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.

  • Kcap@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I’m feeling pretty certain the dems will run Buttigieg. Feels like they’ve been prepping him for a while.

  • Kalysta@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    5 hours ago

    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.

      • return2ozma@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        She is a cop. She dropped out in 15th place in the 2020 primary before she was embarrassed in her home state of California. They should have never ran her and that’s why they didn’t do a primary.

        • PolydoreSmith@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          Hey check out this hotshot over here with a long term memory! No, didn’t you hear she ran a perfect campaign they just couldn’t get enough celebrity endorsements…

      • Saleh@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Or she could have not played this game, that she willfully engaged in. Harris is the epitome of a career politician that rose through the ranks by doing what the party elites wanted her to do.

        Once she was announced candidate, she had all the options to go for her own platform and grow a spine, if she has one. Also that is a quality that is crucial in a president, who wants to lead the supposedly most powerful country on earth.

        And this shows, what the DNC wants. They dont want a strong leader. They want a puppet they can control. This is also why they were more than happy to have Biden go for another 4 years, not despite, but because of his declining mental state making him a great puppet.

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          Yeah, they would have blamed all the inflation on our first woman president and used it to denounce women for another half a century. If she helped Israel she would have been called out for Genocide just the same. If she didn’t she would have been called weak and emotional, unfit to be president.

          Really it was a no win situation for her.

    • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Yep. I remember a time when the Beltway insiders were acting like Amy Klobuchar was a rising star or some such, LOL.

  • OccultIconoclast@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    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.

    • yankfreelive@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      23 minutes ago

      Your black woman president actively help sending bombs to kill brown people in gaza. Not to mention all the brown people she fed to the private prison industry.

      As a good liberal, you probably think of brown people as human as long as they’re rich and american

      • OccultIconoclast@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        19 minutes ago

        Are we playing the accuse people of having political views they don’t have game? Okay okay! My turn!

        You’re a posadist. You want to encourage global nuclear war so society will collapse and communist aliens will save us. And I think your ideology is silly and look down on you for following it!

        • yankfreelive@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          16 minutes ago

          Honestly? I wasn’t until last year but seeing yall cheering for genocide I wish the russians bombs new york lmao. Just imagine all the dead yanks

          How does your own medecine feels like, bitch?

          • OccultIconoclast@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            24
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 hours ago

            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.

  • drascus
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Thinking there is going to be a real election in 2028 is the most optimistic thing I’ve heard in a while.

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 hours ago

    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.

  • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I really do think Tim Walz has a real chance. A very likeable guy.

    Doesn’t hurt that he’s white and male, too.

    • admin
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      If only Bernie wasn’t so fucking old. AOC is your time to shine!

  • astutemural@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    192
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    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.

    • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      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 .

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      7 hours ago

      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”.

    • Yoga@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      and exactly what people want to hear

      It’s what people who care about democracy want to hear. That certainly isn’t everyone.

    • Trailblazing Braille Taser@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      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.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        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.

              • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 hour ago

                Again: Democracy is government by the consent of the governed. The system you described made no effort to ensure constituent consent. You described a populist system, not a Democratic one.

                There are many good ways to popularly elect a singular representative. The one you described is one of the better ones, but it is still two wolves and a sheep voting on dinner. It is still populist: the sheep does not consent to a “government” that can put it on a menu.

                A democratic system would be one in which the government lacks the power to put the sheep on that ballot: the minority has no cause to protest.

                There are no good ways to democratically elect a singular representative. As soon as you allow that representative sufficient power that the minority protest, the appointment of that representative over the minority may be populist, but it is not democratic.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      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.

  • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 hours ago

    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.

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      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.

      • AstridWipenaugh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 hours ago

        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.

        • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          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.

    • samus12345@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      There will, but it won’t be a fair one. They have “elections” in Russia, too.

    • earphone843
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      87
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      14 hours ago

      There won’t at the current trajectory. There won’t even be midterms.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        66
        ·
        14 hours ago

        I remember Republicans checking out on elections back in 2018 because they bought hard into the Trump “elections are rigged” propaganda. The GOP lost seven Senate seats that year as conservative turnout plunged.

        I wonder if Democrats will make the same mistake in 2026.

        • unphazed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Shouldn’t be hard. All they have to say is “Remember the townhalls, and how they mocked you while you paid for them to make your lives worse? We’ll put it back.” They don’t even need to add anything, just try to rebuild. Anything would be a positive change when you’re sliding into the negative side of the scale (and in two years, it’ll be far far far to the left)

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          47
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          13 hours ago

          No, I don’t think Democrats are ready to make new mistakes yet. They still won’t abandon their devotion to the old mistakes.

        • BoofStroke
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          10 hours ago

          They made it in 2024. The results of abstaining or protest voting were obvious, and these idiots did it anyway. And here we are.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 hours ago

            The results of abstaining or protest voting were obvious

            Absolutely. The current Dem leadership is now wildly unpopular and vulnerable to primary. Just like after 2016, the seeds have been planted for a big anti-incumbent wave.

        • Ech@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          13 hours ago

          Not sure about rigged, but honestly, depending on how the next few years go, it may be straight up dangerous for non-republican Americans to vote. While that’s by no means a certainty, people should keep an eye on any electoral changes made in their state.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            23
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            13 hours ago

            If Republicans experience a route like they suffered in 2018, it will likely be due to the mushy indie republican-when-its-convenient voters breaking ranks in droves, just like they did in prior Dem wave years. That’s what Harris was banking on in 2024 when she paraded around her pet RINOs Liz Cheney and Jeff Flake. She just failed to understand that these wishy-washy voters are chasing less war and less disruption and more protectionist economics, something Trump was able to dangle over their heads (twice!) to win the GOP primary / national election.

            Republicans don’t really seem to get it, either. Which is why they think the midterm after a wave year is the perfect time to put Grade A psychos all over the down-ballots and end up losing statewide in Alabama of all places as a result.

            The “we won’t be having any more elections” crowd is heavily invested in a theory that Republicans can get their own base to sit down, shut up, and follow orders. But the last eight years of Trump should be an indication of the exact opposite. The party is being lead by the base, which means the prior generation’s power brokers like the Bushs and Cheneys and Bloombergs no longer have a place in it.

            • Laereht@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              13 hours ago

              This line of thinking has preserved whatever is left of my optimism. Let us hope my fellow Americans continue to function predictably.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 hours ago

          I wonder if Democrats will make the same mistake in 2026.

          i really, really fucking hope this doesnt happen, i’m going to fucking lose my shit if it does. Because unless things change, it’s not looking great for the trump midterms right now.

        • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Democrats will make the same mistake in 2026.

          The only thing the Democrats failed at was fielding a fat old white male felon narcissist serial rapist with ties to a foreign nation-state. If they can just do that they’ll win no matter what.

          Sorry if you didn’t get a personal hug from America’s Mom and Dad but yoire kinda expected to make a value judgement between two options and choose the best. As a group, you did not.

          Only blame Dems who voted for a kleptocratic felon. The rest did their best to field the best candidate they could and lost to a traitor – and those guys need to start with our apology for being stupid, same as all of Ukraine, and next Moldova.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            12 hours ago

            The only thing the Democrats failed at was fielding a fat old white male felon narcissist serial rapist with ties to a foreign nation-state.

            Is that why Obama lost in 2008?

      • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Look, guys. I’m rather concerned that the states that haven’t seceded by then won’t even have electricity anymore.

    • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 hours ago

      The one thing we have going for us is that Don’s dementia and age are going to increasingly make it difficult for him to hold his party together. And there is the chance one of those things will leave the GOP trying to field a new traitor to try and get the cult to consolidate around.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        once he kicks the bucket, assuming they can’t find someone the republican base will support as fervently as trump, the entire party is done for, it will collapse into a blackhole of nothingness.

    • rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      14 hours ago

      There will absolutely be an election.

      It will be a farce, a Russian election where there’s only one possibility to win.

      If we’re not pitchforks in the street before then, I don’t hold much hope

      • Hubi@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Or maybe a Hungary-style election where the entire media landscape shills for the ruling class and people on social media are bombarded with misinformation and one-sided reporting.

    • Jolly Platypus@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      There will be since elections are held at the state level. Many won’t be free or fair in the red states, but they’ll be good in the blue states.

      If red states don’t hold elections, that’s fewer electoral college votes we need to win the presidency and we wouldn’t win in red states anyway.

      Please, Texas and Florida. Oh, please, don’t hold elections. 🙏

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        The way I read it, electoral college votes are the one thing where individual states can somewhat easily cancel elections for President, as long as they do so before the election. States have broad discretion over the appointment of electors. All states currently appoint them based on the results of elections, but the rules around that are all set by State legislation, and can be reset by States as well. The only Federal requirement is that the rules don’t change after any election is held.

        Prior Supreme Courts have ruled that things like the Equal Protection clause may be used to challenge any act where the legislature restricts voting rights once they have been granted. But who knows what this clown Court would make of that.

        Congressional elections, on the other hand, must be held in order for those seats to be filled. So any state that unilaterally cancels elections across the board will be sending nobody to Congress (and likely any expired Senate terms as well). Some states may go the extra mile and cancel the election for President, but not for Congress. We’ll see how that turns out.

    • Dogsoftulkas@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Nah, there probably will. Whoever is taking control of the US really don’t care about MAGA’s and 3rd terms. They’ll just put another puppet there, the new way of doing things in post-capitalism still maintains and some people will continue to get increasingly very rich doesn’t matter who the prez is. We finally reached “the future”.

    • tyrant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 hours ago

      There will definitely be an attempt to eliminate or “postpone” them. I’m certain Trump is looking at Putin in power and other governments in a state of war without elections as inspiration.

  • gravitas_deficiency
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Fuckin should have been the nominee in the first place - him or Sanders.

    • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Not sure of moderates are ok with Sanders. The center and right will keep calling Sanders a socialist and communist.

      • gravitas_deficiency
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Who fucking cares? The moderates who were supposed to swoop in and save Kamala pointedly didn’t. Catering towards a fictional segment of the electorate is (demonstrably) a recipe for failure.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          9 hours ago

          The moderates who were supposed to swoop in and save Kamala pointedly didn’t.

          kamala had 75 million votes, to the 77 million that trump got.

          If anybody fucked up the election it was the hardline commies or super aggressive left leaning people that refused to vote for kamala because of whatever silly reason they had.

          IDK why people on the internet are willingly this fucking stupid. Evidently looking at the biden results, there were about 7-8 million more votes than kamala received, which is considerably more inline with what you would expect had younger voters actually, well, voted.

          You would literally need to be on fucking crack to take anything else away from the results of these recent elections. IF ANYTHING, the obvious answer is that the younger voting block NEEDS to go and vote, because historically, they don’t.

          TL;DR if you didn’t already pick this up from basic civics knowledge, the vast majority of the voterbase is going to vote for “whoever is on the ticket this time” that’s why trump even gets traction at all, maybe 10-20% of his voter base actually cares about him in any substantive manner. It’s the same for the dems, 75% of the base is people who will vote for WHOEVER gets put on the primary ticket, some of those are going to be more moderate though, and if you run someone like bernie, they will pull out or switch support, which is one of the risks you take when running a more hardline candidate.

          Trump was just able to viciously mobilize his segment of the population against the republican voter base (who are historically known to behave like this)

          We do not have this advantage on the dem side, we literally have to mobilize the youth, that’s the ONE thing that can save us.

            • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 hours ago

              yeah, primarily because you can’t vote by mail in the 2024 election, where as you could in the 2020 election, enfranchising more people to go out and vote, and historically, it’s not republicans that struggle to vote, it’s the democrats.

              • unphazed@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 hours ago

                I still think it was voters showing their protest against the Israeli Genocide. I mean, I voted for Harris, but ffuuuuuuckk, all she had to do was say she’d at least try to find another way other than selling weapons.

                • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 hours ago

                  i’m not really convinced it was a significant enough margin to outpace the usual no show voter rolls. Historically we’ve had issues with turnout, and when it gets easier, more people vote, when it gets harder less people vote. I really don’t think something that seems to really explicitly mobilize people under the age of 25 and above the age of 18 would be a very significant voter block to begin with. There’s probably more people in there, but you’re talking about people who are ethnically arab, and i wouldn’t necessarily count those as those are going to be opposed to pretty much anything you do in the middle east regarding israel.

                  Someone would have to do some actual polling or research to find out whether or not it had a significant effect, but i’m betting it wasn’t. It probably had something to do with it, but literally every campaign has these 1% base issues, it’s literally unavoidable.

          • Yeather@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            8 hours ago

            If everyone voted mainline Trump still would have won the election. Greens got 860000, while the Libertarians got 650000 and RFK got 750000.

        • Nalivai@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Well, your supposedly existing leftists didn’t achieve even that. I don’t remember where I heard it, but the saying gows something like “Catering towards a fictional segment of the electorate is (demonstrably) a recipe for failure.”

          • gravitas_deficiency
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 hours ago

            Probably because Harris and Biden succeeded in alienating a group that SHOULD have been a slam dunk for them: Arab-Americans.

            And also, they listened to their consultants instead of, you know, normal people. They were too busy jacking themselves off about how “great” the economy was to notice that MOST people in the country are straight up not having a good time.

            The Arab-American vote was crucial in Michigan, and they threw that away. And frankly, I’d argue that they alienated a lot more moderate voters by INSISTING the economy was better (failing to realize economy != people’s actual lives) and staunchly defending the status quo on that front.

            • Yeather@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              8 hours ago

              Ah yes, Arab-Americans, known for their tolerance and feminist ideals, did not turn out for the woman preaching tolerance for all and love for Israel.

              To capture a more left leaning audience you are going to have to abandon this notion notoriously conservative and backwards cultures will suddenly be progressive and accepting.

              • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                8 hours ago

                “Have you considered that the people we’re genociding might be kinda problematic?”

                • Yeather@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  7 hours ago

                  It’s true, why should we try to support a group that fundamentally disagrees and hates a large part of the base? There’s no salvaging such disagreements.

      • h4x0r@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago
        Left                    Sanders                   Republican reich (rnc)
        
        +-----------------------+---------+--------------+
        
                                          Republican lite (dnc)