Harris had many reasons to pick Walz over Shapiro

Vice President Kamala Harris’ pick of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate has energized her campaign, but it also touched off an ugly controversy about antisemitism, with claims that Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, another contender for the slot, had been rejected because he was Jewish.

Shapiro is a highly popular, charismatic governor of a crucial battleground state. He is also an outspoken supporter of Israel who has harshly criticized radical pro-Palestinian protesters. As such, he was the target of an intense campaign among progressive activists who labeled him, among other things, “Genocide Josh.” Since there was no comparable effort directed at other possible vice presidential picks with similarly pro-Israel views — Walz among them — many commentators, not all of them on the right, argued that the pressure campaign was driven by animus toward Shapiro as a Zionist Jew.

While this may well be true, the outcry on the right in response to the Walz pick was absurdly over the top. Some claimed that it was “a dark day for American Jews” and that the rationale for Harris’ choice boiled down to “Don’t pick the Jew.” Conservative pundit Eric Erickson even asserted on X, formerly Twitter, that there were “no Jews allowed at the top of the Democratic Party” — drawing a “News to me” rejoinder from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York, who is Jewish.

First of all, we don’t know to what extent progressive opposition to Shapiro played a role in Harris’ decision. History shows that there’s no guarantee Shapiro would have clinched Pennsylvania; he may also be more effective stumping for Harris/Walz in his state. And perhaps the chemistry really wasn’t good, with Harris having concerns that Shapiro wouldn’t be happy in a secondary role. What’s more, even many Shapiro supporters acknowledge Walz brings some important positives to the ticket: above all, populist credibility (he doesn’t have a law degree and didn’t go to an elite school) and an ability to connect with Midwesterners. Some believe he could help the Democrats recapture some of the working-class base that has drifted away toward former President Donald Trump. And Walz’s supporters include both progressives like New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and conservative Democrat-turned-independent Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia.

The decision also may have been influenced by negatives that had nothing to do with Shapiro’s anti-Zionist foes. Shapiro has drawn fire, fairly or not, for his handling of a sexual harassment complaint against a top aide and of a high-profile murder case during his tenure as state attorney general.

It’s entirely possible that Shapiro was the better choice. But if his Jewishness had been the issue, Harris had several other contenders to choose from, such as Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly. Clearly, she wanted Walz, not just someone other than Shapiro.

That’s not to deny that the Democratic Party’s pro-Palestinian wing has a problem with anti-Jewish bias, as CNN political analyst and former Barack Obama adviser Van Jones has acknowledged. The party needs to grapple with this issue. There is also no doubt that some Jewish voters genuinely believe this bias played a role in the Walz pick and are disturbed by this possibility. But most of the chorus crying antisemitism on the right is plainly disingenuous, especially since it includes people who had slammed Shapiro for supposedly betraying his Jewish identity when he seemed to be the top contender.

Conservatives have often blasted progressives for playing identity politics. In this controversy, they have cynically adopted the same tactic.

Opinions expressed by Cathy Young, a writer for The Bulwark, are her own.

By Cathy Young

Cathy Young is a writer for The Bulwark.