I think Whitmer, Shapiro, Kelly, and Beshear are all excellent choices on the merits and politically and would be happy with any of them. I think Pritzker, Wes Moore, and Roy Cooper are excellent choices on merits but less likely to help politically.
Sherrod Brown would be a catastrophic choice. Going from a competitive senate race to rock solid R? No thanks.
I think a two woman ticket would be best, because taking out Harris would still give a woman as president. I doubt that someone could get both of them at the same time.
Or the hijinks they could pull off in cabinet meetings!
I’m all for Mark Kelley— would swipe at in much-less-experienced veteran Vance in any debate. If not, maybe Beshear brings in some votes.
I keep hearing Beshear and . . . I don’t know. Sure, he’s had amazing success in Kentucky for a Democrat. But he has some advantages there that won’t play elsewhere, particularly a storied last name in Kentucky politics (his father was Governor). His record in Kentucky is pretty light because he’s been at the mercy of the supermajority Republican state legislature. Not his fault, but there’s not a lot he can point to in the way of accomplishments that could resonate in states that may swing like NC or GA.
Okay, sure.
This is a pretty dark thing to say after the past couple of weeks INHO.
I read up on Beshear and I’m pretty impressed he’s been elected twice in Kentucky. As State AG he sued pharmaceutical companies for causing the opioid epidemic. By executive orders, he’s restored voting rights to more felons than any governor in American history and legalized possession of medical cannabis (he supports full legalization). He’s strong on abortion and LGBT rights. Seems like a strong option.
I’ll think of it as practical.
I want to win the presidency, but i think that’s going to be tough, no matter who the VP pick is. So my first concern is not risking losing a seat in the Senate, or the House, or a Democratic governor.
In addition to the links posted previously: Conventional wisdom these days is that the best possible choice buys you very little benefit, but a bad choice will hurt a lot. (I can see an example from my house.) So the calculus here is not about what the choice gets you positively, but about minimizing the negatives.
Jamie Raskin
I’d love to see Andy Beshear tapped for the job.
The case for running while Jewish:
As Trump demonstrates, trying to satisfy everyone is unnecessary. Any Harris ticket is already too Jewish and Zionist if Palestinian rights and suffering is your big issue. And Biden’s Michigan polling has been pretty consistently ahead of Pennsylvania, even though he is a known Zionist sympathizer.
The median voter theorem has not been disproven. To quote Matt Yglesias, ”The good news for Harris is that her basic political problem — she is perceived as more liberal than the average voter — is extremely fixable.” Having a running mate who is Jewish (and, as true for Shapiro, not just by descent) will signal to persuadable centrist Christianity Today evangelicals that Harris respects religion and is moderate.
Fast moving discussion and the above was posted yesterday afternoon/evening (ages ago!) but this would be my concern as well. When I learned Biden was officially withdrawing, my first thought after at least that’s settled was that Harris can, hopefully, maintain separation between herself and Biden over Israel and Gaza. However, if she (or the DNC) chooses an outspoken proponent of Israel (here defined as someone who has either expressed support for Biden’s pro-Israel stance or come out arguing that Biden hasn’t done enough for Israel), then I think that could seriously undermine what little support Harris might draw back in a state like Michigan with a substantial (perhaps even decisive) Muslim minority population.
If Shapiro is such an individual, then I think he is a poor option for VP. That’s only an “if” statement because I don’t know much about Shapiro myself, other than what’s been posted in this thread.
It’s a good point but likely the wisdom that got HRC choosing Tim Kaine.
My memory of how little benefit a VP running mate brings to the ticket, in particular in their home state, was fuzzy, and that “little” being roughly 3%, or more for a respected current governor or senator, is bigger than had remembered that article in my head.
Flipping it - how much harm does a VP do? Hell even Palin level bad probably did crash McCain any worse than he was already on track for. Maybe a home state running mate in MI would have saved the election for HRC?
Probably no data to test the conventional wisdom.
Still if many of us have crossed off Whitmer because we are worried people will vote against the two women ticket, while those 3 points are a good chance of making a difference in MI.
I see Shapiro as a poke in the eye to all potential supporters that are unsure about coming out because of Gaza. Yes critical in MI but also a deal across the country.
Whitmer helping enough in MI to count on it is clear. How much harm is a two woman ticket actually? Are there really going to be voters who would have voted for the woman with Black and Asian heritage who has Jewish step children … if only her VP wasn’t a straight Christian woman? Alternatively it really pulls the GOP to making misogynistic attacks, which helps keep the conversation on women’s rights, specifically the reproductive rights conversation, a winner focus, and off immigration. Not a bad trade off?
I still like Beshear on a global basis and think it will be him, but I’m coming back to hoping for Whitmer.
Shapiro does NOT advocate a Democratic Party flip-flop on Gaza.
Kamala’s challenge is to give the impression of some independence from Biden without it looking like she pandered to a Democratic Party constituency. The veep choice is just about the only opportunity to do this without being accused of a flip-flop (something that doesn’t hurt Trump, but Democrats have a problem with).
Look at how the Republicans allow Trump to depart from their orthodoxy on abortion, or, almost anything. More from my last link:
I get that you have family members who are hoping Harris does just the opposite – breaks with Biden to move leftward. This dynamic is why the Democratic standard-bearer is still an underdog, just not as badly as yesterday.
If Harris needs a veep who will be more pro-Palestinian, my question would be – is there some other progressive issue where the veep choice can signal that Kamala isn’t a California progressive? I guess the obvious answer is Andy Bashear from coal-mining Kentucky. He would be a good choice, but I think Shapiro can deliver Pennsylvania.
Me too, although she supposedly told Democratic party leaders that she wasn’t interested in the VP slot.
If she is willing, then go all in. Whitmer can help deliver Michigan and she has executive experience. Get the two of them on the same page and then do a town hall/campaign blitz. Get an election train and crisscross the country.
Someone asked me this morning: what about that guy from Texas, Beto O’Rourke? What’s he doing these days?
It took me a long time to convince them that my apology for instantly laughing in their face was genuine.
And I’ve heard her speak. A definite asset.
Doubling back on Shapiro, I wonder how it would play if he was vocal on making the case that one can be supportive of Israel and Zionism AND critical of current actions, willing to apply pressure to get more restraint and willingness to work to a more just longer term solution?
My WAG is not well. Israel right now is divisive even in many temple congregations! Best to keep the focus off it to the degree possible and on items that unite across the party and beyond.