Summary
Former vice presidential nominee Tim Walz criticized Trump for economic chaos while taking personal responsibility for the situation during an MSNBC interview.
“We wouldn’t be in this mess if we’d have won the election — and we didn’t,” Walz told Chris Hayes. He called Trump the “worst possible business executive” and praised the Wall Street Journal’s editorial criticizing Trump’s tariff war.
Walz emphasized Democrats must offer something better, not just criticize Trump. Recently, he acknowledged a leadership void in the Democratic Party and admitted spending too much time combatting Trump’s false claims about immigrants.
i want walz and aoc in 2028
we don’t blame you tim we love you ❤️
I don’t love him, I don’t even know the guy and politicians are generally horrible enough people to give me pause.
He DID seem to have the only decent angle of attack with the “weird” stuff so that looks good at least.
DNC will never let it happen.
No, we’d be “GAmBlIng wItH wOrLd waR THree!”
Not you walz but the Democratic party. Send out 19 billion to Israel while our kids were hungry in school.
Tim signed the bill that guaranteed free breakfast and lunch for every K-12 student in Minnesota public schools. No needs-testing, no “lunch debt”…just free healthy food for children.
So true. The republicans are clearly better.
Did I say it anywhere that Republicans are better?
So the answer is to keep slowly sliding into fascism with the ‘slightly less evil’ party, rather than forcing their hand in the hope of democratic reforms which stop the slide?
The system is absolutely rigged and there are no winners. Americans are never gonna pull a france and pull out the guillotines. They hardly even protest. And when they do it’s because they want cheap eggs, gas or bot wearing masks. Or when a new iphone is out, then they have enough free time to camp on the street for a week.
Yeah yeah, continue giving excuses to the Democrats for not being as bad as the Republicans. They’re lucky they have supporters like you who will just take whatever bullshit they give out whenever they try and emulate the Republicans. Clearly you’re not satisfied with how right leaning the political system in America already is, you want them to go all the way. Considering how spineless their supporters are in making them shift their policies, I can see why they think it’s completely fine for them to offer mediocrity in the face of fascism.
Blue MAGA. That’s all they are.
Thank God Trump won, because now we get… checks notes… Mar-a-Gaza!?
Thank god for your hindsight, without you we’d never realize what Trump is doing!
Like as if Biden did not find Israel. 19 billion dollar of our money As a Democrat, I expected Biden to do better. We already know trump is crap. One worse does not make another one good. Both parties are bad. United States is doomed with just two parties. I don’t want any of these two parties. What’s you take?
If you want to win my vote and many others, know your base well democrats. We are not here to elect the least worse, we are here to elect the best out there for this nation. And don’t come btching here because u guys literally are the one that said our vote does not count before the election. may be it suddenly does? See ya in 2028. Hope u learn some lesson.
coming from someone who worked with Trump to fund the jackboots manhandling the oil pipeline protesters
Walz is a fucking tool just looking for upvotes
Gotta love those downvotes \s. Libs love capitalism/oil more than life/planet.
I disagree Mr. Walz. Had Biden not sat on his hands after being given the power of god by the supreme court - we wouldn’t be in this mess today.
DNCs fault for blocking Bernie
i cant imagine its likely he would’ve even won in the first place, literally just schizophrenia politics.
Sure as opposed to the totally stable and sane politics of today🙄. The establishment neoliberals aren’t popular . It’s just a fact
but people keep voting for them???
Why does every dumbass on this site keep saying “BUT THEY AREN’T POPULAR” only to see them get literally 40-50% of the votes. If they truly weren’t popular, they would get like 30% of the vote.
But i guess your entire counter argument is probably “WELL BUT HOW DID TRUMP WIN THEN?” anti-incumbency. Plain and simple.
There’s no leadership void in the Democratic Party, it’s been Bernard Sanders for quite a while. Them denying this is to their (and everyone elses) detriment. Just run Bernie/AOC and let’s get this over with.
Nancy Pelosi is the leadership of the Democrats. And AOC was not allowed to become top house dem. They chose Gerry
AtrickConnely instead.AOC and Bernie will never be allowed to do anything besides sheepdogging progressives into the Democratic party. And at this point it appears they are fully on board with that.
At some point they have to fall in line and follow orders. Or fade into obscurity. It’s a truly shitty system. One long overdue for a big reset…
Pelosi, Schumer, Jeffries may control the official party apparatus, but when it comes to communicating and connecting with constituents and energizing the base, AOC and Bernie are clearly the only ones acting as opposition leaders.
Sheepdogging is why Bernie’s out on the road right now.
finally! I hate when peope are always blaming trump or maga or republicans for this shit when its been the democrats every time. reagans deregulation and tax cuts, bush juniors war on terror, trumps total idiocy. ALL DEMOCRATS! We need to stop fighting the republicans and work with them against our common enemy.
Republicans ARE our common enemy, at this point… Democrats have been an “enemy of my enemy” scenario for decades now, but they are LITERALLY the lesser of two evils. Howsabout we get rid of this BS two-party system that’s allowed the Overton window to go so far right? Maybe start there, not "work with cuntservatives.
news to me. Everything I see is lets fight the current administration by bitching about the democrats not quite doing enough in the past. Its only by rectifying the past that we can solve the future. do not be concerned about the present.
I partly agree with “It’s only by rectifying the past that we can solve the future”… but you cannot do that while being unconcerned with the present.
Democrats have been an “enemy of my enemy” scenario for decades now
Unconvincingly.
True… but that rolls off the tongue better than, “The not-quite-friendly business partner of my country’s toxic monsters is my friend.”
Well, I mean the worst Walz did personally was maybe his performance against JD, but that’s pretty small compared to a lot of other errors that can be attributed to the collective campaign decisions and DNC as a whole. And yes, Biden. And really, 2020 and 2016. Actually fuck it, compared to all the butterfly effect possibilities, Walz is such a small part of why we’re in this mess, lol. I still want the 2000 supreme court to support the Florida recount that actually says Gore won.
Still, kudos for taking responsibility.
I wouldn’t place any of it on Walz, this is all about Harris/Biden. He did well in his debate, he was obviously more progressive than Harris and was pretty much just reined in.
I think if the ticket had been reversed, they’d have won. The center wasn’t ready for a black woman to start with, and when she was just parroting the same party line re: Gaza, and cozying up to fucking Cheney’s, for crying out loud, it turned off the progressives that might have voted.
deleted by creator
Well, how much money do you have?
deleted by creator
I have 2, maybe if we can get a few more peeps together we can buy a politician or three
Looking at the disinformation on social media I don’t think they could do much.
I saw people being convinced that Harris had positions that were compete opposite of her actual stances.
I even saw people have complete opposing view. For example about situation in Gaza, I saw:
- pro Israel people being encouraged to vote for trump, because Harris was supporting “Hamas terrorists”
- pro Palestinians being encouraged to not vote or vote for trump in protest, because Harris was strong supporter of Israel and it won’t make any difference
When narrative is already controlled by social media that already is biased toward specific candidate, it is impossible to win.
I don’t think Harris, Walz or even Biden could do anything when everything was attack against them.
We either need to make sure that non far right is also represented in social media.
Alternatively Democrats would have to use a celebrity, for example somebody like Jon Stewart of whose popularity could cut through the disinformation.
Progressives like Bernie and AOC, they are after what we actually need, but they are not immune from this disinformation, only people who actually pay attention to politics know them the rest of population can be easily persuaded that they are just “commies that want to kill America”
It’s purely vibe based. Everyone is just pick a choosing whatever specs of information drift their direction.
I disagree with you about what everyone picks and chooses. The reason why people complain about Mastodon as an alternative to Twitter is because they have to choose what to see, they are used that the website would choose things for them.
Social media for dangerous, because they build profile about you and they know what topics will trigger you. So people who are pro Israel will get one content, people pro Palestine get different, but both of them will tell them to vote for Trump.
This is so much more dangerous than TV, which of course could manipulate people to make them react in certain way, but at least it couldn’t target individuals like social media can.
Twitter has a chronological timeline
Pro Palestine dems were voting for Jill Stein not trump
That way part of the “not vote”. There were some that did vote for him.
Losing on both sides of an issue is the whole reason triangulation isn’t a political cheat card.
You played it too safe and used your son as a prop
Turns out holding back the things that work (like calling fascists “weird”) while not breaking with some of Biden’s unpopular policies was a terrible idea… who would’ve thought? At least Walz is honest enough to admit it. I doubt the DNC will let the social democrats like Walz or Bernie take the lead though… establishment dems would rather stand by and praise Reagan while Trump dismantles the constitution.
Bernie’s chances of running are pretty much up and over. He’s like 83. The time to have gotten him in was definitely 2016, but the DNC wanted Clinton and that got them to lose. 2020, he lost again because everyone tone deaf wanted Biden because they believed “well, he was around Obama during his two terms, he should be in because he’ll just continue what Obama built!”. They only got lucky to have won 2020 with Biden, just lucky.
I cannot see Bernie Sanders ever running again.
I don’t think Bernie will run again in 2028, but he is still relevant right now because nobody else is taking the lead. I hope people like Walz will step up and try to turn the DNC around. It’ll be an uphill battle even with the DNC, not to speak of the actual election.
I think Bernie should run, alongside AOC, Walz, Al Green, and others. The primary can sort out who is truly best as president. That is the whole bloody idea of a primary, one the DNC never honestly permitted after Obama’s tenure.
The reason why the conservatives found an effective candidate in Trump, is that he was allowed to legitimately compete in their primaries. It is a stress test, and the DNC refused to allow their own primary to work as intended.
AOC has not interest though, she said it would best if she stayed in the house
The best he can do is rile people up and it works.
he lost again because everyone tone deaf wanted Biden because they believed “well, he was around Obama during his two terms, he should be in because he’ll just continue what Obama built!”.
An article I read about this talked about how DNC-funded advertising discredited Bernie not by attacking his actual policies, but via a message of “his promises are good, and you may like them, but how many voters out there won’t vote for a scary socialist?”. I think that’s ultimately what did him in; it’s impossible to make a reasonable person hate the stuff Bernie was promising (unless they think it’s gonna placate the proletariat and make them lose the will to seize the means of production or some shit), but it is possible to convince them that some unspecified “many people” wouldn’t vote for him and therefore he’d lose the election.
They also banked on the sexist “Bernie Bros” and tried to paint the movement as majority male when it wasn’t. Plenty of women who liked Bernie. And a lot of that enthusiasm would have captured some youth that could have attracted young men wanting change and wanting to put their weight behind something.
Change was coming regardless. The DNC had an option for a brief moment to permit or encourage change for the better of all. Instead, they let our economic problems fester, accelerated the income disparity, and chose to back…whatever the fuck this shit show is now.
When parties get so arrogant that they think the people they represent are the enemy—they need to go. Unrestricted and fully backed? I think Bernie could have won against Trump in 2016.
“Weird” alienated voters. It’s an example of bad messaging that the dems doubled down on that made them lose.
They lacked a platform that promised anything but more of the same that Americans were tired of. They needed to present something new and hopeful, not just lob an insult that much of America identifies with. A suite of policies to help the working class attracts votes to your side. Calling your opponents weird attracts votes to the weird anti-establishment.
Weird plays into the republican’s hands, and it annoys the hell out of me how the dems decided to throw the election to focus on petty insults that come off as compliments to most observers.
A part of the problem is that they didn’t hold back on broken and alienating messaging like “weird”. They should have focused on talking about what they can do for the people.
Alienated which voters?
Me.
“Weird” alienated voters.
Oh? got any proof of that? Was your proof on fox news maybe? I saw plenty of articles praising it.
It alienated me.
Most queer people identify with the label “weird”.
I also saw pro-corporate outlets praising it.
It alienated me.
Most queer people identify with the label “weird”.
That’s fair actually. When I first heard it without context, I also felt kind of alienated by it.
I think you can be weird in good and bad ways, context matters in this case. I think it’s fair to call out fascists for being “weird” in the sense that they are evil, crooked and - crucially - not relatable for the vast majority of voters. The “weird” thing is about the fascists not being “like us” - and thus very instinctively not trustworthy.
At the same time it’s also possible to be “weird” in an individualistic, relatable and validating way. Most people have insecurities or fears on some level and accepting this “weirdness” can be validating and actually show likeness. I think it’s very clear that Tim Walz didn’t mean it like this.
He didn’t call them weird out of the blue, but rather to sum up his other points about their unrelatable, evil behaviors. The message was something like: “The fascists are not real, believable people. They don’t seem driven by everyday worries like us. They don’t seem to have the same kind of feelings like us.”
And I think that is actually exactly the message that wins elections in this political climate. Debating the issues is getting you nowhere if your opponent has no actual beliefs to debate against. Calling them out for being fake people with no actual beliefs is a better strategy.
Oh see you said it alienated voters, plural.
What a ridiculous take.
I’m sure I’m not alone. America is a very pro-weird place.
Most queer people identify with the label “weird”.
OK. First of all, words can have multiple meanings. Like the word “screw” or “bark” or “current”. We dont need to deprecate these multiple meanings in favor of just one. In conversation you pick the applicable meaning, and if you cant thats more a ‘you’ problem. I have enough problems of my own without taking yours on too. My use of the word doesnt affect you at all.
Secondly, I will stick with the normal usage that most people use. Language is an agreement between people around meaning, and the vast majority of the population doesnt agree that it has this new meaning. Sorry. Maybe in a few years “wierd” will have a more predominant meaning that you prefer, but today it does not, and again, even if it did, the word need not mean only one thing.
I also saw pro-corporate outlets praising it.
But it seems like your memories dont match your ability to show it now. Human memories are notoriously unreliable.
It alienated me.
If you simply dont like that the word means what it means because you wish another meaning was more dominant, then I have a hard time feeling like you’ve much of a right to be aggreived at anyone about that. But by all means, be alienated if you want to. Just dont expect anyone else to make your alienation into a thing. Cheers.
No, weird was a successful offensive attack on Republicans that was both popular and was great at making them get flustered and double down on their weirdness (which is itself an incredibly charitable way to describe their fascist policies)
Other messaging that was very popular
https://blueprint2024.com/polling/harris-poll-positive-message-8-8/
https://blueprint-research.com/polling/distance-biden-ads-message-test-10-15/
Progressive policies that a majority of Americans support
Democrats’ Working-Class Failures, Analysis Finds, Are ‘Why Trump Beat Harris’
2024 Post-Election Report: A retrospective and longitudinal data analysis on why Trump beat Harris
How Trump and Harris Voters See America’s Role in the World
Majority of Americans support progressive policies such as higher minimum wage, free college
Democrats should run on the popular progressive ideas, but not the unpopular ones
Here Are 7 ‘Left Wing’ Ideas (Almost) All Americans Can Get Behind
Finding common ground: 109 national policy proposals with bipartisan support
Progressive Policies Are Popular Policies
Tim Walz’s Progressive Policies Popular With Republicans in Swing States
Just because it flustered republicans doesn’t mean it didn’t alienate voters.
I agree with the rest of your message listing progressive policies that the majority of Americans support. That’s the winning strategy.
Where’s the proof that it alienated voters? The vox article has evidence voters received it positively
It alienated me and others like me that identify as weird.
You can’t win the left while shit talking non-hegemonic personalities and preferences.
You were never going to vote for Dems anyways, you keep saying alienation but you have not provided any proof. The fact that your being flustered means it’s actually working against Republicans, yes we know you are one.
I did vote for the dems.
“Weird” as an insult is fundamentally pro-centrist and pro-status-quo.
You don’t find Republican policies that dehumanize immigrants, attack women’s rights, and demonize LGBT rights weird? To put it as nicely as possible, fascist policies are weird
Why are you proposing that we be as nice as possible to fascists?
This is the Clinton-era way of thinking. A losing campaign must have done everything wrong, and a winning campaign must have done everything right.
No, Clinton-era thinking is trying to fluster the Republicans without being concerned with alienating the voters.
“Weird” alienated voters.
No, the initial comment was fine, as was the authentic reaction to it.
What made it weird and ineffective, was Kamala and other zero charisma neoliberals beating it into the ground while screaming “you like this”.
It’s like when Dee was trying to make Instagram videos and Charlie kept fucking with her:
I said I wanted staged moments that felt authentic!
When Walz said it off the cuff, it was a good thing. When Harris tried to make it an entire campaign, it was stupid and “weird” on its own.
deleted by creator
The DNC is a
right-wing partydictatorshipAnd we just got the furtherest left chain we’ve had in over 30 years…
The chair has complete control and no accountability to anyone else.
and replaced with an actual far left worker’s party.
And the new chair agrees with you. You don’t even have to take his word, look at what he did as head of Minnesota’s state party
the new DNC chair just gave us elissa slotkin as trumps speech rebutter. She’s a zionist and menber of the problem solvers coalition (bipartisanship for bipartisanship sake) and new democrat caucus (pro business focus). She’s measured as the most centrist dem there is.
The new chair is accountable to the same corrupt influences as the last one. We might as well have not appointed a new chair. Ken has to go.
She also co-sponsored legislation to ban corporate pacs…
How are her (absolute dog shit) opinions about Israel affect the position she has?
You can pretty much tell which one , Ds are getting the same megadonor moneys from the GOP, and yes the Dems are hoping coast on by along with the GOP, to eek some federal elections.
It wasn’t really Tim’s fault. I will never understand why Kamala decided it was more important to try to court Republicans than get Democrats excited. Democrats, and I know this will be a big surprise to Democratic leadership, don’t want to vote for conservatives.
She’s a genocidal cop (aka prosecutor). She has literally spent her whole life opposing leftism. Ofc she campaigns to/with republicans.
Kamal Harris voting record as a sitting senator
Policy Area Key Actions/Positions Left-Wing Alignment Economic Policies Supported Sanders’ plan for free public college, proposed six months of paid family leave at full income[2]. Strongly aligned with progressive economic ideals. Environmental Policies Proposed a $10 trillion plan to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2045, opposed fracking[2]. Advocated for aggressive climate action, exceeding even the Green New Deal. Healthcare Co-sponsored “Medicare for All,” initially supported eliminating private insurance but later moderated[8]. Strongly left-leaning, though moderated stance on private insurance. Housing Introduced the “Housing Is Infrastructure Act” to invest $100 billion in housing, focusing on public units[2]. Robust support for affordable housing and public infrastructure investment. Labor Rights Received a lifetime AFL-CIO score of 98%, indicating consistent support for workers’ rights[4]. Strongly pro-labor and aligned with union priorities. Judicial Appointments Voted against most Trump judicial nominees and supported liberal appointees as VP[8][5]. Consistently aligned with progressive judicial priorities. Kamala Harris’s Senate record places her among the most liberal senators, consistently supporting policies that align with left-wing ideals across economic, environmental, healthcare, and social justice issues[1][2][5].
Citations: [1] Kamala Harris is extremely liberal — and the numbers prove it https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/4816859-kamala-harris-is-extremely-liberal-and-the-numbers-prove-it/ [2] Analysis of Kamala Harris’s Economic Record | City Journal https://www.city-journal.org/article/analysis-of-kamala-harris-economic-record [3] Kamala Harris: Where does she stand on key issues? - BBC https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-53770654 [4] Sen. Kamala Harris - AFL-CIO https://aflcio.org/scorecard/legislators/kamala-harris [5] Kamala Harris’ liberal record is hiding in plain sight https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/sep/5/kamala-harriss-liberal-record-is-hiding-in-plain-s/ [6] Where Kamala Harris stands on 10 key policy issues, from … - BBC https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx924r4d5yno [7] Political positions of Kamala Harris - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Kamala_Harris [8] Fact check: Is Kamala Harris the most liberal member of the Senate? https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/17/politics/kamala-harris-most-liberal-senator-fact-check/index.html [9] Voteview | Sen. HARRIS, Kamala Devi (Democrat, CA) https://voteview.com/person/41701/kamala-devi-harris [10] Senator Kamala D. Harris (1964 - Congress.gov https://www.congress.gov/member/kamala-harris/H001075
And yet she talked about her glock while kids were seeing more school shootings than ever, went hard againt immigrants, silenced Palestinian voices, supported the genocide, and said she couldnt think of a single thing she’d do differently than Joe Biden. She ran a campaign practicaly designed to lose.
I just want a candidate who calls out the fleecing of the American people to the benefit of the 1%.
To stop breaking everyone down to this or that identity. The Repugnacans are doing a great job of making this look like it’s about identity politics and the Dems keep taking the bait. It’s not. It’s about money and power. They are happy to throw red meat in the pit and walk off all the richer while we squabble.
Just existing as an alternate to chaos should have been enough.
Genocide is not an order worth supporting.
And the current situation is?
(The answer is no.)
Cool so now we have the same genocide but everything else is worse too? Awesome. Love it.
I’m curious, given the choices that were put in-front of the voters at the election, and considering the whole ballot, what would you suggest would have been the best course of action for a voter to take to minimize harm or even seek a positive outcome?
If your point is that it should never have come to that, then I would agree with you, but it did, so what would you have suggested voters do?
The guy who tried that and failed is telling you it wasn’t enough.
