Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
Thinking there is going to be a real election in 2028 is the most optimistic thing I've heard in a while.
“A large number of people did not believe we were fighting for them in the last election – and that’s the big disconnect.”
does this mean he would pander to republican voters again
Walz seems like a good guy but I think anyone associated with Harris campaign is tainted and rightfully so.
Probably a mistake.
Walz is a completely valid candidate. The only thing that held up Harris was that she was a black woman. I'm confident that any reasonable white man would have beat Trump, and that's unfortunate, but it's the reality of the American electorate
i think it's got a lot more to do with the nonsense she spouted and the massive campaign failure than her being black or a woman.
let's be real. I wanted her to win, i really fucking did. If i was American, i would have voted for her. (You can check my comment history for proof). But the way that the dems are presenting themselves and the whole communities of dems who are saying shit like this is the reason why voters feel alienated and consequently don't vote for your candidates. Every comment like this adds to the alienation of the could-be dem voter. This causes them to not want to be associted with people like you, DrFistington. They don't/won't like you.
Not a lot of people can endure the bs barrage that goes along the lines of "fuck you, white straight man, you are a racist sexist!! 😡 but still vote for our candidate tho please 🥺👉👈" and still vote for the dems! They'll vote against you just to fucking spite you and I'm not surprised that's what lots did in this election.
Dems need to change as people if they want to ever see a dem president ever again. The dem communities need to be welcoming. We're all in this together ffs!
I don't think that's even remotely true. While it is true that the USA has it's fair share of racists and sexists, Hillary won the popular vote, and Obama is one of America's most popular presidents.
Harris lost because she ran a terrible campaign, on the coatails of another terrible campgaign, from a terrible president.
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.
I'm the opposite. I know that snappy comebacks on live stages are not what make a presidency great. Even if someone can't give immediate responses in a debate, I can respect them if they display anger and passion when appropriate, and reason and negotiation when that's appropriate. You might be overestimating that a president needs to be an image of perfection all the time to every single person, when our current one survived conviction as a sex offender.
The ability to do behind the scenes work is super important. It's half the requirement. But the other half is being able to do in the moment interactions. Look at Trump/VD with Zelenski. Being charismatic and able to handle in-person negotiations with foreign leaders is hugely important.
Walz/Sanders ticket, please.
Pile of dust 2028
Walz won't even be at retirement age by 2028. That's practically an infant in terms of a presidential candidate.
and Sanders has an amazing ability to get Republican voters on his side.
Unless he steps up and starts fighting alongside the progressives trying to do something (like joining Bernie's current Midwest tour), I don't see him as being a viable candidate for 2028.
I like Walz. A lot. But he's got to show more leadership on the national stage right now, ala Newsom, Whitmer, Pritzker and (in a pleasant surprise) Mills. I think he was thrust onto the national stage before he was ready by the DNC looking to swing the Midwest with a non-threatening centrist candidate, and his silence after the election (and the lack of a real response from the Harris campaign) has left it to other governors to take up the mantle of national leadership.
Would I vote for him if he were on the ticket? Yes. Would I vote for him over Newsom, Whitmer or Pritzker - probably not unless he steps up and takes the battle to Trump NOW.