981
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by willsenior@lemm.ee to c/politics@lemmy.world
  • His disclosures, both from his final year in Congress and his time as Minnesota governor, also show no mutual funds, bonds, private equities, or other securities.
  • No book deals or speaking fees or crypto or racehorse interests.
  • Not even real estate. The couple sold their Mankato, Minnesota, home after moving into the governor's mansion, for below the $315k asking price).
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Fosheze@lemmy.world 123 points 3 months ago

Everybody in MN has been saying Walz needs to run for president for years now. But, being a relatively unknown guy from a flyover state it was kind of a pipe dream. I'm hoping now that everyone is seeing him, getting to know him, and obviously loving him that he'll get his chance in 4 years to run for actual president.

[-] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 53 points 3 months ago

Give Harris two terms to cook, but I otherwise I'm on board. The guy seems awesome.

[-] Fosheze@lemmy.world 54 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

By that time he'll be 69. I know that's not unpresidented ~(fully intended)~ but I'd still rather see him as president before he's fully geriatric.

[-] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 23 points 3 months ago

Hopefully she'll win. When she does, it's highly likely it'll be for 8.

[-] Moneo@lemmy.world 21 points 3 months ago

If Dems win the I feel like Republicans are gonna have a period of recalibration as they move away from maga politics.

One can hope at least.

[-] ripcord@lemmy.world 18 points 3 months ago

I figured so when they lost in 2008, but they doubled (quadrupled) down on the party shit and stuff in 2016 and won.

I have absolutely no expectations they'll start getting introspective and sane.

Which is a shame, having a sane, working-in-good-faith opposition party is - generally - a very good thing.

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

2008 they ran their most honest, honorable, and classy candidate in modern history. And he lost.

So they stopped trying to be honest, honorable, and classy.

[-] ripcord@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

He lost partly because they added the stupid tea party candidate to the ticket.

Plus Obama was a goddamn phenomenon at the time.

You're right, but still.

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Oh yeah. Between Bush fatigue and Obama there was no Republican who could have win that election.

Part of me is sad we never had a McCain presidency. I didn't love his politics, but if he'd beaten Bush in the 2000 primaries I think we'd be living in a much better world.

[-] ripcord@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Yeah, I didn't agree with McCain on a lot but I at least RESPECTED the guy. He seemed to genuinely want to do the right thing. And behaved like, you know, a grown-up.

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

I will always respect him for saving the ACA. He fought tooth and nail to keep it from being passed, but when he saw the damage that killing it would do he stood up against Trump and the rest of the party and cast the deciding vote to prevent its repeal.

[-] Xanis@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago

As WE force them away from MAGA politics. Make no mistake, in a few months we'll have more work to do. POTUS is the first step.

[-] barsquid@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

They'll have a period of recalibration where they do yet more terrorist attacks on the capitol.

[-] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 months ago

Given how Biden stepped down, maybe this could be the start of a new trend. It’s the administration that matters anyway.

[-] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

It's not necessary for Kamala. Walz will need to wait.

[-] BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world 2 points 3 months ago

It's not necessary due to age, but it'd be a huge win for the Democratic Party if they encourage her to not seek a second term so that someone actually left of center has a chance.

[-] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago
[-] lepinkainen@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

After two terms of Harris the US (barring civil war) might be ready for a Buttigieg/AOC presidency

[-] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 3 months ago

I'd pass on Pete. His work with McKinsey and being a moderate putting up a progressive front is pretty problematic. His historical interest in cultivating relationships with elites rather than supporting equity also causes significant pessimism for how he would act.

In 8 years (supposing the GOP isn't allowed to destroy the little bit of democracy left), demographics will shift with Boomers dying and Millennials likely finally getting more political power (sorry Xers). Millennials and Zoomers trend significantly further left than Boomers, having been fucked over by wealth hoarders much of their lives. Running to the Right and punching Left isn't likely to remain a good strategy.

this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2024
981 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2161 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS