Unless they know who it is, what’s the point? The campaign has said she’s making an announcement tomorrow, so it’s hardly a surprise that she’s made the choice by now.
Double-checking, it do see that this story was indeed broken by The Bulwark, even though their management is pro-Shapiro.
Because those kinds of headlines and stories generate clicks and clicks generate revenue
And if the offer has been made and accepted, that’s news.
Why not?
Reuters reported](x.com) Harris has narrowed the field to Shapiro and Walz.
Not the same as Harris announced.
I do not think Walz’s use of the word fascist was mentioned before:
Weird seems to have worked, but I cannot believe that voters who swing between Trump and Clinton/Biden/Harris want to think they once voted for a fascist.
If Harris had chosen Kelly, there wouldn’t have been much ideological drama. But it feels to me to now be a pure political choice between the turnout/base theory that progressives might like, leading to Walz, and the median voter theorem more associated with moderation, leading to Shapiro. Which side is Harris on?
Probably she looks at it differently and will choose whomever she most respects and like to work with.
come on walz!!
The guy worked directly for the very department whose name is synonomous with “Israeli state propaganda”, and Israel is currently in the midst of possibly the most controversial conflict in the past 20 years - a conflict which continues to spread, which now involves Iran, which just resulted in a carrier attack group being sent to the Middle East, and which many Democrats including myself wish America would not involve itself in.
Shapiro for VP would be the most collossal unforced error Harris could make.
Yeah, putting him on the ticket makes it harder for her to approach this issue with any sort of nuance.
To say yet again, or it frees her up to be harder on Israeli actions herself.
The more that Israel and Gaza becomes a focus of this campaign, the more it hurts Harris’s chances. It doesn’t matter whether she’s going to be harder on Israel or not. It hurts the campaign. It sucks energy out of it and introduces many pitfalls and opportunities for someone to say something divisive and/or dumb.
Except, were I someone with people over in the Middle East, all I would see is that she partnered with a Zionist propagandist. Actions speak louder than words.
I’ll stop repeating myself, but it’s what we can do until the real news drops: it WILL be in the news and the is ZERO possible path which includes her being able avoid taking positions on it.
She needs to have a plan to try to thread the needle no matter who her running is.
Ok, they’ve got about 11 minutes to prove me right.
Come on, Kamala, push today’s negative stories off of the front end of the 6 O’Clock news!
I can’t parse your meaning here. What is your intent?
- A propagandist only deals with words, so it’s not a big deal compared to what she’d do as president.
Or
- Choosing someone who is a Zionist is an action that matters more than the propaganda.
Or, something else.
Won’t be 5pm for a while still in DC.
Sure, it will be. It’s currently 4:51 in DC.
Ugh. I did the math in the wrong direction. lol
ETA: Let’s say…California then.
“Actions speak louder than words”, in a campaign, sounds like something I might say. And this would be a real test of it.
The GOP campaign is largely based on convincing swing voters that Harris is to their left. Naming Shapiro looks like an action to counter that. If Walz is picked, Harris will need to utter more words, showing a pivot to the center, then she would if she took the action of nominating Shapiro. We may see how that works.
Sorry-- basically if I were Arabic and I had skin in this war (family, friends, etc over there), or just felt really passionate about the humanitarian crisis going on on Gaza right now, and she partnered with someone who worked for Israel’s Hasbara, and aggressively cracked down on the college protests, his addition to the ticket would tell me she has taken a side on this issue, and it isn’t in defense of the Palestinians. No matter what lip service she might give on the stump
I agree that Shapiro will be a risk for Harris especially, if as looks likely, the war in the Middle East becomes bigger. Picking Shapiro will definitely anger some progressives who may stay home or vote third party as well as lose Muslim/Arab votes in Michigan. He brings some big advantages of course in PA, but on balance I don’t think the benefits are worth the risk especially since someone like Walz is such a solid alternative.