this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2025
1088 points (97.6% liked)

politics

23654 readers
2850 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, 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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 283 points 2 months ago (20 children)

I'm not convinced there will be an election in 2028...

[–] earphone843@sh.itjust.works 110 points 2 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 85 points 2 months ago (17 children)

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.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 62 points 2 months 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.

load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 58 points 2 months ago

There will, but it won't be a fair one. They have "elections" in Russia, too.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 29 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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 23 points 2 months ago (4 children)

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.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 19 points 2 months ago

sounds a lot like the last 12 years TBF

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
[–] astutemural@midwest.social 240 points 2 months ago (6 children)

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.

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 24 points 2 months 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".

[–] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)

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.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 136 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Him calling the GOP weird was not a gaffe but the campaign made him walk away from that language because it might offend potential turncoats. The fact he is internalizing the criticism worries me.

[–] neidu3@sh.itjust.works 54 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

My only "problem" with the weird-comments were that they were overused. While it is certainly true, and Waltz had every reason to call it out, supporters often kept repeating it in the context of "look how triggered Republicans are by this". After a while it gave me the same vibe as people shoehorning "let's go brandon" into every situation.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago (1 children)

After a while it gave me the same vibe as people shoehorning “let’s go brandon” into every situation.

Except that....worked?

One of the takeaways from the 2024 election is that if you have something that works, repetition is key for the idiot American electorate.

[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social 26 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Yeah, interesting how the Harris campaign had all the momentum after the Waltz nomination, then pivoted back to neoliberal wonkiness and then crashed and burned again.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Kalysta@lemm.ee 85 points 2 months ago (9 children)

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.

[–] isaaclw@lemmy.world 32 points 2 months ago (6 children)

And Harris was hamstrung by Biden.

She could have been better.

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 23 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (12 children)

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.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] knightmare1147@lemmy.world 59 points 2 months ago (11 children)
[–] AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Bernie's going to be almost 90 years old by then

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 58 points 2 months ago (35 children)
load more comments (35 replies)
[–] madjo@feddit.nl 52 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Bold of him to assume there will be elections in 2028.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 51 points 2 months ago (26 children)

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

load more comments (26 replies)
[–] drascus@sh.itjust.works 48 points 2 months ago (6 children)

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

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] DukeHawthorne@lemmy.world 41 points 2 months ago (3 children)

It's cute that he thinks there will be an election in 2028, or ever again, for that matter.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] hperrin@lemmy.ca 38 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I’d vote for him, given that we’re still allowed to vote.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FahrenheitGhost@lemmy.world 37 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Personally, I'm hoping Zelensky will run for US president after strong Dien in Ukraine. You might be thinking that someone from another country can't be president. Well.... looks at current situation in White House At least this one would be elected.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] OccultIconoclast@reddthat.com 36 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (24 children)

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.

load more comments (24 replies)
[–] MilitantAtheist@lemmy.world 33 points 2 months ago

It's cute that they think there's gonna be another election.

[–] GooberEar@lemmy.wtf 29 points 2 months ago (3 children)

He's got some things going for him. Male. Presumably heterosexual. Caucasian. Old (but perhaps not quite old enough). I say go for it.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ceenote@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

We could do (and have done) a lot worse. My only concern is whether or not he has the backbone to refuse to be steered to the right, the way Kamala was after the convention. His Midwestern politeness definitely didn't serve him well in the debate.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] robocall@lemmy.world 23 points 2 months ago (4 children)

He was the better half of the ticket.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Gsus4@mander.xyz 21 points 2 months ago (1 children)

He can run for the primary, like everyone else...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] hOrni@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago (5 children)

"Run for president in 2028" XD That ship has sailed. I don't think they will have any more elections.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] HalfSalesman@lemm.ee 21 points 2 months ago

I'd vote for him but he'd need to ignore the consultants next time if he wants any hope of winning.

[–] Kcap@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago (4 children)

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

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Lasherz12@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago

I'm worried that despite having very good views himself that he is going to be tainted by the past. Not without reason too, because the consultants made him stand down with the "weird" insult and progressive messaging. Like most of these people, if it's not their authentic campaign, then whose is it? He's demonstrated, like most people who reach a moment in their career to seriously consider this, that he's too malleable for populist politics. It's possible that he completely sheds that team and runs his own, but who here really thinks that's going to happen? I'd believe it if we had AOC for VP. The pressure to succumb to inferior messaging is higher than it'll ever be during a presidential campaign, I don't really trust anyone to stay firm except AOC, Talib, and Bernie because they have demonstrated resistance in this sort of high pressure consultant environment.

load more comments
view more: next ›