this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2025
1008 points (97.5% liked)

politics

20615 readers
3946 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, Kamala Harris’ 2024 running mate, has suggested he may run for president in 2028.

Reflecting on the Democrats’ loss to Donald Trump and JD Vance, he admitted: “A large number of people did not believe we were fighting for them in the last election – and that’s the big disconnect.”

Walz said his life experience, rather than ambition, would guide his decision.

Though his VP campaign was marred by gaffes, he remains open to running if he feels prepared.

(page 4) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 130 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Him calling the GOP weird was not a gaffe but the campaign made him walk away from that language because it might offend potential turncoats. The fact he is internalizing the criticism worries me.

[–] [email protected] 56 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (6 children)

My only "problem" with the weird-comments were that they were overused. While it is certainly true, and Waltz had every reason to call it out, supporters often kept repeating it in the context of "look how triggered Republicans are by this". After a while it gave me the same vibe as people shoehorning "let's go brandon" into every situation.

[–] [email protected] 54 points 1 day ago (5 children)

My only problem with the “weird” verbiage is that it was far too soft.

The GOP is far beyond “weird” and well into full-blown Fascist territory.

But we wouldn’t want to “alienate” anybody by speaking facts!

[–] [email protected] 50 points 1 day ago (1 children)

But the thing about the "weird" verbiage is that it pissed them off way more than the harder insults. Especially if you phrase the accusation correctly.

For example, here's a good response to a MAGA shitting on trans children, "it's really weird that you care so much about children's genitals."

It's because they don't have a defense for it. They can do mental gymnastics for the harder stuff pretty easily because those terms are in black and white. Weird is a very grey area term, and they have to explain why the behavior is normal.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 54 points 22 hours ago (23 children)

Fuckin should have been the nominee in the first place - him or Sanders.

load more comments (23 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 15 hours ago (5 children)

Idk who needs to hear this, but Tim Walz is pretty moderate and centrist. You're not going to unite the splintered left with Tim Walz.

The biggest barrier Democrats have is that left leaning voters are not going out and voting for them.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

He can run for the primary, like everyone else...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 19 hours ago (4 children)

Honestly, he was OK as a candidate, but he didn't wow me, and he shit the bed in the debate which imo makes him a poor choice. He wasn't as bad as "they're eating the dwawgs" but he really blew it when they asked him about his time in China. All he had to say was that he was there around that time and maybe he misspoke, but what matters was the sentiment. It's a really easy question to answer instead he just fumbled his words like crazy.

He said he's notoriously bad at debating, and imo that's like saying I'm really bad at taking tests. So you are saying that you aren't good at the part where we find out what you know? You can't articulate your positions without a teleprompter? If you can't debate, then you must not be that fervent about them imo, and the person that takes on trump, (assuming we have a real election) needs to be able to call him on his bullshit to his face. I think Walz had way too much of an aww shucks vibe. He's too "Minnesota Nice". We need AOC.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 15 hours ago (4 children)

I really do think Tim Walz has a real chance. A very likeable guy.

Doesn't hurt that he's white and male, too.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Walz / Kelly, Kelly / Walz, Kelly / Kelly, or Kelly / AOC.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 15 hours ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 84 points 1 day ago (50 children)

Oh man I can't wait for right-wing/foreign propaganda to tell progressives what they should hate about Walz.

[–] [email protected] 45 points 1 day ago (5 children)

And don't forget this from a russian propagandist in 2015 (archived reddit link):

“Once we isolate key people, we look for people we know are in their upstream – people that they read posts from, but who themselves are less influential. We then either start flame wars with bots to derail the conversations that are influencing influential people, or else send off specific tasks for sockpuppets (changing this wording of an idea here; cause an ideological split there; etc).”

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (49 replies)
[–] [email protected] 39 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I’d vote for him, given that we’re still allowed to vote.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

He's got some things going for him. Male. Presumably heterosexual. Caucasian. Old (but perhaps not quite old enough). I say go for it.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (6 children)

Is he going to play a centrists or actually move the needle?

Don't need another "capitalist Harris"

Seemed like a genuine awesome dude, love what he's done in Minnesota but I lack faith that in the democratic party he'll do any good. That and he needs to work on debating....

Rather have AOC

That said better than most of the geriatric pandering democratic ineffective options. Even though he'll be close to 70....

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 58 points 1 day ago (62 children)
load more comments (62 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Anyone who failed to beat Trump has to go away. No exceptions.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 22 hours ago (5 children)

Walz was the main reason I voted for a right winger like Kamala anyway.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›