - they’re all ambitious men.
Being nitpicky and pendantic:
The Fox Business article cites three betting sites, who all give Shapiro between a 69% and 80% of being the VP nomination.
The betting site that puts Shapiro at 80%, BetUS, put out a PR statement that “… Shapiro is about as close to a sure thing as we ever see in betting markets.”
Nate Silver would tell us that 80% is nowhere near a sure thing or a lock. 
We’ll see, I guess.
I’m not saying they’re not ambitious men. my point was if the Shapiro team is so aggressively pushing his inevitability in the press and on social media, which I believe they are, that makes him a little more nakedly aggressive than the others.
Nate Silver thinks that Shapiro should be the pick.
I’m not sure I follow. Who is that “tell” from? For it to be a tell from that organization, I figure they’d have to already know which way Harris is “leaning hard toward” — but if they don’t know that, if they merely know (as we all do) that he’s on her short list, they can make a pointed effort to push her away from that choice even if they think he’s got a one-in-three chance or whatever; they wouldn’t need to think he’s the favorite, just that he’s in the running and not their choice.
Nothing “nitpicky” about it. You nailed it.
They may only think they know. Or they may not know at all. But I believe the message is, “We want to support you, but this endorsement can be withdrawn if you make the wrong pick for VP.” It’s the timing of the endorsement more than anything that makes me wonder about it.
It’s just idle speculation on a message board. I wouldn’t put too much stock in it. 