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.

  • Dadd Volante@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    22
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Muricans won’t show up to elect a woman as president and y’all need to figure this out.

    I love AOC but if she ran as president you’re gonna see exactly what happened the last two times a woman ran.

    Gotta be realistic. It’s a shitty reality but it is the reality we live in.

    Walz is a good candidate with a history of helping his citizens. AOC is a firecracker for sure, but the public isn’t going to elect a woman of color. They just aren’t.

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      That’s what they said about black men until one ran as a progressive and won twice by sizable margins. Perhaps it’s not the race / gender that’s the biggest hindrance but the policies.

      • Dadd Volante@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        16 hours ago

        That was a VERY different time. We didn’t have these little screens programming our social views.

        I’ve said it in other replies that I hope I’m wrong, but we’ve been backsliding for some time, now.

        Kinda like how we saw a lot of white civil rights supporters in the 60s go flying to the right.

        We’ve been here before.

        • krashmo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          I don’t want to hear any of this nonsense until a progressive loses a general election. Until then, all you’re doing is repeating the talking points neoliberals need people to believe in order to keep trying the same bullshit over and over.

    • hddsx@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Clinton was old guard. Harris was more or less trying to be a continuance of the same damn thing. I’d like AOC to at least be on the primary ballot.

      • Dadd Volante@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        19 hours ago

        I would too. I like her. A lot.

        I just don’t think she would have as good a chance as we all wish she could.

        Make no mistake, I would LOVE to be wrong here, I would love to think the Murican people have evolved enough to realize that a woman in charge would probably be in our best interest, I just don’t see it happening. At least not in 2028

        • hddsx@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          17 hours ago

          I give exactly zero fucks that she’s a woman. I don’t think a woman in charge would be in our best interest. I don’t think a man in charge would be in our best interest.

          We need a leader who has the actual ability to evaluate the system, figure out what’s broken with EVIDENCE, and can articulate it.

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Called this. “Harris lost because she’s a woman of color” was always a preemptive excuse for shutting out AOC.

      The party is holding back women in order to hamstring one person, and it’s gross.

      • Dadd Volante@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        15 hours ago

        It wasn’t the singular reason she lost.

        There were many.

        But it IS a factor, an ugly one but one people seriously need to come to terms with.

        But apparently I hate AOC for pointing this out

    • crusa187@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Harris and Clinton are both hardcore establishment neolibs. Clinton had Epstein murdered in his cell to cover the rampant sex trafficking crimes of the elites, and Harris campaigned with the Cheneys and thought it was smart politics. It’s not their gender that turned people off, voters just didn’t want to show up for another corporate robot. AOC could be remarkably different here.

      • Bob Robertson IX @discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Clinton had Epstein murdered in his cell to cover

        And how did she do that when his murder happened in a federal prison when trump was president, and the Department of Justice was run by William Barr?

        • crusa187@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          18 hours ago

          I dunno, called Trump and asked? He was a regular client too after all.

          • Bob Robertson IX @discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Even if those two had that kind of relationship where he would do her a favor, if he was also ‘a client’ of Epstein’s, why would Clinton need to ask trump to do something that he already wants to do?

            • crusa187@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              17 hours ago

              I assure you Trump considers Hillary one of “his own” much more so than any maga hat wearing rube.

              Anyway, this could all be cleared up if the radically transparent Trump admin would release the missing footage from inside the prison that night, and also all the remaining evidence on Epstein beyond flight logs we already knew of in ‘22. I’m sure they will do that approximately never.

      • Dadd Volante@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        19 hours ago

        If you think gender had nothing to do with it I’ve got some baaaaaad news for you, my friend.

        Also, saying Hilary had Epstein murdered in his cell is a magnificent stretch, since there are literally hundreds of scenarios that could have led to his death. An unsubstantiated conspiracy theory didn’t hurt Hilary’s campaign, especially since Epstein was still alive at that point.

        Are Americans tired of corporate shills? Certainly. Do we still have a severe misogyny problem? Most definitely. To say otherwise is just silly.

        • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          18 hours ago

          Three of the seven swing states Harris lost elected female senators. This is just a bullshit excuse to excuse Harris’s shitty campaign, because “the Democratic party can never fail, it can only be failed”

          • Dadd Volante@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            18 hours ago

            Don’t put words in my mouth. Stand on your own, and don’t tell me what my motivations are concerning why I draw my conclusions unless you have evidence to back it up

            Harris ran an extremely imperfect campaign, I fucking hate the fact that the Democrats are the only other option we have, and a senator is a LONG way off from the leader of the country.

            Huge. Fucking. Difference.

            • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              18 hours ago

              and a senator is a LONG way off from the leader of the country.

              I love how this insanity is always what y’all turn to when confronted with direct evidence that you’re wrong. The guy who determines who to vote for exclusively based on gender, but only with the presidency, and is perfectly fine with evaluating women fairly in all other top government positions.

              It’s just a way to arbitrarily limit the dataset to like two points in order to draw whatever conclusion you want from it. It’s difficult to imagine any possible world in which we have stronger evidence that Harris did not lose because of sexism than the one we live in.

              But I understand that, as I said, it’s not about reason but fulfilling a psychological and rhetorical need. You’re not fooling me with this, “Actually, I’m super critical of Harris” in one breath and “she’s 100% my ideal pick” in another, it’s just a motte and bailey.

        • crusa187@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          19 hours ago

          I honestly don’t think it’s gender bias, just that they didn’t represent a change from the status quo which is essential in almost every presidential election. Could be wrong though, certainly a lot of shitheels crawling out of the woodwork these days.

          • Dadd Volante@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            edit-2
            19 hours ago

            She’s smart, capable, (imo) gorgeous and aggressive in her outlooks. This is threatening to a LOT of men and women alike in our society.

            As much as many hate to admit, misogyny is a problem in both left and right wing circles.

            Let me make this clear, she would 100% be my optimal choice for a presidential pick. I honestly believe she would be the best person for the job.

            I’m also unfortunately keenly aware of how far we have to go when it comes to overcoming the severely deep rooted hatred of women a lot of our citizens (on both spectrums) have.

            It sucks. Hard. But it IS a very real hurdle.

    • Mog_fanatic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      18 hours ago

      I don’t think it will happen because

      A) she’s a woman and they’ve tried that twice already

      And more importantly B) she has said many times she doesn’t agree with a lot of the democratic party’s policies. She has beliefs that would undoubtedly vibe with a ton of voters but there’s been a very obvious pattern of both parties only primary-ing “fly right” candidates.

      I think Bernie scared the crap out of them and they don’t want a repeat of that. Heaven forbid we get a candidate actually for the people!