this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2025
619 points (97.5% liked)

politics

21141 readers
4057 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 has criticized the Harris-Walz 2024 presidential campaign for playing it too "safe," saying they should have held more in-person events and town halls.

In a Politico interview, Walz—known for labeling Trump and Vance as "weird"—blamed their cautious approach partly on the abbreviated 107-day campaign timeline after Harris became the nominee in August.

Using football terminology, he said Democrats were in a "prevent defense" when "we never had anything to lose, because I don't think we were ever ahead."

While acknowledging his share of responsibility for the loss, Walz is returning to the national spotlight and didn't rule out a 2028 presidential run, saying, "I'm not saying no."

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 2 points 16 minutes ago* (last edited 16 minutes ago)

My opinion on this matter is going to be unpopular one but here goes: I firmly believe that Left wing and Democrats failed in these elections because of Transgender push in Social Media / Movies / Series / Ads and basically everywhere it was forced down the throat of people that just got fed up. Republicans and MAGA capitalized on this HEAVILY and successfuly leveraged this issue to the extreme for their benefit.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 hour ago (3 children)

yeah that’s one way to put it.

2024 was not an election to play it safe or take the high road, yet every chance the DNC collectively got, they did just that.

They should have slung mud and gotten nasty.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 32 minutes ago

Not even nasty, just play ads of Fatputin spewing his idiotic/fascist nonsense non-stop, that would do it. There's practically a never ending well of content from the last decade they could have used to make some truly devastating ad (grab 'em by the pussy, on a loop??), and how about going back and talking about his 1st term that ended in a year so bad it was a running joke? Nah, let's talk about joy and leave it at some vague notion of this guy sucks, but not going into why. A coup attempt? Meh, we'll show a clip of J6, but not bother mentioning it was a fucking coup attempt. Twice impeached convicted felon? Meh, let's just leave it at some vague "not going back" slogan. Fucking malpractice. Again. Dems are either breathtakingly incompetent, or in cahoots.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 minutes ago

Shorter sentences, bolder statements, hell, they needed to say things that didn't entirely make sense when you analyzed them, but sounded cool. Political campaigns clearly need to be more approachable, more relatable than what the Dems are doing. Look at AOC, Bernie, and JC, THAT is the messaging that resonates.

Also, way more calls to action. What are YOU doing and what should I do? And stop asking me for damn money - you can invoice me when the work is complete.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 24 minutes ago

They should have been doing that for 40 fucking years.

[–] [email protected] 80 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

If by safe you mean ignoring your constituents and only listening to your wealthy contemporaries. Then yes you were too safe.

[–] [email protected] 51 points 13 hours ago

If you read the article, that's EXACTLY what he means. They told him the reason for this is that they could avoid "Having any public gaffees"

The idea is that by just not being Trump they were "Ahead", and any public misstep would put Trump in the lead.

Walz now believes he and Harris were "never ahead" and it was arrogance that lead to them thinking they were the "Default Choice" for America

[–] [email protected] 8 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)

Democrat politicians should level with you all. Politicians need a tremendous amount of money to stay viable. They can only answer you their donors and they get donors only if they can accomplish their goals which they do with the support of their constituents. They don't just support their constituents out of feel good stuff. Republicans give them a free pass to do whatever they want. So they get lots of donors. The left groups do not do they don't get donors. We're fucked.

Look into how many call centers are around Washington. They're all call centers for the different politicians. They're calling donors 24/7 trying to get more funding. All the time. The Reason leftist do not get anywhere, we don't generate money

[–] [email protected] 2 points 12 minutes ago

Leftists don't generate money on the top line. The fact that actual leftist policy would create a utopian society where everyone is prosperous is completely an afterthought, and that's because the economic system is run by a bunch of giant babies with zero impulse control or sense of delayed gratification.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 hours ago

Look into how many call centers are around Washington. They’re all call centers for the different politicians. They’re calling donors 24/7 trying to get more funding. All the time. The Reason leftist do not get anywhere, we don’t generate money

Well yeah, most of them refuse to take corporate money and SuperPAC donations. They don't do insider trading when in office because they have consistent morals and ethics.

Also helps when they corporations who own the media refuse to cover you and your wins, and then pay for the milquetoast candidates who won't tax them to win more.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

The DNC is pretty much always playing it too safe....

[–] [email protected] 39 points 14 hours ago (4 children)

People really need to accept that the Democratic Party is the conservative party in the US. The Republican Party is the nationalist, authoritarian party. The US does not have a major progressive party.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

No shit. I didn't feel like I was voting for progressives. It left like I was voting for "not Trump." You could have put a piece of corn-bread at the podium and I would have voted for it instead of Trump. But still. I didn't vote for them because I just loved what they had to say... Because they weren't for changing anything. They wanted to keep the status quo where it was. They were only listening to their wealthy donors. It was sad to watch.

[–] skittle07crusher 14 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

What an absolute fucking champ-

While acknowledging his share of responsibility for the loss, Walz is returning to the national spotlight and didn't rule out a 2028 presidential run, saying, "I'm not saying no."

Both of those things are such music to my ears (although ofc we should all know that it was Harris’s brother-in-law Uber exec lawyer who muzzled Walz and deserves that blame that Walz is selflessly taking on here).

Sadly I’m not even sure the US will exist by 2028.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 34 minutes ago

pritzker with a walz vp would be my ideal ticket.

Pritzker stands his ground, knows what to say, and won't just bow down to the establishment of republicans OR the dem establishment. I think he's the best pick. He's also great with budget, lgbtq rights, and common sense policies

[–] [email protected] 31 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I agree, Walz, start being unsafe. Show us what we want to see in a candidate.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 16 hours ago

Or, ya know, actually BE what we what in a candidate.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

IMO the problem is, they falsely assume everyone wants what the republicans are selling, and their biggest flaw is that they are pollarizing. That's why they always start introducing as much republican lite things into their policies.

They don't understand, that by doing that, they are effectively telling the american people that the republicans are right. IE say the republican party on immigration etc... is lock em up in the fastest way, forget about humanity and ship them out as fast as possible, fuck due process these people are dangerous and destroying everything.

Democrats: Well I can back you on making sure we get them out as soon as we can, but I think we can do it without human rights violations.

They don't realize... that effectively to the outside observer going off of both of those policies they are hearing "both parties agree these people are dangerous and ruining everything, one wants to get rid of them as fast as possible, the other wants to prioritize us not hurting them over preventing them from harming us".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 minutes ago* (last edited 4 minutes ago)

Exactly this. The whole "both sides" thing is because they care so much about optics that they refuse to actually take a stand on anything. Nobody wants to vote for a wet dishrag. It sucks out here, and has for a while. We want actual change, and they think their shitty numbers cycle after cycle are because they didn't push the Republican lite status quo agenda enough, when the real reason is that they pushed it at all.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe they should have held primaries and let Americans choose who they wanted to be for the Democratic candidate. Harris was never going to win no matter how she campaigned.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 45 points 18 hours ago (8 children)

If they had focused their campaign on helping the middle class, helping the poor, and acknowledged that Palestinians are people too, they would have a chance.

If they focused on environmental issues and the rights of individuals they would have had a chance.

If they had called Trump a criminal, because he is, at every stop, they would have had a chance.

If they did all of those things, and meant it, they would have won!

Instead they tried to appeal to business owners, Republicans who don't like Trump, and people with money. That's not what Democrats want. That's not who Democrats are. That, is why they lost.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 13 hours ago

That’s not who Democrats are.

unfortunately, yes, it is

[–] [email protected] 9 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

If they had focused their campaign on helping the middle class

I agree with most of that except this. They basically ONLY focused on the middle class. All the tax break incentives were great. But they never offered a damn thing for the working class. And that's who they SHOULD have focused on.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 47 minutes ago

No Dem has helped the Middle class the entire time I've been alive. There was no one on the ballot who was going to make my life better. I couldn't even get Dem representatives to reply beyond a canned message about "hard times". I've never seen such a disconnect from the Dem party. They're not even trying. I bet they're excited for fascism so they don't have to pretend to care about us.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 54 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

if he'd stuck to calling them weird and attacking them, maybe it wouldn't have been useless. but they dropped that, tried to buddy up with the fascists, and brought on insane endorsements like fucking liz cheney.

if they'd run sanders/walz, even late after biden convinced even party leadership that he couldn't win, they would have crushed that shit with historic numbers.

if they had let a palestinian talk, or given the most mild 'please tone down the genocide shit' they might've had a chance.

it was like they were trying to lose at every step. truly snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

[–] [email protected] 79 points 21 hours ago (12 children)

One problem the DNC has is that they keep throwing boring ass lawyers into a game that isn't about law. It's about being a face the country knows to run the government.

You need charisma, you need to appeal to people, and you need to be human. Obama did this perfectly. Bill Clinton had it in him. Biden at least had such a long record in politics he could wing it his first term. I don't know how he managed to win, but he did.

Clinton, while being a lawyer, had already been the governor of Arkansas. Meaning he had the experience being that executive. He could convince people to work beyond their own interests. Al Gore, we all know, won the 2000 presidential election, but the supreme court let everything get fucked up.

Kerry? Never stood a chance. Hilary? No chance. Kamala? As much as we needed her to win, she was unappealing to stupid people.

Lawyers, by nature of their career, have to read and understand the most boring ass shit and then convince others that the boring ass text supports their side of the case. That means a lot of them are boring people.

You wanna know why Walz is popular? He fucking loves football. He can connect to highschool students. IDK about you, but if you've ever met high schoolers, they aren't the brightest, and bored easily. He's progressive, but he won't shove it in someone's face to be more righteous. Not many people can do that.

To win an election, you have to excite people. Trump, despite his rhetoric clearly being terrifying, was, unfortunately, exciting.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Part of the problem was not saying the word Fascist enough

[–] [email protected] 1 points 23 minutes ago

Well I do declare, that would just be uncouth and rude, let's instead keep saying we want to work across the aisle with the fascists, people love that shit! Right? RIGHT?? Oh....

[–] [email protected] 6 points 13 hours ago

They should have stuck with the "they're weird". And they definitely shouldn't have tried courting Republican voters. All that yielded was pushing away Dem voters and Republican voters aren't going to vote for Dems, they will just not show up for Trump. They shouldn't have constantly called them a danger and threat because we've been saying that for years, and at some point people stop listening. Instead, they should have leaned into the "they're weird" and the weird things they want to do. Making them sound like an existential threat, even if they are, just sounds like someone yelling the sky is falling, and people ignore it. But we've already seen how they can't handle being mocked. So mock them. Belittle them, make them out to be the buffoons they are.

[–] [email protected] 166 points 1 day ago (18 children)

And the Dems are, mostly, still too safe. They need to start fighting while they still have a chance of stopping the insanity.

Step 1: Schumer needs to step down.

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] [email protected] 93 points 22 hours ago (14 children)

They were too far right. They pursued the "moderate republican" vote and lost spectacularly.

It is a politically suicidal idea. But they just can't stop themselves. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory is what they do best.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 129 points 1 day ago (14 children)

The old guard (both literal and figurative) need to get the fuck out of the way for the AOC's and Crockett's who will actually speak to power instead of cowering in the corners.

The other big problem is that politics have become such a negative impact on people's lives in the US that regular people don't want to run for office anymore, which is what we really need.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 14 hours ago

They should have leaned left harder instead of engaging in a futile attempt to sway conservatives.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Putting Liz Cheney on stage was a pretty risky move if you ask me.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›