The Economist says Harris is now leading in nationwide polls, but it’s early days and that electoral college thing still matters. One presumes Walz might go down well with younger voters and with female voters who support personal autonomy.
(Limited gift link.)
https://econ.st/3AeuE3u
I think he’s a sharp choice–and a sharp talker!
There is one horrific inside effect of this decision. Won’t someone think of the grammar?!
Practically a spring chicken.
But really I get all itchy when I’ve heard people talking about him after a Harris presidency. That is way too far away that it’s not worth thinking about.
The despair I felt two months ago.
The Daily Show has done a deep dive into Tim Walz and came up with all of the pertinent facts.
I know it’s in jest, but this is more a style issue that will vary depending on which style guide you’re following. AP style would use apostrophes the first way. The Chicago Manual of Style would go the third way. I don’t think anyone would do the second. All would capitalize proper nouns, too. Or just do “the Harris-Walz campaign” which is more concise, anyway.
Better would just be “the Harris–Walz campaign.” Just like it was “the Biden campaign” or “the Biden–Harris campaign.”
So, just for the record, I was on Team Kelly, but had no major reservations with Walz. Of the three finalists, I was Kelly - Walz - Shapiro, and felt all three were qualified, just might bring different things to the table.
My internal polling felt that Kelly was best if trying to appeal to the more traditional “manly” image in an effort to encourage non-MAGA traditional Republican voters, offset traditionalists who were uncomfortable with a POC female, as well as trying to lock in AZ.
Walz wasn’t off my radar, but was certainly lower profile until the thread (thank you) and events brought him to prominence. I liked him, and it seems he’s an easy man to like, which is a plus, but I didn’t feel that he had crossover appeal.
And I find Shapiro competent, but as a fellow Jew, felt that there were far too many crazies that would come out and vote against him, rather than FOR anything else. Although trying to lock down PENN was always a nice bonus.
So in reviewing Harris choice, and where the ticket may go from there, I was wondering how they saw the same calculus.
My guess - I think I may be overestimating the crossover market. TBH, the remaining Never-Trump Republicans were not going to vote Trump, and probably just not vote at all (so they can claim they’ve done no evil). Anyone winnable/rational on the more conservative side of the spectrum was going to vote for Harris anyway (although they may not have voted for Biden after the debate performance), and therefore Kelly may not have been able to move the needle much.
Instead, the emphasis seems to be on Not dividing the Democratic party, and doubling down on the progressive strengths, energy, and optimism of the new ticket. A return to the Obama-tactic of “Yes we can” as it were.
They’re probably right in that analysis.
Here’s to Walz (
), and here’s to hoping a long life and successful career to the ticket!
Nah. That doesn’t work.
What they need to do is what every campaign should do:
Don’t worry about “tacking to the middle.” A change in ideological position just pisses off a small group of people who can’t be pleased, and doesn’t have much impact on 90% of the electorate.
Ultimately, most voters don’t give a shit about ideology, not really. They do perceive the idea that a politician intends on doing something that will make life better. That wins votes.
IMO, at least two of those need to specifically be around economic issues (inflation, housing prices) and immigration/migrants.
I also get tired of the “8 years down the road” punditry. Has it ever gone the way anybody predicted?
I have this fantasy that Biden may have started a unilateral tradition where Democratic incumbents all step aside after one term so their VP can run, putting a stake through the heart of “incumbency advantage” and giving the base something new to get excited about every four years.
Absolutely, but this is probably better in the “Kamala Harris and the runup to the 2024 Presidential Election” thread so I’ll leave it at that.
Fair, and apologies for a potential hijack.
I think what we see in this VP discussion is that there were multiple good choices for VP, which means multiple good choices for President. What the Democrats need to do is start giving all of them good jobs that build on this base, so that they’ll be even better options for President in 4 or 8 years. Then let them compete, and see where the votes land.
Building up their bench has been a weakness in the Democratic Party for many years now. They need to fix that. Stop with The Anointed One thinking that caused so many problems in 2016.
I hear the decision was close until they got to the part where Kamala asked the finalists to back a camper into a tight spot. Tim Walz brought his own pop-up.
Whenever Tim Walz is done backing a camper into a space, he gets out of the truck grinning and says “Hoo boy! That’s a workout!”
Tim Walz sent hotdish over to Josh Shapiro’s office this afternoon, with the recipe attached.
Tim Walz promised to take his kids to IHOP tonight for chocolate chip pancakes to celebrate.
No matter where he is or what he’s doing, Tim Walz goes out to his car everyday at 4:00 for a 15-minute snooze.
Whenever Tim Walz gets introduced at an event as the governor of Michigan, he never corrects the person because he knows they’re probably nervous and they’re doing their best.
Tim Walz says he thinks he has a couple good 2x4s in the shed. But he’s just being humble. He knows he has a couple good 2x4s in the shed
This ticket just got some Big Dad Energy!
(Search Threads or Twitter for #BigDadEnergy for some more of these wholesome Walz humdingers. He’s trending in the best possible way right now.)
An interesting note about Shapiro in a Politico article:
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, another finalist, avoided the green-room circuit and instead touted Harris and his own record at a series of events throughout the state. A pro-Harris event in Philadelphia turned into a Shapiro-for-VP party.
His style was seen by at least some in Harris’ world as showboating. One senior Democrat in touch with Harris’ team called it “counterproductive.”
And there was a sense within Shapiro’s team that, unlike Walz, his interview with Harris did not go as well as it could have.
Which leads me to wonder if this weakness is inherent to the nature of a VP running later for president. The Dem presidential candidates have chosen don’t-rock-the-boat VPs (Gore, Biden, Walz) where “boring white male” was a factor. Biden probably won 2020 in part everyone wanted boring normal in the crazy pandemic year - but that was an extreme situation.
Yes, that’s definitely a factor. Being the incumbent VP when the current President is either term-limited or chooses not to run again is enough of an advantage in the primary votes. There shouldn’t be a presumption that they “automatically” become the presumptive nominee in the next election.
I agree with that but I also think that constitutes tacking to the middle. The 3-5 clear promises need to be on pretty universal topics that affect everyone and not just the base or the left.
I’m liking him more and more. I’m increasingly convinced (thanks @RickJay for the points made) that his actual progressive positions and accomplishments will only be of significance to the progressive base and help their turnout marginally. But the unengaged voters? They will instead respond to his rural background, his safe white guyness, his being a football coach, and the gentle humor as a refreshing change from the extreme noise they perceive from each side.