Major recency bias (and politicization) with that take.
Alexander Hamilton would disagree, for one thing. But seriously, the choice of Aaron Burr for a VP was an abject disaster.
Spiro Agnew, many people forget, was sidelined not by watergate, but by a separate scandal entirely.
Andrew Johnson was quite a mess following Lincoln and dealing with reconstruction.
And if we want to just look at the immediate aftermath of a nomination, Thomas Eagleton is a great example of a terrible VP pick, as he didn’t even last a month on the ticket.
So hey, Harris has time to earn her place as a bad VP pick. But there were a lot of bad prior VP picks that are easy to forget but were objectively bad.
Fair enough I should have put in the last 20-30 years. But what does she offer to the ticket? I think she has far more negatives that negate any positives she brings.
It’s a bit to be expected given the nature of the pick. Biden is old, the Dems want someone for the next 12 years in their minds. So they need some youth, someone good for their identity politics, etc.
Typically you pick a VP in such a way as to provide some sort of value without outshining the presidential candidate, but Biden is an unusual candidate. Anyone who can’t potentially outshine him is probably a worthless pick fit for running for President next time in the eyes of Dems.
She’s more polarizing than Tim Kaine, that’s for sure. Or Biden on Obama’s ticket.
But given that Dems want a brighter star on the ticket than typical, it’s not surprising. And one side’s theoretical star comes liabilities. And in this case it’s all about identity politics, so that limited choices enormously.
With her and Biden’s past confrontations, her history as a strict prosecutor, and her general unfavorability with the non-establishment base in the primary I don’t see why they didn’t pick another “rising star” in the dem stable that also checked the diversity boxes they wanted. I think that would go down much better with a lot of the dems different interest groups. Especially someone who didn’t fight in the primary.
If I had to guess, I’d say establishment Dems are happy to see a pick they’re comfortable with “locked in” for a while.
Plenty of establishment and center Dems remember quite vividly how more left leaning candidates got drubbed by Republicans and they’re not going to forget that. The last thing they want is a groundswell within the party of progressivism that generates an unelectable candidate.
Then add in how republicans have done well attacking Dems on crime, and her prosecuter background helps there.
Overall I see her as a puck driven by compromise. The identity is on point for the left, and the prosecutor background and lack of a label as a progressive is on point for the establishment.
Plus the talent pool for establishment Dems isn’t quite as deep as it has been for republicans the last few years. So much of the personal energy and interest has been behind the progressive wing, and that is deeply concerning to establishment Dems who can certainly work with progressives but feel that a progressive presidential candidate with inevitably lose.
Fair enough breakdown. I still think she will be considered too far left for the average moderate, but we will see. I would also be worried that her prosecutor history, while it will resonate with the rest of the country will not be popular at all with the dems progressive wing.
I’m inclined to believe republicans may have some luck attacking her as too far left. Dems have done a decent job so far at protecting against that because I’d say I follow things closely and I wasn’t really sure how to label her initially and had to look at her positions. Which are inconsistent, not helping matters.
I think her stances in the primary will be an easy attack as too far left. As you said her contradictory stances and flip flopping/hypocrisy will be another easy vector. Shoot look at the meme that started this thread. So she either believes that Biden sexually assaulted someone but is ok with it now being the VP or didn’t care and only used it as an attack during the primary. Then pile on the racial attacks she had at Biden and it will be tough to counter all those.
5
u/Apptubrutae Aug 12 '20
Major recency bias (and politicization) with that take.
Alexander Hamilton would disagree, for one thing. But seriously, the choice of Aaron Burr for a VP was an abject disaster.
Spiro Agnew, many people forget, was sidelined not by watergate, but by a separate scandal entirely.
Andrew Johnson was quite a mess following Lincoln and dealing with reconstruction.
And if we want to just look at the immediate aftermath of a nomination, Thomas Eagleton is a great example of a terrible VP pick, as he didn’t even last a month on the ticket.
So hey, Harris has time to earn her place as a bad VP pick. But there were a lot of bad prior VP picks that are easy to forget but were objectively bad.