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.
It’s cute that they think there’s gonna be another election.
How about someone good?
I’m feeling pretty certain the dems will run Buttigieg. Feels like they’ve been prepping him for a while.
Tim Walz unleashed would have won this.
He was hamstrug by Harris. He’s likely the dem’s best choice for 2028.
So of course they’ll run Newsome or Shapiro or Hillary Clinton again because they’re a bunch of idiots.
Walz was great in 2024. He had enthusiasm and actually answered the interviewers’ questions. I would have preferred the symbolic victory of a black woman president, but I like Walz better as an individual person. I think he could have won if he’d been the presidential candidate. Well, Harris won too, but I mean he could have won even with the voter suppression stealing all those democratic votes.
President Walz and Vice President Cortez is the future we need. But probably not the future we’ll get.
What exactly were his policy positions? What was important to him? Back in my day candidates spoke about those. Now he just runs with his big goofy smile and talks about being a coach.
I would have preferred the symbolic victory of a black woman.
This is why DEI is getting bitchslapped the fuck off.
Your black woman president actively help sending bombs to kill brown people in gaza. Not to mention all the brown people she fed to the private prison industry.
As a good liberal, you probably think of brown people as human as long as they’re rich and american
Why are you bringing up her race when it isn’t a relevant factor here?
Are we playing the accuse people of having political views they don’t have game? Okay okay! My turn!
You’re a posadist. You want to encourage global nuclear war so society will collapse and communist aliens will save us. And I think your ideology is silly and look down on you for following it!
Honestly? I wasn’t until last year but seeing yall cheering for genocide I wish the russians bombs new york lmao. Just imagine all the dead yanks
How does your own medecine feels like, bitch?
It isn’t healthy to wish murder upon those who disagree with you about a military conflict they aren’t involved in.
I would have preferred the symbolic victory of a black woman
Really? Electing president by the color of the skin and/or sex? You totally deserve the current president then. He perfectly symbolizes your values: racism, sexism and degeneratism.
Okay.
I love this response.
Just for shits and giggles, I’ll try giving an actual argument.
In 2016, Hillary Clinton was right. It was her turn. She won the popular vote. I hate everything about that woman. I hate that she’s part of a dynasty, I hate that she rigged the primaries, I hate that her campaign donated money to Trump because they thought radicalising the right would lead to an easy win.
But she was right. The people did want a woman president, and that’s what they voted for. Walz is a really nice, genial guy. I like him. If he were a woman, I think he’d be a different person, or he’d not be a politician. Because to be a woman in the heart of the patriarchy, you need to be strong. You have to have unbreakable armour with no cracks. If the sexist system is challenged, then maybe the next woman president can be a nice person like Walz. But if we keep on having this system where women have to fight to be taken seriously and then aren’t liked for being fighters, then we’re never gonna have equality.
I don’t really care all that much about how good Harris is with a spreadsheet. Her debate and interview performance is important to me in a primary, not in a presidential election. At that point, I’m thinking about the future. About the girls who are going to become women in government. I want them to have more role models. I care way more about that than if Harris is nice, or if her budget plan is perfect.
I think Harris can be what America needs better than Walz can. Personality is only important in an election, symbolism is important in the white house.
I also love this response.
Thank you!
Thinking there is going to be a real election in 2028 is the most optimistic thing I’ve heard in a while.
There’s going to be an election, or we’re going to learn the meaning of “All enemies, foreign and domestic”.
More like a Russian/Chinese election.
Bulgarian.
Anyone who failed to beat Trump has to go away. No exceptions.
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.
The Harris campaign had to cover the governor’s tracks when he tripped up during a California fundraiser by stating that the constitutionally-mandated system used to select the president, otherwise known as the electoral college, “needs to go”.
How the hell is that a gaffe? It’s both the truth and exactly what people want to hear. Any lib who thinks like that needs to kindly keep their mouths shut for the next four years. This country needs radical change, the only choice you get is which one you want.
The pearl-clutching Tone Police in the Democratic Party are nothing if not exhausting, that’s for sure.
The Republicans can and do say just about whatever the fuck they want, and that’s sanewashed, and overlooked, and brushed under the rug, sometimes even celebrated, but the tone police in the “liberal media” and the left, and the Democratic Party itself will be there, wagging-finger at the ready, if some Democrat misses a semicolon .
deleted by creator
Here, let me grab a sharpie and fix that.
The Harris campaign made a cowardly attempt to walk back the governor’s statements when he said during a California fundraiser that the broken election systems used for gerrymandering and enabling the double elections of Donald Trump, “needs to go”.
and exactly what people want to hear
It’s what people who care about democracy want to hear. That certainly isn’t everyone.
Just guessing, but it might be a gaffe because it could be skewed to sound like he doesn’t believe in democracy. Of course, this makes no sense because Trump has quite literally said that we might not need another election in four years.
A more careful statement might have been, “the electoral college needs to be replaced with a system where every citizen’s vote has the same magnitude.” If that’s not the mathematical ideal of democracy, I don’t know what is.
Edit: For you pedantic mathematicians, I’ll add that everyone’s vote should have the same magnitude, and that magnitude should be greater than zero.
If that’s not the mathematical ideal of democracy,
That is the mathematical ideal of populism.
Democracy is “government by consent of the governed”; There is no good way of democratically electing a singular individual. Which is why the presidency should be little more than a figurehead, with very little actual authority.
deleted by creator
most of the electorate
You just defined “populism”.
deleted by creator
Again: Democracy is government by the consent of the governed. The system you described made no effort to ensure constituent consent. You described a populist system, not a Democratic one.
There are many good ways to popularly elect a singular representative. The one you described is one of the better ones, but it is still two wolves and a sheep voting on dinner. It is still populist: the sheep does not consent to a “government” that can put it on a menu.
A democratic system would be one in which the government lacks the power to put the sheep on that ballot: the minority has no cause to protest.
There are no good ways to democratically elect a singular representative. As soon as you allow that representative sufficient power that the minority protest, the appointment of that representative over the minority may be populist, but it is not democratic.
deleted by creator
i’m not even sure what that text is supposed to be referencing?
I assume it’s not literally the message itself, because that would be kind of broad. I’m guessing he just said it weirdly, and that bothered people, because of course it did.
I really do think Tim Walz has a real chance. A very likeable guy.
Doesn’t hurt that he’s white and male, too.
Walz / Kelly, Kelly / Walz, Kelly / Kelly, or Kelly / AOC.
Kelly / Kelly?
Scott/Mark. Or Mark/Scott.
deleted by creator
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.
Look at Trump/VD with Zelenski. Being charismatic and able to handle in-person negotiations with foreign leaders is hugely important.
I’m curious how you’d view that interaction? I bet those with magafied brainz think that was peak charisma, on Bronzo and “JD” "Vance"s part, while normal Americans probably look at that and think they completely shit the bed and embarrassed America.
He can run for the primary, like everyone else…
The dnc will make sure their pro business bribery centric candidate wins the primary.
I’m not convinced there will be an election in 2028…
There will, but it won’t be a fair one. They have “elections” in Russia, too.
There won’t at the current trajectory. There won’t even be midterms.
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.
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)
No, I don’t think Democrats are ready to make new mistakes yet. They still won’t abandon their devotion to the old mistakes.
Not sure about rigged, but honestly, depending on how the next few years go, it may be straight up dangerous for non-republican Americans to vote. While that’s by no means a certainty, people should keep an eye on any electoral changes made in their state.
If Republicans experience a route like they suffered in 2018, it will likely be due to the mushy indie republican-when-its-convenient voters breaking ranks in droves, just like they did in prior Dem wave years. That’s what Harris was banking on in 2024 when she paraded around her pet RINOs Liz Cheney and Jeff Flake. She just failed to understand that these wishy-washy voters are chasing less war and less disruption and more protectionist economics, something Trump was able to dangle over their heads (twice!) to win the GOP primary / national election.
Republicans don’t really seem to get it, either. Which is why they think the midterm after a wave year is the perfect time to put Grade A psychos all over the down-ballots and end up losing statewide in Alabama of all places as a result.
The “we won’t be having any more elections” crowd is heavily invested in a theory that Republicans can get their own base to sit down, shut up, and follow orders. But the last eight years of Trump should be an indication of the exact opposite. The party is being lead by the base, which means the prior generation’s power brokers like the Bushs and Cheneys and Bloombergs no longer have a place in it.
This line of thinking has preserved whatever is left of my optimism. Let us hope my fellow Americans continue to function predictably.
They made it in 2024. The results of abstaining or protest voting were obvious, and these idiots did it anyway. And here we are.
The results of abstaining or protest voting were obvious
Absolutely. The current Dem leadership is now wildly unpopular and vulnerable to primary. Just like after 2016, the seeds have been planted for a big anti-incumbent wave.
I wonder if Democrats will make the same mistake in 2026.
i really, really fucking hope this doesnt happen, i’m going to fucking lose my shit if it does. Because unless things change, it’s not looking great for the trump midterms right now.
Democrats will make the same mistake in 2026.
The only thing the Democrats failed at was fielding a fat old white male felon narcissist serial rapist with ties to a foreign nation-state. If they can just do that they’ll win no matter what.
Sorry if you didn’t get a personal hug from America’s Mom and Dad but yoire kinda expected to make a value judgement between two options and choose the best. As a group, you did not.
Only blame Dems who voted for a kleptocratic felon. The rest did their best to field the best candidate they could and lost to a traitor – and those guys need to start with our apology for being stupid, same as all of Ukraine, and next Moldova.
The only thing the Democrats failed at was fielding a fat old white male felon narcissist serial rapist with ties to a foreign nation-state.
Is that why Obama lost in 2008?
Look, guys. I’m rather concerned that the states that haven’t seceded by then won’t even have electricity anymore.
Even Russia has elections
There will absolutely be an election.
It will be a farce, a Russian election where there’s only one possibility to win.
If we’re not pitchforks in the street before then, I don’t hold much hope
Or maybe a Hungary-style election where the entire media landscape shills for the ruling class and people on social media are bombarded with misinformation and one-sided reporting.
sounds a lot like the last 12 years TBF
Sounds like you described the US process as well. May not be far from it now.
Certainly could never happen here, twice at least. /s
The one thing we have going for us is that Don’s dementia and age are going to increasingly make it difficult for him to hold his party together. And there is the chance one of those things will leave the GOP trying to field a new traitor to try and get the cult to consolidate around.
once he kicks the bucket, assuming they can’t find someone the republican base will support as fervently as trump, the entire party is done for, it will collapse into a blackhole of nothingness.
Just like the dems. Who will we vote for then, the greens?
States run the elections, so I’m positive there will be one. But whether or not the results are respected… I’m not so confident in that.
I’m not confident the results in red states will be accurate to begin with.
There will be since elections are held at the state level. Many won’t be free or fair in the red states, but they’ll be good in the blue states.
If red states don’t hold elections, that’s fewer electoral college votes we need to win the presidency and we wouldn’t win in red states anyway.
Please, Texas and Florida. Oh, please, don’t hold elections. 🙏
The way I read it, electoral college votes are the one thing where individual states can somewhat easily cancel elections for President, as long as they do so before the election. States have broad discretion over the appointment of electors. All states currently appoint them based on the results of elections, but the rules around that are all set by State legislation, and can be reset by States as well. The only Federal requirement is that the rules don’t change after any election is held.
Prior Supreme Courts have ruled that things like the Equal Protection clause may be used to challenge any act where the legislature restricts voting rights once they have been granted. But who knows what this clown Court would make of that.
Congressional elections, on the other hand, must be held in order for those seats to be filled. So any state that unilaterally cancels elections across the board will be sending nobody to Congress (and likely any expired Senate terms as well). Some states may go the extra mile and cancel the election for President, but not for Congress. We’ll see how that turns out.
Nah, there probably will. Whoever is taking control of the US really don’t care about MAGA’s and 3rd terms. They’ll just put another puppet there, the new way of doing things in post-capitalism still maintains and some people will continue to get increasingly very rich doesn’t matter who the prez is. We finally reached “the future”.
There will definitely be an attempt to eliminate or “postpone” them. I’m certain Trump is looking at Putin in power and other governments in a state of war without elections as inspiration.
Fuckin should have been the nominee in the first place - him or Sanders.
Not sure of moderates are ok with Sanders. The center and right will keep calling Sanders a socialist and communist.
the moderates are the ones who lost
Who fucking cares? The moderates who were supposed to swoop in and save Kamala pointedly didn’t. Catering towards a fictional segment of the electorate is (demonstrably) a recipe for failure.
The moderates who were supposed to swoop in and save Kamala pointedly didn’t.
kamala had 75 million votes, to the 77 million that trump got.
If anybody fucked up the election it was the hardline commies or super aggressive left leaning people that refused to vote for kamala because of whatever silly reason they had.
IDK why people on the internet are willingly this fucking stupid. Evidently looking at the biden results, there were about 7-8 million more votes than kamala received, which is considerably more inline with what you would expect had younger voters actually, well, voted.
You would literally need to be on fucking crack to take anything else away from the results of these recent elections. IF ANYTHING, the obvious answer is that the younger voting block NEEDS to go and vote, because historically, they don’t.
TL;DR if you didn’t already pick this up from basic civics knowledge, the vast majority of the voterbase is going to vote for “whoever is on the ticket this time” that’s why trump even gets traction at all, maybe 10-20% of his voter base actually cares about him in any substantive manner. It’s the same for the dems, 75% of the base is people who will vote for WHOEVER gets put on the primary ticket, some of those are going to be more moderate though, and if you run someone like bernie, they will pull out or switch support, which is one of the risks you take when running a more hardline candidate.
Trump was just able to viciously mobilize his segment of the population against the republican voter base (who are historically known to behave like this)
We do not have this advantage on the dem side, we literally have to mobilize the youth, that’s the ONE thing that can save us.
left leaning people that refused to vote for kamala because of whatever silly reason they had
we literally have to mobilize the youth, that’s the ONE thing that can save us.
The youth think centrists are useless traitorous war criminal arseholes. You think you can talk down to progressives but somehow get the youth vote? You’re on crack.
Voter turnout in these elections was lower than in the 2020 elections
yeah, primarily because you can’t vote by mail in the 2024 election, where as you could in the 2020 election, enfranchising more people to go out and vote, and historically, it’s not republicans that struggle to vote, it’s the democrats.
I still think it was voters showing their protest against the Israeli Genocide. I mean, I voted for Harris, but ffuuuuuuckk, all she had to do was say she’d at least try to find another way other than selling weapons.
i’m not really convinced it was a significant enough margin to outpace the usual no show voter rolls. Historically we’ve had issues with turnout, and when it gets easier, more people vote, when it gets harder less people vote. I really don’t think something that seems to really explicitly mobilize people under the age of 25 and above the age of 18 would be a very significant voter block to begin with. There’s probably more people in there, but you’re talking about people who are ethnically arab, and i wouldn’t necessarily count those as those are going to be opposed to pretty much anything you do in the middle east regarding israel.
Someone would have to do some actual polling or research to find out whether or not it had a significant effect, but i’m betting it wasn’t. It probably had something to do with it, but literally every campaign has these 1% base issues, it’s literally unavoidable.
If everyone voted mainline Trump still would have won the election. Greens got 860000, while the Libertarians got 650000 and RFK got 750000.
Well, your supposedly existing leftists didn’t achieve even that. I don’t remember where I heard it, but the saying gows something like “Catering towards a fictional segment of the electorate is (demonstrably) a recipe for failure.”
Probably because Harris and Biden succeeded in alienating a group that SHOULD have been a slam dunk for them: Arab-Americans.
And also, they listened to their consultants instead of, you know, normal people. They were too busy jacking themselves off about how “great” the economy was to notice that MOST people in the country are straight up not having a good time.
The Arab-American vote was crucial in Michigan, and they threw that away. And frankly, I’d argue that they alienated a lot more moderate voters by INSISTING the economy was better (failing to realize economy != people’s actual lives) and staunchly defending the status quo on that front.
Ah yes, Arab-Americans, known for their tolerance and feminist ideals, did not turn out for the woman preaching tolerance for all and love for Israel.
To capture a more left leaning audience you are going to have to abandon this notion notoriously conservative and backwards cultures will suddenly be progressive and accepting.
“Have you considered that the people we’re genociding might be kinda problematic?”
Don’t do that
It’s true, why should we try to support a group that fundamentally disagrees and hates a large part of the base? There’s no salvaging such disagreements.
They called Kamala a communist too. It doesn’t fucking matter, they’ll say it about anyone, you can’t be afraid of it.
Moderates can take their own fucking advice for once and vote blue no matter who.
Left Sanders Republican reich (rnc) +-----------------------+---------+--------------+ Republican lite (dnc)
