Would have been very unwiseI wish AOC could have been the one running with Kamala
Would have been very unwiseI wish AOC could have been the one running with Kamala
BTW, turns out the "tampon law" does not in fact have a mandate that boys bathrooms in schools be stocked with period products. What a surprise, creepy perverted GOP weirdos lying...
BTW, turns out the "tampon law" does not in fact have a mandate that boys bathrooms in schools be stocked with period products. What a surprise, creepy perverted GOP weirdos lying...
Welcome to assured loss on election dayI wish AOC could have been the one running with Kamala
lmaoWelcome to assured loss on election day
The first rule of choosing a VP is - do no harm
Fair or not, years of attacks and labels of being far left/socialist means AOC would be DOA
Not to mention her young age and complete and total lack of executive experience
Kamala is ahead in polls right now, but margins are still thinlmao
if she'd picked joe manchin they'd be saying he's far left and socialist, that attack has no weight
bernie sanders was actively referring to himself as a socialist and continually topped polls vs trump with a higher margin than anyone else
tim walz is connecting right now because he's happy, vibrant, and aggressive about prosecuting his positions, which are quite left-wing for the united states
aoc would fill the same boxes
as for lack of executive experience, this is the electorate that voted in donald trump
populism sells to a country continually beaten down by corporatocracy
everyone is polarizing, it's a polarized eraKamala is ahead in polls right now, but margins are still thin
Betting market is now favoring Trump with the news of RFK dropping out
I still think she (Kamala) is more likely to win but this election far from over
Fact is AOC is extremely polarizing and would have been an awful choice
As a moderate personally I am glad it's Walz and not AOC - I don't want to see AOC anywhere near a high officeeveryone is polarizing, it's a polarized era
it literally does not matter who kamala picked, trump would have sold them as a communist who is the most radical person in history
what would have mattered is the record
this is ultimately academic, because i think tim walz was the best choice because he humanized the democratic side and dehumanized the republican side
tim walz oozes regular dude energy, and every story about him is like "he made a public holiday for all elementary students to see the minnesota rainbows called sunshine day"
but i think it's old thinking to say that aoc would have doomed the democratic ticket
far from it, i think she would have bolstered it a lot, kamala's weakness with the dem base is her record, a leftie was needed and found with our dad tim walz
hold up- walz and aoc are quite similar politicallyAs a moderate personally I am glad it's Walz and not AOC - I don't want to see AOC anywhere near a high office
I hope Walz runs for president one day and AOC stays in Congress
dunno if he had any widespread support at all before the light got shined on him and he outperformed expectationsYeah, I don't think "too left" is the issue. I just don't think AOC has as much crossover support as Walz does.
I very much doubt it, the latest polling which includes some dates the DNC was held on shows Harris 8 points ahead of Trump with third-parties included. Even if every single RFK voter went to Trump (unlikely), that only nets him another 3 points.anyway, I guess the game is up, Kennedy votes will give him the edge he needs?
I'm really curious to see how much slack the MSM will cut him, since they hammered about Biden multiple times a day, every dayI think the ABC debate is going to be absolutely disastrous for him, if he decides to show up at all.
hey but you forget someone here shares bookies regularly who put trump as winner!I very much doubt it, the latest polling which includes some dates the DNC was held on shows Harris 8 points ahead of Trump with third-parties included. Even if every single RFK voter went to Trump (unlikely), that only nets him another 3 points.
If the past is any indication, probably a fair amount. They were, as you suggest, persistent in covering Biden’s gaffes (which, to be fair, he is guilty of and *is* president) while glossing over Trump’s repeated word salads, mixing up of names, mistaking where he is, etc.I'm really curious to see how much slack the MSM will cut him, since they hammered about Biden multiple times a day, every day
Not serious in the same way thoIf the past is any indication, probably a fair amount. They were, as you suggest, persistent in covering Biden’s gaffes (which, to be fair, he is guilty of and *is* president) while glossing over Trump’s repeated word salads, mixing up of names, mistaking where he is, etc.