Down the Hall, the VP (not quite) Weekly #7: Harris, Vance, and the Unique Challenges of Veeping
There is a lot going on with VPs since DTH last posted. Harris is facing an unprecedented situation, as the party seeks to oust the president, while Trump has chosen his running mate (probably the least experienced politician picked in modern times.) So without further ado…
What Vice President Harris is and isn’t Doing
What the VP is Doing
Vice President Harris is campaigning, a whole whole lot (more than 60 trips so far this year). That’s what VPs do in an election year. Most of these trips have been to swing states, to fundraisers, and to core constituencies. She did a few events in must-win Michigan the other day. Harris has emerged as the administration’s leading spokesperson on reproductive rights.
She’s getting better on the stump and making fewer missteps, but her approval rating remain underwater. That being said, no one is particularly popular right now. According to 538, Biden’s approval rating is 17.7% below his disapproval rating, Trump has the higher approval rating at 41.5% but that’s still 12.4% lower than his disapproval rating of 53.9%. Harris is the least underwater, slightly more popular than Biden and the least unpopular of the three, only 11.8% underwater. Several polls find Harris is the strongest potential candidate against Trump, but none of them are particularly encouraging – particularly this from my favored pollster Emerson College. Still, given Biden’s debate disaster, these findings lead to…
What the VP is not Doing: Measuring the Drapes
Many prominent Democrats are pressing for Joe Biden to step aside. The VP is not one of them. In this she is following the precedents set by her predecessors.
Presidential illnesses and scandals put VPs in awkward positions. But the current situation, in which the president is under siege by his own party and Harris is the best-placed to replace him on the ticket is unprecedented. Still the past provides some guidance for the very careful game she is playing – absolute public and private loyalty to the president, while protecting her own position. Her public support has both raised her profile (thus making her appear an attractive alternative), while giving her the internal capital to ensure Biden’s efforts to whip up support for his own candidacy don’t undercut her potential strength as a candidate. Biden has personally reciprocated, telling the NAACP, “She could be president of the United States.”
Past VPs in comparable situations have been loyal. Anything else raises suspicions that the VP is trying to usurp power. Looking back, Gore was completely loyal to Clinton in public statements during his impeachment. Similarly, Ford professed loyalty to Nixon as Watergate unfolded. Pence was Pence. VPs to presidents in trouble do consult confidentially with their Counsels, but no public moves are made.
With presidential health crises, VPs have also maintained a low profile.
George H.W. Bush received accolades for his low-key response to Reagan’s shooting. Perhaps most famously, when the Secret Service told him to helicopter to the White House after Reagan’s shooting, Bush insisted, “Only the president lands on the South Lawn.” He also felt it would bother Nancy, who had had a terrible day (by all accounts he was a very decent person). Later, visiting Reagan in the hospital, Bush grabbed a folder marked Secret and put some papers in it to deliver to the president. He made sure cameras caught this, so that it appeared the president was receiving important information in the hospital.
Nixon quietly chaired White House meetings during Eisenhower’s two illnesses. It was a difficult time, and he was generally praised for his work keeping the machinery of government turning, without appearing to usurp the president.
Perhaps the best-known case – and the one closest to today – was that of Thomas Marshall, Woodrow Wilson’s hapless VP. Wilson was seriously ill and it appears that his personal physician and the First Lady worked together to manage national affairs while the president recovered. The situation was widely suspected, but Marshall kept his distance. Marshall told his secretary, “I am not going to seize the place and then have Wilson, recovered, come around and say, ‘Get off, you usurper!’” He also told his wife, “I could throw this country into a civil war, but I won’t.”
Harris’ situation is not quite the same. Biden is not debilitated. While the debate was a disaster, he has had numerous other appearances that were solid. He is obviously aging, but it is an exaggeration to say that he is vegetative. Harris can plausibly state that in her meetings with Biden, he is capable.
The key takeaway is that Harris is playing this exactly as she should. One does not take on a sitting president lightly. If Harris began saying that Biden wasn’t fit – she would make a lot of enemies (a lot of people like Biden) He could drop her from the ticket or undercut her candidacy if he does drop out. Her actions could divide the party and leave it in a weak position for the election.
She’s making the best play possible – absolute and articulate loyalty.
But… who should the VP pick for Veep?
And what if Biden does step down? Odds are that Harris becomes the nominee, there isn’t a lot of time to pick someone else. So, who does she pick as VP?
There are a lot of very good possibilities. The most critical item is that they appear “presidential”. The best political science research finds that VPs don’t have much of an effect, just don’t choose someone embarrassing. My bias is towards Senators, who know how things in DC work, over governors. I like Cory Booker, who, in his second term as a Senator, has some profile on the national stage, and is a charismatic and likeable figure. Plus, he’s African-American which would make history. There are numerous other Democratic Senators from safe seats who would also be viable.
There has been a great deal of focus on Gretchen Whitmer, the governor of Michigan. She is a very good politician. Research on whether a VP pick can swing a key state is also mixed, but it is not implausible that Whitmer – who is hugely popular in Michigan – could keep Michigan in the Democratic column. She’d also be historic. She has not been tested on the national stage. She’d need to get up to speed on a whole range of national and international issues very fast. She might be great, but there’s a risk. Josh Shapiro, governor of PA, another must-win state, is also being mentioned. Shapiro was only just elected, although he served two terms as state Attorney General (so his experience is comparable to that of Harris when she was selected by Biden.) Like Whitmer, Shapiro has been in politics his whole life and is very competent. He has less time as governor, but has Washington experience as a Hill staffer early in his career.
There is also talk of North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper, who Harris knows when they both served as state Attorney General and could potentially put North Carolina into play. Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear, who was elected to a second term in deep-red Kentucky would provide a great contrast with J.D. Vance (more on him below). Arizona Senator and former astronaut Mark Kelly would add some star power (sorry) to the ticket.
There are other possible candidates – Van Jackson (whose work I always enjoy, even if I don’t agree with it) suggests Bernie Sanders as Harris’ running mate. This seems weird to me, if Biden’s age is an issues Sanders is actually older. Sanders, like Trump, appears more vigorous than Biden, which makes me think that Americans just want a president who can yell or is annoyed all the time. Poor Howard Dean missed his moment.
Harris will have very little time to vet her running mate, and it is important not to make a mistake. None of the people described above are implausible. But there is always the risk that there is something in their background that becomes an issue.
Speaking of picking VPs, on to the main event…
Taking a Chance on Vance, but can he Dance?
Wednesday night Americans met Ohio Senator J.D. Vance, Donald Trump’s running mate. The selection process was an Apprentice-esque drama, with an assassination plot twist. This was not unprecedented, other candidates have played games with their running mate selection.
Vance’s speech rehashed is autobiography (which was described in his best-selling memoir Hillbilly Elegy). Vance escaped poverty and a dysfunctional family in small-town Ohio thanks to his beloved Mamaw, joined the military, went to college and then Yale Law School. After law school he went to Silicon Valley and then back to Ohio. Hillbilly Elegy seemed to capture the alienated rural and blue-collar vibe that also brought us Donald Trump. Initially Vance himself as a leading GOP voice against Trump. Then, dispensing with his anti-Trump persona he ran and won Ohio’s Senate seat in 2022. His campaign to be Trump’s vice president began immediately.
Quick take on his speech: It was a solid speech, B+. He had some very good bits and besides his biographical notes hit most of the key Republican talking points. His delivery was solid, but not truly compelling (few are!) It’s an open question as to whether this makes a difference?
DTH strives for deeper analysis of the vice presidency, not mere punditry, and there are three questions to ask. First, will Vance make a difference in the election? Second, what does this choice say about Trump’s thinking? Third, what kind of role will Vance play in a potential Trump administration?
Will Vance as running mate make a difference?
Not really.
As discussed above, the bottom of the ticket does not make much of a difference in the elections. They rarely lift the ticket in general or bring along a critical state or constituency (with the limited exception of ideological constituencies.) They can help a ticket a bit by appearing to be a solid, presidential, choice. Mike Pence, for example, was a very strong choice for Trump. He was liked by the GOP’s hard right which at the time was skeptical about Trump. He also performed well on the stump and in his debate with Sen. Tim Kaine. But in general, the running mate only makes a difference on the margins (which in a very close election might matter). Vance appeals to and is popular with the constituencies that are already all-in for Trump. The biggest impact Vance can have on the race is by appearing (or not appearing) “presidential,” that is appearing to be a solid choice and someone who can step into the presidency should the need arise. Vance is very smart and articulate. He also has very little experience in politics (a mere two years in the Senate, and no other time in elected office.) These two facts make it possible that he could surprise – in either positive or negative ways. He could prove glib and dynamic on stump and in the media – there’s certainly evidence to suggest that’s the case. As the author of a best-selling book, he can communicate and is familiar with the spotlight. But his campaign for Senate was lackluster (he significantly underperformed and had to dump many millions to secure a seat in a deep red state.) Politics is its own domain – what works for an author may not work at all for a major party candidate?
What was Trump thinking?
Selecting a running mate is one of a presidential aspirant’s first major decisions and it can provide useful insight into how they are going to approach problems. Some nominees make blatantly political decisions, sometimes to the detriment of their campaign (see Sarah Palin). Jimmy Carter started the trend of employing a careful analytical process that included personal and policy compatibility, although political considerations were always paramount.
And Trump? For Trump everything is a show and he wants people who look the part. He likes men who are big and handsome, in conventional ways. He didn’t renew Janet Yellen as Fed chair because Trump thought she was too short.
Trump was taken with Vance’s blue eyes and pleased when he lost some weight. Obviously, Vance’s own sucking up was key, but Vance was far from alone in that project. Trump’s son, Don Jr. was a big advocate for Vance as well. There is an argument that Vance, with his youth and background, can articulate a Trumpian worldview and is well-placed to carry the banner of Trumpism forward after Trump departs the scene. Did Trump consider these things? Perhaps. But it seems more likely that Trump just liked the way Vance looked. Trump is well into his eighth decade of following his gut and from his perspective it’s worked well, so why would he change now?
What role will VP Vance play in a Trump administration?
I can’t say it often enough, Down the Hall is about what the VP does in office (I mean just look at the name!) The third, and most interesting question is what kind of VP would Vance be for Trump? Writing back in 2016 about a potential Pence Vice Presidency, I noted Trump’s lack of experience in government and suggested that Pence would be an across-the-board advisor. Eight years later, Trump has more experience (although it is not clear if his on the job training was terribly effective.) Trump has however acquired a coterie of experienced followers who can enact his policies. In areas where such people existed (Stephen Miller on immigration and Robert Lighthizer on trade) Trump had some success in enacting his policies. In other areas, like withdrawing from Syria or Afghanistan he struggled to achieve his ends. But there is now a coterie of Trumpistas with policy-making experience so Trump may be better equipped to enact his policies and not need an insider VP to help. And Vance isn’t much of an insider. He has been in the Senate for two years. Besides Trump himself, he has the least experience in public office of any major candidate in living memory. Even Sarah Palin had two years as governor and six as mayor of Wasilla (plus chairing the state Oil and Gas Commission.) Vance is the same age as Nixon when he was nominated VP. But Nixon had won two elections to the House and one to the Senate, serving a total of six years. VP Harris had four years in the Senate, six at California AG, and six before that as San Francisco DA, before becoming VP.
The point here is not that J.D. Vance isn’t an extremely capable person, he obviously is. But getting things done in the government is difficult and there really is no substitute for experience.
The most important factor for the VP is their relationship with the President. Pence and Trump never really clicked. But Trump seems to like Vance.
A throughline in Vance’s career is ingratiating himself with powerful people – from “Tiger Mom” Amy Chua at Yale to Peter Thiel in Silicon Valley, and a huge swath of the public (including my mom, btw) in Hillbilly Elegy. It’s intriguing to speculate that Vance lacked a stable father figure, and he has filled this gap with powerful mentors.
Vance told Trump things he wanted to hear, which is kind of what Hillbilly Elegy did for Americans during the rise of Trump. The memoir was ostensibly an explainer of the disenchanted working-class whites who brought us the surprise of 2016. There has been quite a bit of pushback, including the claim that his depiction of Appalachians echoed the classic GOP trope of welfare queens. Many Appalachians didn’t seem to appreciate Vance’s depiction of them either.
Vance was skillful in courting Trump. He was appropriately obsequious, but not too desperate. Vance had Thiel broker the 2021 meeting asking for Trump’s endorsement for Vance’s Senate bid. He gained the confidence of people who had Trump’s ear, including Don Jr. and Tucker Carlson.
This speaks well to Vance’s ability to be an effective Trump whisperer. Trump gets tired of people, particularly when they don’t do precisely what he wants. Will that translate to influence? That’s tough to say. Influencing Donald Trump, who is generously described as mercurial, is not an easy game. Trump holds firm convictions about the world and his own judgments that are not readily swayed. If anyone can do this, it will be Vance.
But to what end? Vance and Trump appear to be basically aligned on policy. Much VP advice is about how to achieve an end, rather than on what to do. But Vance brings no particular experience getting things done in DC (less than Trump – who did not appear to learn much on the job.)
Vance will bring little experience to the traditional VP role of liaison to Congress. He will undoubtedly be assigned some task forces and issues. Interesting, Pence’s assignments were limited, while Jared Kushner received the assignments more typical of a vice president. Presumably Vance will not face this challenge and may garner critical foreign policy and domestic roles. While Pence did not play a central role in the Trump administration, the general chaos of the Trump White House, allowed him to get involved in all kinds of issues at a lower level.
On balance, Vance is well-placed to be the Trump whisperer – but given his own limited experience, the question is who will be whispering in Vance’s ear.