
New book sheds light on Harris decision to pick Walz as her running mate over Shapiro: 'Went with her gut'
"2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America," released Tuesday by journalists Josh Dawsey of The Wall Street Journal, Tyler Pager of The New York Times and Isaac Arnsdor of The Washington Post, described a vetting process that came down to three finalists: Walz, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly.
All three candidates did a final interview with Harris at her residence, the book explains, adding that when asked what they wanted to drink, Shapiro and Kelly chose water while Walz chose Diet Mountain Dew.
Appeal with rural voters was a top priority for the Harris ticket and the book states that Harris's advisors felt that Walz was the best candidate to do that.
"Pelosi privately pushed for him too, because she'd worked with him in Congress," the book said about the former House speaker. "The pitch for Walz was straightforward: He could appeal to white voters across the Blue Wall states (Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania) and hopefully help Harris with male voters. He'd never lost election."
While most political experts felt Shapiro, governor of a key swing state, was the most logical choice, the book states that the interview with Harris and Shapiro "revealed the two were not a perfect match."
"He came across as overly ambitious, pushing Harris to define what his role would be. He also conceded it would not be natural for him to serve as someone's number two, leaving Harris with a bad impression," the book states.
Conversely, the authors explain that Walz was "deferential" while "showing no interest in himself" and "flatly denied any interest in running for president."
"He went so far as to proactively volunteer reasons why she might not want to pick him," the book says. "In his interview that Friday, he said he had never used a teleprompter before. On Sunday, he told Harris, 'I would understand if you went with someone else because I'm really nervous about the debate, and I don't think I'll do well.' Still, the vetting team did not fully appreciate his tendency to misspeak, his folksiness sometimes tipping into factual imprecision."
Walz would ultimately draw intense scrutiny on the campaign trail for his "folksiness" with a series of blunders, including his characterization of his military service and a claim he was present at the Tiananmen Square massacre.
The book says Harris "struggled" deciding between Shapiro and Walz, believing that she had a better "rapport" with Walz but understood the importance of Pennsylvania. Harris' team, according to the book, told her that polling did not offer a clear answer as to which of the two candidates would help the ticket more.
"There was no empirical evidence that Shapiro would deliver Pennsylvania and with it the White House," the book said.
As Shapiro was being considered, many pundits speculated that his staunch support of Israel could be an issue given the progressive wing of the Democratic Party being vocally pro-Palestinian, resulting in protests, sometimes violent, across the country after Oct. 7.
The book said the Harris campaign was aware of that issue.
"Much of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party declared war on Shapiro, largely because of his support of Israel," the book said. "Some Shapiro allies saw the criticism as deeply unfair and borderline antisemitic, since the governor was an observant Jew, but his positions on the Palestinian conflict broadly aligned with the Biden administration and the other vice presidential contenders. The lawyers vetting Shapiro did flag some comments they viewed as more incendiary, particularly as it related to pro- Palestinian protests on college campuses after the October 7 attacks."
"One that caught their attention was his commentary on CNN from April: 'We have to query whether or not we would tolerate this, if this were people dressed up in KKK outfits or KKK regalia, making comments about people who are African American in our communities.'"
Ultimately, the book says Harris "went with her gut" and chose Walz believing he was the "better fit" in a decision her staff was "unanimously behind."
Fox News Digital reached out to the offices of Walz and Shapiro for comment.
After losing every battleground state and ultimately the presidency to Donald Trump, critics were quick to judge the Walz pick as a misstep by Harris.
"The choice of Walz was only one of many disastrous mistakes but symptomatic of one larger problem – the Democratic Party leadership is too scared to say no to the hard-left progressive wing of the party," Julian Epstein, longtime Democratic operative and former chief counsel to the House Judiciary Committee, told Fox News Digital shortly after the election.
Rob Bluey, president and executive editor of The Daily Signal, told Fox News Digital in November that Harris picking Walz "proved to be a disastrous decision that doomed Kamala Harris from the moment she made it."
"Not only was Walz ill-prepared for the national spotlight and media scrutiny, but Harris passed over several better options," Bluey said. "Given how little Americans knew about Harris or her policy positions, they were right to question her judgment on this big decision."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Washington Post
21 minutes ago
- Washington Post
From tech podcasts to policy: Trump's new AI plan leans heavily on Silicon Valley industry ideas
An artificial intelligence agenda that started coalescing on the podcasts of Silicon Valley billionaires is now being forged into U.S. policy as President Donald Trump leans on the ideas of the tech figures who backed his election campaign. Trump on Wednesday is planning to reveal an 'AI Action Plan' he ordered after returning to the White House in January. He gave his tech advisers six months to come up with new AI policies after revoking President Joe Biden's signature AI guardrails on his first day in office.


Washington Post
26 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Far beyond Harvard, conservative efforts to reshape higher education are gaining steam
Ken Beckley never went to Harvard, but he has been wearing a crimson Harvard cap in a show of solidarity. As he sees it, the Trump administration's attacks on the school echo a case of government overreach at his own alma mater, Indiana University. Beckley, a former head of the school's alumni association, rallied fellow graduates this spring in an unsuccessful effort to stop Gov. Mike Braun , a Republican, from removing three alumni-elected members from Indiana University's Board of Trustees and handpicking their replacements.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Self-Described Fascist Begs for Donations After Claiming Viral Debate Got Him Fired
A man who admitted to being a fascist during a debate claims he's been fired from his job after sharing his 'traditional' right-wing political views, and is now asking for handouts. The man, who identifies himself as 'Connor' in a fundraiser asking for donations but uses the pseudonym Pinesap, was one of '20 far-right conservatives' who debated progressive broadcaster Mehdi Hasan as part of Jubilee's 'Surrounded' series. During the debate—which has been viewed almost 4 million times on YouTube alone—Connor said he believes in 'autocracy' and was asked by Hasan if he's a fan of the Nazis. 'I, frankly, don't care being called a Nazi at all,' Connor answered. Connor, who identified himself as a Catholic, also complained that the Nazis 'persecuted the church a little bit.' Asked about the Nazis' persecution of Jews specifically, Connor added: 'I certainly don't support anyone's human dignity being assaulted.' 'There was a little bit of persecution and stuff like that, which is bad,' he added, when Hasan pressed him on Jewish persecution again. 'We may have to rename this show,' Hasan said, 'Because you're a little bit more than a far-right Republican.' 'Hey, what can I say?' Connor replied with a smile. When Hasan suggested Connor could describe himself as a 'fascist,' Connor said: 'Yeah, I am,' before laughing maniacally and receiving applause from others in the debate. Connor now claims he was fired for his views and has launched a fundraising page on GiveSendGo, a Christian crowdfunding site which has faced criticism for hosting extremist causes. 'I'm raising money as an emergency fund and for other expenses while I look for a new job,' the page reads, without providing details of the role or company he was supposedly fired from. 'Unfortunately, voicing fully legal traditional right-wing political views results in real consequences. This is cancel culture and political discrimination on full display.' The page has already blown past its original $15,000 goal, with contributions hitting just under $20,000 as of Tuesday morning. 'We need a white nation! It's our only future! Vive le Fascisme,' one donor wrote while contributing $88. The number 88 is a coded far-right symbol used by neo-Nazis and white supremacists, which stands for 'Heil Hitler' as H is the eighth letter of the alphabet. 'We are rising and must look after one another,' another anonymous donor posted while chipping in $15. Connor discussed getting fired, without naming the company or his job title, during an appearance on the Rift Report podcast on Monday. 'Well, unfortunately, I lost my job as a result. And no one really is to blame for that,' he said of the debate. 'It's just the culture that kind of exists currently surrounding the manner in which you're canceled for voicing [...] any heterosexual, Christian, sort of moral belief that goes beyond sort of the secularism and the relativism that we're so used to in our time.' Connor did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Daily Beast. Solve the daily Crossword