Nate Silver: ‘Tim Walz Is a Minnesota Nice Choice’
Nate Silver:
This was a choice designed to maintain the social fabric of the
Democratic Party, and avoid news cycles about a disappointed left
and Democrats’ internal squabbling over the War in Gaza. Or at
least, that’s what I think it was: we’ll need to learn more about
Harris’s deliberation process. I’m not inclined to be too
deferential to any political candidate, but it’s plausible that
there were vetting issues with the runner-up, Gov. Josh Shapiro of
Pennsylvania. Harris certainly has more information about the
internal feeling within the Democratic caucus than I do, or she
may just have thought the chemistry of a Harris-Shapiro ticket
wouldn’t work.
It’s a nice pick: Walz, a two-term governor and six-term U.S.
Representative, is from the family of Tim Kaine-style VP choices:
inoffensive, unlikely to cause any harm, “safe”. Although maybe
that’s unfair: Walz is likely to be better on the stump than
Kaine. If you surveyed Democratic members of Congress, he’d
probably be who they’d choose. But I believe he’s
probably the wrong choice, a step back toward the
Democratic Party’s instincts to triangulate instead of the
boldness the Harris campaign has displayed so far. […]
On Saturday, I made the case that Harris should pick
Shapiro. And nothing has really changed since then — although
you could argue that Harris’s increasingly strong position in the
polls compels greater risk-aversion than when she’d
initially appeared to be an underdog against Donald Trump. The
basic reasons for picking Shapiro are that he increases the
likelihood you win Pennsylvania, he has a demonstrated
track record of popularity in the most important swing state, he’s
obviously an extremely talented politician and perhaps a future
standard-bearer for the party himself. And also, the reasons for
not picking Shapiro aren’t great. Democrats in the political
bubble overstate the salience of the Gaza issue and
understate the benefits of moderation, and that’s before getting
into the issue of Shapiro’s Jewishness.
My fear is that Walz is, as Silver also worries, another Tim Kaine. Tim Kaine didn’t lose the 2016 election but he didn’t help win it either. Kaine is a fine senator but a total milquetoast. Zero charisma. As soon as the 2016 election was over he completely disappeared from the national stage. It’s been 8 years and I’ve only seen Kaine in the news once in that entire stretch, and that was because he got stuck on I-95 for 27 hours because of a snowstorm. Bill Clinton picked a running mate who had the charisma and gravitas to run for and win the presidency on his own. (Gore lost by like 600 votes in Florida, of course, but clearly he could have won.) Barack Obama picked a running mate who went on to run for president and beat Donald Trump. Hillary Clinton picked a running mate with the personality of a wet towel.
I’m thinking Walz is more like Biden in 2008 though. Reassuring in-his-60s white guy with a solid career, thorough knowledge of the issues, and with good zip on his political-barbs fastball.
★
Nate Silver:
This was a choice designed to maintain the social fabric of the
Democratic Party, and avoid news cycles about a disappointed left
and Democrats’ internal squabbling over the War in Gaza. Or at
least, that’s what I think it was: we’ll need to learn more about
Harris’s deliberation process. I’m not inclined to be too
deferential to any political candidate, but it’s plausible that
there were vetting issues with the runner-up, Gov. Josh Shapiro of
Pennsylvania. Harris certainly has more information about the
internal feeling within the Democratic caucus than I do, or she
may just have thought the chemistry of a Harris-Shapiro ticket
wouldn’t work.
It’s a nice pick: Walz, a two-term governor and six-term U.S.
Representative, is from the family of Tim Kaine-style VP choices:
inoffensive, unlikely to cause any harm, “safe”. Although maybe
that’s unfair: Walz is likely to be better on the stump than
Kaine. If you surveyed Democratic members of Congress, he’d
probably be who they’d choose. But I believe he’s
probably the wrong choice, a step back toward the
Democratic Party’s instincts to triangulate instead of the
boldness the Harris campaign has displayed so far. […]
On Saturday, I made the case that Harris should pick
Shapiro. And nothing has really changed since then — although
you could argue that Harris’s increasingly strong position in the
polls compels greater risk-aversion than when she’d
initially appeared to be an underdog against Donald Trump. The
basic reasons for picking Shapiro are that he increases the
likelihood you win Pennsylvania, he has a demonstrated
track record of popularity in the most important swing state, he’s
obviously an extremely talented politician and perhaps a future
standard-bearer for the party himself. And also, the reasons for
not picking Shapiro aren’t great. Democrats in the political
bubble overstate the salience of the Gaza issue and
understate the benefits of moderation, and that’s before getting
into the issue of Shapiro’s Jewishness.
My fear is that Walz is, as Silver also worries, another Tim Kaine. Tim Kaine didn’t lose the 2016 election but he didn’t help win it either. Kaine is a fine senator but a total milquetoast. Zero charisma. As soon as the 2016 election was over he completely disappeared from the national stage. It’s been 8 years and I’ve only seen Kaine in the news once in that entire stretch, and that was because he got stuck on I-95 for 27 hours because of a snowstorm. Bill Clinton picked a running mate who had the charisma and gravitas to run for and win the presidency on his own. (Gore lost by like 600 votes in Florida, of course, but clearly he could have won.) Barack Obama picked a running mate who went on to run for president and beat Donald Trump. Hillary Clinton picked a running mate with the personality of a wet towel.
I’m thinking Walz is more like Biden in 2008 though. Reassuring in-his-60s white guy with a solid career, thorough knowledge of the issues, and with good zip on his political-barbs fastball.