The tradition in American politics is that vice-presidential candidates don’t really matter beyond healing intraparty rifts and throwing a bone to a rival. But with one major party candidate of such an advanced age that he may not live through the term and the other renowned for word salads and a seemingly constant state of unpreparedness, the running mates take on special importance this year. It’s thus interesting that both Kamala Harris and Donald Trump have chosen VPs that appeal almost entirely to the party faithful, with little thought to expanding their bases.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, Harris’ pick, was “considered the most liberal choice” among those in the running, according to the Wall Street Journal, “reflecting his left-leaning record since being elected governor.”
“Liberal” might not be the best description. He was a pandemic control freak, imposing restrictions on gatherings, even in outdoor spaces, and maintaining a snitch line through which Minnesotans could turn each other in for violations of public health rules.
His state health department rationed COVID treatments based, in part, on racial factors. The Cato Institute’s “Fiscal Policy Report Card on America’s Governors” awarded him an F grade for his “big-government approach to fiscal policy” that worked from the assumption that personal and business income is wasted if it isn’t taxed away for government use. Walz infamously insisted that, “One person’s socialism is another person’s neighbourliness.” That’s less “liberal” and more left-wing authoritarian.
If ideology weren’t already a clear appeal to progressive true believers, Walz also represents a missed opportunity to reach beyond that already solid core of voters.
Choosing Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro could have helped woo Americans who are concerned that Democrats are not only drifting too far left but have actively embraced the hatred of Jews. Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly could have helped Harris on immigration, where Democrats are seen by many voters as weak. Instead, Walz just doubles down on the ticket’s commitment to progressivism.
Of course, that makes Walz a good match for his counterpart on the Republican ticket, J.D. Vance.
Contrary to the old-school GOP preference for trimming the ranks of regulators and their rules, Vance wants to “seize the administrative state for our purposes,” replace existing bureaucrats with “our people” and defy the courts if they object.
It’s not just the courts he wants to battle: Vance proposes to “seize the assets” of wealthy non-profit organizations that support policies he opposes. Instead of free markets, he’s an advocate of industrial policy, under which the state guides the economy, substituting the preferences of government officials for the free choices of consumers and business owners. He also wants to ban pornography. In short, J.D. Vance embodies nationalist-populist authoritarianism.
Vance’s choice represents Donald Trump’s failure to reach beyond the ranks of the cult he’s built around himself in the reinvented Republican party. Nikki Haley might have reassured traditional conservatives that there’s still a place for them in the party, and Vivek Ramaswamy could have reached out to forward-thinking free-marketeers who want to limit government, and not just turn its dangerous power against a new set of enemies. Instead, Vance promises a continuation of Trump’s populist movement.
That continuation is the key to the appeal, such as it is, of both Tim Walz and J.D. Vance. Last month, Axios reported that President Joe Biden delayed dropping his re-election bid over fears that “Vice-President Kamala Harris wasn’t up to taking on Donald Trump.”
People hate working for her — she has “an extraordinarily high 91.5 per cent staff turnover rate,” according to the watchdog group Open the Books. In 2021, members of Harris’ staff complained to Politico that she often doesn’t take responsibility for her own failures and instead places the blame on staffers. Her constant unpreparedness results in convoluted word salads as she tries to conceal her failure to do her homework.
Competence is also a concern for Donald Trump, who was famously disinterested in briefings, and has the lack of focus that you might expect of a hyperactive child. He’s also thin-skinned and vindictive, which makes for difficult relations with staff, officials from other governments and the public at large.
But his biggest liability is probably his age. At 78, with Biden out of the race, Trump’s ability to perform the responsibilities of the presidency into his 80s is a major concern for voters. He could win the race but be unable to fulfill the requirements of the job for lack of a pulse.
For Kamala Harris, then, Walz represents a more competent progressive who might hold out a greater hope of actually doing the work and implementing the plans and programs that Democrats anticipate from Harris. He combines the increasingly left-wing politics of Democrats with a track record of accomplishment.
Vance, for his part, is roughly half the age of Donald Trump. As a nationalist-populist in the mould of the recreated Republican party, he embodies some form of Trumpism after Trump. He holds the promise of implementing the hopes and dreams of Trump’s supporters, even if the man himself shuffles off this mortal coil.
So, Tim Walz and J.D. Vance are more important vice-presidential candidates than usual, and more unvarying from the party core than we generally see in presidential elections, because they just might prove to be the presidents that Democrats and Republicans pretend they expect Harris and Trump to be.
As reasonably competent human beings who are likely to live through the next four years and do their jobs, they have significant advantages over the people at the tops of their tickets.
That doesn’t mean that Walz and Vance are people you want in power. They’re both deeply authoritarian believers that government should intrude in economic activity and personal lives. But then, so are the mainstreams of their parties.
They don’t reach out to the rest of America because their parties hope they’ll step in if their presidential candidates aren’t up to it, but also because Republicans and Democrats have lost interest in building bridges, compromising or even in living near people who disagree with them.
Tim Walz and J.D. Vance are, very likely, the most important vice-presidential candidates we’ve seen in a long time. And America is worse off for that fact.
National Post