It happened even earlier than I was expecting. Not even six weeks into 2019, we are seeing a flood of candidates for the presidency on the Democratic side formally entering the race: Kirsten Gillibrand, Cory Booker, Julian Castro, Elizabeth Warren, and Pete Buttigeig are already in. Rumors suggest Bernie Sanders, Beto O’Rourke, Joe Biden, and Amy Klobuchar aren’t far behind. So begins 22 months of punishing, round-the-clock coverage. It’s punishing for us. It’s punishing for journalists tasked with covering it. And heaven knows it’s punishing for candidates, their families, and their staffs.
And certainly a lot can happen, given that we are still a year out from even the earliest primaries and it will be months before we even start to see debates happen. If I were a betting man, though, I would wager that California senator Kamala Harris has the best chance of winning. Don’t be fooled by the early polls giving an advantage to Sanders or Biden– the polls are almost meaningless at this stage of the game, and there is plenty of opportunity to make an impression in a crowded field. There’s a number of reasons why I think that Harris will prevail. Fivethirtyeight does a good job of representing this visually: she covers most of the Democratic Party’s key demographics, with strong potential among black voters and Asian voters, while still performing respectably among party loyalists and millennials. A group that is characterized vaguely as “The Left” might represent some trouble– she’s not going to be the first or even second or third choice of Sanders partisans– but overall, Harris has strong potential even in a crowded field. It also helps that California, where Harris is a prohibitive favorite at this stage, has moved it’s primary up early this year. It’s part of a Super Tuesday after Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada.
Anyway, it’s never too early to start thinking about running mates. Now, Harris is a historic candidate for a number of reasons. If elected, she would be the first woman to be president, the second president of African heritage, and the first of Asian heritage. Conventional wisdom suggests that her running mate be a white man. Is conventional wisdom correct, though? Is the U.S. willing to vote for a ticket with two women? Or two minorities? Or a woman and a queer person? It should be. Given the number of presidential tickets with two white guys that we’ve had in our history, it shouldn’t be an issue. And yet, groups that were once in a position of unchallenged power share that power unreadily, and often need to have their hand held in the process.
Kamala Harris’s platonic ideal of a running mate would therefore probably be a reasonably good-looking man in his 40s from the Midwest– a populist and a progressive with a knack for communicating with and energizing millennials and new Gen Z voters– but who can also articulate the needs of voters in smaller towns and in less urbane communities. There isn’t any one person who ticks each of these boxes, and every prospect comes with his or her own disadvantages. With this in mind, my fifteen top vice-presidential candidates for Kamala Harris are:
15. Cheri Bustos: If you look at a map of Illinois’s congressional delegation, there is only one Democrat from outside of the greater Chicagoland area, and that’s Bustos. Her 17th district hugs the northwest corner of the state, including Rockford, East Moline, and parts of Peoria. Given her constituents, Bustos is well positioned to articulate the needs of rural voters, as suggested by this video. It’s also very helpful that her district borders two swing states: Wisconsin and Iowa. In just a few terms, she’s already ascended into House leadership, and now serves as the chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. With that position comes fundraising prowess and a keen awareness of how to recruit candidates and maximize the potential of grassroots politics. Disadvantages? She is more of a moderate Blue Dog (which I don’t see as being electorally advantageous) and looks vaguely like Michelle Bachman.
14. Tom Harkin: This is a stretch, but hear me out. Harkin, as you may know, was a senator from Iowa from 1985 to 2015, choosing to retire ahead of the 2014 elections. Personally, I think he would have won another term if he chose to run. But to my point: Harkin has a stellar track record in this quintessential rural midwestern state winning handily in every statewide election he’s been in. He’s practically royalty in Iowa, and his annual steak-frys are where national political careers can be made. Moreover, he has a reputation as a congressional work-horse, and served as chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee. Indeed, Bill Clinton in ’92, John Kerry in ’04, and even Obama in ’08 considered him as a running mate. For Harkin, the main disadvantage is age: he’ll be a few weeks shy of 81 on Election Day, 2020. But current footage suggests he hasn’t missed a beat, and I know many, many octogenarians who are as sharp as anyone decades younger. Perhaps if he chose up front to only serve one term as vice-president, that might allay some fears.
13. Russ Feingold: Another name from yesteryear. I don’t mean to keep pushing the upper-midwest thing, but I’m pretty sure Team Blue has 268 of the 270 votes they need to win: Hillary’s states, plus Pennsylvania and Michigan. One more state gets them over the hump, and Wisconsin is the best candidate. With Feingold, the warning sign is obvious: he lost winnable Senate races in 2010 and 2016 to a lackluster candidate. But other advantages abound. For one, in terms of generating grassroots progressive enthusiasm, Feingold hits the bull’s eye: people of my age, certainly, remember his courageous opposition to the Iraq War, and even his lone Senate vote against the PATRIOT Act. He also, of course, was for universal health care before it was cool and sponsored major campaign finance reform legislation with the late John McCain. If the DNC is held in Milwaukee, which is a distinct possibility, Feingold sends a clear message to the upper Midwest that their perspectives are valued. You get lots of progressive credentials with Feingold, as well as 18 years of Senate experience.
12. Tim Walz: While we’re in the upper midwest, let’s look at Tim Walz, who was just elected governor of Minnesota in November. The magnitude of his election is striking, for one. He succeeded a two-term Democratic governor in a swing state (not easy)- and did so by a margin of 10 points. For twelve years before that, Walz represented the southern part of Minnesota, easily winning in Trumpy territory and connecting with voters in a district with medium-size towns and small cities like Rochester. Walz also provides a quarter century of military service– a sharp contrast with the Republican ticket. Minnesota gave us two exemplary vice-presidents in Hubert Humphrey and Walter Mondale. Perhaps Walz will be a third.
11. Greg Stanton: Alright, we’re moving out of the Midwest for the Sun Belt. Stanton was mayor of Phoenix for six years before getting elected to the House in November. If “Mayor of Phoenix” seems like an iffy qualification, remember that it’s our fifth or sixth biggest city. As mayor, Stanton put Phoenix on a long-term path to sustainability in an unforgiving desert environment. That’s included recycling wastewater, improving public transportation and infrastructure, and running the city’s vehicles on alternative fuels. Best of all, his environmental policies are correlated to Phoenix’s booming economy and the highest wage growth of any city in America. Look, if you win Maricopa County in Arizona, you’ve almost certainly won the state. And if the Democrats win Arizona, then all other things being equal, they’ve won the election.
10. Tammy Baldwin: So, Feingold’s problem is that he lost two statewide elections in Wisconsin within the last decade. In contrast, Baldwin has won two– including a near-landslide last November. Baldwin is also a progressive with a record of support for Medicare-for-All and gun safety. More importantly, she has a knack for communicating these ideas in an authentically Midwestern way, more Robert LaFollette than Ivy League. A Harris-Baldwin ticket would be additionally historic. Not only would it be the first to include two women, but it would also be the first to include an openly LGBT person. As a sitting senator, her replacement would be initially chosen by governor Tony Evers, a Democrat. But Wisconsin law holds for a statewide election not long afterwards to fill out the term–which might result in the loss of a Senate seat.
9. Jared Polis: Polis would also be the first LGBT person on a major party ticket if chosen. Like Walz, he was just elected governor of his state (Colorado) in November after serving in congress. He’s also a businessman of some note, having started a few very successful online companies that earned him a fortune. His positions are generally within progressive orthodoxy, although he’s a bit more bullish on charter schools, even as his years on Colorado’s Board of Education give him solid education credentials. His favorable positions on bitcoin and marijuana legalization should also make him somewhat more appealing to the Bernie Sanders social libertarian wing of the party and attract some young “South Park Democrats” to reframe an old political phrase. Polis also opens some gateways in terms of funding the campaign, and his Jewish heritage might even make Florida more competitive. While Colorado’s definitely a blue-leaning state at this point, every bit of help to shore up the Southwest is appreciated.
8. Josh Shapiro: This choice is something of a wild card, and an unexpected selection. Shapiro is neither a governor nor a congress-critter, but the attorney general of Pennsylvania. Is it enough of a pedigree to be “one heartbeat away” from the presidency? I think so. He’s used that position to root out sexual abuse within the Catholic church, prevent residents from 3-D printing guns, and fight back against the Trump administration’s travel ban. A devout Jew, Shapiro would, like Polis, be the first person of that faith to serve as vice-president if elected. He would also be the first Pennsylvanian vice-president since the 1840s, oddly enough. He’s clearly ambitious, and potentially could be the deciding factor in both Pennsylvania and Florida in 2020.
7. Joe Kennedy III: Robert Kennedy’s grandson and a congressman from Massachusetts, Kennedy has the quintessential family pedigree. That includes not only the Kennedy name and the money and media attention that it brings, but public service (such as JK3’s time in the Peace Corps), the youth and “vig-ah”, and the unmatched ability to articulate a vision for the future. And that’s important– Vision, not not merely opposing Trump in visceral terms, but painting an alternative way that we shall live. His State of the Union response– compassionate and energetic– speaks volumes, and he should be able to decimate Mike Pence in the veep debate. (Stacy Abrams did a great State of the Union yesterday, but since she hasn’t held a high office yet, I can’t consider her a true contender. Experience matters.) I’ve tried to avoid picking running mates from the East Coast– it would be regrettable if the 2020 ticket gave no voice to the great American interior, but Kennedy is too talented a prospect to ignore.
6. Amy Klobuchar: All signs point to Klobuchar running for president on her own. But I don’t think the odds are in her favor. If she does everything right, she might be able to win the Iowa caucus, but like Tom Harkin in 1992…where does she go from there? No, Amy’s a born vice-president. Her work as a senator and Hennepin County Attorney is a testament to her ability to get across-the-aisle results, seek broad consensus, and please Americans who aren’t especially ideological, but simply wants the government to do the people’s work. She’s won all three of her Senate races by massive landslides, and– not to beat a dead horse– that kind of success in the suburban and small-town upper Midwest translates to an ability to reach voters in Wisconsin, Iowa, and Michigan. To that effect, her 2018 re-election saw her winning forty counties in Minnesota that Trump had carried two years earlier. At the same time, her story adds a lot to the equation. Trump’s ratings were never lower than when he tried to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Klobuchar’s story– her daughter was born with a condition that inhibited her ability to swallow, thus requiring frequent hospital visits– makes the urgency of health care reform more personal and accessible.
5. Steve Bullock: Bullock is Montana’s governor, and like Brian Schweitzer before him, has a talent for getting elected even in unfavorable headwinds. Bullock won in 2012 when Mitt Romney carried Montana 14 points, and again in 2016 when Donald Trump won Big Sky by over 20 points. He has carried one of the most rural states in the country, and governed effectively even with the opposing party controlling Montana’s state legislature. As Bullock put it, “The Democratic Party didn’t necessarily change; we just haven’t been able to figure out the ways to speak to people off of the coasts. And if we can’t speak the language of Iowa or Michigan or Wisconsin, even if you get an electoral majority you’re never going to have a governing majority.” Yet Bullock screwed up a few times, botching up an aide’s sexual harassment scandal, and having some bad working relationships with former lieutenant governors. Bullock cannot win the presidential nomination– it defies everything we know about political gravity in the United States– but he might work as a vice-presidential choice and an envoy to rural America. But I’d rather he just run for Senate against Steve Daines in 2020.
4. Sherrod Brown: Brown is right out of central casting and checks most of the boxes I talked about earlier. He’s from the all-important swing-state of Ohio. He’s a scrappy champion of the working class. And he knows what makes Obama ’12/Trump ’16 voters tick, which is one reason why he’s much more of a tariffs and protectionism guy than almost anyone else on this list or in the wider Democratic field. Brown thinks and acts and legislates overtly in terms of class, and sides himself with the aggrieved persons of the deindustrialized Midwest. He’s made a few missteps lately…if he were going to run for president he should have made more noise about it sooner, and his skeptical answers about Medicare-for-All suggest a strikingly less-than-progressive stance. Yet, in terms of uniting the Clinton and Sanders wings of the party, nobody can do it better than Brown. One significant drawback, though– Governor Mike DeWine– who Brown unseated in the Senate back in 2006– gets to pick his replacement, costing Team Blue a critical spot in the chamber, and one that might be very difficult to win back.
3. William McRaven: One of the significant weaknesses of a Trump-Pence ticket is the lack of foreign policy experience and the lack of any kind of real service, military or otherwise. McRaven, of course, directed the Navy SEAL team that killed Osama bin Laden, and has for years been esteemed within the military community for his leadership and character. In terms of picking someone not for their geographical strengths but strengths of character and experience, McRaven is a surefire win. Recently, he has served as chancellor of the University of Texas system. He has also criticized Trump for removing security clearance from his critics, and Trump’s response (“Wouldn’t it have been nice if we caught Osama sooner?”) blew up in the president’s face. McRaven demonstrates that this election isn’t about rock-em-sock-em politics, but about a nation’s destiny and its honor. The contrast couldn’t be clearer.
2. Martin Heinrich: The first rule of vice-presidential selection: do no harm. Heinrich offends no one, has strong environmental credentials, and just won a massive landslide re-election in his home state of New Mexico. Now, New Mexico isn’t really a swing state any longer, but Heinrich’s understanding of the issues of the Southwest– including immigration–could create some spillover appeal in Arizona, Nevada, and even Texas. He and fellow New Mexico senator Tom Udall have recently teamed up on legislation to prevent future family separation, helping take the moral initiative on this issue. He’s issues-oriented, and focused with a discipline that suggests his engineering background. As a partner for governing and campaigning, Heinrich is going to be near the top of the veepstakes.
- Beto O’Rourke: Is Beto running for president? Who knows. Lots of people are worried that he squandered his “moment” after nearly beating Ted Cruz in a Senate race for the ages, but that strikes me as an awful lot of pearl-clutching. Beto’s tapped into something, as advocate for a sensible, visionary, neighborly, and compassionate brand of politics that caught on. Beto towed a remarkable line in making somewhat moderate and sensible positions palatable to the Democratic Party’s squadron of young leftist activists by shear persuasion and personality. Harris-O’Rourke as a ticket would hit a kind of sweet spot in American politics, creating a ticket that touches on America’s multicultural identity, and is broadly acceptable to party regulars, grassroots activists, AOC people, Bernie people, minorities, and all permutations thereof. And Beto has six years in Congress, lest anyone think this guy is an empty suit– and has represented the crucial border city of El Paso.
So, those are my fifteen picks for vice-president, should Kamala Harris get the nomination. Did I miss any of your favorites? Are some of these choices better than others? Let me know in the comments.
The Northumbrian Countdown 