this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2025
874 points (97.7% liked)

politics

20604 readers
4687 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

(page 4) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 16 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (5 children)

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....

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

He's got some things going for him. Male. Presumably heterosexual. Caucasian. Old (but perhaps not quite old enough). I say go for it.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 39 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I’d vote for him, given that we’re still allowed to vote.

[–] finitebanjo 2 points 9 hours ago

I'll vote for him in the generals, I will beg other people to vote for him and I will spread the word on his policies, but I'd never vote for him in a million years in a primary. He's just a republican in a blue tie on certain issues like Palestine.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart 81 points 20 hours ago (50 children)

Oh man I can't wait for right-wing/foreign propaganda to tell progressives what they should hate about Walz.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 19 hours ago (5 children)

And don't forget this from a russian propagandist in 2015 (archived reddit link):

“Once we isolate key people, we look for people we know are in their upstream – people that they read posts from, but who themselves are less influential. We then either start flame wars with bots to derail the conversations that are influencing influential people, or else send off specific tasks for sockpuppets (changing this wording of an idea here; cause an ideological split there; etc).”

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (49 replies)
[–] [email protected] 55 points 19 hours ago (60 children)
load more comments (60 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 16 hours ago (5 children)

Walz was the main reason I voted for a right winger like Kamala anyway.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 15 hours ago (6 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (5 children)

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.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] A_Random_Idiot 9 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Walz/Sanders ticket, please.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 14 hours ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 20 hours ago

He's got the stink of Biden/Harris on him, but he's got four years to wash that off.

Let's see if he does, or if he thinks cozeying up to establishment Dems is the ticket to victory.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›