• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

US Presidential Election 2024 - Trump vs Harris - Vote Hard with a Vengence

Status
Not open for further replies.

Is this a thing?
Will it matter who the VP choice is?
It can matter despite what some say.

Apparently a VP pick can swing a few points in ones favour. Given the close spread between Harris and Trump that will matter even if it 2 to 3 points.

Also a VP pick can hurt you. Vance is a recent example but choices like Palin is definitely another example of a VP pick doing more damage than good.
 
Harris's "bump" includes the RCP 5-way average tipping slightly in favour, but it would be more useful to them if Democrats halted their efforts to block third-party candidates from ballots.
 

Is this a thing?
Will it matter who the VP choice is?
Probably won’t make a huge difference… But a small difference can still be significant.

A VP pick may not necessarily be a big boost to a campaign, but Vance is showing us it can be a bit of a drag on one. Harris will want someone who shores up a different part of the Democrat base, and who comes with minimal baggage or skeletons that could pop up as an uncomfortable surprise.
 
I think the choice is obvious: You want name recognition, you want someone from the northeastern US, you want someone with experience around the presidency. Heck, with the west tending towards family dynasties, you want someone from a political family - in the US context, why not someone whose father previously donated to the Democratic party.

The Democratic VP nominee: Donald J Trump, Jr.
 
Huh, he sure made a last lap sprint from farther back in the pack.

Former high school teacher, ~12 year congressman, ~6 year governor of Minnesota, and a US Army National Guard Command Sergeant Major- basically RSM of a field artillery regiment. That should make for some good memes.

On the ‘dirt’ side, he ate a DUI charge in 1995, pled down to reckless driving. That’s come up in past campaigns.

And now we wait and see what impact this has on the dynamic of the campaign.
 
So much for either candidate selecting a VP to increase odds of taking a swing state or to appeal to voters beyond the base.
 
So much for either candidate selecting a VP to increase odds of taking a swing state or to appeal to voters beyond the base.
Possible. It may also be possible that they feel they can still leverage them for those states and not take any risks.

Shapiro is not popular with the progressive wing.
Kelly has a lock on an important senate seat.

Also, for all we know , something may have come up in the vetting process that they didn’t like.
 
He appears to be as far left as Harris. His performance during the riots is also going to be called into question.
 
And now we wait and see what impact this has on the dynamic of the campaign.
Regardless of whether this was a better choice than a more center-left option, or someone from a more contentious swing state, what this VP does is establish is that, unlike the Republican ticket, the Democrat Ticket is 100% "not weird".
 
The Republicans are going to have to work very hard and hope the swing voters smoke a lot of dope to try to portray this guy as any sort of extremist. Hasn’t stopped Trump’s immediate ‘sky is falling’ emails, but they’ve got a ton of work to do to try to make anything stick for normal, reasonable people.

First impressions, pretty well established and regarded Midwest politician with established middle class professional roots. The Democrats can (and have) immediately point to his record as a teacher, an ANG NCO, a recreational hunter, and blue caller work experience early in life. He has nearly two decades’ experience working the campaign circuit and working in both the legislative and executive branches at both state and federal level. All in all, Harris seems to have made a pretty decent pick here. Shapiro has already voiced his support and pledged his active campaigning for the Harris/Walz ticket. This should be an easy choice for the Democrats as a party to mostly unify behind and get on with business.
 
Possible. It may also be possible that they feel they can still leverage them for those states and not take any risks.
MN hasn't been won by a Republican since 1972 (Nixon), and I don't find Trump's claim that MN is in play credible. OH...maybe, but I don't recall it ever popping into lists of swing states this time around.

The Democratic ticket is now progressive left, and the Republican one is populist right. After all the crowing Democrats did asserting that Trump made an error picking Vance, I find Harris's choice is no better. I can't tell whether they're angling to win the presidency, or aiming to shore up seats in the House and Senate.
 
MN hasn't been won by a Republican since 1972 (Nixon), and I don't find Trump's claim that MN is in play credible. OH...maybe, but I don't recall it ever popping into lists of swing states this time around.
No I meant Arizona and Pensilvania. That both Shapiro and Kelly can still be leveraged without being VP.
The Democratic ticket is now progressive left, and the Republican one is populist right. After all the crowing Democrats did asserting that Trump made an error picking Vance, I find Harris's choice is no better. I can't tell whether they're angling to win the presidency, or aiming to shore up seats in the House and Senate.
Nah. I think he was a safe choice.

My guess is both the presidency and the house and senate.
 
Possible. It may also be possible that they feel they can still leverage them for those states and not take any risks.

Shapiro is not popular with the progressive wing.
Kelly has a lock on an important senate seat.

Also, for all we know , something may have come up in the vetting process that they didn’t like.

The cynic in me immediate thought was she selected someone who wouldn't take the spotlight off her. That doesn't necessarily mean that she has a fragile ego (or is a toxic narcissist - only one per election cycle should be allowed) but the other two who were in the running could conceivably compete with her for media attention, either intentionally (IMO, Shapiro) or unintentionally (Kelly). Walz provides a solid campaigner who presents an image that may appeal to the white, blue collar, Mid-West voter. He also is not as "pretty photogenic" as the other guys, and who wouldn't have likely been positioning himself for a run at the White House as top of the ticket in 4 or 8 years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top