If you ask me, I’m upset no one picked up that this consideration was sexist and racist, although it is indeed the best choice for her to win, which reflects how bad US can’t get over race and gender.

  • Moneo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’d argue Walz bucks this trend, at least to a certain degree. His progressive policy and seemingly unwavering integrity seems to be a huge reason he was picked. They’ve leaned into his achievements and republicans are desperately grasping at straws trying to criticize him.

      • nomous@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        8 years of Harris and then 8 years of Walz.

        16 years isn’t much in the grand scheme but maybe in that time The Left can wake up and mobilize and actually make some progress towards election reforms so we can start un-fucking the last 50 years of GOP-Heritage Foundation Trickledown Reaganomics Bullshit that’s destroying the country.

      • Moneo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Completely agree. He also just seems like a better candidate vibe wise so far, he’s funny and endearing in a way Kamala is not. Although I do vibe with Kamala’s dorky/weird moments that so many seem to criticize.

    • Zorque@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s still about perception over tangible benefits, though. He’s not chosen because he’ll make progressive decisions, he’s chosen because he helps encourages progressives to vote come November. Just like if he was black or hispanic would help push those demographics to vote in the general election.