Barack Obama was not elected president because he chose to run alongside Joe Biden.
Mitt Romney did not lose his bid for the White House because Paul D. Ryan was his choice for vice president.
In the current turmoil, there is a tendency to attach great political importance to what is often described as the first major decision a presidential candidate makes: the selection of his vice-presidential running mate.
Too much importing.
That’s not to say the choice is inconsequential, or that Kamala Harris’s Tuesday pick of Minnesota’s Tim Walz is completely irrelevant to the nation’s tight presidential race. As is her wont, she went with the safe option, a Midwestern governor with a nonthreatening dad vibe who won’t be out of place showing up at the local Grange Hall or chatting at a coffee shop on a rural main street.
The alternate governor and vice presidential runner-up, Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania, had the advantage of potentially boosting Harris in a must-win state, but also risked alienating progressive Democrats unhappy with Shapiro’s past support for school vouchers and his current stance on the war between Israel and Hamas.
And, to put it bluntly, pairing a black woman with a Jewish running mate may have been too much at once for a nation that, not many generations ago, treated both as less than full citizens.
That said, Harris’s choice of Walz (or, for that matter, Donald Trump’s choice of J.D. Vance) will not determine who occupies the White House on January 20. When voters go to the polls, all but a few will be focused on the number one candidate, not the vice presidential nominee.
“The truth is she has to do this alone,” said Paul Maslin, a Democratic strategist who praised Harris’ selection as a thoughtful decision that would do no harm.
Walz, who emerged from relative political obscurity, is certainly having a special moment. He will enjoy another, lesser one, when he and Vance face off in a debate later this fall.
But soon, if Harris wins in November, Walz will assume the traditional role of vice president: fading into the long shadow of the chief executive, virtually forgotten until some set of extreme or unusual circumstances thrust him back into the spotlight.
Let's consider the current occupant of the number 2 spot.
Despite the historic nature of her selection — as the country’s first Black and Asian vice president — Harris has spent most of her vice presidency in a combination of obscurity and political purgatory. If anything, her role as a trailblazer created expectations that far exceeded the subservience inherent to her vice presidential position. It was only in the past two weeks, after she replaced Biden on the ticket and was free to claim the spotlight, that Harris generated anything resembling the enthusiasm that accompanied her initial selection.
So Walz should enjoy his fleeting fame while he can.
Early reviews were positive among Democrats, who received praise from across the ideological spectrum, from progressive Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to right-wing Democrat-turned-independent Joe Manchin. (The Republican attacks — failed governor, radical leftist — were to be expected.)
Walz manages to tick the boxes on many of the issues that Democratic activists care most about — abortion, gun control, labor and LGBTQ+ rights. At the same time, his bipartisan work as a member of Congress and the years he spent representing rural Minnesota before his election as governor suggest a moderation that could appeal to centrists and independents who are reluctant to accept the extremes of either side.
That balance — progressive but grounded in traditional Midwestern pillars — is reflected in his years as a high school geography teacher, when Walz served as football coach and faculty adviser to the campus Gay-Straight Alliance.
Her selection came after a rushed vetting process, necessitated by the short time frame Harris was given once Biden stepped aside. Any proverbial skeletons that have been overlooked will come to light in the coming days and weeks. For the moment, at least, Walz appears to have passed the do-no-harm test that has become the criterion for choosing a running mate.
But that is a part of Hippocratic wisdom that may be exaggerated.
Of course, no candidate wants to create problems for himself, but two of the most ill-timed vice presidential picks in modern times — Dan Quayle and Sarah Palin — had no significant influence on the fate of their running mates.
George HW Bush won despite Quayle's stumbles. John McCain lost not because of Palin's ineptitude.
In the end, like any other presidential candidate, Harris will win or lose the White House on her own merits. Walz may help here or there, on the margins. But most of the time, he's just passing through.
