The fact Harris’ campaign muzzled Walz when he could have been saying shit like this the whole time was a big fucking mistake. Christ, why wasn’t HE the god damn nominee?!
So yes, Harris fucked up her campaign by trying to appeal to conservatives, but I still don't place the blame on her. I would have voted for motherfucking dick Cheney to keep trump out of office, he's that dangerous for the country.
That being said, now that we're in this boat I hope the democrats keep up this kind of fire. Going high when they go low has failed us for a decade now, it's time to play the game by their rules.
Agreed. He’s got balls and is a straight shooter. Unlike Harris, that tried to pander and just be another sell-out like Pelosi, Schumer, and Feinstein.
"keep up this fire," lmao yeah man I'm sure the administration is gonna hurt so much from this lip service. We're kinda past the point of just making some snarky tweet or something. It just gives "democrats introduce bill where first letter of each sentence spells trump is bad"
Walz WAS saying shit like this throughout the entire campaign and got plenty of press, or did you forget the whole "weird" thing? Front page of reddit couldn't get enough of his quips. If the campaign ever "muzzled" him, it was only after he bombed his debate performance and let Vance make him look like a blubbering idiot.
The “weird” messaging from him started before he was picked for VP, and it ended right around when the campaign decided they needed to trot out the Cheneys for some reason
It was a crazy maneuver by J.D. Vance. He acted all fake nice and agreeable and Walz couldn’t cut through it. Now he is back to being rude and condescending so you can tell it was a one night play to throw him off his game.
Because Vance is a professional when it comes to debating. I went to law school and Vance was doing very tried and true debate team strategies which obviously work on someone who isn't an expert.
Basically you start off every single statement by pretending to agree with your opponent just to undercut them in the second half of your statement. But since you came off as amicable and complementary in the first half of your statement, if your opponent comes after you aggressively, they will look like a rude asshole. It's a pretty good trick but it doesn't work on other lawyers it's literally just using his law school training to verbally beat up an amateur debater.
Vance is basically a snake oil salesman. No substance but great speaking techniques.
If Vance had tried it on Kamala she would have ripped him to shreds because she's a lawyer.
He would be demolished by Trump, not because Trump is a good debater or says anything true or smart, because he doesn't. But the gish gallop/reverse gallop "skills" he spews on stage would have made it hard for Walz to finish a single sentence or argument.
Thing with Walz that’d work in his favor is his history as a public school teacher
He’s definitely dealt with a lot of idiot kids with stupid things to say; this would be his chance to actually speak his mind at one of these dumb assholes
did you see the VP debate? Vance unfortunately kinda ate his lunch. I like Walz and appreciate everything he stands for, but I’m gonna need a candidate with a bit more bite the next time around.
He didn’t eat his lunch. He was better in style but completely lacking in substance. Vance lied several times and Walz gave some great answers with great points.
Not to mention how horribly trump did in the debate should have ended the campaign then and there.
Is there any actual evidence this happened or is this just something people say? You have got to be taking crazy pills if you think they sidelined Walz if his message was resonating with people. That is, unless you're pushing that russian/republican fueled conspiracy that Harris lost on purpose.
They shouldn’t have gone with Biden in 2020, I completely agree. Not remotely my first choice, but whatever. I voted for him because him vs Trump is a nobrainer.
Then they just ran him again! Are you kidding? Fine. Still a nobrainer.
Oh, but then they switched to someone else and all the fuckers who voted for him TWICE are like, “Whaaat?!?! This is a bridge too far!”
If you voted for Biden in the primary, and got Kamala, and you’re whining about it now, seriously? You’re getting what you deserve, because it was still a nobrainer.
I guess I should do more research, but I don't understand how pointing out that there were no primaries gets downvoted so heavily.
Is it because suggesting that if there were primaries and the people voted for the democrats candidate that said candidate would have won? Genuinely asking
Is there a source for this whole "no primary" claim?
There were definitely Democratic primaries in Missouri.
Is it because suggesting that if there were primaries and the people voted for the democrats candidate that said candidate would have won?
Republicans were all geared up to go against Biden. They had 6 years to prep and had their whole campaign ready. An incumbent president basically always wins their primary, no it was a safe bet.
Biden dropping out ruined all their plans. So they threw a tantrum and said Biden should be forced to run. Which is a stupid fucking argument; especially when you consider that they said he should step down.
To be clear, there 100% was a primary in every state. The idea that there wasn't is misinformation. It is completely possible (however improbable) that Biden would have lost the 2024 primary.
The only thing that is (tenuously) questionable is whether or not the front-runner is allowed to step out of a primary.
It's the front-runner specifically because losing candidates dropping out of the the race and signing their votes to someone else has been the norm for my entire lifetime and no one questioned until 2024.
Yes, but the primaries were not serious primaries. Biden ran against people like dean phillips and Biden didn't show up to the debates. There was almost no media coverage.
What people mean when they say there were no primaries was that it was no competitive primary, they just ticked the boxes to fulfil the procedure. If the dnc wanted to run a competitive primary, they could have invited the serious contenders to run but then chose not to.
edit:
If Biden decides to run for re-election and there is a primary challenge, DNC executive director SAM CORNALE told us: “We’re with Biden. Period.”
edit2: Dornith. You didn't contest anything I said, this is essentially admitting your previousl comments were full of shit. Im not being hypocritical and I have none of the positions you assumed so you are attacking a stawman. And was this comment really block worthy?
And why were all the Republicans demanding that Biden be the nominee if supposedly the primary didn't count?
Your take is hypocritical and doesn't even follow it's own internal logic.
Edit:
Tell me, when exactly did it become "illegitimate" for a candidate to drop out of a primary? Because until last July, not only was it "legitimate", it happened in basically every primary.
Not only that, but Republicans were calling on Biden to drop out of the race. Y'all are just bitter Democrats called your bluff.
Because it's 99/100 times just a conservative trying to rile people up. Would it have been good to have a full primary without Biden when there was still time to? Yeah, but they decided to go with the incumbent which is a reasonable choice. Biden started having health issues at exactly the wrong time, so he dropped out and they didn't have time to do a primary so went with the next person in line, Harris. Conservatives say "there wasn't a primary" as though Harris was unqualified for office, but she was already second in line to the presidency. When we voted for Biden, we also voted for her.
Nominating a Presidential candidate has changed a number of different ways since 1796. The most current method started in 1972 and really isnt as old of a process as most people might think.
Edit: Either way, the process is not in the Constitution and for a reason. The founding fathers wanted parties to have the freedom to determine their own candidates.
Look, we don't respect actual democratic practices around here. The Party will tell you who is going to be president, and it's your responsibility to vote for them, no matter what.
No the only criticism that I agree with is that Biden should’ve declared his intention to not run as early as 2022 and no later than early 2023 given the party time to figure shit out.
Yeah it is. People can rightfully point out that a rock is better than Trump but the rock doesn't get people out of their homes to actually go do anything. People can cry about this shit and point fingers but the reality is you have to inspire people to go out and do something and honestly Trump was the only candidate doing that for both sides and that's a fatal flaw for democrats. Expect more losses on "no brainer" elections if they don't wake up and realize they actually need to get out there and get regular people to care about them by running candidates they actually care about and believe in
Currently, candidates go through a series of state primary elections and caucuses where, based on the number of votes they receive from the electorate, they win a certain number of delegates. The delegates—people authorized to represent their state—will vote for their assigned candidate at their political party's convention.
So Primaries like I originally said and Caucases?
That link didn’t tell me anything about the nomination process that I haven’t been aware of for the last 20 years.
Okay, so I get the point here in that Kamala didn't win a primary, but there absolutely was a primary. Just no one besides brain worm ran against Biden.
396
u/TechnologyRemote7331 13h ago
The fact Harris’ campaign muzzled Walz when he could have been saying shit like this the whole time was a big fucking mistake. Christ, why wasn’t HE the god damn nominee?!