The V.P.’s Search for a V.P.
In this episode of The Daily, the compressed timeline and challenges of selecting a running mate for Kamala Harris's vice presidential campaign are explored. With just 2-3 weeks for vetting — far shorter than the traditional process — there are risks of overlooking potential issues with candidates.
Harris aims to balance her ticket by finding a running mate who appeals to diverse groups of voters across demographics and geographies. The episode examines her strategy of considering candidates from battleground states as well as those with different ideological leanings. Several potential running mates are discussed, each with their own strengths and weaknesses related to factors like background, ethnicity, religion, and state electability.
This is a preview of the Shortform summary of the Jul 30, 2024 episode of the The Daily
Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.
1-Page Summary
The Accelerated Kamala Harris Running Mate Vetting Process
The vetting process for Harris's vice presidential running mate is occurring on a compressed 2-3 week timeline, Lisa Lerer explains, far shorter than the months-long traditional vetting process. This severely limits time for thorough investigations and interviews, increasing risks of selecting a running mate with unresolved issues.
Harris's Running Mate Selection Strategy
Harris aims to balance her ticket, responding to diverse American voters. She prefers a male running mate from a conservative or swing state, Lerer notes, to broaden appeal across demographics. Yet Harris seems cautious about selecting another woman or person of color, as many Democrats worry the country may not yet accept such a groundbreaking ticket.
Geopolitically, Harris may choose a running mate from a battleground state like Pennsylvania or Arizona to bolster electoral prospects. Lerer also suggests Harris is weighing ideological balance, considering a moderate or conservative running mate to court swing voters, despite risks of alienating progressives.
Potential Running Mate Candidates
Battleground State Candidates
- Mark Kelly (AZ): His compelling background could balance the ticket, but taking him from the Senate risks a Democratic seat loss.
- Josh Shapiro (PA): His bipartisan governing appeals, but his Jewish faith and Zionist views may polarize voters.
Non-Battleground Candidates
- Andy Beshear (KY): His popularity in a red state suggests appeal to rural white voters drifting from Democrats, but Kentucky's non-battleground status limits his impact.
- Tim Walz (MN): His "Republicans are weird" messaging resonates in the Midwest, but Minnesota is already a Democratic stronghold.
- Pete Buttigieg: His media savvy is appealing, but concerns remain that adding a high-profile gay candidate could be seen as too bold historically.
1-Page Summary
Additional Materials
Clarifications
- The vetting process for a vice presidential running mate involves thorough investigations and interviews to assess the candidate's background, qualifications, and potential risks. Traditionally, this process takes months to ensure a comprehensive review. However, in this case, the process is compressed into a 2-3 week timeline, which may limit the depth of scrutiny and increase the chances of overlooking important details.
- In the context of selecting a vice presidential running mate, concerns about public acceptance of another woman or person of color on the ticket stem from worries about potential voter biases and the historical lack of diverse representation in top political positions. These concerns reflect ongoing debates within the Democratic Party about the balance between pushing for progressive change and appealing to a broader electorate, especially in more conservative or swing states.
- Selecting a running mate from a battleground state can potentially benefit a presidential candidate by increasing their chances of winning that state in the election. This choice may also help in appealing to voters in crucial swing regions, thereby strengthening the overall electoral strategy. However, there is a risk involved as removing a prominent figure from a battleground state, such as a senator, could lead to a loss of that seat for the candidate's party. Additionally, the impact of choosing a running mate from a battleground state may vary depending on the state's political dynamics and the candidate's overall campaign strategy.
- Ideological balance in selecting a running mate involves choosing a candidate whose political beliefs complement the presidential candidate's views. This strategy aims to appeal to a broader range of voters by showcasing a diverse set of perspectives within the ticket. It can help attract swing voters who may align more closely with the running mate's ideology. However, this approach may also risk alienating certain segments of the party base if the running mate's views are significantly different from the presidential candidate's.
- Selecting candidates from non-battleground states may limit the potential impact on the election outcome, as these states are typically already leaning towards one party. Candidates from non-battleground states may not bring as much electoral advantage in terms of securing additional votes compared to candidates from battleground states. However, candidates from non-battleground states could still offer other strategic advantages, such as appealing to specific demographics or bringing unique qualities to the ticket. Ultimately, the decision to choose a running mate from a non-battleground state involves weighing these factors against the overall electoral strategy.
- Adding a high-profile gay candidate like Pete Buttigieg as a running mate could be seen as bold historically due to the potential for backlash from voters who may not be fully accepting of LGBTQ individuals in prominent political roles. This concern stems from the historical lack of representation and acceptance of LGBTQ individuals in high-ranking political positions, which could lead to challenges in garnering widespread support for the ticket. The hesitance to select a gay candidate reflects ongoing societal attitudes and potential risks of alienating certain voter demographics who may not be comfortable with such a choice.
Counterarguments
- The compressed timeline for vetting could be seen as a strategic move to maintain momentum and adapt to the fast-paced nature of modern politics, rather than a limitation.
- Selecting a male running mate from a conservative or swing state might not be the only strategy to balance the ticket; there could be other ways to appeal to diverse voters, such as focusing on policy over demographics.
- The concern about public acceptance of another woman or person of color on the ticket may underestimate the electorate's readiness for a diverse leadership team.
- The importance of choosing a running mate from a battleground state could be overstated, as the vice presidential candidate's influence on the election outcome is often debated among political scientists.
- Ideological balance with a moderate or conservative running mate might alienate the progressive base, which could be just as risky as alienating swing voters.
- The risk of losing Mark Kelly's Senate seat could be mitigated by the appointment of another Democrat or by the potential for increased voter turnout and engagement resulting from his candidacy.
- Josh Shapiro's faith and views might not necessarily polarize voters; they could also appeal to voters looking for a candidate with strong convictions and the ability to reach across the aisle.
- Andy Beshear's popularity in a red state could be leveraged to demonstrate the Democratic Party's broader appeal, even if Kentucky is not a battleground state.
- Tim Walz's messaging, while potentially divisive, could also be seen as a candid approach to addressing political differences, which might resonate with voters tired of traditional political rhetoric.
- Pete Buttigieg's candidacy could be a historic and positive step forward, and concerns about his sexual orientation might overlook the potential for his candidacy to mobilize younger voters and those who prioritize LGBTQ+ rights.
Get access to the context and additional materials
The accelerated timeline and challenges of the vetting process for Kamala Harris's running mate selection
As the vetting process for Kamala Harris’s vice-presidential running mate unfolds, it is apparent that the traditional months-long affair has been truncated into a mere 2-3 weeks, creating unique challenges and increasing the risk of unforeseen issues.
The traditional vice presidential vetting process
Lisa Lerer explains that traditionally, the vetting of a vice-presidential candidate is a prolonged process. It often starts during the primary before the presidential nomination is locked in. The process is exhaustive, including collecting extensive documentation such as legal and financial records, conducting interviews, utilizing private investigators to delve into candidates' backgrounds, and assessing policy position alignment.
The compressed 2-3 week timeline for Harris's selection process
Harris's campaign indicates that a selection is likely by August 7, condensing what is usually many months of vetting into approximately two to three weeks. Lerer describes this timeframe as incredibly short, emphasizing the gravity of the decision which could impact not only the candidacy but the presidency itself.
Due to this rapid timeline, the campaign has to quickly complete the extensive investigations typically conducted over several months. Lerer notes the difficulty of gathering thorough information in such a short span. The vetting is tightly held with a small circle, resulting in fewer leaks and a more speculative process. Moreover, Harris's team, having recently inherited the Biden team, is in the nascent stage ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
The accelerated timeline and challenges of the vetting process for Kamala Harris's running mate selection
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- The accelerated timeline might be a strategic decision, reflecting the campaign's confidence in their existing knowledge and vetting processes.
- Modern technology and data analytics could streamline the vetting process, potentially making it more efficient than traditional methods.
- A smaller vetting team could lead to more focused and efficient decision-making, reducing the risk of "too many cooks in the kitchen."
- The campaign's early configuration could be seen as an advantage, allowing for fresh perspectives and innovative approaches to the selection process.
- The presence of significant information on the opposition's weaknesses could compensate for the shorter vetting period.
- The risk of unresolved issues with a running mate might be mitigated by the candidate's public service record and previous scrutiny.
- The traditional months-long vetting process is not necessarily a guarantee against future controversies or issues with a running mate.
- The urgency of the selection process might refl ...
Actionables
- You can streamline decision-making in your personal life by setting strict deadlines. For example, if you're considering a major purchase or a career change, give yourself a fixed, short timeframe to gather information, weigh the pros and cons, and make a decision. This mimics the accelerated vetting process and can help you become more decisive and efficient.
- Develop a checklist for evaluating new opportunities or partnerships that focuses on the essentials. When you're faced with a new project or collaboration, create a list of non-negotiable criteria that must be met, such as value alignment and transparency. This approach helps you quickly assess the viability without getting bogged down in less critical details, similar to a vetting process under time constraints.
- Practice maintaining confi ...
Get access to the context and additional materials
Harris's criteria and strategy for selecting a running mate, including the goal of balancing the ticket
Vice President Harris is tasked with the critical decision of selecting a running mate, and her strategy seems to be one of cautious balance, reflection upon social readiness for change, and a nod to traditional electoral strategy.
Balancing the Ticket
Harris seeks a balance in her ticket that responds to demographic and ideologically diverse American voters.
Geographic and Demographic Considerations
As a woman from a liberal bastion like California, Harris is indicating a preference for a male running mate from a more conservative or battleground state. This approach may compensate for her attributes and broaden the ticket's appeal across different demographics. Lisa Lerer notes that Harris's team is seriously considering male candidates, contrasting with the 2020 selection process focused on choosing a Black woman.
Historically Conscious Choices
Understanding the historic weight of her own place on the ticket, Harris appears cautious of selecting another woman or person of color as her running mate. Lerer says that many Democrats think America may not be ready for a ticket with two women or two people of color—Harris's ticket may hold only one historic first because that's as far as they believe the country is willing to go.
Weighing Risks and Rewards
Harris's team deliberates the potential impacts of various running mate possibilities, seeking a candidate who maximizes appeal and chances of victory without besetting the party with unforeseen issues.
Geopolitical Strategy
A running mate from a key battleground state could tilt the electoral scales in Harris's favor. Lerer suggests that Harris might lean toward selecting a vice-presidential candidate from pivotal states like Pennsylvania o ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Harris's criteria and strategy for selecting a running mate, including the goal of balancing the ticket
Additional Materials
Clarifications
- Vice President Harris is considering a running mate who can balance the ticket by appealing to diverse American voters geographically and ideologically. She aims to select a candidate who can maximize electoral prospects, potentially from a battleground state like Pennsylvania or Arizona. Harris is cautious about choosing someone who could alienate the party's progressive base while also focusing on a candidate who can complement her strengths and challenge political opponents effectively.
- "Balancing the ticket" in selecting a running mate involves choosing a candidate who complements the presidential nominee's strengths and appeals to a broader range of voters. This balance can be achieved through factors like geography, demographics, ideology, and experience. The goal is to create a well-rounded ticket that maximizes electoral prospects by appealing to different segments of the electorate. Ultimately, the aim is to present a united and appealing front to voters across various backgrounds and preferences.
- Selecting a running mate from a conservative or battleground state can help broaden the ticket's appeal across different demographics and regions. It may attract voters who are more aligned with the political views prevalent in those states, potentially increasing the chances of winning in those areas. Additionally, choosing a running mate from a pivotal state could strategically enhance the ticket's electoral prospects by influencing the outcome in closely contested regions. This selection approach aims to balance the ticket by considering the geographical and ideological diversity of American voters.
- Harris is cautious about selecting another woman or person of color as her running mate to avoid potential voter resistance or backlash. This decision is influenced by a perception that the country may not be ready for a ticket with two individuals from historically underrepresented groups. By opting for diversity in other aspects, Harris aims to strike a balance that maximizes the ticket's appeal and electability.
- Choosing a running mate from a key battleground state is significant because it can potentially sway the outcome of the election in favor of the presidential candidate. These states are often closely contested, and having a running mate from such a state can help in mobilizing support and securing crucial electoral votes. It is a strategic move to increase the chances of winning the election ...
Counterarguments
- Balancing the ticket geographically and demographically may not address the deeper policy concerns of voters who are more interested in substantive issues rather than representational balance.
- The assumption that America may not be ready for a ticket with two women or two people of color could be seen as underestimating the electorate's capacity for progress and inclusivity.
- Focusing on a running mate from a battleground state might be an oversimplification of electoral dynamics, as personal qualities and national issues often transcend state lines.
- Selecting an ideologically moderate or conservative running mate could risk dampening enthusiasm among the progressive base to the point where voter turnout is negatively affected, which cou ...
Get access to the context and additional materials
Key potential running mate candidates being considered, including their strengths, weaknesses, and how they would or wouldn't balance the ticket
As the political climate heats up, speculation about potential running mate candidates grows, with a focus on their regional influence, personal background, and how they might complement the presidential nominee.
Candidates from battleground states:
Mark Kelly (Arizona)
Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, with his compelling personal story including his background as an astronaut and his advocacy on border and immigration issues, is seen as someone who could balance the ticket. However, there's a significant concern that taking Kelly from the Senate could risk losing a critical Democratic seat in a closely divided chamber.
Josh Shapiro (Pennsylvania)
Josh Shapiro comes with a bipartisan governing record in Pennsylvania and has gained national attention for his high-profile battles against Trumpism. His credentials make him an appealing option for a running mate. However, as a proud member of the Jewish faith with liberal Zionist views, he might become a polarizing figure in an increasingly diverse and politically sensitive American electorate.
Candidates from non-battleground states:
Andy Beshear (Kentucky)
Kentucky's Governor Andy Beshear has maintained popularity in a deep-red state, suggesting he could appeal to rural white voters who have drifted away from the Democratic Party. However, his influence may not extend far beyond his state—which is not in play for Democrats, reducing his potential impact on the national stage.
Tim Walz (Minnesota)
Governor Tim Walz of Minnesota could bring a Midwestern appeal to the ticket, and his "Republicans are too weird" messaging has demonstrated effectiveness ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Key potential running mate candidates being considered, including their strengths, weaknesses, and how they would or wouldn't balance the ticket
Additional Materials
Clarifications
- Speculation about potential running mate candidates involves analyzing and discussing individuals who could be chosen as a vice-presidential candidate by a presidential nominee. This process considers various factors like the candidate's background, experience, demographics, and how they could complement the presidential nominee's strengths and weaknesses. The goal is to select a running mate who can help balance the ticket, appeal to a broader range of voters, and enhance the overall electoral prospects of the ticket. Speculation often intensifies as elections near, with pundits, analysts, and the public offering opinions on who would be the most strategic or beneficial choice for the ticket.
- Regional influence in the context of selecting a running mate for a presidential nominee involves considering where the candidate is from and how their background and policies might resonate with voters in that region. Complementing the presidential nominee means choosing a running mate who can balance out the ticket by bringing different strengths, experiences, or appeal to broaden the overall appeal of the campaign. This can include factors like ideology, demographics, or expertise that the presidential nominee may lack.
- The concern about losing a critical Democratic seat in the Senate arises from the potential impact of removing a sitting senator like Mark Kelly to run for vice president. If Kelly were to leave his Senate seat to become a vice presidential candidate, there is a risk that the Democratic Party could lose that Senate seat in a subsequent election, affecting the balance of power in the Senate. This concern is significant because the Senate is closely divided between Democrats and Republicans, and each seat holds importance in shaping legislative outcomes and confirming appointments.
- In an increasingly diverse and politically sensitive American electorate, a polarizing figure is someone who generates strong opinions and divides public opinion. This can occur when a person's background, beliefs, or actions are controversial or evoke strong emotions among different groups of people. In such a context, a candidate with characteristics that could alienate or deeply resonate with specific segments of the population might be considered polarizing. The term highlights the potential for such a figure to create significant debate, attract strong support from some quarters while facing intense opposition from others.
- Appeal to rural white voters: This phrase indicates the ability of a political candidate to attract and resonate with individuals living in rural areas who identify as white. Candidates who can appeal to this demographic may focus ...
Counterarguments
- Mark Kelly's Senate seat could potentially be filled by another Democrat, and his national profile might energize voters beyond Arizona.
- Josh Shapiro's faith and views might actually mobilize a base of voters who feel underrepresented and could appreciate his stance on various issues.
- Andy Beshear's success in a red state could be leveraged to show that Democratic policies have broad appeal, potentially influencing voters in other non-battleground states.
- Tim Walz's effectiveness in Minnesota could translate to a national platform ...
Get access to the context and additional materials
1-Page Summary- The accelerated timeline and challenges of the vetting process for Kamala Harris's running mate selection
- Harris's criteria and strategy for selecting a running mate, including the goal of balancing the ticket
- Key potential running mate candidates being considered, including their strengths, weaknesses, and how they would or wouldn't balance the ticket
Create Summaries for anything on the web
Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser
