369
‘They chose the billionaire’: Tim Walz returns to Minnesota as part of ‘revenge’ tour
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2025
369 points (100.0% liked)
politics
22431 readers
3540 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Second part is what matters, and what should be in headlines.
The party failed voters, and they need to do better. The entire point of settling for moderates was supposed to be electability, but moderates aren't electable. And when they do get elected, they don't accomplish anything.
The stated point was electability. Given the DNC's reaction to repeatedly being shown that pushing right has given them essentially 0 votes and they've double and tripled down on that strategy and have explicitly said they want to go after big dollar donations instead of small donors, seems like it's more ideological than electability.
Honestly, every time the only criticism of Ken Martin is him saying he wouldnt refuse donations from a billionaire, I feel a lot more confident in him running the DNC.
Guy ran a state party for years, resulting in not just Dem gains, but progressive Dems...
And the only thing you all can find on the guy is him saying he would accept donations from some billionaires while campaigning for DNC chair....
Like, the obvious reason he was asked that in the first place was he's progressive and saying "no billionaires" would make him lose, and if he won the sound bite could be used to turn voters away from the new more liberal DNC.
Do you just not see any of that?
You don't have the slightest inkling that mainstream media (owned by conservative billionaires) turning on the DNC could possibly mean that good things happened at the DNC?
If it was a neoliberal running things, we wouldn't see any criticism of the DNC from major news organizations
I'm not referring to Ken Martin saying that.
Then you don't understand how the DNC operates.
He is the chair effective about a month ago, he has all the power and is accountable to no one as chair.
He literally and figuratively is the DNC now
I think commenter was probably talking about this
That's a pretty low opinion of them....
That's obviously not the DNC