I'm not sure who would have been the best pick for running mate. I'm just focused on keeping Trump away from the White House.
People are feeling more hopeful with Kamala Harris and Tim Walz (compared to Biden). But I’m concerned that some people are complacent. There are thousands of swing state voters who aren’t clear on how they’d benefit by voting Democratic. Incredibly, some people cannot see how dangerous Trump is. Some Democrats get that, but hesitate to vote for Kamala because they don’t like Biden’s handling of Gaza. And some people are dumb enough to not realize that voting for RFK Jr. is essentially voting for Trump.
Phone banking is a waste of time; people don’t answer unknown numbers. Texting people just makes them angry.
I believe the most effective way to generate Democratic votes in swing states is Focus4Democacy. They have decades of experience crafting effective campaign messages. Look at their website and see their deep bench of expertise. Only $300 spent on their outreach gets a Democratic vote, in contrast with other options that cost thousands just to get 1 vote. They actually have research to back this up. Their next Zoom is Sunday, August 18 at 5PM PT/8PM ET
Register at https://bit.ly/F4D18Aug They do a zoom every 2 weeks where they explain how they test and refine messages that generate more Democratic votes in battleground states. And they track the results. They need donations. If you can't donate, pls. forward Focus4Democracy's info to everyone you know. https://www.focus4democracy.org I’ve forwarded it to many people and together, we’ve garnered several thousand dollars in donations.
Alternatively, contact people you know in the swing states. Former colleagues, friends, relatives – anyone you know in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin, Nevada, Georgia, North Carolina.
People, time to take off the party hats and get moving! Who will join me in taking action?
As a Minnesotan, Tim Walz is just regular people. I might not agree with his approach all of the time, but he made it important to feed kids in school for free, put sanitary products in school bathrooms (yes, the boys rest room as well because not everyone is a true "boy" these days) and ensured that women have a choice in their maternal health. That last one will get him in trouble because he let the legislature basically remove all the rules because you just never know what sort of medical condition you will encounter and legislators are great at legislating but not necessarily the best doctors in the world.
I really liked his "mind your own business" remark because it is so spot on. We'd all be a lot better as a society if we followed that advice. Not everyone has the ability or resources to make decisions like everyone else, so people need to just mind their own business.
I think Americans will come to appreciate him as "Dad" and "Coach".
After all, you all won Biden's major policy achievements by hobbling build back better. But his worst defeats also have the moderate imprimatur. No filibuster reform. No protections for voting rights. No codifying Roe vs. Wade. Tons of suffering for innocent women and girls. Going even slower on reining in fossil fuels. Record highest global temperatures this year.
A set of admissions that we know it alls may not always be right allowed me to accept your humanity but also not fail to see how you would like to see your moderate views steer us away from majority progessive aims winning the day even though we'll represent more votes.
People want to characterize this election as a binary choice, but it is much more nuanced than that. For the base of both candidates, the choice is relatively straightforward and simple, I’m an R, I vote R, or I’m a D, and I vote D. Simple. However, the election really is about what kind of government do we want. Democracy is a messy, participatory endeavor. It fails to function if people decide to sit on the sidelines and allow a minority to determine the outcome of elections. Authoritarianism does not require nearly the same amount of participation. It functions because the leader determines what is best for the majority, whether you agree or not. Generally speaking, Democracy is a meritocracy, meaning you have to earn your position of power through the vote of the people. Authoritarian regimes are a lazy forms of government, requiring only being in good with the leader and his cabal of sycophants. It is not hyperbole to say this is a consequential election. Both candidates have their baggage, but one shows a path towards the future, while the other is mired in grievance, hateful rhetoric that is all about retribution and not governance.
The most important thing about Harris's VP pick is that Walz is unlikely to give her heartburn. That, and a few more great lines like Walz delivered in his intro speech yesterday, and he'll be a great asset.
Whereas Vance will regularly give tRump a pain in his pompous rear end. Is there a pool out there betting on when tRump will dish on his own Veep pick?
I can't agree. I voted for McCain in the Wisconsin primaries (because everyone else was nuts) and then he picked Palin as his running mate and I was horrified by my vote. Before I was on the fence between McCain and Obama but that pushed me *far* (FAR) over the line into voting for Obama.
That being said, I do think Walz is a great choice and I think it helps in Wisconsin too especially in those parts of the state that are more rural and the 'burbs around Milwaukee. Not that I think Shapiro would have been bad or honestly anyone else (I personally really like Pete Buttigieg) but as someone who worked AG adjacent for two implement companies that will remain nameless, I really love his small town Nebraska no-nonsense roots, his throwback DFA Minnesota vibes and yes, his progressive (not a dirty word) politics.
(Also? Dogs, we don't deserve them.)
edit: for the random "e" instead of an "i" in Butt*i*gieg.
I think the key to making sense of this pick is that there are 2 types of swing voters: Obama-Trump and Romney-Clinton. While it is true that Shapiro is a moderate and can appeal to voters outside of the Democratic base, he mainly appeals to suburbanites who previously voted Republican (Romney-Clinton), whereas Walz appeals to traditional working class Democrats who Trump appealed to (Obama-Trump) with his biography and folksy demeanor, and the latter is more common across the Midwest. Economic progressivism isn't a dealbreaker for them; indeed, it's an asset! Shapiro on the other hand has a biography that screams "coastal liberal" and wouldn't be a strong choice if not for what state he's governor of, which he won by 14 only because of Mastriano. Plus, he introduces significant risk especially outside of PA because of his more vocal Israel stance, his stance on teachers' unions, and his (quite likely overblown but still bad in terms of optics) scandals such as the sexual harassment case and the Ellen Greenberg case. I still thought Shapiro was the pick with the highest expected value, but it was a high-risk high-reward pick and Walz was safer. Kamala might not do as well in PA with Walz as with Shapiro, but it was a strong possibility that Shapiro could have been a drag elsewhere.
It actually reminds me a lot of the Conor Lamb vs. John Fetterman debate in the PA Senate race in 2022 - Shapiro is Lamb while Walz is Fetterman. Both are great politicians with appeal beyond the base, but they have *different* appeals outside of the base and in the Midwest, the rural populist type is more numerous. I think 2022 Fetterman would have played better across the Midwest as a whole as compared to Lamb, and I think that played into the decision. Charlie may be the type of person who Shapiro and Lamb would appeal to, but that's not the type of swing voter that is more common in the Midwest in the Trump era.
next, Walz is center. Check his congressional voting record. Shapiro is center-right. Trump-Vance is three standard deviations right of center. The calibration of progressive, liberal, moderate, conservative needs to be corrected as it has been pulled so off-center by MAGA. Walz takes a conservative position on guns, abortion, and Covid. MAGA pushes The conservative position, which is all extreme and selfish, not conservative.
Maybe the sexual harassment cover up, school vouchers or Gaza nixed Sharpiro
Yes Charlie. You. Are. wrong.
I'm not sure who would have been the best pick for running mate. I'm just focused on keeping Trump away from the White House.
People are feeling more hopeful with Kamala Harris and Tim Walz (compared to Biden). But I’m concerned that some people are complacent. There are thousands of swing state voters who aren’t clear on how they’d benefit by voting Democratic. Incredibly, some people cannot see how dangerous Trump is. Some Democrats get that, but hesitate to vote for Kamala because they don’t like Biden’s handling of Gaza. And some people are dumb enough to not realize that voting for RFK Jr. is essentially voting for Trump.
Phone banking is a waste of time; people don’t answer unknown numbers. Texting people just makes them angry.
I believe the most effective way to generate Democratic votes in swing states is Focus4Democacy. They have decades of experience crafting effective campaign messages. Look at their website and see their deep bench of expertise. Only $300 spent on their outreach gets a Democratic vote, in contrast with other options that cost thousands just to get 1 vote. They actually have research to back this up. Their next Zoom is Sunday, August 18 at 5PM PT/8PM ET
Register at https://bit.ly/F4D18Aug They do a zoom every 2 weeks where they explain how they test and refine messages that generate more Democratic votes in battleground states. And they track the results. They need donations. If you can't donate, pls. forward Focus4Democracy's info to everyone you know. https://www.focus4democracy.org I’ve forwarded it to many people and together, we’ve garnered several thousand dollars in donations.
Alternatively, contact people you know in the swing states. Former colleagues, friends, relatives – anyone you know in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin, Nevada, Georgia, North Carolina.
People, time to take off the party hats and get moving! Who will join me in taking action?
Small sample size
As a Minnesotan, Tim Walz is just regular people. I might not agree with his approach all of the time, but he made it important to feed kids in school for free, put sanitary products in school bathrooms (yes, the boys rest room as well because not everyone is a true "boy" these days) and ensured that women have a choice in their maternal health. That last one will get him in trouble because he let the legislature basically remove all the rules because you just never know what sort of medical condition you will encounter and legislators are great at legislating but not necessarily the best doctors in the world.
I really liked his "mind your own business" remark because it is so spot on. We'd all be a lot better as a society if we followed that advice. Not everyone has the ability or resources to make decisions like everyone else, so people need to just mind their own business.
I think Americans will come to appreciate him as "Dad" and "Coach".
Here’s a fun game to try and play, see how far back you can go, election by election naming the losing VP candidate without looking it up
I’m doing it now and am at
Pence
Kaine
Ryan
Palin
Edwards
Lieberman
Kemp
Quayle
Can’t remember Dukakis running mate but can remember
Ferraro
Mondale
Dole
But then can’t remember McGoverns running mate either
I do know some others but I only got to Dukakis
See how far you can go to prove your political nerd cred (no cheating, if you cheat you love Donald Trump)
After all, you all won Biden's major policy achievements by hobbling build back better. But his worst defeats also have the moderate imprimatur. No filibuster reform. No protections for voting rights. No codifying Roe vs. Wade. Tons of suffering for innocent women and girls. Going even slower on reining in fossil fuels. Record highest global temperatures this year.
A set of admissions that we know it alls may not always be right allowed me to accept your humanity but also not fail to see how you would like to see your moderate views steer us away from majority progessive aims winning the day even though we'll represent more votes.
Based on the Fetterman story, it sounds like Kamala valued chemistry over political science.
Palin may not have been a game changer, but she caused my vote to change from McCain to Obama.
Read the article, I thought it was very good sir.
People want to characterize this election as a binary choice, but it is much more nuanced than that. For the base of both candidates, the choice is relatively straightforward and simple, I’m an R, I vote R, or I’m a D, and I vote D. Simple. However, the election really is about what kind of government do we want. Democracy is a messy, participatory endeavor. It fails to function if people decide to sit on the sidelines and allow a minority to determine the outcome of elections. Authoritarianism does not require nearly the same amount of participation. It functions because the leader determines what is best for the majority, whether you agree or not. Generally speaking, Democracy is a meritocracy, meaning you have to earn your position of power through the vote of the people. Authoritarian regimes are a lazy forms of government, requiring only being in good with the leader and his cabal of sycophants. It is not hyperbole to say this is a consequential election. Both candidates have their baggage, but one shows a path towards the future, while the other is mired in grievance, hateful rhetoric that is all about retribution and not governance.
The most important thing about Harris's VP pick is that Walz is unlikely to give her heartburn. That, and a few more great lines like Walz delivered in his intro speech yesterday, and he'll be a great asset.
Whereas Vance will regularly give tRump a pain in his pompous rear end. Is there a pool out there betting on when tRump will dish on his own Veep pick?
I can't agree. I voted for McCain in the Wisconsin primaries (because everyone else was nuts) and then he picked Palin as his running mate and I was horrified by my vote. Before I was on the fence between McCain and Obama but that pushed me *far* (FAR) over the line into voting for Obama.
That being said, I do think Walz is a great choice and I think it helps in Wisconsin too especially in those parts of the state that are more rural and the 'burbs around Milwaukee. Not that I think Shapiro would have been bad or honestly anyone else (I personally really like Pete Buttigieg) but as someone who worked AG adjacent for two implement companies that will remain nameless, I really love his small town Nebraska no-nonsense roots, his throwback DFA Minnesota vibes and yes, his progressive (not a dirty word) politics.
(Also? Dogs, we don't deserve them.)
edit: for the random "e" instead of an "i" in Butt*i*gieg.
I think the key to making sense of this pick is that there are 2 types of swing voters: Obama-Trump and Romney-Clinton. While it is true that Shapiro is a moderate and can appeal to voters outside of the Democratic base, he mainly appeals to suburbanites who previously voted Republican (Romney-Clinton), whereas Walz appeals to traditional working class Democrats who Trump appealed to (Obama-Trump) with his biography and folksy demeanor, and the latter is more common across the Midwest. Economic progressivism isn't a dealbreaker for them; indeed, it's an asset! Shapiro on the other hand has a biography that screams "coastal liberal" and wouldn't be a strong choice if not for what state he's governor of, which he won by 14 only because of Mastriano. Plus, he introduces significant risk especially outside of PA because of his more vocal Israel stance, his stance on teachers' unions, and his (quite likely overblown but still bad in terms of optics) scandals such as the sexual harassment case and the Ellen Greenberg case. I still thought Shapiro was the pick with the highest expected value, but it was a high-risk high-reward pick and Walz was safer. Kamala might not do as well in PA with Walz as with Shapiro, but it was a strong possibility that Shapiro could have been a drag elsewhere.
It actually reminds me a lot of the Conor Lamb vs. John Fetterman debate in the PA Senate race in 2022 - Shapiro is Lamb while Walz is Fetterman. Both are great politicians with appeal beyond the base, but they have *different* appeals outside of the base and in the Midwest, the rural populist type is more numerous. I think 2022 Fetterman would have played better across the Midwest as a whole as compared to Lamb, and I think that played into the decision. Charlie may be the type of person who Shapiro and Lamb would appeal to, but that's not the type of swing voter that is more common in the Midwest in the Trump era.
next, Walz is center. Check his congressional voting record. Shapiro is center-right. Trump-Vance is three standard deviations right of center. The calibration of progressive, liberal, moderate, conservative needs to be corrected as it has been pulled so off-center by MAGA. Walz takes a conservative position on guns, abortion, and Covid. MAGA pushes The conservative position, which is all extreme and selfish, not conservative.