view the rest of the comments
politics
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
Yeah! I was so worried she'd tank her momentum by picking Shapiro and ham-handedly presenting it. I continue to be impressed with the Harris team's ability to both politic and stay tapped into the people's sentiments.
Except they missed the part where we need someone young instead of a geezer...
He is one year older than her.
When you're an edgy teenager on lemmy, anyone older than 22 is a geezer.
Exactly... he's a geezer. She needed to go with someone younger. If we assume she wins (twice), then Walz will be close to 70 before it is 'his turn'. What a waste. If Dems had gone with someone younger then they could keep the momentum of the youth support AND they'd have someone ready to take over when Harris is done. Now, they'll have to start over in 8 years.
I read that he doesn't want to take his shot at the White House. If Harris wins the election he plans to retire after her second term. She didn't want a veep who saw her as a stepping stone to the Oval Office.
Whether that is wise we will figure out on 2028 (hopefully) but if it's true it provides some context.
I don't necessarily think that the VP spot being a lead-up to a presidential run should be one of the top considerations right now. We need to win this race, 2028 and 2032 can wait their turn.
Beyond that critique, there's a lot the Harris-Walz ticket can do to line up future Dem candidates for many races. For one, this is a big leftward shift for the Dems. That opens up the board for the Squad to make a run in the future. That opens up a path for other, more progressive candidates to fill other positions. We have no idea what the Harris cabinet will look like and a strong cabinet position is also an excellent prelude to a presidential campaign.
Plus, I don't want to get my hopes too high here and indulge in fantasy, but look at what this is doing to Republicans. What if that party shatters post-Trump? Maybe in two: a returning center-right party and an actual fascist party? If the Republicans try to retake the center, that could drive the Dems further left longterm.
tldr, a Harris presidency could go many ways, and I'm not ready to be a pessimist yet! I think this is a good thing especially because it sets us up to do even better in the future!
That is where I'm finding any comfort in the decision. I totally agree that #1 priority has to be getting elected.