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.
I’m not convinced there will be an election in 2028…
There won’t at the current trajectory. There won’t even be midterms.
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.
No, I don’t think Democrats are ready to make new mistakes yet. They still won’t abandon their devotion to the old mistakes.
Not sure about rigged, but honestly, depending on how the next few years go, it may be straight up dangerous for non-republican Americans to vote. While that’s by no means a certainty, people should keep an eye on any electoral changes made in their state.
If Republicans experience a route like they suffered in 2018, it will likely be due to the mushy indie republican-when-its-convenient voters breaking ranks in droves, just like they did in prior Dem wave years. That’s what Harris was banking on in 2024 when she paraded around her pet RINOs Liz Cheney and Jeff Flake. She just failed to understand that these wishy-washy voters are chasing less war and less disruption and more protectionist economics, something Trump was able to dangle over their heads (twice!) to win the GOP primary / national election.
Republicans don’t really seem to get it, either. Which is why they think the midterm after a wave year is the perfect time to put Grade A psychos all over the down-ballots and end up losing statewide in Alabama of all places as a result.
The “we won’t be having any more elections” crowd is heavily invested in a theory that Republicans can get their own base to sit down, shut up, and follow orders. But the last eight years of Trump should be an indication of the exact opposite. The party is being lead by the base, which means the prior generation’s power brokers like the Bushs and Cheneys and Bloombergs no longer have a place in it.
This line of thinking has preserved whatever is left of my optimism. Let us hope my fellow Americans continue to function predictably.
That’s completely wishful and fantastical thinking. By midterms the base will be so propagandized again to just forget about the regime robbing them blind left and right. I want to believe it, but recent history has taught me otherwise.
By midterms the base will be so propagandized again to just forget about the regime robbing them blind left and right.
DOGE is currently lining up a big chunk of the Social Security Administration. There’s some speculation as to whether they’ll even be able to keep delivering checks in another few months. Onboarding new recipients will be functionally impossible.
Then you’ve got the seemingly routine instance of airplane collisions and accidents. Big historically conservative-friendly districts are losing whole swaths of their workforce. NASA is downsizing in Huntsville, Alabama and Galveston, Texas and Cape Canaveral, Florida. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
All the friendly Republican press didn’t save Congress in 2006 or 2018, and for good reason. You have a very different perspective on politics when you land on the unemployment line.
That said, if Dems fumble as hard as they did in 2002, its very possible they could hand the GOP a historic victory by disenchanting the entire liberal electorate with their cowardice and inaction.
Again, I want to believe, but recent history doesn’t provide that angle. During COVID there were people saying it was a government hoax as they were dying in the hospital. If they can be brainwashed to not believe their own fucking death, then nothing will change them.
I’m not talking about some of the moderates who don’t really mind Trump but don’t stay informed, by the way. I think some small percentage of these folks will be able to see the reality, just not in time.
Time to start over on Lemmy and use a VPN, sounds like…(?) been worrying about this kind of thing
They made it in 2024. The results of abstaining or protest voting were obvious, and these idiots did it anyway. And here we are.
The results of abstaining or protest voting were obvious
Absolutely. The current Dem leadership is now wildly unpopular and vulnerable to primary. Just like after 2016, the seeds have been planted for a big anti-incumbent wave.
Shouldn’t be hard. All they have to say is “Remember the townhalls, and how they mocked you while you paid for them to make your lives worse? We’ll put it back.” They don’t even need to add anything, just try to rebuild. Anything would be a positive change when you’re sliding into the negative side of the scale (and in two years, it’ll be far far far to the left)
Democrats will make the same mistake in 2026.
The only thing the Democrats failed at was fielding a fat old white male felon narcissist serial rapist with ties to a foreign nation-state. If they can just do that they’ll win no matter what.
Sorry if you didn’t get a personal hug from America’s Mom and Dad but you’re kinda expected to make a value judgement between two options and choose the best. As a group, you did not.
Only blame Dems who voted for a kleptocratic felon. The rest did their best to field the best candidate they could and lost to a traitor – and those guys need to start with our apology for being stupid, same as all of Ukraine needs our apology, and next Moldova.
The only thing the Democrats failed at was fielding a fat old white male felon narcissist serial rapist with ties to a foreign nation-state.
Is that why Obama lost in 2008?
Look, guys. I’m rather concerned that the states that haven’t seceded by then won’t even have electricity anymore.
There will, but it won’t be a fair one. They have “elections” in Russia, too.
States run the elections, so I’m positive there will be one. But whether or not the results are respected… I’m not so confident in that.
I’m not confident the results in red states will be accurate to begin with.
There will be since elections are held at the state level. Many won’t be free or fair in the red states, but they’ll be good in the blue states.
If red states don’t hold elections, that’s fewer electoral college votes we need to win the presidency and we wouldn’t win in red states anyway.
Please, Texas and Florida. Oh, please, don’t hold elections. 🙏
The way I read it, electoral college votes are the one thing where individual states can somewhat easily cancel elections for President, as long as they do so before the election. States have broad discretion over the appointment of electors. All states currently appoint them based on the results of elections, but the rules around that are all set by State legislation, and can be reset by States as well. The only Federal requirement is that the rules don’t change after any election is held.
Prior Supreme Courts have ruled that things like the Equal Protection clause may be used to challenge any act where the legislature restricts voting rights once they have been granted. But who knows what this clown Court would make of that.
Congressional elections, on the other hand, must be held in order for those seats to be filled. So any state that unilaterally cancels elections across the board will be sending nobody to Congress (and likely any expired Senate terms as well). Some states may go the extra mile and cancel the election for President, but not for Congress. We’ll see how that turns out.
Even Russia has elections
Nah, there probably will. Whoever is taking control of the US really don’t care about MAGA’s and 3rd terms. They’ll just put another puppet there, the new way of doing things in post-capitalism still maintains and some people will continue to get increasingly very rich doesn’t matter who the prez is. We finally reached “the future”.
There will definitely be an attempt to eliminate or “postpone” them. I’m certain Trump is looking at Putin in power and other governments in a state of war without elections as inspiration.
Give me AOC or Bernie.
Bernie’s going to be almost 90 years old by then
biden is no longer in office, so age can be a problem again.
I like adding AOC to the ticket. But getting through primaries may pit them against each other; their bases, at least.
I think it would actually be very easy to unite their bases. At a certain point we’re going to have to acknowledge that progressive populism is appealing to every demographic apart from evangelicals, xenophobes, and 3%ers. Midwesterners who like Walz may be more religious and worse LGBTQ+ allies, but fundamentally people want someone who is going to even the playing field for workers and that’s something that both groups would appreciate. A large amount of any campaign is going to have to be education about the benefits of unions, public projects, and being a member of your community rather than a shut-in if they want to generate positive buzz. Negative buzz is easy, just call the fascists weak and gross.
Bernie should not run again. He’s great but we need some young blood.
That’s what the primaries are for. Selecting a candidate for your party to proceed with. The general election should set aside that division with the candidate having been chosen for the party already.
The problem is, primaries are really good at selecting the worst candidate.
See, the problem comes from something called candidate cloning.
See, you might get more than 50% of the population supporting Tim Walz, or AOC.
But when you force the people to choose between the two, well, now you have less than 50%.
Add in a few more candidates with reasonable platforms and you can get the average support down to less than 10%.
Then all you have to do is add in a candidate with a markedly different platform and 15% support can make them the winner of the primary.
Ranked Choice cannot fix this problem, regardless of the claims made by proponents.
The voting system that can fix things is Approval.
Under Approval, you can vote for A, B, and C. The winner is the person with the highest overall approval.
Yeah, what we need is ranked choice same day primaries. Unfortunately that’s something that might land them the presidency so the democrats would never do it
Ranked Choice is a deeply flawed system.
Approval is far better, or if you like to be granular in your voting STAR.
Flawed in what way?
I was going to type up a bunch here, but instead I’ll share some links.
First is this section of this wiki.
2009 Burlington Mayoral Race. The wrong guy won.
The Monotonicity issue is unique to Ranked Choice, and is pretty fucking bad.
These people have a good breakdown as well.
Then there was the fun incident in Alameda County.
Finally, the guy who invented the system threw it out as deeply flawed. Mostly because it doesn’t find the Pairwise winner, i.e. the candidate who can win in a one on one election vs every other candidate. Also called the Condorcet winner.
As a side note, Nicolas de Caritat, the Marquis de Condorcet, was fucking based.
Bernie is too old and he knows it. He’s not gonna run. AOC has a pretty bad favorable to unfavorable ratio nationally. That’s not automatically disqualifying; numbers aren’t set in stone, and a lot could change between now and 2028, but she’s not starting from the same place of broad appeal that Sanders did. As much as I love both of them, we need to look beyond the same two people for progressive candidates.
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.
And Harris was hamstrung by Biden.
She could have been better.
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.
She was the 4th most progressive candidate still in the 2020, solidly mid of the primary field, with some really terrible candidates behind her, and some really good candidates ahead of her.
I think she could have been the best president since Carter, but she certainly didnt run like it.
But again, none of this really matters.
They did do a primary and Biden/Harris won. They had opposition even if you were unaware of it.
Edit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries
It’s depressing how uninformed so many people are here of basic objective facts that are easily researched.
I’m not even sure how to respond to a lie that bold.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries
No one is lying here. You seem to forget Dean Phillips ran against Biden. There was a primary.
Why are some on this site so aggressive while being so poorly informed?
Hey check out this hotshot over here with a long term memory! No, didn’t you hear she ran a perfect campaign they just couldn’t get enough celebrity endorsements…
Some of us have a long enough memory to know that ozma’s whole schtick has been shitting exclusively on Democrats for like the last year. He’s not the guy you should look to for an unbiased opinion.
But they’re right. Harris did drop out of the primaries before they even started and she was unpopular in the polls the entire time.
She would in all likely hood not be on the ticket if it wasn’t for Bidens stubborn pride.
The one who kept warning for months that Biden would drop out, they’d put Harris in, and Trump would win again?
The one who got himself banned for explicitly saying all he wanted to do was post negative articles about Biden at an alarming rate.
And she chose not to.
I saw a video of him sitting down to have an earnest conversation with hardcore Trump farmers and they left liking him a lot. He’s got that “common sense” Midwestern energy on lock and I can see him gaining a lot of ground with the blue collar and rural folks because of it.
If he has pro-hunting gun views like Bernie, he’ll be an amazing pick.
I think he hunts himself. Didn’t he say that during the campaign with Harris?
Running Hillary again
The fact that this is somewhat believable is so stupid
Yep. I remember a time when the Beltway insiders were acting like Amy Klobuchar was a rising star or some such, LOL.
Ah, Klobuchar. She is the prize senator from the DFL-- their only Sr Senator. She more or less runs it. The same Klobachar who threw out every single police misconduct case given to her when she was a county prosecutor, including the murder of George Floyd by officer Derek Chauvin. She just let him walk because he was a cop.
Honestly, I just can’t hear another fucking anecdote about her Grandfather. That was her sole pivot.
The Democratic Party is finished, just like the GOP.
Pretty much any reasonable person unleashed by the Democratic party would have won.
It’s cute that he thinks there will be an election in 2028, or ever again, for that matter.
Ohh, there’s probably be an election. Keeping up appearances and all that.
Don’t think he’ll be allowed to run tho.
He’ll probably be allowed to run, but just enough of his votes would mysteriously disappear to swing the election.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWSWqn7UHYM
And they wont even try to hide it because no one will stop them.
Yeah, let’s keep alive the existence of Walz’s couple of misstatements, while ignoring the insane, senile nonsense that Trump spews on the hour. Fuck the media.
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.
I think we need to go with the Zelensky model (comedian-turned-politician) rather than Zelensky proper. My money’s on Jon Stewart and/or Bill Burr.
Burr would be a good choice. I hate to lean hard into identity politics here, but a blue collar aesthetic cishet white guy seems to have a better chance of winning so long as he’s progressive.
Dems have been thinking of it backwards. The center wants vibes, the left wants policies.
Oh man I can’t wait for right-wing/foreign propaganda to tell progressives what they should hate about Walz.
And don’t forget this from a russian propagandist in 2015 (archived reddit link):
“Once we isolate key people, we look for people we know are in their upstream – people that they read posts from, but who themselves are less influential. We then either start flame wars with bots to derail the conversations that are influencing influential people, or else send off specific tasks for sockpuppets (changing this wording of an idea here; cause an ideological split there; etc).”
To be fair it doesn’t take much to cause an idealogical split between leftists.
I mean yes, but that’s why it’s important we push back hard for leftist unity and use propaganda-like approaches to simplify the message into easier to digest chunks for everyone else.
I think it’s fair to say nazis and imperialists/colonizers/fascists/insert-word-for-oppressors-here are a common enemy we can fight against, and access to housing/food/healthcare/etc. are basic human rights.
Theory is great and all but semantics between ourselves can happen after action. It’s a small start but the economic blackouts seemed to break through to the wider populace a bit - I’ve had loved ones who were aware/tried that are otherwise pretty embedded into corpo ecosystems and they didn’t even hear about it from me.
TL;DR: Yes, but “apes together strong.” We can break stereotypes and now’s our chance to reach outward too.
simplify the message into easier to digest chunks for everyone else.
This is a must. America is a country of morons who barely read above a 5th grade level.
You’re an interesting Lemmy, I’ve been watching your work.
I’m more interested in seeing if democrats hold honest primaries.
Or primaries at all.
Continue to pretend that every criticism from your left is from your right. It makes it easier to blame the left you hate when you lose to the right you admire.
Considering democrats held primaries in 2016, 2020 and 2024 and they lined up with what polls where saying what would it take for you to believe that the primaries are honest?
Actually having one would be a start.
They actually had two in 2024.
Uh huh.
I get it after Bernie lost in 2016 a bunch of people lost faith in the system and the DNC using the easy excuse of ‘it’s our primary we can cry if we want to’ was real easy for right-wing and foreign propaganda to bait a hook with and fishing was real good for them.
I get it after Bernie lost in 2016 a bunch of people lost faith in the system and the DNC using the easy excuse of ‘it’s our primary we can cry if we want to’ was real easy for right-wing and foreign propaganda to bait a hook with and fishing was real good for them.
I get that you want to dismiss everything to your left as being all the way to your right so you can keep ignoring the left and moving to the right until you have become the second republican party.
Interesting response as well to that quote. How you feeling about the Republicans right now. Love or hate?
If you aren’t going to be voting in a R primary or for a R candidate, how one feels about them is immaterial.
If you do plan on voting in a D primary or eventually for a D candidate, you may have some small impact on them, their policies, or their trajectory.
“R worse” as a campaign strategy and as political philosophy is why the life raft called the Democratic party is at the bottom of the sea right now. No one who was going to vote D was going to vote R. No R’s were going to vote D.
It was only EVER about D’s doing things that would get D’s to show up, and R’s doing what R’s needed to do to get R’s to show up. R’s understood the assignment and did those things.
Democratic leadership wishes they had R’s for voters. Its the goal of leadership, to turn the D’ party into the R’ party, and has been for decades. Every instrumental decision leads them in this direction.
The problem is that what D’ voters want and what R’ voters want are diametrically opposed. If you run an R’ campaign trying to get D’ voters, you WILL lose. See Kerry 2004, Hillary 2016, and Kamala 2024.
When you run a D’ campaign focused on the wants and needs of D’ voters, you win. See Gore 2000, Obama 08, and 12, and Biden 2020.
The question your asked is a kind of intentional whataboutism that serves to distract from the real issue of why D’s don’t win elections when it matters most.
When you run a D’ campaign focused on the wants and needs of D’ voters, you win. See Gore 2000, Obama 08, and 12, and Biden 2020.
I agree with that.
Now do the Republicans. What did they do wrong in 2020 and what did they do right?
what did they do right
Why would I care about giving information or creating analyses to help the Republicans win?
Every comment you make shows a deep misunderstanding of, well, everything. So why don’t you give me some reasons why I should bother beyond a performative exercise to show how deeply out of touch you are?
What evidence do i have that you ask these things in good faith when you don’t seem bothered by your own nonsequiters?
Continued hate. How about you? Still prefer trump to any progressive?
What do you think the R’s did wrong this last cycle? Do you think they legally cheated and maybe had some actual cheating by his minions? Or do you think they won it because the democrats did everything wrong?
they won it because the democrats did everything wrong?
This isn’t even up for debate. R’s won because D’s did everything wrong, at least during and post convention. Trump had an approval rating almost as low as Biden, and even with the incredible opportunity swapping out the candidate represented, they still managed to blow it. Its in the data.
Biden was dead in the water as far back as March of that year, but realistically, he never had a chance. I’ve posted the analyses here and can dig them up for illustrative purposes, but Biden’s probability of turning it around in March was coming in at between a 1:1000, to 1:10000 chance. It just wasn’t going to happen, and the sane among us were down voted into oblivion, banned from important subs, banned all over the place for pointing that out.
Once the candidates swapped, Harris was suddenly on a trajectory to wipe the floor with Trump. In the few weeks where we had meaningful data, before the convention, She was on pace to be in the range she needed to be in to take the game home in a lunch box. Her polling looked great, she had done no real damage to herself, and voters were mostly basing their estimates of who she was based on her 2020 primary campaign. Her trajectory was on base to be in the range of 50-55% by November in those models. Things looked really good.
Then… the convention happened. And she took all the wrong advice and made all the wrong decisions. She swapped out the progressive policies for neoliberal/ neoconservative polices. She refused to step away from Bidens deeply unpopular positions, which were many. She elevated Republican voices at the convention and silenced Gazan delegates.
And her polling tanked. She then proceeded to double down on these things that were deeply unpopular among Democratic voters. And thats the key. Doing almost nothing before the convention, and she was set to coast to victory. Every move she made after the convention was the wrong one, and cost her, substantially.
So again. This isn’t even a discussion. If you require this kind of enlightenment, you might want to just pay more attention on a regular basis because everything I’m putting out here is pretty much common knowledge and has been, since/ as/ when it all happened.
Do you think they legally cheated and maybe had some actual cheating by his minions?
What about this part? When I say legally cheated, I mean gerrymandering, voter suppression, etc.
I think you replied to the wrong comment.
What do you think the R’s did wrong this last cycle?
Same thing the Democrats did wrong. Moved to the right. The difference is that their base likes it.
But they didn’t win, so if their base liked it, why didn’t it result in a win? I think you understand what I’m saying. There is no black and white, only grey.
Ok, you’ve chosen to deliberately misunderstand what I said in absolute bad faith. I should have expected nothing else.
Republicans’ base likes it when republicans move to the right. Only centrist democrats like it when democrats move to the right. Now misunderstand this on purpose as well.
Zionism, obviously. But if course, anyone who criticizes Israel or it’s supporters must be a secret right-winger or foreign agent, nobody could possibly be legitimately bothered by an apartheid state doing genocide.
you do realize Biden’s neolibs just supported a far right leaders muderous war crimes right? And the progressives were fighting that criminalality the whole time.
Biden and Blinken should be in chains at the Hague, but somehow you want to blame progressives for your sides rampage against human decency.
He was the better half of the ticket.
while this is true, it would still be a total loss to run him
How so?
Thinking there is going to be a real election in 2028 is the most optimistic thing I’ve heard in a while.
I’d vote for him but he’d need to ignore the consultants next time if he wants any hope of winning.
Fuckin should have been the nominee in the first place - him or Sanders.
Not sure of moderates are ok with Sanders. The center and right will keep calling Sanders a socialist and communist.
Who fucking cares? The moderates who were supposed to swoop in and save Kamala pointedly didn’t. Catering towards a fictional segment of the electorate is (demonstrably) a recipe for failure.
You’re right, we should stop try appealing to moderates like Kamala did and just do what’s best for the working class.
That’s the vast majority of what I’m saying.
Well, your supposedly existing leftists didn’t achieve even that. I don’t remember where I heard it, but the saying gows something like “Catering towards a fictional segment of the electorate is (demonstrably) a recipe for failure.”
Probably because Harris and Biden succeeded in alienating a group that SHOULD have been a slam dunk for them: Arab-Americans.
And also, they listened to their consultants instead of, you know, normal people. They were too busy jacking themselves off about how “great” the economy was to notice that MOST people in the country are straight up not having a good time.
The Arab-American vote was crucial in Michigan, and they threw that away. And frankly, I’d argue that they alienated a lot more moderate voters by INSISTING the economy was better (failing to realize economy != people’s actual lives) and staunchly defending the status quo on that front.
Ah yes, Arab-Americans, known for their tolerance and feminist ideals, did not turn out for the woman preaching tolerance for all and love for Israel.
To capture a more left leaning audience you are going to have to abandon this notion notoriously conservative and backwards cultures will suddenly be progressive and accepting.
“Have you considered that the people we’re genociding might be kinda problematic?”
Don’t do that
It’s true, why should we try to support a group that fundamentally disagrees and hates a large part of the base? There’s no salvaging such disagreements.
They called Kamala a communist too. It doesn’t fucking matter, they’ll say it about anyone, you can’t be afraid of it.
Moderates can take their own fucking advice for once and vote blue no matter who.
I think it’s important to work towards enabling more political parties between now and 2028. We need alternative voting systems like Alaska and Maine have, but in the other states as well. That is only really possibly through getting ballot initiatives passed in each state for something like STAR Voting, Ranked Robin Voting, Score Voting, or Ranked Choice Voting.
A different voting system enables us to move away from First Past the Post, which is what forces a two party system. By having this, there can be more smaller parties that more truly represent the values of each state that can work with the bigger parties. Plus, it opens up the door for the most liked candidates to not knock each other out over the least liked candidates when tallying the votes.
All that is needed in about half of the states is to get signatures to put ballot initiatives up for a vote. Through grassroots action we can make a meaningful difference, and get more politicians like Walz that actually care about us in office.
Thats not gonna happen in three years bro
It could happen in at least some states. It takes ballot initiatives that require signatures. If you have other ideas I’m all ears, but I think at least starting the process to change our current system and can be applied fifty states is at least worth a shot. It requires grassroots organizing and would benefit a lot from smaller political parties getting on board as well.
Ill give you that, changing just a few states gradually is much more achievable. As for other ideas in the meantime, Id love to see some leftist militias prepared to repel the feds if shit gets fucky
Alaska has had two voting attempts to overturn RCV and will have another during the midterms. The MAGA wing has fought intensely against it and has the majority pull in the mostly red state. The major parties are doing their work to try to prevent alternative voting strategies and generally has the money and clout to do so. Grassroots movements have helped, but is difficult messaging for the average voter. In the last RCV run in Alaska spending was 10:1 towards RCV and it only narrowed out a 3pt margin. Maybe what’s happening in DC bludgening federally-dependent state might shake things up, but if we’re to believe media/social media trends about MAGA doubling down I won’t hold my breath.
RCV is Alaska is still relatively new for voters. Republicans only fought against it in Alaska when a Democrat managed to win an election when RCV was present, which they may have still won with FPTP as well.
The Democratic Party is not strongly for or against alternative voting systems. More or less on a state by state basis it could be in their favor to have, and the same applies with Republicans as well.
Some forms of Alternative voting have been banned in red states. They certainly are trying to prevent it and marketed against it hard in 2024. 2026 will likely have less Republican turnout due to it not being a presidential election year.
Many states were trying to push RCV and failed to get it passed in 2024. I feel it mostly had to do with not enough people understanding how it or other alternative voting systems worked. We have two to four years to work on educating people about how alternative voting systems will work and trying again and again to get an alternative passed. It’s okay if each state chooses something else, as almost anything is a step up from First Past the Post.
I will say that Alaska opting to barely keep RCV is still a solid sign for Alternative Voting systems as whole, as everywhere else it was on the ballot but not in place it got voted down in 2024.
I think along with a state centered Alternative Voting strategy, a lesson we can take from 2024 is trying to go for grassroots change at the local, city, school board, and union board elections level to promote alternative voting systems. If it’s something people are familiar with, it’s much more likely to succeed at the state and national levels. What’s neat is that even low stakes things such as a vote for what you and your friends want for dinner or what movie to watch can use these different voting systems to introduce people to the idea.
It will take time and hard work for change to happen, but every bit we do now will matter if we want to try to shape things for the better.
I am replying just to let you know I have read, like, and appreciate your thoughtful reply.
No. Run AOC
Muricans won’t show up to elect a woman as president and y’all need to figure this out.
I love AOC but if she ran as president you’re gonna see exactly what happened the last two times a woman ran.
Gotta be realistic. It’s a shitty reality but it is the reality we live in.
Walz is a good candidate with a history of helping his citizens. AOC is a firecracker for sure, but the public isn’t going to elect a woman of color. They just aren’t.
That’s what they said about black men until one ran as a progressive and won twice by sizable margins. Perhaps it’s not the race / gender that’s the biggest hindrance but the policies.
This we need an actual progression
That was a VERY different time. We didn’t have these little screens programming our social views.
I’ve said it in other replies that I hope I’m wrong, but we’ve been backsliding for some time, now.
Kinda like how we saw a lot of white civil rights supporters in the 60s go flying to the right.
We’ve been here before.
I don’t want to hear any of this nonsense until a progressive loses a general election. Until then, all you’re doing is repeating the talking points neoliberals need people to believe in order to keep trying the same bullshit over and over.
Sure thing.
Clinton was old guard. Harris was more or less trying to be a continuance of the same damn thing. I’d like AOC to at least be on the primary ballot.
I would too. I like her. A lot.
I just don’t think she would have as good a chance as we all wish she could.
Make no mistake, I would LOVE to be wrong here, I would love to think the Murican people have evolved enough to realize that a woman in charge would probably be in our best interest, I just don’t see it happening. At least not in 2028
I give exactly zero fucks that she’s a woman. I don’t think a woman in charge would be in our best interest. I don’t think a man in charge would be in our best interest.
We need a leader who has the actual ability to evaluate the system, figure out what’s broken with EVIDENCE, and can articulate it.
That’s you. You are not everyone
I don’t have a problem with it, either.
We are not the general public
Harris and Clinton are both hardcore establishment neolibs. Clinton had Epstein murdered in his cell to cover the rampant sex trafficking crimes of the elites, and Harris campaigned with the Cheneys and thought it was smart politics. It’s not their gender that turned people off, voters just didn’t want to show up for another corporate robot. AOC could be remarkably different here.
If you think gender had nothing to do with it I’ve got some baaaaaad news for you, my friend.
Also, saying Hilary had Epstein murdered in his cell is a magnificent stretch, since there are literally hundreds of scenarios that could have led to his death. An unsubstantiated conspiracy theory didn’t hurt Hilary’s campaign, especially since Epstein was still alive at that point.
Are Americans tired of corporate shills? Certainly. Do we still have a severe misogyny problem? Most definitely. To say otherwise is just silly.
I honestly don’t think it’s gender bias, just that they didn’t represent a change from the status quo which is essential in almost every presidential election. Could be wrong though, certainly a lot of shitheels crawling out of the woodwork these days.
She’s smart, capable, (imo) gorgeous and aggressive in her outlooks. This is threatening to a LOT of men and women alike in our society.
As much as many hate to admit, misogyny is a problem in both left and right wing circles.
Let me make this clear, she would 100% be my optimal choice for a presidential pick. I honestly believe she would be the best person for the job.
I’m also unfortunately keenly aware of how far we have to go when it comes to overcoming the severely deep rooted hatred of women a lot of our citizens (on both spectrums) have.
It sucks. Hard. But it IS a very real hurdle.
Three of the seven swing states Harris lost elected female senators. This is just a bullshit excuse to excuse Harris’s shitty campaign, because “the Democratic party can never fail, it can only be failed”
Don’t put words in my mouth. Stand on your own, and don’t tell me what my motivations are concerning why I draw my conclusions unless you have evidence to back it up
Harris ran an extremely imperfect campaign, I fucking hate the fact that the Democrats are the only other option we have, and a senator is a LONG way off from the leader of the country.
Huge. Fucking. Difference.
and a senator is a LONG way off from the leader of the country.
I love how this insanity is always what y’all turn to when confronted with direct evidence that you’re wrong. The guy who determines who to vote for exclusively based on gender, but only with the presidency, and is perfectly fine with evaluating women fairly in all other top government positions.
It’s just a way to arbitrarily limit the dataset to like two points in order to draw whatever conclusion you want from it. It’s difficult to imagine any possible world in which we have stronger evidence that Harris did not lose because of sexism than the one we live in.
But I understand that, as I said, it’s not about reason but fulfilling a psychological and rhetorical need. You’re not fooling me with this, “Actually, I’m super critical of Harris” in one breath and “she’s 100% my ideal pick” in another, it’s just a motte and bailey.
Someone is definitely coming to conclusions they need in this conversation.
Enjoy that.
Then primary her.
I’m down.
I don’t think it will happen because
A) she’s a woman and they’ve tried that twice already
And more importantly B) she has said many times she doesn’t agree with a lot of the democratic party’s policies. She has beliefs that would undoubtedly vibe with a ton of voters but there’s been a very obvious pattern of both parties only primary-ing “fly right” candidates.
I think Bernie scared the crap out of them and they don’t want a repeat of that. Heaven forbid we get a candidate actually for the people!
It’s not about the gender at all. Dems don’t seem to care about that. They care about having a reason to get off the couch. The only time Republicans win is when Dems can’t be bothered to get their asses moving.
What matters is having someone exciting enough to get the Dems to show up to the booth. Neither Hillary nor Kamala brought fresh energy or anything exciting except a continuation of the status quo establishment.
Please, no Tim Waltz either. I love the guy but my god, we need something fresh besides another sweet grandpa on the ballot.
Please, democrats. No. We have to do better. Biden barely slid by in 2020. Ffs. No more sweet grandpa’s scuffling around the debate stage.
Called this. “Harris lost because she’s a woman of color” was always a preemptive excuse for shutting out AOC.
The party is holding back women in order to hamstring one person, and it’s gross.
It wasn’t the singular reason she lost.
There were many.
But it IS a factor, an ugly one but one people seriously need to come to terms with.
But apparently I hate AOC for pointing this out
That’s my first choice, personally, and if she wins the primaries, that’d be awesome.
Otherwise, I could still get pretty hyped about a Walz/AOC ticket, which would pave a more conventional path to a 2032 AOC presidential run.
Hopefully this time they don’t muzzle him. Tim’s a great example of dem policies working,
Using the military against protestors is indeed a dem policy but I don’t think it worked.
I said dem, not progressive.
It’s cute that they think there’s gonna be another election.
