Isn’t Newsom disqualified because he is from the same state as Harris?
Based on the names known to be considered, it looks like she’s going with a moderate.
I agree that Kelly seems like the best choice from an electability point of view. His personal story is exciting, and embodies the kind of genuine machismo that Trump and Vance conspicuously lack. He’s been personally affected by gun violence, and he comes from an important swing State. Honestly, he just LOOKS badass!
There are ways around it (Like Harris changing her residence to DC) but he’s politically disqualified for not bringing anything to the ticket that Harris doesn’t already have.
This has been discussed a lot in other threads in recent days. Technically, it’s a problem (it violates a clause in the 12th Amendment), but a problem that can be easily addressed, by having one of the two candidates establish residence in a different state.
Exactly this same thing happened in 2000, as both George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were Texas residents; Cheney established residence in Wyoming prior to the election.
And was also discussed when Trump was (apparently) considering Rubio as his ticket mate.
I assume Harris can be “from” anywhere where she has a residence, such as DC.
Probably? From what I read the other day, Cheney established residence in Wyoming by getting a driver’s license, and registering to vote, in that state. So, it does require a little bit of actual administrative stuff.
A Senator who used to be an astronaut and a career Navy officer.
They do a pretty deep background check on astronauts, but it’s not an oppo check. Hopefully he doesn’t have any skeletons.
I think Kelly is the best choice. But I just had to give my man Jared my vote, for all the entertainment he has given me on YouTube! 
God, what I wouldn’t give to see him go HARD on the campaign trail…
I voted Whitmer because I think she gives the best chance for a win. But if she is serious that she doesn’t want the role, my second choice is Kelly.
I really like almost every name on the list. I’m very torn between Beshear, Shapiro and Whitmer. Y’all are bringing me over to Kelly, so that makes my indecision worse. Jeff Jackson is also a favorite, but I guess he’s not known enough. I’ve always liked Pete and Jared Moskowitz is awesome, but maybe not for everybody.
I think I’m going to give it some more though before I vote.
You can!
I’m reminded of Sean Connery in The Untouchables.
I voted Shapiro. Any purple or red state governor would be, as far as we can measure such things, similarly electable, except that Pa has more electoral votes and is in play.
As for Mark Kelly, members of congress have many times casted controversial votes that can be used against them. While governors sign controversial bills into law, fewer of them are on hot-button issues. That’s why the pre-Obama so-called senatorial curse was a real phenomenon.
I would be interested to see a second poll where everyone had to vote twice — once for who you want to be the next veep, assuming Kamala will win, vs. who you think would help the ticket win.
Do they have a suit they can wear to a state funeral? Since Harris is a healthy 59 year old with the best protection in the world, that’s all that matters after the election.
Is there a way to change the colors so that they’re more distinct?
Jared Polis summed up my attitude pretty well and funnily. Seriously just.whatever the swing state polls say go with that. VPs aren’t particularly important (unless you know… ) the Dems just need to do whatever the numbers say. Personally I’d say Mayor Pete or Mark Kelly but seriously if she could pick a wheel of mild Wisconsin cheddar she should it it polls well in the swing states
No, not that I can find.
Personally I’d love that, but the question is who Harris should pick “to help her win.” If you think two women have a stronger likelihood of winning than a “balanced” ticket like Harris and Kelly, why is that?
There is a poster, I forget who, who insists that no woman can win a presidential election in 2024 because there are too many people who would not vote for a woman. I get indignant when I read that, as anyone who won’t vote for a woman simply because of her gender was probably a Trumpist anyway, and it seems ridiculously defeatist and outmoded to posit that no woman can succeed as a candidate.
But TWO women? When the alternative to Whitmer is a white male with a simply fantastic backstory? I’m curious as to your reasoning.
Mind you, I voted for Kelly strictly because I think he can help Kamala win. If it were just my personal favorite without practical concerns on electability, Whitmer or Buttigieg would be fantastic.
ETA: Though everything I know about Kelly is great. I’d be very happy with him as a choice, all questions of electability aside.
I assume everyone is voting for who they think will best help the ticket. Personally, I’d probably go for Jeff Merkley, but that’s not happening.