‘If the circumstances are right, in 2028...I’ll do it,’ the former Democrat VP hopeful said

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.

  • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
    162·
    19 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
      29·
      19 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
        112·
        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.