The mainstream media item headlined as Crabgrass has headlined, that item was carried by Strib, this link. No effort was made to seek out the LATimes original. The headline says enough.
Walz is a good guy, and Trump chose Vance, an interesting choice who's had to face some pearl clutching among Republicans, but who is interesting and smart; and Trump might have picked a regular Wall Street donor beloved Republican Romney-type stiff, i.e., Marco Rubio.
Give Trump credit for not doing that.
Now Walz is being vetted and sniped at by the other party, but it is about Harris, and her chops vs Trump, and his persona and style. Trump we know, some like, many don't.
We shall see more of Harris, and, of interest, Trump has reneged on his withdrawal from the Sept. 10, ABC network debate, and is back to saying he'll be there. Whether Trump can be decently behaved to allow a real debate, we shall see, but he says he will show up. It is expected the contrast will be clear, and the contrast will disclose much to voters -- Harris who she is, her talents, vs. Trump, who he is.
Before ending the post, the JD Vance VP tap is arguably more newsworthy. Not that Walz is less an interesting choice. But, because Trump did not pick a vanilla stiff, (Rubio), and because of Trump's quite advanced age and his declined health, (physical and mental, the latter questionable as it is by his manners and ways of campaigning), suggest Trump may likely be unable to do a full four years if elected -- so, what might a President Vance inheriting the mantle be like, and which of the two is arguably the closer to an actual full-bore attempted imposition of the threat-laden Heritage Foundation's Project 2025, (it's Vance, be warned, the evidence is clear). [UPDATE: Forbes. Same message.]
____________UPDATE____________
To refine the presentation of thinking, the main premise is that Trump very likely would fail to last four years, should he win, so he is passing the MAGA torch, derivative of Tea Party roots, and to do that he picked Vance from among Vance, Rubio and Burgum.
Burgum is wealthy. A regular traditional Republican. Rubio is not wealthy, but equally as safe with Wall Street donors as Burgum. Trump passing the torch to either, would reestablish Romney-like Republicanism, which Trump intentionally avoided.
The Crabgrass view, MAGA being imperfect, the future of the party could slide back to Romney and Bain Capital vulture capitalism, finding a ripe takeover of a going venture, selling off assets and liquidating, with sales proceeds paying off acquisition bank lending, with a profit because the target venture's market value, and asset liquidation value were disjoint. Find 'em. Fold 'em.
Counterposed, venture, not vulture, capitalism is focused on new possibly successful innovative ideas, being capitalized, the profit being in a portfolio of ventures where one getting to small-cap or mid-cap status would pay off the profit the collective gambles represented and hoped to realize.
Neither is charity, nor private-sector subsidy, but the themes of how business is best grown into a future, those fundamentally differ, where Vance, after his big law firm ticket punching was done, sought his way into Silicon Valley rather than into Wall Street. Peter Thiel then treating Vance as yet another venture being capitalized, into politics rather than high tech, while also liking Vance, seeing how the risk might pay back long-term.
It's all theory. But it is a cogent view of why Trump may have chosen Vance over the other two, in passing his MAGA torch while, like Biden, facing Father Time.
With the Trump casino bankruptcy experience and difficulty thereafter getting stateside credit, he had cause to distrust Wall Street big international banking and the business judgment there, while seeding of new ventures fit the theme he has advanced of America First. Innovate here, let the globalized remainder follow.
_________FURTHER UPDATE_________
Under that theory of JD Vance being selected/annointed, consider Paul Ryan; his three word critique of Trump starting with "populist," and the "where is Ryan now" part of the report, (if you can get past the awful terminology of "purring lapdog." Cats, possibly childless cat ladies, purr; dogs bark and drool). Anyway, think it over. What part of Republican Gestalt, transitory as it seems, does Paul Ryan think of as his team? The team employing him now as before? His "team of the future?"