Speaking to Vikerraadio's "Uudis+" show in an interview which follows, Kaju also noted Walz does not come from a swing state – Minnesota is a true blue state and with a higher than average voter turnout; not only the governor but both senators are Democrats. The last time the Republicans got a majority in a presidential election popular vote there was in 1972.

Interviewer Arp Müller: Why did Tim Walz, are relative unknown, get the Democratic vice president nomination?

Andreas Kaju: First off, it has to be admitted that in fact most governors, meaning the highest political officials in the states, have a relatively low profile outside their home state. In that respect, the choice is never very good.

Second, history and statistics do not show that the vice presidential candidate pick is particularly vital; this probably does not affect the election outcome very much. But if we try to look at it from the strategic perspective of the Democrats' presumed presidential candidate, Kamala Harris, the considerations were as follows.

The first consideration is whether to try to recruit a governor or, in certain cases, a senator, as running mate, who would aid the Democrats on election day in some of the key swing states. As is common knowledge, the president is elected across all 50 states, but only a few of them, half a dozen, are so-called swing states which will likely determine who becomes president.

Several candidates Harris considered were indeed from those states, but for one reason or another, she did not pick one of them. One reason certainly relates to what I just said; that history does not show that the vice presidential candidate will bring a decisive benefit on election day.

Another important consideration might be to try to choose a vice presidential candidate of a kind who would expand your voter base, meaning whose strengths would complement your strengths, or even compensate for your weaknesses.

For example, given Kamala Harris is a former prosecutor and senator with a background in California and is a person of color, then surely the vice presidential candidate could be someone who could appeal to the white male voter.

Kamala Harris is a woman, so therefore some [running mate] candidates, or the majority of the candidates, were white, middle-aged, or late middle-aged men.

The third consideration was certainly whether to try to find a candidate who is strong on those areas of policy where you are not so strong.

For example, in Kamala Harris's case, foreign and security policy could be those areas where her credibility is not very high.

Similarly with economic policy, where Donald Trump's credibility is higher. For example, Senator from Arizona Marc Kelly, a former astronaut, certainly has higher credibility in security policy than does Harris.

Yet still, she chose Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her vice presidential running mate, and whose strengths are probably none of the aforementioned considerations.

The strength in his case is rather a profile that further strengthens or gives additional assurances to the existing Democratic voter base.

By this, I mean that he has some very progressive views on issues important to the Democratic voter base today, primarily on social policy, on abortion, and also in several economic and trade policy issues.

In these, he is clearly progressive or left-wing in the U.S. sense; actually relatively centrist or even center-right in the European sense.

These were the primary considerations, though it must be said that Tim Walz, contrary to Republicans' efforts to label him as a very progressive candidate, is not really in the classic sense.

For example, in the view of the NRA, he is an A-list candidate precisely because he has always supported gun ownership rights, he is a gun owner himself, he goes hunting, hunts game and happily posts about it on his social media accounts.

He is certainly not a run-of-the-mill urban-oriented Democrat focused on the young college student voter, but a more versatile politician.

Just on Tim Walz's background, it has been highlighted that he comes from a blue-collar family, worked on the family farm during summers, has served in the army, and has worked as a teacher.

Müller: I read in the New York Times that at yesterday's campaign event he sharply attacked Donald Trump (Walz has, now famously, referred to both Trump and J.D. Vance as "weird" – ed.). Some quotes have been highlighted: "He doesn't know the first thing about service. He doesn't have time for it because he's too busy serving himself," Walz said. Or another quote that has been highlighted: "Make no mistake, violent crime was up under Donald Trump. That's not even counting the crimes he committed." This was an actual quote from Walz. Does Walz somehow in any case have a symmetry with Donald Trump's vice-presidential running mate J.D. Vance?

Kaju: It depends on how you look at it. In some sense, certainly.

J.D. Vance, as is now well-known, despite being a very wealthy venture investor in his later career, has a background in the old mining and industrial towns in Appalachia, and is from a family in the grip of alcohol and drugs. He comes from very, very difficult circumstances.

In this sense, alongside Kamala Harris, who is certainly a representative of the elite in terms of her background and career, Tim Walz is exactly the ordinary American man who comes from the working classes himself and fights for other working-class people, has not forgotten that background and those hobbies and interests that were important to him in his youth.

He has not left that life behind. He can be seen on social media and off-line, walking around in a gray T-shirt with same hunting and shooting theme, and so-called American way of life.

Walz has also served 24 years in the U.S. National Guard and actually throughout his political career, including 12 years in Congress, fought for veterans' rights, their mental health services, and in every way has supported American vets.

In this sense, he is certainly a good match for Vance, also coming from very modest conditions but at the same time remaining true to the same community or background he hails from.

Finally, I am asking you for a general assessment of the state of the campaign, Kamala Harris versus Donald Trump, now that a couple of weeks have passed since Harris, 59, took over from Joe Biden. How has it changed the campaign themes, dynamics, and course, how on one side we have Harris and on the other side, the 78-year-old Donald Trump. Please also consider world economic news, the stock market downturns at the start of this week and the slight rise in U.S. unemployment to 4.3 percent, suggesting a cooling job market.

I think that from the current state of the campaign, both sides can read out the positive signs for themselves.

Precisely the wavering state of the U.S. economy is something that should certainly favor Donald Trump. According to the research, the credibility of the Republicans and of himself on economic issues is already higher than the Democrats enjoy.

Plus if for the voter the main issue is the current state of the economy, then this should in any case favor the Republicans, Donald Trump, and J.D. Vance.

On the other hand, if the voter should not currently make decisions based on the credibility of policy positions and political topics and purely on such a, as it has been put today, vibe or energy and enthusiasm - an important part of the logic of making a political choice - then then Democrats certainly have some sort of advantage at the moment also.

They are certainly enjoying a bit of the afterglow of this decision (for Biden to step down and the nomination of Harris – ed.).

Biden was indeed willing to step aside and make room for a younger candidate, which has significantly boosted activity and enthusiasm among Democrats, also according to the research. The lack of this had deeply troubled them over the past year.

Half of the Democrats consistently said in surveys that they would actually prefer to see another candidate on the ballot besides Biden.

Now they have got their other candidate; actually already two candidates with the vice presidential candidate, and this has significantly raised levels of enthusiasm. If we talk about the fact that on election day it comes down to who gets more voters out there, then today the Democrats certainly have some sort of advantage, thanks to this renewed energy they have received.

And we must not forget one thing: Donald Trump's biggest enemy is still Donald Trump himself.

Despite having seemingly secured the Republican nomination, he is still the most unpopular candidate of all time. He is not liked at all by people outside the Republican voter base.

He had a brilliant opportunity after that tragic incident, when a supporter at his rally died after a failed assassination attempt on Trump, to become a slightly different candidate.

A figure who unifies more than divides American voters. Yet at the moment, it seems that after the first couple of days he had fallen back into his old routine, something which Republicans also criticize him for.

For example, he attacks Kamala Harris over her color of skin, which is absurd in modern day America, especially considering that Trump had actually worked very hard in recent months, and years, to increase his rating among young black men.

If he does not stop attacking via this theme, he will likely destroy what he has gained with his hard work.

Election day is November 5.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!