While I mentioned recently how
Amy Klobuchar is trying to emphasize her Midwestern-ness to separate herself from the rest of the Dem. primary field, this is really a strategy that (I think) she’s using because (at least as of right now) she has no other cards to play. There’s nothing else that really separates her from the rest of the field. (That is, assuming she doesn’t want to emphasize the fact that she’s the biggest foreign policy hawk in the field, which probably wouldn’t play too well.)
For the most part, I don’t think regional identity makes much difference. It may make a slight difference in the primaries, where the candidates are running within their own party, and so they agree on most of the issues and there isn't as much to distinguish them, but I don’t see it as being very meaningful at all in the general election. Sure, I could imagine some kind of regional considerations being one of many factors in the mix for the VP selection, but that’s about it. My guess is that many voters wouldn’t even be able to tell you what the home states of the candidates are.
And so no, I don’t think Harris being from California makes much difference at all for her general election prospects, and people are only bringing it up so much in this thread because they haven’t seen her campaign yet, and so the only thing you have to go on is her biographical sketch. Once she actually starts running, then her performance as a candidate will be much more important than what state she’s from. Being from California will only matter in the indirect sense that her political positions have been shaped by the kind of electorate she’s been trying to appeal to.
