Despite it being more than two years away, there is a great deal of interest in the 2028 US presidential election. As such, there is fierce speculation about who the Democrats’ candidate will be. While it is a fool’s errand to definitively say who that will be – given the candidacies of past ‘shoo-ins’ such as Edmund Muskie or Gary Hart – it may be worth considering who their running mate could or should be.

The role of Vice President is not insignificant. Fifteen out of forty-five Presidents previously served as VP, with eight directly succeeding following deaths in office and one following resignation. As elected representatives, they cannot be fired or dismissed like appointed Cabinet secretaries. And as President of the Senate, they can cast deciding votes to resolve ties over budgetary bills.

During elections, running mates are meant to serve as campaign assets, balancing out a ticket geographically, ideologically and personally to gain wider appeal. As this position is not determined through primaries, it is up to successful nominees under advisement to consider and select the best possible running mate.

Democratic anxieties about 2028 stem from recent memories of 2016 and 2024. In 2016, US Senator for Virginia Tim Kaine served as Hilary Clinton’s running mate, and in 2024 Governor of Minnesota Tim Walz served as Kamala Harris’s. The losses of these tickets to Donald Trump – while baffling – may be attributable to several factors, the choice of running mate should not be dismissed.

Geographically, neither Tim gave their respective tickets an advantage as they both came from reliably Democratic states on the peripheries of key US regions they were meant to represent (the South and the Rust Belt). As the Electoral College means that elections hinge on outcomes in a handful of swing states, there was no benefit having both halves of the ticket come from safe states.

Demographically, both Tims were meant to be ‘inoffensive’, balancing out tickets headed by women, seeking the highest office in a country where many voters are sceptical about the idea of a female President. While there was speculation that Clinton could nominate Elizabeth Warren, Harris voiced in her memoir 107 Days that her preferred choice of Pete Buttigieg was too risky, the combination of a black woman and a gay man potentially alienating voters. This has led to the belief that the next Democratic nominee needs to be a straight, white man.

As ‘safe’ candidates, both Tims may well have the sorts of amiable personalities suiting them as working legislators or state-level politicians. However, they arguably lacked the attributes necessary to energise their party’s base or persuade swing voters in a national contest. As unfair as it may seem, especially given who they were competing against, some voters may have viewed them as lacking the qualities needed for federal executive office. This potentially led to focus on the tops of their tickets, allowing concentrated attacks on their perceived flaws.

Whomever the Democratic candidate is, their choice of candidate must provide balance to their ticket, be an effective campaigner, and have the experience and attributes necessary to serve as Vice President or potentially President.

Senatorial experience would be ideal for a running mate’s prospective role as President of the Senate. While other practical governing experience may suffice – as only nineteen out of the fifty VPs to date were previously Senators – jeopardising a Senate seat should not disqualify a candidate.

Whether the nominee comes from a safe blue state – like New Yorker AOC or Californians Kamala Harris and Gavin Newsom – or not, their running mate should represent a swing state, which in many cases would more or less mean nominating a ‘red state whisperer’. Such candidates may include Senators Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock of Georgia or Senators Ruben Gallego and Mark Kelly and Governor Katie Hobbs of Arizona.

A running mate must be exciting rather than safe. On the campaign trail, they must generate enthusiasm among their base or key voting groups. A woman or a man with strong women’s rights credentials – potentially Hobbs, Gallego, Ossoff, or Senators Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevado or Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin – would counter the Trump administration’s failures to women. Following Trump’s callous anti-immigration agenda, a running mate who may appeal to those disproportionately harmed by it may also be a boon.

This will be a difficult balancing act, with a potential running mate unlikely to embody every single criterion and their suitability being heavily dependent on who the nominee is. This year’s midterms may well produce additional candidates, such as Governor Jocelyn Benson or Senator Haley Stevens of Michigan, Senator Roy Cooper of North Carolina, or Senator James Talarico of Texas. When all said and done, we may wish any Democratic ticket every success if it means ending the chaos wrought by MAGA.

* Samuel James Jackson is the Chair of the Policy Committee of the Yorkshire and the Humber Liberal Democrats and had served as the Liberal Democratic candidate in Halifax during the 2024 general election.