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.

      • @UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        834 months ago

        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.

        • @Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          624 months ago

          No, I don’t think Democrats are ready to make new mistakes yet. They still won’t abandon their devotion to the old mistakes.

        • BoofStroke
          link
          fedilink
          English
          94 months ago

          They made it in 2024. The results of abstaining or protest voting were obvious, and these idiots did it anyway. And here we are.

          • @UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            34 months ago

            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.

        • KillingTimeItself
          link
          fedilink
          English
          34 months ago

          I wonder if Democrats will make the same mistake in 2026.

          i really, really fucking hope this doesnt happen, i’m going to fucking lose my shit if it does. Because unless things change, it’s not looking great for the trump midterms right now.

        • FundMECFS
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          That makes no sense at all. 2018 was two years after Trump won in 2016, and he rarely claimed elections were rigged in 2016, because he won.

          In 2020, however, he was gloating about how elections were rigged, and republicans did okay in the midterms later in 2022.

          • @UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            54 months ago

            he rarely claimed elections were rigged in 2016, because he won.

            He was highly outspoken in 2016 straight up until the elections closed, then did a number of interviews after the fact where he insisted he could have won in states like California and New York if the vote hadn’t been rigged against him. There was also a big wave of “RINOs are undermining the party!” discourse, particularly after McCain spiked the Senate vote on repealing Obamacare that lead to a ton of internal GOP drama.

            In 2020, however, he was gloating about how elections were rigged, and republicans did okay in the midterms later in 2022.

            The J6 riot was the product of four years of Republican discourse, insisting elections were rigged. Once Trump was out of office and banned from Twitter, his ability to amplify conspiracy theories was diminished. The Republican media machine was able to pivot back to a “We’re the majority! We’re going to flood the polls! Red Wave!” exuberance and away from the internalized defeatism post-2016.

        • @unphazed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          14 months ago

          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)

    • @rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      284 months ago

      There will absolutely be an election.

      It will be a farce, a Russian election where there’s only one possibility to win.

      If we’re not pitchforks in the street before then, I don’t hold much hope

      • @Hubi@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        234 months ago

        Or maybe a Hungary-style election where the entire media landscape shills for the ruling class and people on social media are bombarded with misinformation and one-sided reporting.

        • Bone
          link
          fedilink
          114 months ago

          Sounds like you described the US process as well. May not be far from it now.

        • djsoren19
          link
          fedilink
          English
          54 months ago

          Certainly could never happen here, twice at least. /s

        • @FrostBlazer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          That’s close to what happened in 2024 tbh. Sites like Reddit, Instagram, and YouTube were heavily botted and full of bad faith actors to promote misinformation. Since there are no guardrails like BlueSky has for instance, the bots could show up early to every thread/post/video to set the narrative and then they’d be the last to reply before threads closed to get the final word in.

          I believe the future depends on more Federated sites to become mainstream and for Federated sites to adopt the same moderation mechanisms used by BlueSky.

    • @maplebar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      144 months ago

      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.

    • Jolly Platypus
      link
      fedilink
      English
      124 months ago

      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. 🙏

      • @dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        8
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        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.

    • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      64 months ago

      The one thing we have going for us is that Don’s dementia and age are going to increasingly make it difficult for him to hold his party together. And there is the chance one of those things will leave the GOP trying to field a new traitor to try and get the cult to consolidate around.

      • KillingTimeItself
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        once he kicks the bucket, assuming they can’t find someone the republican base will support as fervently as trump, the entire party is done for, it will collapse into a blackhole of nothingness.

        • @Kitathalla@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          44 months ago

          I’d like to believe that, I really would, but let’s be honest with ourselves. The current republicans (in leadership) aren’t stupid. They’ve gotten pretty decent at running with donald’s bullshit and spinning it. They also know that politics isn’t much different than sports teams for the vast majority of the voting public in america. They’ll not have trouble finding someone who is charismatic enough to spit verbal acid at opponents in a primary AND can be riled up against the demographic target of choice.

          The only real challenge for them will be 1.) finding someone with donald’s ‘blessing’ or a connection to him to set it up as ‘taking over’ so the republican voters will find it so amazing, AND 2.) ensuring someone like musk doesn’t try to torpedo everything by using vast amounts of money to try to buy their way into the ring.

          • KillingTimeItself
            link
            fedilink
            English
            14 months ago

            maybe, but you’re talking about finding someone who can win the graces of the people who like trump, who see trump as this historic figure. That’s a REALLY tall order. Even if you hemorrhage like 10% of your voter base, that’s enough to lose. If the republicans are smart they’re already working on grooming the next republican figurehead, but i doubt they are. Though they might end up playing their cards right, i’m not really convinced it’s a reliable determination to assume that they will find someone to replace trump, these things are just way too volatile.

          • KillingTimeItself
            link
            fedilink
            English
            24 months ago

            no, the dems, because literally who else are you going to vote for lmao. There is always a budding dem/left leaning candidate, we will never have that problem, we don’t play as aggressively on that.

            • @kreskin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              1
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              because literally who else are you going to vote for lmao.

              Well, I’ll leave the entry blank. And I dont agree that theres always a budding dem candidate. The party is sickly and captured by the donors, particularly aipac. There is no way it magically becomes uncaptured without losing elections. So thats what I’m working on.

              • KillingTimeItself
                link
                fedilink
                English
                14 months ago

                protest voting is definitely an option, although i wish it listed actual numbers. Kind of ruins the point if it’s just worthless to do.

                Losing elections to the republicans? You mean the party that most lefties accuse the dems of being in bed with? Seems like a bold strategy. Do nothing and, when you do end up doing something, make sure it’s something that doesn’t actually do anything.

                • @kreskin@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  14 months ago

                  Kind of ruins the point if it’s just worthless to do.

                  My vote and other voters like me made the point to the DNC that if they ignore the will of a large enough segment of their base, they will absolutely lose the election. If everyone thought like you did, the DNC would completely ignore the entirety of their base. They clearly operate from a completely amoral calculation these days. They dont care about much of anything. Not law, not human dignity. Nothing.

                  • KillingTimeItself
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    13 months ago

                    does the DNC even know what the protest vote numbers are? And even if they did, how does anybody know whether or not they’re even significant.

                    If everyone thought like you did, the DNC would completely ignore the entirety of their base.

                    ??? ok.

                    They clearly operate from a completely amoral calculation these days. They dont care about much of anything. Not law, not human dignity. Nothing.

                    Not even a little bit of any of these things? Not a single percentage point of ANY of these things? AT ALL?

    • @Dogsoftulkas@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      24 months ago

      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”.

    • @tyrant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      24 months ago

      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.