politics

18883 readers

3685 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

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.
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.
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.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
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.
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 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

703

Republicans are struggling to paint Tim Walz as a villain (www.rollingstone.com)

submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

135 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The GOP is scrambling to find a line of attack against Kamala Harris's VP pick — and it's not going well

Tim Walz has made his debut as Kamala Harris’ running mate, and Republicans are struggling to apply their standard villainization playbook to the Minnesota governor.

Walz has been making waves for weeks now as a good-natured, relatable politician with a particular aptitude for dressing down the Republican agenda in terms that any voter can understand — and the GOP hates it.

Republicans are scrambling to paint the governor-turned-VP candidate as a devilish Marxist hellbent on running the country into the ground — their usual stuff — while leveling a bunch of other really weird attacks. Here are some of their most pathetic attempts to turn voters against Walz.

…

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago

Some info about the stolen valor comments:

Left national guard after two decades to run off public office

Eustice says he remembers Walz struggling with the timing of wanting to serve as a lawmaker but also avoiding asking for a deferment so he could do so.

"He had a window of time. He had to decide. And in his deciding, we were not on notice to be deployed. There were rumors. There were lots of rumors, and we didn't know where we were going until it was later that, early summer, I believe,” Eustice told ABC News.

Also, he did carry weapons of war and “in war”, unless someone wants to correct this.

Walz deployed with the Minnesota National Guard to Italy on Aug. 3, 2003, to support Operation Enduring Freedom, according to the Minnesota Guard. The battalion supported security missions at various locations in Europe and Turkey, according to the Guard, and Walz was stationed in Vicenza, Italy, until returning to Minnesota in 2004. He did not deploy to Iraq or Afghanistan.

On operation enduring freedom, part of war on terror

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Enduring_Freedom

So, in fact he did carry weapons in war. Why are people saying he didn’t?