Tim Walz was selected as Kamala Harris’s running mate on August 6, 2024 and remained on the Democratic ticket through the November 2024 election, so the condition of the prediction was met.

However, the predicted outcome — recurring, publicly reported protests by Gold Star families at Harris–Walz campaign events, effectively dogging “all of their events” and creating an ongoing media headache through Election Day — did not occur.

What did happen is a concentrated controversy around Donald Trump’s August 26, 2024 visit to Arlington National Cemetery with Gold Star families of the 13 service members killed at Abbey Gate. Harris criticized Trump’s team for filming there as a political stunt, and several of those Gold Star families responded with videos, a joint statement, and later a Trump campaign ad sharply attacking Harris and the administration’s handling of the Afghanistan withdrawal. This generated a burst of negative coverage for Harris across outlets from the AP and Boston Globe to numerous conservative sites, but the conflict was framed around her comments on Trump’s Arlington visit and the 2021 withdrawal, not around protests at her rallies. (en.wikipedia.org)

By contrast, contemporaneous reporting on Harris–Walz campaign events shows repeated disruptions by pro‑Palestinian / Gaza protesters and “uncommitted” activists, including at major rallies in Detroit and Phoenix and at a New York City support event, as well as organized Gaza‑focused protests around the Democratic National Convention and in Minneapolis. These stories consistently describe Gaza-related activists — not Gold Star families — as the source of recurring protest pressure on the Harris–Walz campaign. (wdet.org)

Extensive news searches turn up Gold Star families’ videos, letters, and media statements criticizing Harris, but no evidence of them repeatedly protesting at Harris–Walz campaign stops in person, and no narrative that Gold Star family protests became a constant presence “at all of their events.” Given that such a pattern would have been newsworthy and is absent from major coverage, the specific, event-focused and recurring-protest scenario described in the prediction did not materialize. Therefore, the prediction is best classified as wrong.