I think the east coast elites truly underestimate how strongly young voters feel about Israel. I think this was a smart move. They absolutely would stay home if they felt there would be no change in stance regarding Israel and the Palestinians. She already has a Jewish husband. Walz provides a lot of cover for middle of the country folk. I don’t think the “super liberal” label will stick to an older white farmer/teacher/coach/National Guard guy from the Midwest. No way. Besides, once you get past the red team/blue team crap, most folks like his version of “progressive “ policies.
Yeah Chris is out of touch on this one. It is an INTENSELY motivating issue and this election will be won on turnout, and those voters absolutely are at risk of not making the effort if they are demoralized on atrocities in Gaza.
Completed disagree. Hundreds of thousands of voters in several states write in uncommitted over Biden's Gaza policy. Those people would have done the same had Shapiro been chosen. Michigan would have been lost. Shapiro can do her just as much good in Pennsylvania as governor. You grossly underestimate the visceral anger many have over the 40,000 dead in Gaza. It is anti-Semitic to fail to condemn what Hamas did. It isn't anti-semitic to mourn the deaths of dead Arabs.
I failed to add that I do not believe that Walz is too liberal. On the contrary, Shapiro supports school vouchers, a position that is anathema to wide swaths of the Democratic Party. I believe he is too conservative for many. Also, I scoured the web looking for one instance where Shapiro was critical of the devastation of Gaza. If anybody can find it, please let me know. I couldn’t find it. To me that is as disqualifying as staying silent on Hamas’s atrocities.
I agree Mark, I think the progressive left is far too harsh on Israel as a whole (not on Netanyahu though), but most people fall along the lines you describe here, they want Israelis safe, but they don’t want to see the deaths of innocent Palestinians either. Very public infighting would have occurred with Shapiro and the GOP would use it to their advantage.
Recent poll puts Kamala double digits ahead in MI. Michigan was lost with Biden. The uncommitted vote in the primary was larger than the 2020 margin of victory. Michigan is far from lost. Ann Arborite speaking here, by the way.
Lost for MAGA, you’re completely right, @dutchmaga! Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and here’s your one time. (Not that there was EVER a chance that Michigan would go red: it’s *not* and never has been a “swing state”.)
Chris you really flubbed on this one. But you suffer as many up and down the Acela corridor do as well, from “coastal blindness” — Shapiro made sense to you, but he wouldn’t play well in the heartland at all. He comes across as an Alpha coastal bruiser — not at all what will get you votes in Racine, Wisconsin or Saginaw, Michigan.
Interesting, but I disagree with you somewhat: I live in Pennsylvania now, but lived over a decade in Michigan and over a decade in Iowa. I consider myself a (relatively) savvy comprehender of Midwesterners -- outside of pockets (college towns, bigger cities) they are not generally liberal and love someone with moderating views. Those that might not like Trump (and that's a larger constituency than you think) would love a moderate (someone who has shown he/she can work across the aisle), so despite what you call his 'Alpha coastal bruiser' aspect, Shapiro could be quite popular. But it's all speculation now. She's decided on Walz now.
Our country's largest Arab American population is in Dearborn, MI. They would not have loved Shapiro's Likud-friendly "moderation." GOP wins when they motivate the most wild eyed members of their base, with no moderation whatsoever; why won't a strategy of energizing progressives work for us?
It's funny, because on the East Coast you'll get a decent number of people who consider Pennsylvania the Midwest so basically the same as the "heartland" you're describing.
I commented last evening, and I'll comment again today...Josh Shapiro will campaign effectively for Harris in Pennsylvania..as governor, NOT as her VP candidate. I was hoping for Walz, he's a solid choice...nothing "weird" about him. I'm happy with the ticket.
Agree with everything except the headline, which imho implies (no, says directly) that Harris is weak. She is not. A better headline would have been “Harris Leans Left” which is more accurate without the snark.
Yes. If there's a choice that doesn't make sense to you, I wouldn't start with: oh, that means she's dumb. She's not dumb when her top priority appears to have been getting David Plouffe onboard come hell or high water.
I'd start with the assumption that there was a reason for this. My guess is that it lies in all those reams of new post-Biden internal polls and rapid-fire focus group interviews, etc. What might those have shown that would persuade a smart person to go this way instead of that way?
This time I dare to disagree. I think you are too much immersed in online conversation. I only follow a few podcasts and newspapers and follow a few cable channels on Youtube, but it was very clear that overall, there is very little excitement for Shapiro beyond the simple electoral mathematics. Which, I think is a bit too thin for a reason. Waltz, on the other hand, generated a lot of excitement not only on the Democratic left but in mainstream media as well. Which Shapiro could not do -- which may be quite telling.
His vocal pro-Israel opinion in the Gaza conflict may have caused bigger problems than the slight gain he could have brought in Pennsylvania.
I am disappointed with the choice. Not because I dislike Walz, but because I really like Shapiro and because of his position as maybe the key factor in winning PA. BUT, based on his down the middle record in Congress, Walz is far from the flaming liberal the press (and the Rethugs) portray him to be. He was Chair of the House Armed Services committee for Pete’s sake. And, maybe, Harris just clicked better with him. Which, as you mentioned, is important. Also, the Dems have been in a crouched position regarding their ideology for far too long. And, as has been demonstrated by polling on major issues, voters like many Dem positions (preserve Social Security, prioritize health care, tax the very rich more, prioritize greater income equality, abortion rights) more. So, what we will probably see, and what could be decisive, is a Dem assault on the weirdness of the Rethug ticket along with a passionate defense of their positions on many of the major issues. And would like this be a bad thing? I think not
The problem is that it’s not reality that matters, it’s perception. If people *perceive* him as a flaming liberal, then that’s a problem, even if that’s complete BS.
Well, let's pause for a moment. Let's think about actually governing the country instead of how the horserace looks. Walz is a VERY experienced guy. Six terms in the House. A very successful record as the very popular governor of Minnesota, which is right next door to my home state of Wisconsin. Gosh, Governor Walz now looks like a perfect candidate for actually helping run the USA. Trump bragged about flipping Minnesota. That flip just flopped. Harris needs to carry Wisconsin. Wisconsin has a decades-long history of really liking Minnesota Democrats. And let's say the unspoken part out loud. Maybe there were people who worried about a ticket with two minorities at the top. That's not fair and not right, but it is the reality of our country in 2024. Presumably, our very bright and capable vice-president looked at Chris' "no brainer" and had other thoughts.
You expressed a well-reasoned case for Shapiro. Some of your readers express other opinions.
Your response? You immediately go into a defensive crouch and reply with a bitchy, whiny, snippy comment. At some point in the future you'll acknowledge making comments in the past that you shouldn't have, but you need to just stop yourself from making these comments in the first place, and appreciate the fact that you have a blog where people are able to express their thoughts. If we wanted a one-way dialogue there are lots of right-wing MAGA blogs we could subscribe to.
I'm thinking maybe an authentic, down-to-earth, reasonable Walz will contrast favorably against the phony, elitist, woman-bashing, billionaire-sponsored Vance.
Chris, bluntly, I believe your thinking on this matter is inadequate. To suggest that selecting Governor Shapiro would have been a "no-brainer" is to denigrate the intelligence of Vice-President Harris and many of your readers, IMO. You can do better.
Chris, thanks for your work and this platform. Let me point out that you yourself in your main message did not equate choosing Walz with losing. You were right then; why flirt with Walz = loss now? Or do I misunderstand you?
There's a portion of the electorate (a large chunk unfortunately) that is incapable of getting past point A and make their voting decisions based on that one fact.
Harris and Whitmer? - "Two women" Queue up the PMS and dyke jokes.
Harris and Shapiro? - "Two minorities" And that's before the whole Middle East thing.
Harris and Buttigieg? - "No way I'm voting for a f*g"
We're making baby-steps towards MLK's vision of America, but we still have a long way to go.
You are completely correct, Eric...and it pains me to say it. We have been having this discussion in our home for the past week. I hold Whitmer, Shapiro and Buttigieg in the highest regard...but the Dems have a very full bench of highly talented people. The GOPers have Vance and, er, Don Jr. The future's so bright we will all have to wear shades!
So are Pennsylvanians going to vote for Trump now because Shapiro was not named Harris' running mate? Are Jews going to vote for Trump now? I mean, come on.
Speaking as a Jewish American, Jews NEVER stay home and not vote. Never. It's one of our foremost survival mechanisms. As a kid growing up in Jewish neighborhoods, I marvelled that the overall national voter turnout was 50 - 60%. "What's going on?" I thought. "Absolutely everybody I know votes."
I was in my 30's when NPR broadcast that the Jewish voter turnout is reliably very high. The figure I heard then was 93%, which is astonishing and possibly overestimated, but No, Jewish voters will not stay home over passing over Shapiro.
My comment was about Pennsylvanians, not Jews, staying home. Speaking as a Pennsylvanian who lives next door to Lancaster County, I worry about Trump carrying PA again.
I think Biden, coming from PA and representing next- door DE, had more sway in PA than Clinton, Kaine, Harris or Walz.
As a fellow Pennsylvanian, I worry about Trump carrying PA again. But I do think that Walz can speak to a lot of central PA folks with his concerns over schools, pro-labor positions, and comfort with firearms.
Also, what are you seeing from a "Trump energy" perspective? In 2016 I would drive to Carlisle quite a bit and saw Trump signs, flags, etc. everywhere. I don't see that now. Do you?
I have not seen as many Trump/Vance signs, nor Biden/Harris signs, driving around Chester, Lancaster, or Delaware Counties. Not quite sure how to read that.
I get your feelings, but I hope that Pennsylvanians get what is at stake in this election. Maybe they have bad feelings not having Shapiro on the ticket, but I assume that will pass. It's not like Walz is an evil man, but Trump and Vance are. They will destroy this nation. All of us from blue states must put any animosity aside and vote blue this November. It is vital for our nation, in fact our world, that we do. Thank you.
Monday morning quarterbacking on Kamala’s choice is inevitable. Everyone has an opinion. BUT now is the time to embrace Waltz, focus on what he brings to the ticket and let Kamala know in no uncertain terms that she has our support. We need to keep the momentum going!
Shapiro has a huge approval rating in PA. He should be out on the campaign trail endorsing Kamala for President. Hopefully that helps deliver PA. And Waltz will definitely resonate with voters in WI and MI. Every politician has pros and cons. Let’s support Kamala in her pick of Walz and move forward. He’s a strong choice
As a native Minnesotan, I'm proud that she picked Walz but sad for the state to lose him. I'm hoping someone can answer my serious (and possibly dumb) question. Why does picking a VP from a certain state mean that that state will go for that ticket? I never understood that. If I was living in Minnesota, while being proud, I would be a bit pissed that he is leaving the state. And Republicans in Minnesota were never going to vote for Kamala, and they can't stand Walz. I would think it would be the same in every state.
The idea the VP pick will help the ticket win that state is flawed. It hasn't happened since like the 60s. Al Gore didn't help Clinton win Tennessee in 1992 or Mitt Romney with Wisconsin in 2012. It just doesn't matter the way people think it will
It worked for Hillary Clinton in the sense that she won Virginia by quite a nice margin, unlike a lot of other states. Having a running mate who has been the lieutenant governor, governor, and popular US Senator of a state did the job. Of course, having the Clintons' best friend, Terry McAuliffe, as governor of Virginia probably did just as much.
Of course, she still did not win. I don't really know if she would have or not with a different VP nominee, perhaps the first Latino VP nominee, for example. But I agree, VP nominees really don't make much difference.
As a non-American it bemuses me how common aspects of European welfare state/capitalist model are seen as hard left.
What is so terrible at offer solutions to popular problems (as opposed to populist ones)?
Offering food for hungry children bad?
Reproductive rights for women bad?
Voting rights for FORMER prisoners bad?
When will the Democrats learn to support policies that actually make life better, rather than accepting the framing of these as unacceptably leftist by the Republican looinies.
Because the dishonest, hyperbolic labels (socialist, communist, fascist, radical leftist) are effective with shallow voters and -as you note- Democrats don't rebut it.
For sure - of all the friends and family members with medical issues, from cancers to joint issues to diabetes, none of them have any medical debt, and in Scotland our medical prescriptions are free for the individual (paid for by general taxation).
I think the east coast elites truly underestimate how strongly young voters feel about Israel. I think this was a smart move. They absolutely would stay home if they felt there would be no change in stance regarding Israel and the Palestinians. She already has a Jewish husband. Walz provides a lot of cover for middle of the country folk. I don’t think the “super liberal” label will stick to an older white farmer/teacher/coach/National Guard guy from the Midwest. No way. Besides, once you get past the red team/blue team crap, most folks like his version of “progressive “ policies.
Yeah Chris is out of touch on this one. It is an INTENSELY motivating issue and this election will be won on turnout, and those voters absolutely are at risk of not making the effort if they are demoralized on atrocities in Gaza.
Right, the atrocities are a deal breaker.
Absolutely agree!
Completed disagree. Hundreds of thousands of voters in several states write in uncommitted over Biden's Gaza policy. Those people would have done the same had Shapiro been chosen. Michigan would have been lost. Shapiro can do her just as much good in Pennsylvania as governor. You grossly underestimate the visceral anger many have over the 40,000 dead in Gaza. It is anti-Semitic to fail to condemn what Hamas did. It isn't anti-semitic to mourn the deaths of dead Arabs.
I failed to add that I do not believe that Walz is too liberal. On the contrary, Shapiro supports school vouchers, a position that is anathema to wide swaths of the Democratic Party. I believe he is too conservative for many. Also, I scoured the web looking for one instance where Shapiro was critical of the devastation of Gaza. If anybody can find it, please let me know. I couldn’t find it. To me that is as disqualifying as staying silent on Hamas’s atrocities.
I agree Mark, I think the progressive left is far too harsh on Israel as a whole (not on Netanyahu though), but most people fall along the lines you describe here, they want Israelis safe, but they don’t want to see the deaths of innocent Palestinians either. Very public infighting would have occurred with Shapiro and the GOP would use it to their advantage.
Yes
Agree 100%
I’m not at all opposed to Walz. I’m enthusiastically for him. Not sure what gave you that idea.
Exactly!
Michigan is lost….
Recent poll puts Kamala double digits ahead in MI. Michigan was lost with Biden. The uncommitted vote in the primary was larger than the 2020 margin of victory. Michigan is far from lost. Ann Arborite speaking here, by the way.
Lost for MAGA, you’re completely right, @dutchmaga! Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and here’s your one time. (Not that there was EVER a chance that Michigan would go red: it’s *not* and never has been a “swing state”.)
if you say it's lost, she is gonna win it by 4 points.
HA!
Time to support both our Dem choices. Let’s put our energy into winning this election.
YES!!
If Harris can’t win Pennsylvania without Shapiro then she can’t win anywhere. Walz is an inspired choice.
Chris you really flubbed on this one. But you suffer as many up and down the Acela corridor do as well, from “coastal blindness” — Shapiro made sense to you, but he wouldn’t play well in the heartland at all. He comes across as an Alpha coastal bruiser — not at all what will get you votes in Racine, Wisconsin or Saginaw, Michigan.
Interesting, but I disagree with you somewhat: I live in Pennsylvania now, but lived over a decade in Michigan and over a decade in Iowa. I consider myself a (relatively) savvy comprehender of Midwesterners -- outside of pockets (college towns, bigger cities) they are not generally liberal and love someone with moderating views. Those that might not like Trump (and that's a larger constituency than you think) would love a moderate (someone who has shown he/she can work across the aisle), so despite what you call his 'Alpha coastal bruiser' aspect, Shapiro could be quite popular. But it's all speculation now. She's decided on Walz now.
Our country's largest Arab American population is in Dearborn, MI. They would not have loved Shapiro's Likud-friendly "moderation." GOP wins when they motivate the most wild eyed members of their base, with no moderation whatsoever; why won't a strategy of energizing progressives work for us?
It's funny, because on the East Coast you'll get a decent number of people who consider Pennsylvania the Midwest so basically the same as the "heartland" you're describing.
How weird!
I commented last evening, and I'll comment again today...Josh Shapiro will campaign effectively for Harris in Pennsylvania..as governor, NOT as her VP candidate. I was hoping for Walz, he's a solid choice...nothing "weird" about him. I'm happy with the ticket.
I think Kamala made a very well-reasoned choice.
Agree with everything except the headline, which imho implies (no, says directly) that Harris is weak. She is not. A better headline would have been “Harris Leans Left” which is more accurate without the snark.
Yes. If there's a choice that doesn't make sense to you, I wouldn't start with: oh, that means she's dumb. She's not dumb when her top priority appears to have been getting David Plouffe onboard come hell or high water.
I'd start with the assumption that there was a reason for this. My guess is that it lies in all those reams of new post-Biden internal polls and rapid-fire focus group interviews, etc. What might those have shown that would persuade a smart person to go this way instead of that way?
Agreed!
This time I dare to disagree. I think you are too much immersed in online conversation. I only follow a few podcasts and newspapers and follow a few cable channels on Youtube, but it was very clear that overall, there is very little excitement for Shapiro beyond the simple electoral mathematics. Which, I think is a bit too thin for a reason. Waltz, on the other hand, generated a lot of excitement not only on the Democratic left but in mainstream media as well. Which Shapiro could not do -- which may be quite telling.
His vocal pro-Israel opinion in the Gaza conflict may have caused bigger problems than the slight gain he could have brought in Pennsylvania.
His vocal pro-Israel opinion in the Gaza conflict absolutely would have put Michigan in jeopardy.
Agree 100%!
I am disappointed with the choice. Not because I dislike Walz, but because I really like Shapiro and because of his position as maybe the key factor in winning PA. BUT, based on his down the middle record in Congress, Walz is far from the flaming liberal the press (and the Rethugs) portray him to be. He was Chair of the House Armed Services committee for Pete’s sake. And, maybe, Harris just clicked better with him. Which, as you mentioned, is important. Also, the Dems have been in a crouched position regarding their ideology for far too long. And, as has been demonstrated by polling on major issues, voters like many Dem positions (preserve Social Security, prioritize health care, tax the very rich more, prioritize greater income equality, abortion rights) more. So, what we will probably see, and what could be decisive, is a Dem assault on the weirdness of the Rethug ticket along with a passionate defense of their positions on many of the major issues. And would like this be a bad thing? I think not
The problem is that it’s not reality that matters, it’s perception. If people *perceive* him as a flaming liberal, then that’s a problem, even if that’s complete BS.
Well, let's pause for a moment. Let's think about actually governing the country instead of how the horserace looks. Walz is a VERY experienced guy. Six terms in the House. A very successful record as the very popular governor of Minnesota, which is right next door to my home state of Wisconsin. Gosh, Governor Walz now looks like a perfect candidate for actually helping run the USA. Trump bragged about flipping Minnesota. That flip just flopped. Harris needs to carry Wisconsin. Wisconsin has a decades-long history of really liking Minnesota Democrats. And let's say the unspoken part out loud. Maybe there were people who worried about a ticket with two minorities at the top. That's not fair and not right, but it is the reality of our country in 2024. Presumably, our very bright and capable vice-president looked at Chris' "no brainer" and had other thoughts.
Got to win before you govern
Chris,
You expressed a well-reasoned case for Shapiro. Some of your readers express other opinions.
Your response? You immediately go into a defensive crouch and reply with a bitchy, whiny, snippy comment. At some point in the future you'll acknowledge making comments in the past that you shouldn't have, but you need to just stop yourself from making these comments in the first place, and appreciate the fact that you have a blog where people are able to express their thoughts. If we wanted a one-way dialogue there are lots of right-wing MAGA blogs we could subscribe to.
That’s exactly the way I read this column: bitchy and whiny. Chris *clearly* has no monopoly on right ideas, and he was 💯 wrong on this one.
Show a bit of humility, Chris. Hopefully that will come with age.
This ticket can win, and win big.
In this case, Walz has an excellent background at governing before he wins as VP
I'm thinking maybe an authentic, down-to-earth, reasonable Walz will contrast favorably against the phony, elitist, woman-bashing, billionaire-sponsored Vance.
And what a contrast it is!!
Chris, bluntly, I believe your thinking on this matter is inadequate. To suggest that selecting Governor Shapiro would have been a "no-brainer" is to denigrate the intelligence of Vice-President Harris and many of your readers, IMO. You can do better.
Agree 💯. Last night, Chris tripled down on Shapiro and today he’s sort of sour grapes. His opinion was incorrect. He needs to get over himself.
Chris, thanks for your work and this platform. Let me point out that you yourself in your main message did not equate choosing Walz with losing. You were right then; why flirt with Walz = loss now? Or do I misunderstand you?
Agree with the unspoken part.
There's a portion of the electorate (a large chunk unfortunately) that is incapable of getting past point A and make their voting decisions based on that one fact.
Harris and Whitmer? - "Two women" Queue up the PMS and dyke jokes.
Harris and Shapiro? - "Two minorities" And that's before the whole Middle East thing.
Harris and Buttigieg? - "No way I'm voting for a f*g"
We're making baby-steps towards MLK's vision of America, but we still have a long way to go.
You are completely correct, Eric...and it pains me to say it. We have been having this discussion in our home for the past week. I hold Whitmer, Shapiro and Buttigieg in the highest regard...but the Dems have a very full bench of highly talented people. The GOPers have Vance and, er, Don Jr. The future's so bright we will all have to wear shades!
Right, there are still millions of people in this country who would discriminate as you mentioned above.
💯
Well said!
So are Pennsylvanians going to vote for Trump now because Shapiro was not named Harris' running mate? Are Jews going to vote for Trump now? I mean, come on.
>In the 2020 presidential campaign, Joe Biden received about 68% of the Jewish vote, while Donald Trump secured 28%.
https://jcpa.org/six-months-out-the-u-s-presidential-election-and-americas-jews/
No, but they may stay home/not vote
Speaking as a Jewish American, Jews NEVER stay home and not vote. Never. It's one of our foremost survival mechanisms. As a kid growing up in Jewish neighborhoods, I marvelled that the overall national voter turnout was 50 - 60%. "What's going on?" I thought. "Absolutely everybody I know votes."
I was in my 30's when NPR broadcast that the Jewish voter turnout is reliably very high. The figure I heard then was 93%, which is astonishing and possibly overestimated, but No, Jewish voters will not stay home over passing over Shapiro.
My comment was about Pennsylvanians, not Jews, staying home. Speaking as a Pennsylvanian who lives next door to Lancaster County, I worry about Trump carrying PA again.
I think Biden, coming from PA and representing next- door DE, had more sway in PA than Clinton, Kaine, Harris or Walz.
As a fellow Pennsylvanian, I worry about Trump carrying PA again. But I do think that Walz can speak to a lot of central PA folks with his concerns over schools, pro-labor positions, and comfort with firearms.
Also, what are you seeing from a "Trump energy" perspective? In 2016 I would drive to Carlisle quite a bit and saw Trump signs, flags, etc. everywhere. I don't see that now. Do you?
Good question
I have not seen as many Trump/Vance signs, nor Biden/Harris signs, driving around Chester, Lancaster, or Delaware Counties. Not quite sure how to read that.
I don't either riding around Montco and Bucks.
I read it as the Trump energy has dissipated somewhat. Not that we can take anything for granted though. He just isn't new anymore.
However, I recognize that my post was ambiguous re how I was referring to, so my bad.
I get your feelings, but I hope that Pennsylvanians get what is at stake in this election. Maybe they have bad feelings not having Shapiro on the ticket, but I assume that will pass. It's not like Walz is an evil man, but Trump and Vance are. They will destroy this nation. All of us from blue states must put any animosity aside and vote blue this November. It is vital for our nation, in fact our world, that we do. Thank you.
I will be voting for Harris/Walz, but I fear my conservative neighbors in PA will stay home or, worse yet, hold their noses and vote for Trump/Vance
It won’t take much to offset the Dem power in Philly/Pittsburgh and their environs
I also wonder if PA is even really a blue state anymore
Sorry, CapeJ, I misunderstood your comment.
Thank you!
Monday morning quarterbacking on Kamala’s choice is inevitable. Everyone has an opinion. BUT now is the time to embrace Waltz, focus on what he brings to the ticket and let Kamala know in no uncertain terms that she has our support. We need to keep the momentum going!
Yes!
Woo Stan Kamala the brat!
Was Walz the best and most politically beneficial VP choice? Possibly not.
But short of selecting Charles Manson as a running mate, she still made a better VP selection than Trumpty-Dumpty.
Shapiro has a huge approval rating in PA. He should be out on the campaign trail endorsing Kamala for President. Hopefully that helps deliver PA. And Waltz will definitely resonate with voters in WI and MI. Every politician has pros and cons. Let’s support Kamala in her pick of Walz and move forward. He’s a strong choice
Agreed💯! He ain’t gonna be on the sidelines!
As a native Minnesotan, I'm proud that she picked Walz but sad for the state to lose him. I'm hoping someone can answer my serious (and possibly dumb) question. Why does picking a VP from a certain state mean that that state will go for that ticket? I never understood that. If I was living in Minnesota, while being proud, I would be a bit pissed that he is leaving the state. And Republicans in Minnesota were never going to vote for Kamala, and they can't stand Walz. I would think it would be the same in every state.
The idea the VP pick will help the ticket win that state is flawed. It hasn't happened since like the 60s. Al Gore didn't help Clinton win Tennessee in 1992 or Mitt Romney with Wisconsin in 2012. It just doesn't matter the way people think it will
Actually, Clinton won Tennessee in 1992, by a healthy margin.
You're right, thank you for correcting me. I was thinking of 2000 when he lost his home state to Bush
I think the last time it may have had a major impact was when Kennedy selected Johnson in 1960.
It worked for Hillary Clinton in the sense that she won Virginia by quite a nice margin, unlike a lot of other states. Having a running mate who has been the lieutenant governor, governor, and popular US Senator of a state did the job. Of course, having the Clintons' best friend, Terry McAuliffe, as governor of Virginia probably did just as much.
Of course, she still did not win. I don't really know if she would have or not with a different VP nominee, perhaps the first Latino VP nominee, for example. But I agree, VP nominees really don't make much difference.
As a non-American it bemuses me how common aspects of European welfare state/capitalist model are seen as hard left.
What is so terrible at offer solutions to popular problems (as opposed to populist ones)?
Offering food for hungry children bad?
Reproductive rights for women bad?
Voting rights for FORMER prisoners bad?
When will the Democrats learn to support policies that actually make life better, rather than accepting the framing of these as unacceptably leftist by the Republican looinies.
Because the dishonest, hyperbolic labels (socialist, communist, fascist, radical leftist) are effective with shallow voters and -as you note- Democrats don't rebut it.
Thank you Yajster. You also left out: health care for all, very very bad. Subsidies for child care, bad. I have such Europe envy!!!
For sure - of all the friends and family members with medical issues, from cancers to joint issues to diabetes, none of them have any medical debt, and in Scotland our medical prescriptions are free for the individual (paid for by general taxation).
Good Healthcare is a policy choice, not fate.
Could not agree more. Health care, child care, wealth and income equity or inequality, all are policy choices and not just the wheel of fortune.