Harris vs. Trump. Walz vs Vance. The 2024 election has been hyped as “the most important election yet” for what seems like forever. While I do have some reservations with this rhetoric, there is one way I find it resoundingly important. It has given textbook examples for both a good and a bad vice-presidential pick. Let’s break it down, and what it means for each candidate.
On July 15, the Republican National Committee nominated Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance as the vice-presidential candidate. Best known for his best-selling autobiography “Hillbilly Elegy,” Vance was elected in 2022, marking his first time holding office.
Hailing from a key swing-state and being one of the Senate’s most powerful voices in cutting funding to Ukraine (a policy former President Donald Trump has vocally endorsed), Vance seemed like a no-brainer pick.
However, as the campaign pushed on, doubts about Vance began to arise. He has a history of criticizing Trump and the MAGA movement in the past. He even called Trump “America’s Hitler.”
Vance has been plenty clear that he has grown and changed, but these statements have already come to the public light. More digging seemed to only unearth stranger and stranger quotes.
In 2021, he told former Fox News host Tucker Carlson that the government was run by “a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable too,” citing Vice President Harris, Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as examples.
On the Charlie Kirk Show, he expressed a desire to raise taxes on adults without children and reduce their voting rights. The quotes resurfaced and were met to much outrage from the public, by celebrities and his peers in Washington.
He has since defended the remarks by saying it was a “sarcastic comment” that was “willfully misinterpreted,” with his only regret being that they were taken the wrong way.
When asked about Vance’s comments, Trump said, “Historically, the choice of a vice president makes no difference.” Many people are in agreement that Vance did not have a great introduction, with many inside the GOP questioning Trump’s choice.
Paul Dame, GOP Chairman of Vermont, said Vance “isn’t the best choice” and “is not adding people to the ticket.” With questionable policy viewpoints and a viral inability to order donuts, Vance seems to bring nothing (if not the aforementioned donuts) to the table.
In stark contrast, Harris’ Aug. 6 decision to elevate Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz to vice-presidential candidate has been met with acclaim. A 24-year veteran of the National Guard, former high school teacher and football coach, Walz has brought an energy to the Democrats that they have been sorely missing.
His policies have been centrist with early campaign movements opposing restrictions on gay marriage and abortion. However, once in-office, he maintained a very NRA-friendly stance on gun control — that he would admittedly forgo later down the line.
His rural background and charismatic speeches have made him a bit of a media darling, with a clip of him being warmly welcomed by a firefighter’s union going viral, one that booed Vance.
Walz isn’t without his faults, he once said of his military service that he “carried a weapon of war to war,” despite the fact that he was never deployed.
Going forward, we may see less presidential candidates going with the Trump/Vance strategy of picking running mates who follow the party line to the letter, and more going with the Harris/Walz strategy of picking someone who can make waves online.
Even if these vice-presidential candidates do not have a large effect on the race, Walz undeniably has the media “x-factor” you want, and Vance simply doesn’t.
