Tim Walz Says 'We Wouldn't Be In This Mess' If It Wasn't For Him And Harris
www.huffpost.com
The former vice presidential nominee offered a blunt mea culpa on MSNBC.

Summary

Former vice presidential nominee Tim Walz criticized Trump for economic chaos while taking personal responsibility for the situation during an MSNBC interview.

“We wouldn’t be in this mess if we’d have won the election — and we didn’t,” Walz told Chris Hayes. He called Trump the “worst possible business executive” and praised the Wall Street Journal’s editorial criticizing Trump’s tariff war.

Walz emphasized Democrats must offer something better, not just criticize Trump. Recently, he acknowledged a leadership void in the Democratic Party and admitted spending too much time combatting Trump’s false claims about immigrants.

  • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
    0·
    3 days ago

    i’m talking about the voter base that actually cares enough to influence their vote over it.

    https://www.imeupolicyproject.org/postelection-polling

    bro, did you see ANYTHING that trump said? Literally an irrelevant argument.

    Don’t move the goalposts. Here’s what you said:

    she was actually pretty ok? The one thing that was bad about her was the israel stance, which is like maybe 5% of the voter base that ACTUALLY cares about that enough.

    We’re talking about Harris on her own merit, not about Trump.

    I remember her talking about a lot of things she and walz were going to do, that was like a pretty big deal.

    Like? Give me something specific she clearly said she would do for the working class and a link of her saying it in September or October.

    yeah and? Biden had pretty good economic policy? Aside from the whole covid thing, but you have no choice there, unless you want a global recession, more like a depression.

    He did well on the economic recovery front, but he or example didn’t go after price gouging. His economic policies were a step in the right direction, not an end state to campaign on.

    Again, trumps economic policy has been an utter disaster in comparison.

    Again, that is literally not what we’re talking about.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        0·
        2 days ago

        in the context between shooting yourself in the head with a 12 gauge slug, and stubbing your toe really badly. I think most people would agree with me when i say that stubbing your toe is the best option. Comparatively, a good option.

        Of course if you compare it to things like, randomly finding a billion check on the ground, nothing compares to that, but that’s an unreal comparison, you literally cannot base a reference point on them.

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          2 days ago

          Of course if you compare it to things like, randomly finding a billion check on the ground, nothing compares to that, but that’s an unreal comparison,

          I mean, if you’re comparing finding a billion dollar check on the ground to democrats being willing to field a candidate with redeeming features beyond “not trump,” I think the check is more likely.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            0·
            1 day ago

            so if we’re basing your logic off of this specific example, where the likelihood of finding that check is, let’s say “approaching zero” to be generous. It would be safe to say that you assume the dems doing anything to appease your opinion of them is “at zero” or “furthering from zero” perhaps.

            • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              1 day ago

              so if we’re basing your logic off of this specific example

              Three specific examples in a row. clinton, biden, harris.