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.
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.
And Harris was hamstrung by Biden.
She could have been better.
Imagine the timeline where Joe got assassinated before the primaries. We wouldn’t have this bullshit timeline.
Yep. I remember a time when the Beltway insiders were acting like Amy Klobuchar was a rising star or some such, LOL.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 .
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.
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 live in MN. Last year Tim W was having his house renovated. So he rented a house for over 17000 dollars a month for him and his family to live in while his house was worked on. MN tax payers paid for this. Absolutely ridiculous.
This is categorically false and I’m pretty sure you know it. The Sunfish Lake house was a possibility on a list of options, but turned down for the high cost. He ended up renting Eastcliff house on the University of Minnesota campus for only $4,400/mo.
That’s about what it costs US tax payers an hour when trump goes golfing.
He can run for the primary, like everyone else…
Yay back to the same old same old likeable candidate who will do the same old same old things that will eventually allow for another Trump. Rinse and repeat…
I’m not sure I agree if you look at the early campaign when he first joined he was very much not doing the same old same old… for like 2 weeks.
Then Harris decided to go full corporatism and muzzled him. I’m not sure he’s right to run, but I’d trust him way more than most other dems.
That’s more time for the lazy Americans to organise and have a communist revolution. That’s the goal. Delay fascism until the workers get their act together.
Americans will never revolt. Period. They’ll change their pfp and hashtag and protest peacefully, but will never do what’s necessary to ensure a fair and meaningful existence for us all.
Okay, so you’re saying a socialist USA is entirely impossible.
Then isn’t a neoliberal USA better than a Nazi USA? Just for 4 years? Isn’t 4 years of bad better than 4 years of awful?
He’s a wet sandwich of a candidate.
Walz/Sanders ticket, please.
Sanders is old and wants to retire. Walz/Cortez instead.
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.
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…
For wast majority of Americans capitalist Harris is actually rapid communist comrade Harris. For significant majority of registered voters her existence is a rampant leftist propane and seven steps too far.
USians are firmly on the rigth, and unless you fix that, all your exciting candidates will achieve jack shit.USians are firmly on the rigth
They are? On the issues? Or are we going by how people label themselves?
For wast majority of Americans capitalist Harris is actually rapid communist comrade Harris.
You don’t seem like you really have a grasp on US politics.
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.
Who is that guy?
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.
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.
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.
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.
To be fair, the black Obama will also be running in the 2028 primary
Run Walz if you want 8 more years of Republican rule.
what kind of magical simulation must you be using to run these numbers my friend?
Vance was polished, smooth, knew his talking points and bullshit claims cold. Walz, not so much. He didn’t have good counters to a lot of the shit that Vance was throwing out. The broad consensus is that Vance handily won the debate, much like the broad consensus was that Harris trounced Trump in the debate.
He’s literally obama, but white.
He is not even close to being a white Obama. Obama is a highly skilled orator, extremely skilled debater, and a scholar. Tim Walz connects well with people–perhaps especially well with midwestern people–but he is not a particularly strong orator, is fairly weak in debates, and is definitely not a scholarly type. They may be close on policy, although I would hope that Walz would be farther to the left than Obama was.
vance was a traditionally good debater in an academic fashion, sure.
But the population doesn’t like people like that. That’s why people like trump and biden get elected over people like vance. Same thing with bush.
He didn’t have good counters to a lot of the shit that Vance was throwing out.
he had good counters to the most important disinformation in that whole debate, including a lot of the more reasonable stuff that vance just parades about, walz actually has something to speak on in those moments. Vance was clearly just focusing on formality rather than actual debate skills. And to be fair, if he countered every factually incorrrect thing vance said, he wouldn’t be able to say anything at all, which is even more of a loss because then you haven’t gotten anywhere, and your opponent has spent the entire time yapping. It’s literally the neo-nazi meme.
not done specifically on the debate, but evidently i think it’s fair to claim it’s relevance here.
The broad consensus is that Vance handily won the debate
i disagree, i think you would find most people would argue that vance held a better debate, but walz was generally a better speaker. You can’t look at this strictly through a debate lens, the american public doesn’t care about them.
He is not even close to being a white Obama. Obama is a highly skilled orator, extremely skilled debater, and a scholar. Tim Walz connects well with people–perhaps especially well with midwestern people–but he is not a particularly strong orator,
i would argue that obama is a really strong speaker, like generationally so, anybody can be skilled in a debate, what really matters when it comes to debating is factual accuracy, and being able to quickly make your point. Which is historically something democrats have struggled with.
Walz i would argue is a good public speaker, maybe not in a formal sense, but again we’re talking about politics here, people like when their politicians are relatable and down to earth, and walz does really well at this. He’s not a scholarly type, but you’d be hard pressed finding anybody on either side of the isle that wants an academic in power. Walz also has significant policy experience through minnesota, which obama has through his presidency. Though it is more prestigious.
Walz is definitely more socially progressive than obama is, but obama is a bit of a weird case. He’s very center left.
