A recently published book offers an in-depth look at the decision-making process behind Vice President Kamala Harris’s selection of Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her running mate, a choice that has been scrutinized by political analysts. The book, titled “2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America,” was released by journalists Josh Dawsey, Tyler Pager, and Isaac Arnsdor. It details the final stages of the vetting process, which narrowed down to three candidates: Walz, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, and Arizona Senator Mark Kelly.

The authors describe how each candidate underwent a final interview with Harris at her residence. During these interviews, Shapiro and Kelly opted for water, while Walz chose Diet Mountain Dew. Harris’s advisors prioritized appealing to rural voters, believing Walz was best suited for this task. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also supported Walz due to their previous collaboration in Congress. The book highlights that Walz’s appeal lay in his ability to connect with white voters in key states like Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, and potentially bolster Harris’s support among male voters.

Despite Shapiro being seen as a logical choice due to his position in a swing state, his interview with Harris revealed a lack of compatibility. Shapiro’s ambition and reluctance to serve as a subordinate left a negative impression on Harris. In contrast, Walz was described as deferential and uninterested in pursuing the presidency himself. He even expressed doubts about his own suitability for the role during his interview.

Walz’s “folksiness” later became a point of contention during the campaign, leading to several missteps and controversies. Despite these challenges, Harris ultimately chose Walz based on her intuition and the unanimous support of her team. The book also discusses how Shapiro’s strong support for Israel could have posed challenges within the Democratic Party’s progressive wing.

After losing key battleground states and the presidency to Donald Trump, critics labeled the decision to select Walz as a significant error by Harris. Julian Epstein, a Democratic operative, criticized the party’s leadership for being overly influenced by its progressive faction. Rob Bluey of The Daily Signal echoed these sentiments, stating that Harris’s choice of Walz was detrimental from the outset.