Was Walz a mistake?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Was he the wrong vp pick?

Maybe. We will never know for sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump didn’t win because of Vance and Harris didn’t lose because of Walz.

I absolutely think Vance helped steer independents to Trump.

I don’t. I think picking Vance was net neutral.

Were you one of the ones thinking Kamala would win too?

[Anonymous]

Ideological spending on wars and illegals were the biggest straws.

[Anonymous]

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

Trump , a celebrity who has cameos in several Hollywood movies, is the king of fake news.

[Anonymous]

Kamala and Tim weren't ideal candidates but against Donald and JD, they were clearly better options. Dems lost because of their policies not because of their candidates.

[Anonymous]

No. VP did not matter. the issue was with Harris being the pick. Biden should not have run for reelection and allowed a proper primary. However, once he decided not to do that and then to step down Harris was the only choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, he wasn’t even from a swing state. He offered no value to the ticket

I agree. I think it was a concession to the left, which then didn’t turn out because of Gaza.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No. This was a choice between good and evil. All other considerations were secondary.

I'm deeply ashamed of my country today.

You are one of the many reasons Trump won. Your hysteria is most unappealing.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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

Right because Trump is self made off bootstraps and mama’s apple pie and whatever else that totally isn’t nepotism and ties to the financial elite of this country.

[Anonymous]

Did not pick Shapiro because he's Jewish and it was a big mistake for PA and generally because he seems less liberal and more "business" than Waltz who seems like an ultra liberal grandpa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kamala and Tim weren't ideal candidates but against Donald and JD, they were clearly better options. Dems lost because of their policies not because of their candidates.

+ 1 million

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did not pick Shapiro because he's Jewish and it was a big mistake for PA and generally because he seems less liberal and more "business" than Waltz who seems like an ultra liberal grandpa.

+1 yep

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nope, nothing to do with Walz or Harris.

We live in a racist and misogynistic country and clearly more than half the people are totally good with it, including the very people who will be harmed the most by the coming regime.

Dems are the racist and woke policies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

Trump , a celebrity who has cameos in several Hollywood movies, is the king of fake news.

But he doesn't lecture voters the way MSNBC, the Obamas, HRC, and The View do (just some examples). And I voted for Harris and admire the Obamas.