Ipsos head of studies Mathieu Gallard: "The choice of a running mate is a first test of a potential president's ability to make important decisions"

An essay published in “Le Monde” by the director of studies at Ipsos provides an analysis of the probable influence that the selection of Tim Walz and JD Vance as candidates for the vice-presidency of the United States could have on the electoral campaign.

Three weeks after Donald Trump made his announcement, Kamala Harris decided to announce her running partner. She was confident that she would win the Democratic nomination at the convention that will begin in Chicago on August 19. Tim Walz, the Democratic governor of Minnesota, and J.D. Vance, the Republican senator of Ohio, have assumed a dominant position in the media coverage of the campaign since then. In point of fact, there are three reasons why they are significant.

In the first place, the institutional role of the vice president has grown over time. Walter Mondale (1928-2021), Al Gore, and Dick Cheney have all significantly strengthened the office of vice president. On the other hand, vice presidents have had a greater chance of ascending to the presidency since 1945.

Harry Truman (1884-1972), Lyndon Johnson (1908-1973), Richard Nixon (1913-1994), and Joe Biden are just a few examples of those who have been through this process. According to Jean H. Baker, the biographer of Vice President Adlai Stevenson (1893-1897), the position was once considered “the final resting place of those who have been (has-beens) or who have never been (never-weres)”; nonetheless, these advancements have given the personalities that were selected a higher significance than they had been in the past.

One more thing, however, lends them credibility: the potential influence they could have on the election.

In their book titled “Do Running Mates Matter?,” which was published by the University Press of Kansas in the year 2020, Christopher Devine and Kyle Kopko have included descriptions of three potential impacts:

There are three types of effects: a “direct” effect, in which voters’ opinions of a running mate change their vote; a “targeting” effect, in which some voters who share a running mate’s sociodemographic or ideological profile decide to change their vote on the basis of that profile; and a “indirect” effect, in which the choice of running mate changes voters’ perceptions of the presidential candidate.

Achieve equilibrium or fortify

It is not very long-lasting and the “direct” effect is not very strong. Running mates are frequently not very well known at the time of their nomination, and the view that voters will eventually form of them is tied to their own ideological orientation rather than to the characteristics of the candidates.

Therefore, a Republican voter will value JD Vance more due to the fact that he is Donald Trump’s running mate than due to the fact that he is a terrific speaker, a conservative, a family man, or any of the other reasons that he is.

In point of fact, JD Vance and Tim Walz were not well known prior to their nominations; according to Ipsos, respectively 61% and 86% of Americans were unaware of their identities. Because of this, they were unable to sway a sizeable number of voters, and the opinion that the American people are developing about them is determined by the votes that they cast rather than by the fact that they change it.

Ipsos head of studies Mathieu Gallard: “The choice of a running mate is a first test of a potential president’s ability to make important decisions”

By knl9j

Related Post

Disney+ is targeting shared accounts

A new ‘The Simpsons’ episode is praised

Marvel’s new film ‘Agatha, Who Else

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You Missed

Guide to an alternative Halloween

Hollywood must reconsider superheroes

Microsoft’s ‘Call of Duty

Max’s new DAZN rate suggests that streaming