Democrats have had to act on a very compressed schedule recently. This compressed schedule is caused by two things: 1) The sudden withdrawal of Joe Biden from the race on July 21; and 2) Ohio Republicans.
On the second issue, for almost five decades now, the tradition has been that, in almost every election cycle, the party in the White House has held their convention between August 15 and the week after Labor Day. Despite this tradition, some states (including Ohio) have set a deadline for certifying the presidential and vice-presidential candidates before the end of August. Despite this nominal deadline, in every cycle, these states (having made whatever point they intended to make) grant a waiver to any party holding their convention after the deadline. This year, however, Ohio waited to long to enact a statutory waiver which creates an ambiguous situation. Ohio’s new law will push the deadline to after the Democratic convention, but that new law does not take effect until September 1. The current law, however, has a deadline of August 7. So, if the Democrats wait until after the convention, their certification will be untimely under current law and then, maybe, become timely under the new law. But that would require hoping for courts to do the right thing in interpreting the law, and, despite the guarantees to the contrary by Republican officials in Ohio, it is as certain as the sun rising in the morning that some Republican would challenge any “late certification.”
As a result, the Democrats have been acting as if August 7 is still the deadline in Ohio. Thus, the virtual roll call for President will be concluded by 6 p.m. on August 6. And Vice-President Harris has until just before the close of business on August 7 to name her vice-presidential nominee. While normally, we would expect to see this pick made on the eve of the convention (in other words around August 14-16), the pick has to be made within the next seventy-two hours.
In the old days, the pick of the vice-president was about “balancing” the ticket (i.e. getting somebody from a different region on the ticket), but, as the number of swing voters has dwindled, the impact of a vice-presidential nominee outside their home state is practically non-existent (and even in their home state is, at most, minimal). Thus, the pick has been more about counter-acting potential weaknesses of the nominee. For example, picking Joe Biden in 2008 to answer potential concerns about Barack Obama’s lack of foreign policy experience. And, perhaps, more importantly, the ability of the vice-presidential nominee to be the “attack dog” allowing the presidential candidate to be “presidential,” and whether the presidential candidate sees the potential vice-president as somebody that they can work with for the next four years. While, legally, a vice-president has few responsibilities beyond breaking ties in the Senate, most presidents want to have a vice-president who can handle heavy assignments and serve as a sounding board in policy discussions. Ultimately, the main consideration in picking a vice-presidential candidate is choosing one who will “do no harm.” While it is unclear that any vice-presidential pick has made a difference recently, there have certainly been picks who caused issues for the campaign (Thomas Eagleton, Dan Quayle, Sarah Palin, J.D. Vance). And there have been picks that have potentially helped the ticket (George H, W, Bush, Lloyd Bentsen, Dick Cheney, Joe Biden),
To the extent that winning a state matters in who gets the V.P. nod, this race seems like it is going to come down to four states — Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Georgia. If any candidate takes three of those four states, they will almost certainly win the White House. Beyond those four states, there are a handful of “next domino in line states) — Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina. But those states will only matter if there is a 2-2 split in the main four states. (Of course, that list of states is based on the 2016 and 2020 results and current polling. By November, the key states might change.)
While nobody knows exactly what the Harris campaign is thinking, there have been leaks to the press of potential candidates who are being “vetted” (under the “do no harm” Rule #1 of the modern campaign which requires making sure there is nothing that is likely to come out between now and November that will torpedo the campaign). Two potential candidates seem to have withdrawn Governor Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan and Governor Roy Cooper of North Carolina. In Governor Cooper’s case, North Carolina is one of those states in which the lieutenant governor is elected separately from the governor and North Carolina also makes the lieutenant governor the acting governor when the governor is out of the state. Since the current lieutenant governor is from the ultra loony wing of the Republican Party, Governor Cooper is pretty much stuck in North Carolina and can’t campaign nationally.
That leaves five names at the top of the lists that have been floating around. The top two appear to be Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona and Governor Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania. To the extent that a vice-presidential candidate can make a difference in their home state, both come from must win battleground states. Both Vice-President Harris and Senator Kelly were born in 1964 (placing them right on the border between Gen X and the Baby Boomers) and Governor Shapiro was born in 1973 placing him right in the middle of Gen X. This contrasts to the Republicans who have nominated an early Baby Boomer for President (who has been showing signs of mental decline for years) and a wet behind the ears Millennial for their ticket.
Senator Kelly, besides being from Arizona, brings a reputation for being a moderate, the glamor of having been an astronaut, and the personal story of his spouse being the target of gun violence/assassination attempt. Governor Shapiro is a former state attorney general and, as somebody who has never served in Congress, is an “outsider.” Given his solid support for Israel, there is some concern that picking him could cause issues with the pro-Palestinian fragment of the party.
The third candidate on the list appears to be Governor Tim Walz of Minnesota. Like Vice-President Harris, Governor Walz was born in 1964. Governor Walz is a former teacher who served in the Army National Guard. In recent weeks, he has been one of the leading individuals attacking the Republican ticket, and seems well-suited for the attack dog role. But Minnesota seems unlikely to be the deciding state in the election.
The same can be said for the two last people who have been getting mentioned. Governor J.B. Pritzker of Illinois and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, formerly of Indiana. Governor Pritzker was born in 1965 (putting him slightly on the Gen X side of the generational divide) and Secretary Buttigieg was born in 1982 (making him a slightly older Millennial than J.D. Vance.
Governor Pritzker’s big disadvantage is the lack of a national profile and that his state is solidly blue. While he does not have any big negatives, picking him would be more about his ability to be vice-president than anything that he adds to the ticket. Secretary Buttigieg does have a national profile and has shown a willingness to go into the lion’s den of Faux News to push the administration’s agenda. He would be the first openly gay presidential or vice-presidential nominee of a major party. And the Harris campaign would have to decide whether a campaign trying to elect the first woman president wants to take on that first as well given that a key component of the Republican campaign for the past fifty years has been the culture wars.
My personal hunch is that the pick will come down to Governor Shapiro and Senator Kelly. Neither one is clearly the “right” pick from the political side. As a result, the pick will come down to whom Vice-President Harris feels most comfortable working with. Both are more than capable of eating J.D. Vance for lunch if J.D. Vance has the courage to participate in a vice-presidential debate. At the present time, I would describe Governor Walz as more of a long shot, but long shots have been nominated before (see Sarah Palin and Paul Ryan).
