Harris is in a weird position right now. She has no stated platform, and as I keep stating, she can either go in a centrist direction or a progressive one. I obviously want her to go progressive. Her 2020 persona was, in retrospect, kinda based, I just didnt trust her vs Bernie and other better candidates on the field. But looking at her policies now, yeah, she was one of the better of the establishment dems, I just didn't want ANY establishment dem.
But in 2024, she could be distancing herself from those positions. It's clear the donors forced Harris out, and it's possible the donors are gonna force her to the center as well. Going back to my 2020 beef with her, Harris always did strike me as a "fauxgressive", someone who fakes left in election season but who will likely triangulate to the center afterwards.
HOWEVER, Biden has proven that he can be true to his word. And he's been carving out a more "harris" like lane in the party with his presidency. And Harris could continue and expand on that. But it's unclear if she will.
As of today, I know it keeps changing, it seems there are three finalists for the VP nomination, and all of them tell a different story about Harris and her place in the democratic party and where she seems to wanna go. As such, I'm going to go into all 3 finalists and what I think of them and their impact on the future of the party and the Harris administration.
1) Tim Walz
Tim Walz is basically....midwestern Bernie Sanders. He's a progressive from Minnesota, he has been the one who came up with the "weird" thing. He has major rust belt appeal. He's actually my ideal choice for the role. if Walz is Harris's hand picked successor, then I feel like the democratic party is in good hands. It wishes to continue in a progressive direction and will likely appeal to me for years to come. Even if I don't get everything, I'll feel like I got a seat at the table, and people in my corner who think like me.
2) Josh Shapiro
Shapiro is the "neutral" choice. He's a bit of a centrist, but he's the best of the centrist and the obvious strategic pick. I won't assume anything either way if she picks shapiro, as his primary utility is to win my home state of Pennsylvania, which is the swing state of swing states and likely THE state to tip the election one way or another. Not to mention his flaws don't grate on me like the others. i know the free palestine is foaming at the mouth over him, but I keep saying it, I don't care about Palestine, screw Palestine, and yeah I really am kind of at odds with the "progressive left" right now as they seem to be throwing economic issues, and by proxy, me, under the bus, over a fricking foreign policy conflict that has nothing to do with us.
Really, I'm falling out with the left HARD here. And I'm really to the point of becoming openly hostile toward the free palestine crowd. They really wanna throw the election over this crap. Well, screw them, they're no ally of mine if that's how they feel.
That said, Shapiro's big flaw is neutralized for me. I don't think he's particularly bad on any economic issues or core priorities of mine. And I think he has strategic utility to win the election. So, yeah, Shapiro is my compromise pick, he's the "neutral outcome" pick for me.
3) Mark Kelly
So yeah, this is where I diverge from the free palestine left, but my progressivism is mostly centered around economics, and my core vision. Mark Kelly is exactly the kind of democrat antithetical to it.He's more from the sun belt centrist wing of the party, and probably in favor with the corporate interests. A Mark Kelly pick tells me that Harris will fold on anything that helps working class people. This is exactly the kind of democrat i DON'T want in the white house.
And yeah, that's who the finalists seem to be now. Apparently Beshear got snubbed in the final round of interviews. Which I'm ok with, I know some union guys kinda liked him and I might've underestimated his appeal, but honestly, Beshear was just another southern moderate dem who talks about bipartisanship and working across the aisle and blah blah blah. Not a fan of his. Pete Buttigieg is apparently an option but he's kinda corporate too, although he could be more of a shapeshifter like Harris in a sense so I'm kinda inclined to see him as a more neutral pick. But yeah.
Honestly, my heart tells me walz, strategy wise, i like shapiro, and most of the others don't resonate with me at all. I really don't like corporate moderates. I just don't.
No comments:
Post a Comment