Harris's choices narrow to two...

 So, it has come to my attention that Harris's VP choice is down to two possible contenders. Tim Walz and Josh Shapiro. I'm going to be honest this is good news for me. I've been for one of these two from almost the get go. Walz always stood out to me as the progressive choice, and if anything, he is my preferred choice. He's the most progressive option, he always been (of the choices considered), and I consider him not just the lesser evil but the greater good. If it's down too these two, Walz is my pick.

Shapiro was basically my "safe pick." If Harris is gonna go for a centrist, I'd rather he go for Shapiro. All of the centrists have flaws. It's about finding the one with the flaws I can live with. And that is Shapiro. His biggest flaw is on Israel-Palestine. He apparently has a zionist past, although he's mellowed out, but progressives are uppity over that issue this election, so yeah they shapiro with a passion. I don't care as much. I don't care about the issue at this point. I find the protesters are rabid, and the fact that Shapiro obviously thinks so too is why he hasn't gained popularity with progressives. 

I also think that Shapiro adds to the ticket from a pragmatic standpoint. I've been following the electoral math of this election and the odds all year, and yeah, we need PA. PA is THE easiest path to the white house, and any other path would require winning several sun belt states. Georgia is more likely than PA at this point, but we can't win with JUST GA. We also need Arizona, Nevada, or NC, which are all a bit harder to get. Until recently I would say the sun belt was totally out of reach. but even as the odds change and and Trump's lead narrows, the rust belt has always been the way. Shapiro and Walz both help us with the rust belt. Shapiro helps us with PA, Walz is from minnesota but probably has a crossover effect to the rest of it. 

But yeah, the path to the white house is easiest through the rust belt, and the rust belt strategy allows for more ECONOMIC PROGRESSIVISM too. If we chose a southern moderate, lke Beshear or Kelly, they would be better on Israel maybe but likely far worse on economic issues. And let's face it, that's my bread and butter. We're getting social progressivism either way, its a given in the modern democratic party. But rust belt progressives are more likely to be labor oriented, while sun belt ones are upper class and more moderate and more willing to throw those issues under the bus.

In a sense, Shapiro is the "damage control" pick for me. Walz is the ideal. As such, I would prefer Walz if he's a serious option. I've mostly been pushing for Shapiro as I really dont have enough faith in the dems to give us an actually good option, but if Shapiro is now the less ideal option, I'll shift my support to Walz. I'll support either, but Shapiro has always been the less than ideal pick. Between these two, I'm going for Walz.