Locator: 48448ARCHIVES.
Matt doesn't often change his banner headlines -- often staying unchanged for days, if not weeks (or so it seems).
But on a most quiet night of the week -- when folks aren't watching -- we get this:
National polls: meaningless when it comes to the presidential election. It all comes down to three or five or seven or nine or eleven states, but having said that, national polls are starting to show Kamala Harris with a widening lead.
Question: why did Kamala Harris feel it safe to not pick Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro.
See this article written before she picked Walz.
Note: in that article, three top contenders for the VP were mentioned. Walz was not in the top three, and, in fact, not even mentioned.
This suggests to me that the Harris team felt comfortable that she would win in Pennsylvania and did not need Shapiro's help. Nationally, he might have been a "negative" for Harris.
Wow, Harris had a strong bench from which to pick her VP. Walz certainly was an interesting choice. My hunch: the bench was too strong. There was a huge risk that she would be overshadowed by guys like Josh Shapiro or Gavin Newsom. She certainly won't be overshadowed by Walz.
But I digress. Back to the original question: why did Kamala Harris feel it safe to not pick Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro? As stated above: because her team was confident she would take Pennsylvania even without Shapiro.
Three themes:
- the economy
- the southern surge
- abortion or as some report, women’s reproductive rights or women’s reproductive health
********************************
Cladistics
In progress. Will be posted elsewhere.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.