The neo liberals don't like what sanders is doing so they are trying to do the same thing to offer their tepid right leaning centrism which is what brought us to this point. The billionaire owned democrats are always looking for a way to impose their tepid right leaning centrism and thwart any hint of leftward movement towards economic democracy. Their goal is to maintain this class dictatorship at all costs and allowing full fledged fascism to enter the highest office was preferable to any administration that resembled FDR from Gaining power.
this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2025
435 points (99.3% liked)
politics
21739 readers
4892 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Good shit, I like it.
I love Tim Walz as the anti-Trump. He has lots of experience as well as a great example of a true public servant. He isn't rich and relies on the decades of public service he complete for his livelihood. As both a veteran and former public educator he can talk about how the cuts to the VA and Education departments are hurting everyone with some personal authority. Minnesota under his leadership got some massive progressive wins and minimized losses in 2024. Most importantly he looks like a Trump voter which apparently is needed for those people. Republicans are going full white male identity politics and he fits the bill.
I would absolutely vote for him for president. I like Minnesota Progressives anyway, and he also possesses that natural trustworthiness that appeals to rurals that are going to be brutalized by MAGA policies over the next few years.
Of course, it only matters if we can have fair, cheat-free elections, or even have elections at all.
I like Minnesota Progressives anyway
I have been a big fan since its less confrontation and quieter than either coastal politics or southern politics. Its boring and effective
I'll vote any dem in the general but I think Walz is a terrible candidate in the primaries.
We've already seen appealing to the conservatives fail in the general miserably, let's not pick that candidate.
He is definitely not an appealing to conservative candidate except for being white and not super young (He is 60).
But look at what Minnesota did under his governorship was all simple none flashy midwestern progressive values. Free school lunches, trans refuge status, abortions rights into law (as well as a supreme court case), funding for schools and legal weed. He is a progressive just not very flashy about it.
He's also just a really nice guy and from what I can tell a great dad. That on its own is practically all the qualifications I need from a politician. I'd rather have a good-hearted idiot than a black-hearted genius (or idiot... which we currently have in charge).
I think the goofy dad demeanor is truly authentic and is disarming enough to get people to like him. Also I really enjoy his fisher stories where he tells the truth but makes it a little bigger or tuned to the audience. Since truth does not seem to matter anymore why not bend it a little bit
I really wish he had been the candidate in 24. There would have been a good chance of him winning.
Well we can always hope for 2028.
I’m hoping for him and AOC in 2028. Get him in there because he’ll be an easy transition and seems like a great candidate on his own and then set up AOC after him.
AOC would be great as a VP pick
Like the billionaire owned neo liberals would allow that. They lost their shit when sanders challenged them and did everything they could to prevent him from bringing any modicum of economic democracy to the us.
It would actually get progressives out to the polls.
Which is why it'll never happen.
This is the way.
I am on the email distro for Tom Emmer from Minnesota just to keep an eye on what narratives are being pushed, and Republicans are already starting to target Walz with a slow drip of propaganda in these districts. This is what he sent out a few days ago:
Minnesota’s Feeding Our Future scandal, the largest COVID-19 fraud scheme in the country, stole more than $250 million from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service. Instead of serving hungry children, this money was used to purchase real estate overseas, luxury vehicles, planes and boats. Tim Walz blamed this on a “culture of generosity” in our state. An independent audit compiled by the Office of the Legislative Auditor found that “inadequate” oversight and lack of action by the Walz Administration “created opportunities for fraud.”
As Tim Walz flails and feigns outrage over the more than $600 million in fraud that has occurred on his watch, Republicans in Washington, D.C., are doing what Walz has failed to do: ensure these criminals and fraudsters face justic.
...
Minnesotans deserve answers as to how their tax dollars were allowed to be stolen and squandered due to the incompetent policies of Tim Walz, and these criminals deserve to face justice. Rest assured, Republicans in Washington, D.C., will continue to demand accountability until each of these alleged fraudsters is convicted for their crimes.
There will be weekly emails like this now that Biden is no longer a target. Walz needs to set a narrative with these people because Republicans are great at seizing the narrative.
I love how they talk about all this fraud and criminal activity, and yet has anything actually been found?
I mean don't get me wrong, our government gets fleeced in a lot of ways, but it's usually through government contracts to private companies, not the agencies themselves.
Here are some things that Reagan had no control over whatever.
Before he became President a Polish labor Union, Solidarity, began tearing away at the myth of the "workers' state." Pope John Paul II began speaking out against Communism. The soviets invasion of Afghanistan became a quagmire.
Chernobyl nuclear disaster happened while Reagan was President. Three Soviet leaders died within three years.
The final nail in the coffin was when hardliners staged a coup against reformer Gorbachev and the Soviet citizens went to the streets to protest.
Somehow, we've been fed the lie that "Reagan destroyed the USSR and won the Cold War."
The Soviet war in Afghanistan didn’t help them much either. Though Reagan did have some influence there by selling weapons to the Mujahadeen, a move which had no repercussions /s
The central party stops financing outside accounts in 1967 which begins a decline in the USSR’s ability to purchase necessary goods that are not made within the Warsaw pact didn’t help.
The Afghan war and the drop in the price of oil are also substantial factors in the decline.
I see they are trying to tie Tim Walz to Feed our Futures. I don't know if it is going to work but it is expected.
If you are following the trial of Aimee Bock its pretty obvious that the way the law was written was suppose to give our food aid fast with checking afterwards. In the middle of global pandemic whether this a good idea or not is debatable but I think it was. Also it was a large operation which sued to keep itself open. If you are interested I recommend the Sahan Journal which has been doing some great coverage.
This is the right move.
If they won't face their constituents, get someone up there to face them and meet the people where they are to get some change in motion.
As a Minnesotan, I'm worried this will alienate him from the state constituency and we'll lose him (and then he'll lose the presidential election cause Minnesota luck)
…. Is anyone dealing with the legitimacy of the last election and the next one? It doesn’t matter what the citizens vote for if their vote isn’t counted….
We don't have the evidence really but I think the "rigging" has mostly been in the form of disenfranchisement -- making it hard for those most likely to vote Democratic. If we can flip the tables and get rural, traditionally Republican, counties to go blue then I don't think the GOP is prepared to counter that.
He literally admitted a few days ago on video.
AOC's district leaned way more heavily towards Trump. Either they cheated literally everywhere or the results were valid.
There was a misleading post about "bullet ballots", but if you looked into the numbers they didn't check out.
If you look into bullet ballots there are outliers that need to be investigated but weren’t. Not to mention Trump has admitted to manipulating the votes several times, even within the last couple of days. It’s on video.
The numbers in that "bullet ballots" post were lies. They were convincing if true, but they just weren't true. North Carolina didn't have 7.1% bullet ballots, for instance, and the swing states weren't significantly different from their surrounding states, as he claimed they were.
Part of the reason that post sounded so good is that he gave easily verifiable numbers. But those numbers didn't verify.
It’s really interesting that we look at the same document and have vastly different interpretations of it.
AOC's district leaned way more heavily towards Trump. Either they cheated literally everywhere or the results were valid.
This logic makes no sense... Those are obviously not the only two possibilities there.
Trump straight up said they rigged it like a day or two ago.
There's enough questionable and suspect evidence that an investigation is warranted. If nothing else, it will put the question to rest. The American people deserve a through investigation.
An investigation by whom? Certainly not our current federal government.
How much damage to any future elections has this administration already done?
Nope! But, who can? Not the broken government. It'll be on the citizens to stop waiting for a savior.
"What's the move Tim?"
"I'm going to pander to the right even harder."
"Excellent, not only will this definitely shift a bunch of trump supporters to our side, it will rally moderate and left leaning voters to us when they realize how brilliant of a strategy it is to mirror our opposition! 2028 is a lock!"
That's absolutely not what he's doing jfc
Could you please explain what he is doing then? Because my impression after reading the article was that Walz is focusing on right wing voters, and not on the other ~70% of Americans. I'm not trying to be divisive. To me this looks like a continuation of the Democrats strategy over the last 10 years of pandering to the center. Which clearly hasn't worked. So what am I not seeing?
because republicans are cancelling town halls and there are large swaths of republican voters angry with the gop and musk
same reason why bernie is doing it
So here's the important bit, I know where you're coming from on this as dems have been courting the right by watering down their policies in an attempt to appeal to them. That's not what Walz is doing, much like Bernie, he's preaching the progressive ideals to the right to try and show them how and why it would actually benefit them, along with attempting to dispel republican lies.
Also apologies on the tone of the original comment, I didn't have enough time to explain and was just irritated.
No worries. I guess my point is that they're overall such a small percent of the voting bloc. And what percentage of them could he sway? I'd be willing to bet not many at this point in time. Harris didn't lose because Republicans didn't vote for her, she lost because everyone else didn't vote for her.
Point it out if you are seeing something else, but all I see the article saying is he's doing town halls.
If you agree that the right has captured rural voters by lying to them, and left policies would actually benefit them, then at some point someone needs to communicate that to them in an effective way. Yes, there's a lot of brainwashing to get through, but Walz seems like a good bet to talk to rural voters in a way they'd accept.
view more: next ›