For these voters, Tim Walz is a reminder of their dad - before they were lost to partisan division
Democratic vice presidential candidate Tim Walz embodies everything liberal women see in their own fathers – except for their political views. For some, it makes them hopeful but also very sad.
He’s got jokes, enthusiasm and a smiley face that’s not even remotely trying to hide how he’s feeling. He’s Tim Walz- and he’s bringing major Midwestern dad energy to the Democratic ticket.
At least that’s how many white women feel when they see Walz in videos, riding the Slingshot at the state fair with his daughter, signing legislation to give kids in Minnesota free lunches or tweeting about his pet cat.
It’s in stark contrast to what some see in their own fathers - who often have more conservative political views.
“He is silly. My dad used to be very, very silly and goofy,” Pamela Wurst Vetrini, a woman who recently compared Walz to her father, said in a viral TikTok video.
...
“A lot of us had moderate to conservative, educated, sensible fathers that we lost to Rush Limbaugh. That we lost to Fox News. That we lost to Donald Trump. And the cult of conservatism that has grown and grown and grown has driven a wedge between millennial woman and her father,” she said.
Goofy dad calling in the national guard on BLM protestors. Silly goose!
Who's shocked?
I AM shocked. The cropping of this screenshot is terrible.
Lol yeah dismiss facts because you didnt like the instance I have a second account on.
also lol keep lapping up the dem propaganda unquestioningly
Hexbear hypocrite hating on some guy who provides tampons to trans people.
If he won't stand up against the genocide his party supports and calls the national freaking guard on BLM protestors, a move so fashist it impressed even Trump:
https://abcnews.go.com/US/despite-new-criticism-trump-told-walz-2020-happy/story?id=112616502
then I don't know how hating on him makes me a hypocrite.
LOL an opinion article from Haaretz about American politics.
And, of course, you'll be fine denouncing that paper when it supports genocide as being completely unreliable as a source.
But when it agrees with you...
You have no idea that the context of citations matters do you?
a) it's an opinion article, I'm not linking it because of factual reporting, which indeed the Haaretz is unreliable on.
b) the point is that the Haaretz, which is trying to whitewash the genocide, is cool with Walz.
I would also cite far-right american newspapers if I wanted to showcase how the far-right likes someone and approves of their "silence".
Cool. Show us how the far-right in America really likes Tim Walz then (one single positive comment about an event that happened years ago is not enough to show that they like someone, sorry). Especially considering they were all pissed off Harris didn't pick Shapiro.
Why? For what point? Can you only be critical of people the far-right endorses or are you just trying to move the goal posts?
For your point. The one you just made and I replied to. You do read your own posts, right?
I made no point that would imply the american far-right endorses Tim Walz.
I see, so only the far-right in Israel likes him. The far-right in America hates him.
Well, since he isn't running for Vice President of Israel, sounds like he's a better choice than the people the far-right likes.
Israel is basically the US' puppet. They could stop the genocide at any point. Electing him and Harris means they won't.
I don't like the instance you're on because it's full of assholes and you're not exactly making it easy for me to change that opinion.
It doesn't matter what justification you use to keep burying your head in the sand, you're still blinding yourself in a desperate attempt to safeguard some hope about the upcoming election no matter how false it may be.
In the midst of your righteous anger, you might have missed the point that I wasn't talking about Tim Walz.
No, you keep trying to deflect from his shitty record to me having a second account on hexbear. I just keep trying to have you take an actual look at the guy and not just blindly cheerlead whoever the dems put in front of you.
I am not a moderator in this community. Believe it or not, I am not able to shut you up or shut you down. You can post a response criticizing Walz in reply to every person on this thread and there would be nothing I could do about it.
Gotta love how people on Lemmy claim you're trying to silence them.
If you're worried about people deflecting from your claims, maybe your claims aren't very good and you should find some claims that people can't deflect.
?????
what are you even trying to say? Is it just word salad to get the last post in? Just DM me, you can have it.
Since you seem to have forgotten your own post, I'll help you out:
I can't deflect from anything you write. However, you are the one who has decided you don't need to talk about Walz anymore and just bicker with me instead. I didn't force you to do that. I can't even force you to reply.
He waited to verify that there was a rioter and looter problem before calling them in. Explicitly so he wasn't calling them in on mere protesters, but looters who deserve it.
Anything youre basing this on? To clarify: who deserved the terrorisation of the national guard and how did Tim Walz make sure they were targeted.
If you actually listen to his recounting of the situation... Yeah, actually. I would say that the way he handled that was absolutely the way a (good) dad would.
Including the bit afterwards where they tell you they were wrong for the initial overreaction, but they did it out of fear for your safety.
But after actually listening to why you're mad, you talk it out and guess what? He recognizes that your anger is valid and opened a dialogue to help fix those problems.
If that's not "great dad" energy, then I dunno what is.
But let's not let actual facts get in the way of you pretending to be a progressive on the internet to make leftists look bad.
Got any links because the search engines are cluttered with articles fact checking trump who keeps wanting to take credit for calling in the national guard.
edit:
How can I if I only get downvoted with no replies? I'm not even arguing here just asking what it is that I haven't seen.
Here's a neutral account: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests_in_Minneapolis%E2%80%93Saint_Paul
Ok, but the poster above is saying that Walz admitted to being in the wrong and that his was an overreaction. I would like to know the context of this.
the police state violently crushing dissent is actually good when it's done by someone who reminds me of my dad!
two comments below yours:
sometimes daddy needs to put his foot down and disappear people I guess?
you don't understand, those people definitely deserved it. they were the bad protestors, not the good protestors. the foot-soldiers of the state only attack people who deserve it. this is basic freedomology.