Connect with us

Politics

Astronaut? Governor? Cabinet member? Assessing Harris' VP options

Published

on

Astronaut? Governor? Cabinet member? Assessing Harris' VP options

As Vice President Kamala Harris consolidates support among Democrats to become the party’s 2024 presidential nominee, a key question dominates the political conversation: Who would be her running mate?

There is widespread consensus that Harris, of Jamaican and Indian descent, would pick a straight, white man — a strategic move in a nation that has never elected a woman, much less a woman of color, as its leader.

Among the elected officials reportedly in contention are Govs. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania, Roy Cooper of North Carolina, and Andy Beshear of Kentucky, as well as Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly.

Some have mentioned the prospect of Harris selecting California Gov. Gavin Newsom as her No. 2, but the 12th Amendment of the Constitution prohibits running mates from residing in the same state. And the imagery of two leaders whose political careers were forged in San Francisco would provide unending fodder for conservatives who have long used the city as shorthand for liberal policies leading to dysfunction and disaster.

The timeline for Harris to make her selection is short — the Democratic National Convention begins in less than four weeks in Chicago. The strategic calculation for her pick is also different than in traditional presidential campaigns, when candidates often select a running mate to shore up weaknesses in their resumes.

Advertisement

In 2008, Democrat Barack Obama — a relatively inexperienced senator from Illinois — chose Joe Biden because of the veteran Delaware senator’s foreign policy chops. In the same contest, then-Sen. John McCain of Arizona chose Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin in an effort to appeal to women and the non-establishment wing of the GOP, and place a younger politician on the ticket.

But President Biden’s announcement Sunday that he would not seek reelection has thrown historical electoral norms out the window and created an unprecedented moment in American politics.

“Sometimes people think about these picks as a way to unify the party and its different wings,” said Thad Kousser, a political science professor at UC San Diego. “I don’t think there are any wings of the [Democratic] Party right now other than the beating-Donald-Trump wing. I think the choice will be all about electability.”

Each of the men mentioned as the top possible ticket mates offers potential upsides — as well as liabilities.

Shapiro, viewed as a top contender, is the governor of a state that is critical for Democrats’ path to winning the White House. Though he has been Pennsylvania’s chief executive for less than two years, the 51-year-old is regarded as a skilled orator and a politician who seeks out bipartisan consensus.

Advertisement

On Tuesday, Shapiro told reporters he had not been asked to submit vetting documents to Harris’ campaign.

“The vice president should make that decision free from any political pressure,” he said, according to the CBS affiliate in Philadelphia. “It’s her decision to make. She’ll make it on the timeline that she so chooses.”

Some political observers have questioned whether having Shapiro, who is Jewish, on the ticket could harm Harris’ chances of winning in the critical swing state of Michigan, which has a significant number of Muslim American voters, as well as among progressive voters who have been critical of Democrats’ approach to the Israel-Hamas conflict.

Shapiro is a strong supporter of Israel but has been critical of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s leadership, even before Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on the country.

Harris’ husband, Doug Emhoff, a Los Angeles-based entertainment attorney, is also Jewish, so some argue that voters who are concerned about Harris’ views on the war are already unlikely to vote for her.

Advertisement

Kelly — a former astronaut and the husband of Gabby Giffords, a House member who was gravely wounded in an assassination attempt in 2011 — is also viewed as a top prospect to be Harris’ running mate. Arizona, once a reliably Republican state, is now a battleground that narrowly supported Biden over Trump in 2020 but backed Trump over Hillary Clinton in 2016.

The day after Biden’s disastrous June debate with Trump, which prompted a drumbeat of calls for the president to end his reelection bid, Harris appeared with Kelly in Las Vegas — in the battleground state of Nevada — and lauded his service to the nation.

Kelly focused on the Western states’ similarities, notably their Latino populations.

Nevada and Arizona “are going to play a very large part in the role of determining the direction of this country,” Kelly said, according to the Arizona Republic. “So, that’s why I’m here. Because Nevada, Arizona and our country face a choice, a choice between continuing the progress we are making or going backwards.”

Kelly also faces obstacles, including Democratic concerns about holding onto a Senate seat in a state that appears to be leaning increasingly to the right at a time when the chamber is narrowly divided.

Advertisement

Additionally, labor leaders who have largely lined up behind Harris’ candidacy are alarmed by Kelly’s lack of support for the Protecting the Right to Organize Act, federal legislation that would expand unions’ ability to organize and collectively bargain, weaken states’ “right-to-work” laws and otherwise empower labor. On Wednesday, Kelly told the Huffington Post that he supports the legislation.

Cooper of North Carolina and Beshear of Kentucky are not from states that are likely to back Harris in the November election, but they are governors who have shown an ability to win conservative voters. If Harris were to select either of them, it may be viewed as an effort to appeal to moderate voters who could be pivotal in swing states in the November election.

Harris is close with Cooper from their days as attorneys general in their respective states. And while North Carolina is viewed as a GOP state, the former Sunday school teacher has repeatedly won statewide elections there.

Cooper has demurred when asked if he would seek to be Harris’ running mate.

“I appreciate people talking about me,” he said Monday on MSNBC. “But I think the focus right now needs to be on [Harris] this week.”

Advertisement

Beshear has also proved his ability to appeal to GOP voters, and his critique of Trump’s vice presidential nominee — Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance, who has played up his Appalachian roots and family ties to Kentucky — has been blistering.

“He ain’t from here,” Beshear told the Associated Press this week.

Vance’s political career was founded on his 2016 book, “Hillbilly Elegy,” a bestseller that some argue captured the struggles of rural Americans while others counter that it was grounded in stereotypical tropes that failed to note the historic exploitation of Appalachians.

“You don’t get to just come in eastern Kentucky a couple of times in the summer and then maybe for weddings and a funeral and cast judgment on us,” Beshear said Monday. “It’s offensive.”

Asked whether he wanted to become Harris’ running mate, the Kentucky governor didn’t directly respond, saying that he planned to serve the rest of his term.

Advertisement

“The only way that wouldn’t happen is if I have an opportunity to help Kentuckians in a different way that would bring additional value,” he said.

These names are among roughly a dozen that are being considered, according to a CBS news report on Wednesday. Others reportedly being eyed are Govs. J.B. Pritzker of Illinois, Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan and Tim Walz of Minnesota, as well as Biden Cabinet members Gina Raimondo, the secretary of Commerce, and Pete Buttigieg, the secretary of Transportation.

Some liberal strategists urged Harris to be bold and dispense with the conventional wisdom that it would be politically unwise to select a woman, a person of color or someone from the LGBTQ+ community.

“It is time that we think outside of the box that we have allowed to define what makes a winning presidential ticket. The traditional, straight Christian white man as the epitome of American leadership can no longer be the default,” LaTosha Brown, the co-founder of Black Voters Matter, said in a statement.

“Straight white men have never been able to save this nation by themselves. While they have been the face of political leadership for decades, America has never moved forward without the prodding, pushing and creative leadership of a diverse group of Americans, particularly women and communities of color,” Brown said. “Our nominees should reflect this truth.”

Advertisement

Politics

Video: Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

Published

on

Video: Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

new video loaded: Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

transcript

transcript

Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

President Trump did not say exactly how long the the United states would control Venezuela, but said that it could last years.

“How Long do you think you’ll be running Venezuela?” “Only time will tell. Like three months. six months, a year, longer?” “I would say much longer than that.” “Much longer, and, and —” “We have to rebuild. You have to rebuild the country, and we will rebuild it in a very profitable way. We’re going to be using oil, and we’re going to be taking oil. We’re getting oil prices down, and we’re going to be giving money to Venezuela, which they desperately need. I would love to go, yeah. I think at some point, it will be safe.” “What would trigger a decision to send ground troops into Venezuela?” “I wouldn’t want to tell you that because I can’t, I can’t give up information like that to a reporter. As good as you may be, I just can’t talk about that.” “Would you do it if you couldn’t get at the oil? Would you do it —” “If they’re treating us with great respect. As you know, we’re getting along very well with the administration that is there right now.” “Have you spoken to Delcy Rodríguez?” “I don’t want to comment on that, but Marco speaks to her all the time.”

Advertisement
President Trump did not say exactly how long the the United states would control Venezuela, but said that it could last years.

January 8, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump calls for $1.5T defense budget to build ‘dream military’

Published

on

Trump calls for .5T defense budget to build ‘dream military’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

President Donald Trump called for defense spending to be raised to $1.5 trillion, a 50% increase over this year’s budget. 

“After long and difficult negotiations with Senators, Congressmen, Secretaries, and other Political Representatives, I have determined that, for the Good of our Country, especially in these very troubled and dangerous times, our Military Budget for the year 2027 should not be $1 Trillion Dollars, but rather $1.5 Trillion Dollars,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Thursday evening. 

“This will allow us to build the “Dream Military” that we have long been entitled to and, more importantly, that will keep us SAFE and SECURE, regardless of foe.” 

The president said he came up with the number after tariff revenues created a surplus of cash. He claimed the levies were bringing in enough money to pay for both a major boost to the defense budget “easily,” pay down the national debt, which is over $38 trillion, and offer “a substantial dividend to moderate income patriots.”

Advertisement

SENATE SENDS $901B DEFENSE BILL TO TRUMP AFTER CLASHES OVER BOAT STRIKE, DC AIRSPACE

President Donald Trump called for defense spending to be raised to $1.5 trillion, a 50% increase over this year’s record budget.  (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

The boost likely reflects efforts to fund Trump’s ambitious military plans, from the Golden Dome homeland missile defense shield to a new ‘Trump class’ of battleships.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget found that the increased budget would cost about $5 trillion from 2027 to 2035, or $5.7 trillion with interest. Tariff revenues, the group found, would cover about half the cost – $2.5 trillion or $3 trillion with interest. 

The Supreme Court is expected to rule in a major case Friday that will determine the legality of Trump’s sweeping tariff strategy.

Advertisement

CONGRESS UNVEILS $900B DEFENSE BILL TARGETING CHINA WITH TECH BANS, INVESTMENT CRACKDOWN, US TROOP PAY RAISE

This year the defense budget is expected to breach $1 trillion for the first time thanks to a $150 billion reconciliation bill Congress passed to boost the expected $900 billion defense spending legislation for fiscal year 2026. Congress has yet to pass a full-year defense budget for 2026.

Some Republicans have long called for a major increase to defense spending to bring the topline total to 5% of GDP, as the $1.5 trillion budget would do, up from the current 3.5%.

The boost likely reflects efforts to fund Trump’s ambitious military plans, from the Golden Dome homeland missile defense shield to a new ‘Trump class’ of battleships. (Lockheed Martin via Reuters)

Trump has ramped up pressure on Europe to increase its national security spending to 5% of GDP – 3.5% on core military requirements and 1.5% on defense-related areas like cybersecurity and critical infrastructure.

Advertisement

Trump’s budget announcement came hours after defense stocks took a dip when he condemned the performance rates of major defense contractors. In a separate Truth Social post he announced he would not allow defense firms to buy back their own stocks, offer large salaries to executives or issue dividends to shareholders. 

“Executive Pay Packages in the Defense Industry are exorbitant and unjustifiable given how slowly these Companies are delivering vital Equipment to our Military, and our Allies,” he said. 

“​Defense Companies are not producing our Great Military Equipment rapidly enough and, once produced, not maintaining it properly or quickly.”

U.S. Army soldiers stand near an armored military vehicle on the outskirts of Rumaylan in Syria’s northeastern Hasakeh province, bordering Turkey, on March 27, 2023.  (Delil Souleiman/AFP via Getty Images)

He said that executives would not be allowed to make above $5 million until they build new production plants.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Stock buybacks, dividends and executive compensation are generally governed by securities law, state corporate law and private contracts, and cannot be broadly restricted without congressional action.

An executive order the White House released Wednesday frames the restrictions as conditions on future defense contracts, rather than a blanket prohibition. The order directs the secretary of war to ensure that new contracts include provisions barring stock buybacks and corporate distributions during periods of underperformance, non-compliance or inadequate production, as determined by the Pentagon.

Continue Reading

Politics

Newsom moves to reshape who runs California’s schools under budget plan

Published

on

Newsom moves to reshape who runs California’s schools under budget plan

Gov. Gavin Newsom on Thursday unveiled a sweeping proposal to overhaul how California’s education system is governed, calling for structural changes that he said would shift oversight of the Department of Education and redefine the role of the state’s elected schools chief.

The proposal, which is part of Newsom’s state budget plan that will be released Friday, would unify the policymaking State Board of Education with the department, which is responsible for carrying out those policies. The governor said the change would better align education efforts from early childhood through college.

“California can no longer postpone reforms that have been recommended regularly for a century,” Newsom said in a statement. “These critical reforms will bring greater accountability, clarity, and coherence to how we serve our students and schools.”

Few details were provided about how the role of the state superintendent of public instruction would change, beyond a greater focus on fostering coordination and aligning education policy.

The changes would require approval from state lawmakers, who will be in the state Capitol on Thursday for Newsom’s last State of the State speech in his final year as governor.

Advertisement

The proposal would implement recommendations from a 2002 report by the state Legislature, titled “California’s Master Plan for Education,” which described the state’s K-12 governance as fragmented and “with overlapping roles that sometimes operate in conflict with one another, to the detriment of the educational services offered to students.” Newsom’s office said similar concerns have been raised repeatedly since 1920 and were echoed again in a December 2025 report by research center Policy Analysis for California Education.

“The sobering reality of California’s education system is that too few schools can now provide the conditions in which the State can fairly ask students to learn to the highest standards, let alone prepare themselves to meet their future learning needs,” the Legislature’s 2002 report stated. Those most harmed are often low-income students and students of color, the report added.

“California’s education governance system is complex and too often creates challenges for school leaders,” Edgar Zazueta, executive director of the Assn. of California School Administrators, said in a statement provided by Newsom’s office. “As responsibilities and demands on schools continue to increase, educators need governance systems that are designed to better support positive student outcomes.”

The current budget allocated $137.6 billion for education from transitional kindergarten through the 12th grade — the highest per-pupil funding level in state history — and Newsom’s office said his proposal is intended to ensure those investments translate into more consistent support and improved outcomes statewide.

“For decades the fragmented and inefficient structure overseeing our public education system has hindered our students’ ability to succeed and thrive,” Ted Lempert, president of advocacy group Children Now, said in a statement provided by the governor’s office. “Major reform is essential, and we’re thrilled that the Governor is tackling this issue to improve our kids’ education.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending