The left loves Tim Walz. Can he unite the Democrats?

fukhueson@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world – 442 points –
The left loves Tim Walz. Can he unite the Democrats?
vox.com
88

Headline suggests that the Democrats - who are currently more united than they've been since probably Kennedy - aren't united.

If you think that's baffling, take a look at Nate Silver's column:

https://www.natesilver.net/p/tim-walz-is-a-minnesota-nice-choice

I'm not sure if Nate is talking about the same Walz and Shapiro as the rest of us.

Shapiro has Israel baggage that I am so glad I don't have to hear about online for the next forever. Kelly had a messy divorce that I'm sure nobody wants to have dredged up. Walz seems relatable to a great number of people.

Plus, he drives a 1979 IH Scout.

Shapiro's Israel issue would have been a toss-up issue. Some independents wanted him to be very pro-Israel, others no so much. Probably wouldn't have made a huge difference.

On the other hand, might have made a difference in Michigan among the large muslim minority who may not have come out to vote.

I really just hope Walz is not going to be another Kaine.

Democrats aren't the biggest fans of Israel right now. It's not independents that matter in his case.

Democrats are very divided on Israel but lots are very pro-Israel. Most American Jews vote Democratic.

Doesn't mean they agree with Netanyahu's handling of Gaza, but pro-Israel nonetheless.

Okay, but lots of Democrats won't vote for a pro-genocide administration. Someone who volunteered to be a soldier for their regime would have been seen as proof to them that Kamala was just as bad as Biden on Israel.

Wouldn't have mattered much when the alternative is Trump, which would be a thousand times worse than any candidate the Democrats could come up with.

Not all Democrats will vote blue no matter who and Harris's pick seems to be an acknowledgement that she can't afford to piss off the uncommitted movement.

2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...

I remember listening to a podcast they would make, a lady and a guy and Nate Silver. I think it's that podcast that makes me not really like him or his ideas aside from the numbers and the team he surrounds himself with. I look at 538 and I trust it for the most part but if it has Silver attached to it, I think of it as editorial

538 no longer has Nate Silver or his model; Disney bought it and fired him like a year ago or so.

Still, I agree; I don't like his politics, but his analysis of polls and numbers is probably the best out there.

He seems to have gotten more right-wing in recent years, although he doesn't talk about it too explicitly (maybe he was always like that and I just didn't know).

I remember him downplaying the J6 insurrection during one of the podcasts which was the point where I lost a lot of respect for him, and frankly him leaving isn't a big loss as he seemed to be just over election modelling in general by the end.

Lmao, Silver is equating a Walz pick to a TIM KAINE pick.

I’m sorry, I can’t read any further with sooo much cope.

Yeah, it doesn't get much better. Silver's great when it's just about numbers, but less so when it's slightly more intangible. This column might be the peak example.

You should read through the comments on that post.

Almost NONE of Silvers subscribers are having it.

This just a way off base miss of Silvers.

Believe the numbers, doubt the pundit.

Silver's claim that Walz is a Tim Kaine pick is just dead on arrival. I'm sorry, I appreciate his actual model, but his argument here is just too speculative.

Yeah, I typically like Nate, but today's column seemed sloppy. I don't see how Walz is the "safe" choice - he's further left than Shapiro. I also didn't get what he was saying about Minnesota values not translating. I think Walz was a bold pick and I'm happy with the choice.

Seconded. Walz isn’t “safe” if you look at his policies. He’s pretty far left and is just fine implementing social policy, gun control, and using government money to fund social programs. That’s pretty radical if you’re a Republican. While he isn’t a policymaker as the VP, he’s a tie-breaker and he’s a future presidential candidate should Harris win.

He doesn't even understand that "Minnesota Nice" is not a compliment. It refers to when people who have lived here their whole lives and have close often going back to high school. When someone from out of state moves to Minnesota, their co-workers, neighbors etc will be friendly, act interested in the newbs lives, and even offer things like "we should get together sometime". That is in no way an invitation to actually do anything. If the newb proposes a date "to get the kids together", the Minnesotan will hem, haw and make up excuses.

Minnesota Nice is a special kind of nice.

He should just predict basketball or what ever and leave politics to the adults that he hired.

In case you're not aware, 538 was acquired by Disney/ABC, and he's no longer involved with them.

So yeah, he's just a pundit now, and his punditry was never that great to begin with. The Model is what made him good

2 more...

I think that's a pretty simplistic take considering we just swapped our candidate less than 6 months before the election. I agree with the article's take that Walz has potential to unify the differing democratic coalitions, and don't see any evidence of your claim.

Walz’s elevation earns the left a big victory. Yet because Walz himself isn’t of the left, the pick seems intended to serve a unifying purpose: a candidate who appeals to all different stripes of Democrats for different reasons. The fact that Democrats across the political spectrum seem thrilled by the pick — with effusive support coming from people ranging from Sen. Joe Manchin (WV) to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY) — seems to validate the theory.

It’s important to be clear: The VP selection matters way less for elections than people think. It’s much more important to select a potential president than an optimal running mate.

But you can see why Harris sees picking Walz as smart politics. It allows her to simultaneously hand the left a win without necessarily tacking left — potentially keeping her coalition united even as she works to win over the general election’s decisive centrists.

I think its important to recognize the value this VP pick can bring, and I've not known vox to try to suggest something like that without reason.

Edit: I'm also going to add that your reply is a disingenuous attempt to falsely turn this into a binary unified or not unified condition, not that the article is making such a claim. I entirely reject your statement.

My statement stands.

Good talk.

Edit: no follow ups.... guess they didn't read the article past the headline? :)

Edit 2: they clearly didn't lol

13 more...

He can defiantly crush Vance and speak to the Midwest. I think that is what matters.

Defiantly definitely works too ;)

While still being a genuinely good person.

Also, he isn’t shy about cutting through the bullshit to the issues. Like this clip. “Oh what a monster!”…

Dude got nominated like an hour ago. How are they putting out articles like this?

Like the average person ain't even got home from work on the east coast.

They are preloaded and ready to go. They probably have other articles in the can for the other names that were being considered as well.

It might also surprise you to know that major news networks pre-tape celebrity obituaries just in case that person dies.

Walz has been known to be on the shortlist for at least a week, probably longer. They probably had articles like this in the pipeline for all the likely candidates.

The campaign worked with news outlets and let them write the articles, under what's often called an embargo. Basically, in exchange for holding the story until it's announced, the journalists can write the story ahead of time.

Source: dated a girl who worked in PR and a girl who was in media relations for a large company

Can confirm.

Source: married to journalist who counts down the hours and triple checks the time zone math to avoid this.

Presumably various media outlets had articles prepared ahead of time for each of the possible outcomes.

Big news sites will do things like write up a story announcing a presidential win for each of the candidates, then only publish the one that matters after the election. This way they can have a story on the front page within minutes (seconds these days) of having official results.

I wouldn't be surprised if Vox had 1 of these lined up for each of the likely VP picks. If not that, it certainly wouldn't be unusual for a journalist to do their homework on all of the candidates and to have the rough outline and some key facts ready to go for each. If you've already done most of the research, assembling the final story shouldn't take more than a couple of hours.

Its like how obituaries are written well in advance of notable people dying. They had this article written up for each person on Harris's list.

Well, he didn't just crawl out of a hole, he has a record. The article is making the claim that he has the potential to bring together different elements of the democratic party, which ultimately is the party of everyone else that isn't voting Trump. This is a big tent with a lot of perspectives, and while democrats are largely united against Trump, that doesn't inherently mean they're just as united behind the candidate (as we just saw), and those kind of things are ripe for Republicans to pick at and promote infighting.

Because it’s Zach Beauchamp and he essentially hates the left.

I know everyone is giving you tidy, case-solving “it’s-always-like-this” responses, but indeed you are on to something.

Let the anti-anti corporate work begin (Walz and Harris being the [somewhat] anti-corporate).

Hmm... are you talking about Zack Beauchamp? Or someone else with publications that represent what you're saying?

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/8/6/20754828/el-paso-shooting-white-supremacy-rise

https://www.vox.com/politics/357963/republicans-white-identity-politics-newsletter

https://www.vox.com/politics/356824/liberalism-way-of-life-lefebvre

https://www.vox.com/politics/361136/far-right-authoritarianism-germany-reactionary-spirit

But whatever, facts don't matter here, considering how many comments want to trash this article (without reading past the title :) )

Donald Trump is ideally suited to expand Kamala Harris' appeal across the ideological spectrum.

Yep.

Harris has an edge to her, she’s quick-smart (imo this is good for presidential material) and that may be off putting to some (because women aren’t supposed to be like that , right?), however, Walz is straight up good guy and he can balance out the ticket as far as presentation.

My only concern about Walz is that he presents so strongly as a good guy/dad figure that, should Harris be elected, the typical behavior is to put the VP up for election upon the incumbent’s term(s) expiring. Does he have the presence to be the potential presidential candidate in the future?

Why is that even a concern? Frankly, they should be pushing for legislation that disqualifies senior citizens anyway and he'll be almost 70 when his turn comes around. Just retire, guys. You've earned it.

It’s a concern because that’s how things generally work.

Sure, you can wish we don’t have ancient, out of touch older people running for office, but you’ll have just as much success with that by banging your head on the keyboard. So you should be concerned until things turn out otherwise.

Well now that depends: Would being in the VP chair help mould him into someone who can rise to the challenge?

Who knows!

For now let's not worry about that. Seriously. Trump bad. Beat first. Big unga bunga, big stick, big smack. Don't let go of that question, just file it away for a bit.

All true, though keeping the fascists at bay in four or eight years will never not be a concern IMO.

People really do think that quick-smart is not a good thing in women???!

If so, I bet it's just the ones who take it really badly when they're outsmarted.

Misogynists think that, and there are a lot of them out there.

What samus12345 said, and people don’t like a woman who behaves the same way a man would in a professional environment - and I mean someone who is demanding, disciplines, is decisive, and holds people to expectations. A good boss does those things, tempered with understanding and leeway as needed. People expect women to hide all that behind some sort of female softness, or they call her a hard-nosed bitch or worse and they don’t respect her the way they would a male in the same position.

I like to think there will be a time in the near future when Americans will want there president to be laid back and somewhat boring

We should be so luck to ever see a time where the president doesn’t need to make a hard decision. Don’t think that’ll ever happen.

He was the best choice. They can win and we can finally force trump to account.

Those who wanted Shapiro or another VP pick are just crybabies who are mad they arent getting everything they wanted.

Honest question, who outside of PA wanted Shapiro? I've heard even PA people say it wasn't a good choice. Not sure if I'm just out of the loop though.

I see the logic of it. He's the governor of arguably the most important state of the election. If you think he could help win in Pennsylvania without costing too many votes from the only other 6 states that matter it would be a good pick

I was reading that he would probably hurt the surrounding 6 more than many other options and wasn't that much of a lock for PA itself. Probably not worth the tradeoff. Make several virtual locks and maybe swing PA vs make some of the 6 less sure and still be shaky in PA anyways. PA is important but potentially so much of a tossup that too many eggs in one basket may cost several surprise other places.

They forgot quotes; by "left" and "progressive" they mean republican-lites. 


The left’s romance with Walz is deeply entwined with hostility to his chief rival for a spot on the ticket: Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro. Harris’s decision on Shapiro, who has a history of hostility with the party’s pro-Palestinian faction, had become seen as a bellwether for whether she’d be meaningfully different from Biden on Gaza. Walz looked like the most progressive available anti-Shapiro, and so emerged as the left’s preferred alternative.

The Minnesota Miracle reforms, enacted in a single legislative session, read like a progressive wishlist. They include paid family leave, free school meals, marijuana legalization, a 100 percent clean energy mandate by 2040, and a slew of protections for organized labor.

But I use the word “progressive” and not its cousin “leftist” deliberately. The Minnesota Miracle policies are all squarely within the Democratic mainstream: none betray an ideological commitment to the party’s socialist or otherwise radical wings.

But Walz’s position on Israel-Palestine is hardly left-wing. The Atlantic’s Yair Rosenberg has put together a list of Walz’s positions and actions that basically reflect the traditional pro-Israel consensus. Walz’s position on how to end the current Gaza war is virtually identical to Shapiro’s. The most important difference is less Middle East policy than domestic: Shapiro has been far harsher on pro-Palestine campus protests than Walz has.

The strongest Trump attack on Harris, at least to date, is that she’s too far to the left. Scored by one (dubious) metric as the most liberal member of the Senate in 2019, she has drawn Republican flak for previous positions ranging from Medicare-for-all to banning fracking to decriminalizing border crossing.

Moreover, his celebrity status on the left gives Harris crucial running room to keep up the strategic centrism. By handing her left flank a victory, she’s theoretically built major credibility that she can spend to defray a left-wing revolt over some of her more centrist stances.