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.

  • unrealizedrealities@kbin.melroy.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    15 hours ago

    you’re right, we didin’t want hillary, the cabal wanted her, we wanted bernie, the cabal wanted harris, we wanted dean, the cabal said his whoop was too much…don’t be this naive dan

    • grumps@lemmy.i.secretponi.es
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      There was a primary. Bernie didn’t win the primary. The numbers were not there in any supportable way. Bernie had a nice lead in the beginning with early states like, I dunno, Vermont, but he didn’t pull in the votes.

      Stop spreading disinformation.

        • PunnyName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          While I understand your frustration, you could always try to get your state to primary as soon as Iowa. By canvassing and working within the local election system.

          Oh, and fight for ranked choice voting, too.

    • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      15 hours ago

      We also didn’t want Hilary and got Obama. The cabal isn’t all powerful.

      • djsoren19@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        14 hours ago

        They weren’t all powerful. I’d highly recommend reading up on how the Clintons captured the DNC after Obama. They very clearly did not want him, and made sure that something like him couldn’t happen again.

        • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          13 hours ago

          If the DNC was that powerful Bernie wouldn’t have won any states. And it’s not like we’re seeing polling (even progressively aligned polling) with 65% for Bernie and then somehow getting Biden. He was in the 30-40% range the whole time and then got 30-40% of the vote.

          The DNC will tilt the scales in favor of the centrist establishment, but they don’t dictate the result and saying they do is just a recipe for progressives to give up and check out rather than stay in the fight.

          • grumps@lemmy.i.secretponi.es
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            if the DNC was the powerful Bernie wouldn’t have won any states.

            Exactly. If you go back to my original comment, all I said is that AOC needs to run if she wants to run. There’s no one picking the people who are on the ballot. If that were the case, the DNC would have blocked Bernie and Williamson. But they didn’t.

            People run for office, at all levels. No one is deciding to “run candidates” like we’re choosing race horses to field for the day.

            they don’t dictate the result and saying they do is just a recipe for progressives to give up and check out rather than stay in the fight.

            Something keeps telling me that this is the goal of all the DNC Boogeyman talk.

          • crusa187@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            14 hours ago

            Policy-wise, I don’t think there’s much difference there. We didn’t get to see with Hillary in office though, but I suspect things would have been run much the same way, by almost all the same people, had she won.

            • rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              14 hours ago

              One difference, germane to the topic and not related to anyone’s skin color, is that the people actually wanted Obama.

              • crusa187@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                14 hours ago

                I’m not so sure about that. I think they wanted the promised “hope and change,” and thought maybe this time the candidate would deliver. Spoiler alert - there were other priorities.

                • rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  14 hours ago

                  You’re not sure that the people chose Obama over Clinton in 2008? I’m sorry you’re not sure about that, when did you arrive here (Earth, I mean)?

                  • crusa187@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    14 hours ago

                    Not what I’m saying. I think people voted for Obama’s platform and marketing. At the time he was a relatively unknown political figure, which amplified the possibility of change. Which, again, was not delivered upon.