Tim Walz
-
@FarmerJayhawk ok i read that article too. I dont think that is extremely bad at all. What he is saying is that we dont have a blanket protection to misinform people about how and when to vote. I agree. I also dont think the first amendment should protect robospammers or scam artists. There is a spirit of the constitution: to protect people, the greatest good for the greatest number. Misinforming voters aint it.
I dont have a problem with that statement. He didnt prescribe a specific stance of how it should be criminalized, but i generally think that organized efforts to misinform voters on how to vote is an awful thing to do.
-
@approxinfinity we have a disagreement here, but a respectful one. It’s protected speech. It’s very bad speech, but protected nonetheless, same with hate speech. I think he knows it can’t be criminalized, the whole “Congress shall make no law…” part of the First Amendment is unambiguous.
Scams aren’t protected speech already, fraud is a crime.
“to protect people, the greatest good for the greatest number” I don’t agree with this at all. The Bill of Rights is a charter of negative liberties, meaning a list of things that are individual rights no matter the consequence for the society as a whole. We could catch A LOT more criminals without the 4th Amendment and arguably make us safer, but property rights are fundamental to a free society. Skokie, Illinois (with its many Holocaust survivors) would’ve probably been better off without the Nazis marching in their parade, but they had the right to be tasteless bastards.
-
This sounds like a matter of identifying how aggressively we should define certain acts as fraud and how aggressively we should prosecute it. I get scam calls all the time. Beyond fed up with it. If it was something they would catch a rap for they wouldnt do it.
-
if that hate speech incites hate crimes thats a problem that needs addressing.
Its very hard to say where and how though.
I think the fact Walz was not prescriptive should indicate he realizes that. Trump refers to taking peoples rights away all the time, at least in Walz’ case it was in the context of benefiting someone other than himself.
Im not saying its correct and i see your point, but i dont think its very bad what he said, and i think the underlying problem of voter suppression and deliberate spreading Of misinformation regarding voting procedures is worth addressing and does fall into fraud but in reality maybe isnt prosecuted presently.
-
I am an “Independent” who doesn’t like or follow politics. What I DO know about politics is:
Trump = Bad
Anyone else is OK.
My opinion.
-
@FarmerJayhawk said in Tim Walz:
He reminds me of the teacher everyone liked because he was easy and gave good grades but was actually grossly incompetent at everything lol
This reminds me of the opinions of the teachers who nobody liked and gave Fs to kid so they would learn. And who thought if too many kids passed their class it wasn’t hard enough.
The fact that KIDS asked a football coach in the 90s to be the GSA sponsor is literally the biggest green flag Ive ever seen in a politician. Kids don’t mess around with stuff like that. Those kids felt safe and seen and that he said yes speaks to his willingness to go above and beyond to help someone else. You don’t get paid to sponsor a club. It’s extra time that most football coaches just would never give because they are already pretty significantly involved in the school culture.
It’s refreshing to see some straight up decency in a candidate. Someone who got into politics because he thought it might be a good way to help people. I know that goes against the fundamentals of @FarmerJayhawk beliefs because the government isn’t supposed to help people. But surely he can admit it’s better than the grifter and just about every other junk that’s been thrown at that office for the last decade or so.
-
@benshawks08 interesting fact about sponsoring GSA when asked, didnt know, thanks for sharing. Another early sign pointing to “good dude”.
I do think thats a slight mischaracterization of @FarmerJayhawk ‘s beliefs. Im sure he believes that there are people on the right that get into politics to make a positive difference, but everyones definitions of “helping people” differs.
-
@approxinfinity wasn’t trying to be insulting honestly. Just has always seemed like the overall position from @FarmerJayhawk was more that the government should stay out of the way and do less. Maybe I’m wrong. But thought he’d agree with that.
-
@benshawks08 all good, trying to keep us on the rails since I introduced this topic
i knew what you were getting at but we live in a world where everything can escalate to a personal affront with silly speed, so i think qualifying statements / explicating nuances is a positive formality.
-
@benshawks08 he might be a nice guy, and that’s fine. Doesn’t qualify him at all to be VP. His administration hasn’t really been successful. Minnesota is growing slower than the US as a whole in both population and income growth, it’s fallen from the teens down to 20th in GDP/capita. Net migration is in the 30’s.
Indeed I do think the government should do less. Just a few examples, end the War on Drugs, liberalize immigration, drastically reduce occupational licensing, reform criminal justice to end mass incarceration, deregulate housing construction, replace the complex system of in-kind transfers with cash transfers, end civil asset forfeiture, cut regressive sales taxes, shift school funding systems from resource allocation to weighted student models, stop banning books, stop meddling in personal health care choices, you know, that kind of thing. I do think that kind of government (in?)action would be helpful in many, many situations.
-
@FarmerJayhawk
spot on sir. People that think the government has any intention of helping its people should pick up a book. History proves quite the opposite in almost every single instance.
-
@FarmerJayhawk I’d ask who of the current options is most likely to enact any at all of the things you list?
I think if I’m not wrong several of those are fairly in line with a lot of Walz’s positions.
-
60 years old? Check. Former HS geography teacher? Check. Diet Dew lover? Check. Prematurely gray? Check. This guy has so many similarities to me that I have to vote for him. But I won’t.
Not sure if anyone watches Peacock for the Olympics, but I have been. Harris runs tons of ads. I can live with the term pro-choice, but hearing her say reproductive freedoms have been taken away just bothers me so much. No one has lost the right to reproduce. If she wants to say the right to abortion has been taken away, that’s at least a partial truth. But more abortions have occurred since the Supreme Court overturned Roe V Wade. People will then say to me well vote for Trump then because he’s pro life. Not sure if that’s true either, but his baggage, heck why sugarcoat it, he convinced his supporters that the election was stolen and people died in an insurrection as a result, is a huge reason to not vote for him. Hush money to porn stars, twice impeached, wow, just can’t fathom voting for that man.
I’m a political refugee. Never Trumper. Never Democrat. Still conservative, except I don’t like guns, I don’t mind the presence of immigrants flooding into our country, and I’m even starting to see and reluctantly agree with global warming theory more and more. So whom do I vote for? Neither seems like the best choice.
-
@benshawks08 most are state and local issues so YMMV depending on the locale
-
@wissox sounds like you and I are in a similar predicament. I won’t ever vote Democrat as long as I’m above the ground lol. I literally can not financially afford for Harris to win. Everything doubled under Bidens regime. Filling up my truck with gas is double, buying groceries is double, lumber/building materials doubled, Obama doubled my family’s health care premiums. I know it’s not popular on here and it’s not all on who’s in the White House. But working class Americans can’t do this much longer. Then you have CNN blowing about how this is the greatest economy and people are doing better than they ever have right. I’ve seen zero evidence to suggest that in the real world, the opposite I see daily. It’s ridiculous to only owe my house that I’ve lived in for 10 years, got multiple promotions/raises and still barely get by. I don’t live above my means, don’t have a boat or camper nothing of that nature.
-
@wissox I vowed not to vote for Biden after his first debate, unless my state was close. Not sure now, but at the time that seemed viable. I think statement votes for third party / write in candidates show viability, not a throw away.
-
Vote third party or write-in. Show these parties we’re tired of terrible candidates
ETA: just not RFK he’s got brain worms (among other severe issues)
-
What’s sad is in 2016 if the Democrats had put up a better candidate than Hillary they’d have won. In 2020 if the Republicans had said enough with Donald and nominated someone else they’d probably have beaten Biden.
-
-
I feel very similar to you.
-
Gotta say, blaming your military service for fake hearing loss to get try to get out of a DUI is ballsy. Disqualifying, but ballsy. https://x.com/kfile/status/1824073042017869900?s=46&t=c0LiaNrxev6XfT7LIH8dAQ
-
@FarmerJayhawk The partial deafness ruse was concocted by Walz’s 2006 campaign manager but I haven’t seen any indication Walz ever made that assertion. The campaign manager apparently hasn’t worked for Walz since 2006. Walz admitted to the DWI when it happened, resigned as a coach and offered to resign as a teacher–not exactly consistent with denying responsibility. He doesn’t drink.
I don’t know the source of your contention he faked hearing loss since he had surgery in 2005 to help correct it. If you know people who served in artillery or armor units, you know hearing loss is quite common.
But obviously this 30 year old crisis is far more scandalous than being found liable for defamation and sexual assault, being convicted of felonies and being charged with dozens more, encouraging supporters to beat up journalists, insulting wounded and dead soldiers and police and their families, endorsing calls for execution of critics and opponents (even in his own cabinet), and the literally hundreds of other crappy things Trump has done. And is proud of.
I guess Democrats have to be pure. After all, a DWI and someone else’s lie about it are equally as bad as denying an attack on Congress and promising to make voting unnecessary for religious extremists to achieve all their goals.
-
@mayjay the campaign speaks for the candidate, full stop. He knew what they were saying was a lie and he chose not to correct the record at the time. To think he had no idea what his own senior staff was saying to the media is extremely naive.
Sorry, I expect more out of our candidates for the highest offices. I’m not voting for either Trump or Harris. I never said both were equal or implied anything of the sort. I left the GOP because of Trump nearly a decade ago. Didn’t vote for him in 16, 20, and won’t in 24. I said on January 6 he should be impeached and removed.
-
@FarmerJayhawk You seem remarkably willing to have Trump become president again if you previously thought he should be removed. Maybe you think his campaign promises are just hot air. I hope you are right.
-
@mayjay not exactly sure how? I dump on Trump all the time. He won Kansas by 200,000 votes in 2020. My vote doesn’t matter in the slightest.
-
@FarmerJayhawk I’m in SC so I can relate to the vote itself being of little numerical value. But I won’t be sitting on the sidelines thinking my voice can’t make a difference.
Incidentally, I have been thinking about your comment that we should be able to expect more from candidates. Can you please give me an example of a major party candidate for VP or President in the 20th or 21st centuries that meets your test if the Walz DWI/2006 (shorthand) issue is disqualifying in and of itself?
-
@mayjay sure, Bob Dole. I’ll even make it bipartisan. Barack Obama, even though I don’t agree with his politics seems like a fine fellow
-
@FarmerJayhawk When did you start following Kansas politics?
-
@mayjay the 08 cycle seriously, but casually beforehand
