Was Walz a mistake?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It was Kamala. Kamala was the wrong pick. Michelle Obama could’ve won if she’d ran. Kamala lacks depth and personality. [/quote

It was the American people. They lack intellect and education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No wonder he couldn’t get Gwen pregnant.

He does leg kicks like Elaine, sometimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No wonder he couldn’t get Gwen pregnant.

Just reinforcing that you're the party of @ssholes.

[Anonymous]

She was never going to pick someone who would outshine her, so a very small pool of people to pick from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Choosing" a presidential candidate 3 months before an election was the mistake. You reap what you sow.

This. As a Democrat who voted for Harris (because what choice did I have?) the minute Biden was out and she was just declared our nominee, I called a Trump win. I voted, I did my part and now it's time to build our party back up from the smoldering ground.

The sooner Democrats realize this the more we can take advantage of the next four years to come back swinging. Stop whining, let's get to work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

This is just mean and made me sad. ( even though I didn’t support him)

[Anonymous]

No! He was a breath of fresh air. What a bright spot in an otherwise dreary crowd.

[Anonymous]

It's so hard to find a good (candidate) for president. It feels like, in such a large country, there should be many such people, but both parties struggle mightily. Successful people are often not likable, or are not leaders, or hold weird views. They appear overly slick, calculated, scripted, or too nerdy or privileged.

The whole reason Biden became president is because there was nobody better. Kamala was a forced choice. And Republicans are f$$ed also. What happens after Trump? Vance could never win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Folks are tired of the elites. Enough of Obamas, Clintons, Hollywood and Fake News. It’s over.

Yeah stick it to the elites by putting a bunch billionaires in power. Oligarchy is great for the little guy. /s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No! He was a breath of fresh air. What a bright spot in an otherwise dreary crowd.

Agree, he was refreshing. The only one who didn't come across as a slick politician. But he didn't do as well in the glare of the spotlight as I had hoped. He was so charming, funny, and sharp on the tv circuit before being picked, and a good governor whose leadership of the governors' association attested to his strengths. Too bad it didn't translate. But the bottom of the ticket had no impact, it never does. It's always the top.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He was a lightweight. His folksy schtick on 60 Minutes wasn’t even cute. I don’t think he hurt her but he definitely didn’t help.

PA was always a must win state. Why they didn’t pick Josh Shapiro as VP was baffling.

They lost WI and MI, Shapiro would not have helped there. Walz was fine, a little out of his depth and didn't do so well under pressure, but he wasn't a hue problem. A weak candidate who could not articulate a clear policy platform was the primary problem, and the majority's perception that the country has moved too far left on immigration and other issues. Harris tried to thread the needle with too many constituencies, which made her seem weak and wishy washy. A strong, articulate moderate who made a point of putting Biden in the rearview, and who always kept the focus on the bread and butter issues American care about, could have won.

It’s rare to find such reasonable takes on here. Good job.

Agree. Both candidates were terrible.
Its sad. Terrible choice to make between two extremes.

Too bad we couldn't have just had a regular primary.

For both parties, that would have been idea.

But the problem for democrats was that Biden picked Harris for VP, and to get rid of him they either had to pick her or risk passing her over and pissing off a lot of people. So she was the only possible choice, even though she wasn't the best. If only Biden hadn't decided to run again in the first place, and then we could have actually had a primary.

But how would the end result be any different? If Biden didn't run, and let's assume Harris did, who would have beaten her in the primary and then beat Trump in the general election?

[Anonymous]

No. I don’t think he mattered ultimately.

Weird how some states Obama won went to Trump….then back to Biden in 2020….then back for Trump last night. It’s almost like people are cool voting for a democrat when it’s a man. I guess you could make the argument Obama was a dynamic campaigner and Kamala and Hillary weren’t but wtf, Biden ran a terrible campaign.

I am not making a point about policies either way. I voted for Kamala but agree with some of Trump’s policies, I just agreed with more of hers. And I do think democrats need to get back to meat and potatoes rather than identity politics. But come on. It’s so, so obvious this country just hates women in power.

[Anonymous]

Yes, completely wrong. He's too far left and he lies with ease. He's too cozy with the squad. He offered nothing. She should have picked Shapiro. Mark Kelly would have been better too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, completely wrong. He's too far left and he lies with ease. He's too cozy with the squad. He offered nothing. She should have picked Shapiro. Mark Kelly would have been better too.

+1. According to articles I'm seeing, the Harris campaign is already throwing him under the bus as a major reason for the loss.

[Anonymous]

Waltz has nothing to do with it.

The country rejected Kamala & progressive policies.

We need to accept it and retool or continue losing.