this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2025
826 points (97.7% liked)

politics

20563 readers
4008 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 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 18 points 12 hours ago (3 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 (3 replies)
[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 251 points 18 hours ago (17 children)

I'm not convinced there will be an election in 2028...

[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 55 points 15 hours ago

There will, but it won't be a fair one. They have "elections" in Russia, too.

[–] earphone843@sh.itjust.works 93 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

There won't at the current trajectory. There won't even be midterms.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 70 points 17 hours ago (10 children)

I remember Republicans checking out on elections back in 2018 because they bought hard into the Trump "elections are rigged" propaganda. The GOP lost seven Senate seats that year as conservative turnout plunged.

I wonder if Democrats will make the same mistake in 2026.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 50 points 16 hours ago

No, I don't think Democrats are ready to make new mistakes yet. They still won't abandon their devotion to the old mistakes.

[–] unphazed@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago

Shouldn't be hard. All they have to say is "Remember the townhalls, and how they mocked you while you paid for them to make your lives worse? We'll put it back." They don't even need to add anything, just try to rebuild. Anything would be a positive change when you're sliding into the negative side of the scale (and in two years, it'll be far far far to the left)

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[–] Gsus4@mander.xyz 22 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 50 points 15 hours ago (19 children)

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

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 120 points 18 hours 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.

[–] neidu3@sh.itjust.works 53 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours 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.

[–] Photuris@lemmy.ml 52 points 18 hours 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!

[–] earphone843@sh.itjust.works 43 points 17 hours 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)
[–] GooberEar@lemmy.wtf 30 points 15 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)
[–] Corigan@lemm.ee 14 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (5 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 (5 replies)
[–] hperrin@lemmy.ca 38 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago

I'll vote for him in the generals, I will beg other people to vote for him and I will spread the word on his policies, but I'd never vote for him in a million years in a primary. He's just a republican in a blue tie on certain issues like Palestine.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 82 points 18 hours ago (47 children)

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

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 45 points 18 hours 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 (46 replies)
[–] AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee 20 points 14 hours ago (5 children)

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

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 9 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

Walz/Sanders ticket, please.

[–] OccultIconoclast@reddthat.com 3 points 8 hours ago

Sanders is old and wants to retire. Walz/Cortez instead.

[–] Classy@sh.itjust.works 11 points 12 hours ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 11 points 13 hours ago (5 children)

Please, do FUCKING NOT.

His debate performance was poor against Vance. We don't need a kindly father-figure running against Republicans, we need an attack dog that knows police cold, who can articulate that tax cuts cost more in tax revenues than we make up in added jobs, economic growth, etc., someone that's going to actively piss-off billionaires and then not kiss their asses once they have power... We need a leftist populist, someone that will get people fired up.

Walz is not that guy.

One lesson that I've seen in politics over and over again is Dems running the same candidate in a rematch, and the rematch always goes worse than the original election.

[–] schema@lemmy.world 18 points 12 hours ago

I mean he can run for primary. A lot of people should. The DNC just needs to take their finger off the scale and let the actual people decide what candidate they want.

[–] SilentStorms@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I don’t know, he might be able to do it with decent advisors.

He was the one who kicked off that “Republicans are weird” messaging campaign which was incredibly effective until establishment Democrats shut it down. If he brings that sort of energy again I’d support him.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

Even if it's not him that runs and takes up that mantra again, the DNC needs to stop standing on the air hose of their own candidates. The rest of the party needs to pick up that mantra, because the truth of the matter is the Republicans are VERY FUCKING WEIRD.

They are absolute freaks. Obsessed with getting everyone to follow the rules of their little book club. With controlling women. Losing sleep over where trans people poop. Obsessed with kissing the asses of freak billionaires like Musk.

More importantly, that narrative was working. People noticed. Because it is so very true and people were happy to have someone with a megaphone saying the truth like that.

[–] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (5 children)

His debate performance was poor against Vance.

it was perfectly fine? He could most definitely run well after trump, due to the classic american flip flop phenomenon. Chances are he'd win, if the public is upset enough about how trump did, which right now, isn't looking great. And probably will continue to be that way.

He's literally obama, but white.

walz has also had a historically successful career in politics? Just look at what minnesota is doing.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 54 points 17 hours ago (60 children)
load more comments (60 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›