1137
Tim Walz says he may run for president in 2028 despite failure of Harris campaign
(www.independent.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2025
1137 points (97.5% liked)
politics
31368 readers
2104 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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.