582
Tim Walz says he and Harris were too ‘safe’ during 2024 presidential campaign
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2025
582 points (97.4% liked)
politics
21283 readers
4229 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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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. 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
One problem the DNC has is that they keep throwing boring ass lawyers into a game that isn't about law. It's about being a face the country knows to run the government.
You need charisma, you need to appeal to people, and you need to be human. Obama did this perfectly. Bill Clinton had it in him. Biden at least had such a long record in politics he could wing it his first term. I don't know how he managed to win, but he did.
Clinton, while being a lawyer, had already been the governor of Arkansas. Meaning he had the experience being that executive. He could convince people to work beyond their own interests. Al Gore, we all know, won the 2000 presidential election, but the supreme court let everything get fucked up.
Kerry? Never stood a chance. Hilary? No chance. Kamala? As much as we needed her to win, she was unappealing to stupid people.
Lawyers, by nature of their career, have to read and understand the most boring ass shit and then convince others that the boring ass text supports their side of the case. That means a lot of them are boring people.
You wanna know why Walz is popular? He fucking loves football. He can connect to highschool students. IDK about you, but if you've ever met high schoolers, they aren't the brightest, and bored easily. He's progressive, but he won't shove it in someone's face to be more righteous. Not many people can do that.
To win an election, you have to excite people. Trump, despite his rhetoric clearly being terrifying, was, unfortunately, exciting.
I mean, I agree with you, but this is also a huge problem. This is why you have someone who pretended to be a successful businessman on TV as a president now. I really miss the days when boring but competent people could run a country.
It's far easier to have a better candidate than change how 80 million people think.
Is this a problem of how people think, or is it a problem of what sells views in newspapers (and that media companies are too rich)?
Boring yet competent people don't get elected in a country with mass media. They just don't get coverage, so people don't know they're there.
As example, look at the first televised presidential debate between Kennedy and Nixon. Kennedy was young and inexperienced, but let them put makeup on him for the debate. Nixon had more experience but looked like a sweaty mess on TV. This helped Kennedy a lot.
Obama covered both lawyer and entertaining. He also had an appeal similar to Reagan, confident and comforting during uncertain times. The conservative media made politics entertaining, now we have entertainers as politicians and I can't get on board with that
It's not something we are going to change anytime soon. Far too many people to change to counter that.
Instead, we need candidates like Walz, who have a brain on their shoulders, and have a way to excite outside of putting on a show.
Bernie Sanders was another example of it. AoC is as well.
Biden won because he wasn't trump. Simple as that.
its way more simple than this, america is not ready to elect a woman--let alone a brown woman, to lead the country.
she was up against a felon, who vowed to ban an entire religion his first go. it should have been a layup but our citizenry is full of sexists. the amount of failures trump has is insurmountable. but no. cant have a woman leading. 'too emotional.'
This is a cope from DNC since Hillary. Americans are more accepting than they are actually given credit for. Many Republican voters actually even appreciate Alexandria Ocasio Cortez's anti-oligarchy run she is doing at the moment.
As an outsider looking at American politics, Harris and the DNC just isn't willing to actually get to the bones of what actually matters more for Americans. Harris' election promises aren't appealing in the face of growing inequality as people can't afford medical bills, student loans, and are living pay check to pay check. The DNC and its centrist/blue MAGA supporters still read 2000s pre-recession surveys when Medicare for all, affordable housing and abolition of student fees and debts were unpopular. Fact of the matter is, those policies are now accepted and popular for years as the middle class has shrunk by the years since the 2009 recession. The DNC and its supporters simply deliberately ignore it.
our first half white president was called our first black president. this country has deeply moronic citizenry. I would call it a cope that its the DNC's fault for not 'exciting them enough' to elect a literal rapist over a woman.
its not as complicated as you think.
Obama had solid policies and in touch with everyday folks. Obama has charisma and implemented needed reforms acceptable for the time. Both Harris and Clinton are seen as part of the establishment with weak policies.
I would have voted for Harris if I am an American simply because he is not Trump, but one has to admit that Harris' policies had been weak. She also did not have a coherent message, simply because she was a last minute replacement for Biden. She was simply mirroring Biden. That said, Harris ran on the platform of status quo while Americans have been looking for change.
he also had a penis! something both hillarry and kamala were lacking.
but oh gee whiz so weird how suddenly charismatic and normal DNC is to blame to losing to a felon rapist. how did that happen such a mystery
If you are not getting what I am getting at...
*insert Principal Skinner musing meme...
DNC: Am I not running on popular economic policies that would help alleviate the woes of young people deep in student debt; families living pay check to pay check; people saddled with hospital bills, and that's why we lost?
No, the electorate is misogynist. Latino and black voters are race traitors for voting Trump. And the white working class in Rust belt are hillbilly hicks who don't know what is better. And now let me look at my stocks if following Nancy Pelosi's portfolio is the right decision.
the dnc has never run on that. not in a long time. they are moderates, literally almost conservative.
this is known.
it was because it was a woman. I repeat. america is too immature to be lead by a woman.
Yes I noticed. you just wrote essentially the same comment 5 times.
This is pretty much all true. Except for...
The DNC wasn't making the decisions. The Harris campaign was.
Somewhat true. But Hillary could have won if she had simply mixed in a few bearded Biker types in the background crowd as prominently as all the Muslim women. But these candidates were the mistakes of the voters, not the DNC.
I change the channel whenever Traitorapist Trump talks so that he never gets a full sentence out. Still do. I don't want to hear one more lie.
But you and I aren't the person Trump is trying to excite.
It's the 25% of Americans that equate critical thought with torture. That is the chunk of people you can't reason with. So you have to have a way for them to care at all. Unloading garbage nonsense that has the occasional inflammatory rhetoric is exciting.
Talking about football? Not exciting to me, but these 25% of Americans? You better bet your ass they like it. They like beer and they like the idea of not having to worry about finances as well.
Oh I agree that the #1 problem is that Harris needed to use way more aggressive rhetoric against Traitorapist Trump.