While the Kamala Harris coronation for Democratic
presidential nomination continues in its safely shielded
path, her sacred status among party members growing with
each day, the decision to select Governor Tim Walz of
Minnesota as Vice Presidential running mate had all the
hallmarks of unbearable caution. Caution for being secure
from any ambition on his part (Presidential contenders tend
to pick running mates unlikely to go off the reservation or
eclipse them during their time in office.) Caution, as well,
from other factions in the party that may make things
interesting at the Chicago Democratic Convention slated to
start on August 19.
Caution, also, from any
disturbance posed by overtly visible talent, which can be
something of a handicap for higher office. The Minnesota
governor had certainly received attention from Harris for
his less than profound suggestion that comments made by
Republican contenders Donald Trump and J. D. Vance were
“weird”. In an
interview with MSNBC, Walz declared that “These are
weird people on the other side.” He reiterated
the view at a campaign event in which he claimed that
the Trump-Vance ticket was a “threat to democracy” that
would see rights removed and people placed in
danger.
Given that much media coverage involves
skipping over garbage cans rather than scouring the garbage,
this was a perfect illustration about a figure who should,
at best, stick to mediocre party slogans. But no. Harris,
the Democratic anointed papier-mâché candidate for the
White House, thought differently.
Many Democrats
revelled in the fatuity of it all. “Tim’s signature is
his ability to talk like a human being and treat everyone
with decency and respect,” said
former President Barack Obama in a statement. The Los
Angeles Times was
told by a Democratic source allegedly close to Harris
that Walz revealed much “ease in cutting through political
jargon to deliver a straight message,” something that
appealed to her.
Walz may have an
advantage insofar as he is utterly unknown to the voters
that will swing the election. Outside his state, he is
clean, cold tabula rasa and utterly without distinction. The
figure of no record can create something anew. But the
person overlooked for his role – Governor Josh Shapiro of
Pennsylvania – may well cause tongues wagging, not least
through his supporters.
Shapiro certainly
would have been a far more interesting choice.
Hypocritically, he was attacked by members of his own party
for adopting an enthusiastically pro-Israeli position in the
Israel-Hamas War, one that most Democrats implicitly, or
explicitly support through the continued supply of arms
sales to the Netanyahu government. But perfumed cant and ham
performances are everything in Washington, and Shapiro’s
refusal to condemn the slaughter of tens of thousands of
Palestinians in Gaza with appropriate ceremony drew
such labels as “Genocide Josh”.
A perplexed
Jared Moskowitz, Democratic Representative from Florida,
summarised the issue with lean clarity: “Josh’s position
on Israel is almost identical to everybody else, but he’s
being held to a different standard. So you have to ask
yourself why.” Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, also from
Florida, noted
with suspicion that Shapiro, as “the only Jewish candidate
is getting excruciating, very specific scrutiny,
particularly around his positions on
Israel.”
William A. Galston, chair and senior fellow
of governance studies at the Brookings Institution, suggests
two possible pitfalls to the Walz pick. For one, he opens a
flank for Republicans to argue that Harris has yielded to
the more progressive side of the political
aisle.
While there is much to rebut and rebuke about
the Harris-is-Progressive position, her stances on the Green
New Deal, supporting Medicare for All, among others, will
provide ammunition for the GOP squirrels that will hardly be
defused by this choice. Walz is obviously there as stuffing
for the moderate, even conservative voters, though this a
severe misreading. The days of Walz as a pro-gun rights
member of the National Rifle Association are now the stuff
of dusty archives and amnesiac diarists.
The notion
that he is a siren to working-class voters and those from
the rural constituency is also highly questionable. Between
2018 and 2022, the gloss, notably in the rural areas, wore
off. In 2022, his re-election was largely attributable to
the suburbanites of Minneapolis. The current version of Walz
is one
endorsed by Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, who has been
enthusiastic, along with other progressive voices, for his
selection.
In another sense, as Galston goes on to
suggest, this Harris pick could well aggravate some
Democratic voters and squander the chance of a VP running
mate able to draw in voters from a swinging state. The
solidly safe Democratic state of Minnesota is hardly likely
to make a dent in the campaign funds of the major parties,
let alone disrupt the electoral compass.
Shapiro,
being the governor of one of the presumptive jewels of the
Electoral College, exceeded
President Joe Biden’s 2020 share in the state by some
margin in a number of salient groups: seven points among
rural and provincial voters; seven points among non-college
voters; nine among Republicans and voters inclined to the
Republicans, and five among Independents.
In the final
count, the VP running mates of either side are unlikely to
redirect navigation in any significant way. Such candidates
generally count as embroidery for the campaign, and, when in
office, function accordingly. That said, embroidery can
still be noticed, and in this regard, Walz is remarkably
unnoticeable.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth
Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures
at RMIT University. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com
Advertisement – scroll to continue reading