The presidential election has taken a sharp turn to the extremes with Vice President Kamala Harris’s choice of Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN) as her running mate, mirroring the selection of Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) by former President Donald Trump. Both picks have been met with surprise, and it remains to be seen whether this shift to the left or right will boost the candidates’ polling numbers.
Vance, a Trump loyalist, has positioned himself further to the right than the former president on several key issues. His stance on immigration and foreign policy aligns with Trump’s, but his views on other matters, such as taxes and abortion, are more conservative. Vance’s commitment to family values and his outwardly Catholic persona have earned him a reputation as a consistent conservative, one who embodies the virtues that Trump’s personal life has been criticized for lacking.
As a vice presidential pick with a stronger intellectual reputation, Vance’s rightward lean is significant. His associations with the “New Right” movement, which includes post-liberal scholars and neo-monarchist bloggers, have influenced his ideas. His advocacy for “techno-authoritarianism” has raised concerns among liberals, who fear that he will use his influence to reconstruct the administrative state in Trump’s favor.
In contrast, Walz’s progressive record is well-documented. His response to the 2020 Minneapolis riots was widely criticized, and his attempts to advance aggressive climate policies have been met with resistance. He has also been vocal in his support for unlimited abortion in Minnesota and has worked to make the state a “trans refuge” that critics argue harms children and denies parental rights.
While Vance’s rightward lean may attract votes from conservative blocs, Walz’s leftward lean is unlikely to sway voters who are already committed to the Democratic Party. Harris’s own progressive ideas have already inspired liberals, making Walz’s selection a wasted outreach to this group.
Conservatives, on the other hand, are more likely to be morally bound to specific issues, such as abortion. Vance’s position on this issue has the potential to influence undecided voters, particularly those who have been disappointed by Trump’s pro-life policies. In contrast, Walz’s views on abortion are unlikely to sway voters who are already committed to the Democratic Party.
