As a Minnesotan, I suppose I’m duty bound to comment on the fact that Tim Walz is now potentially going to be the Vice President of these United States.
Interesting that you feel that this is still Trump's to lose. I feel differently.
I'm not excited about Harris. I don't think she's a great candidate. But, I do think that the shakeup that has happened will excite a lot of people and get them up to vote just to be part of history... and I think those people are likely to vote Harris. I am predicting there will be high turnout, and Harris will do better than polls suggest.
I mean, I was going to go vote, but leave the top of the ticket blank because I sure as hell wasn't voting for another old white man. Now, however, I will vote for Harris. I suspect there are others like me, and others like what I described above, who will just be more aware and more excited now that this shakeup has happened.
But we'll see. I am just as likely to be totally wrong.
I definitely think the turnout will be higher now that it's not Biden v Trump 2.0, but I think that would have been a historic low turnout.
I would be happy to be wrong! I think a big part of Trump's advantage is because of the Electoral College. Also, it's worth remembering that in 2020 he got the second most votes of any candidate in US history, so he does have a lot of supporters. It also doesn't matter if Harris gets 90% of the vote California, New York, and MN if she loses by 2k votes in Michigan and Wisconsin. I think Walz gives her a fighting chance at a lot of state where she was probably going to lose, though.
So really, it doesn't matter if voter turnout is really high, unless the right voters turn out in the right places. Which is, you know, a demonstration of a broken system. But it's the one we've had for over 200 years, so you'd think the Democrats would have a strategy besides hoping for the best.
That's fair. Unfortunately, Republican or Democrat, they're all just idiots with only their continued struggles for power and personal wealth in mind. I wouldn't hold your breath for a change that's designed to improve the system.
"The people of California and New York may wonder why their huge Democrat majorities don’t lead to progressive policies."
I can't speak for California (or even upstate NY), but in NYC those huge Democrat majorities are illusions - if you live in Chinatown/Little Haiti/Orthodoxjewishstan/whatever, you're probably a Democrat (because it's easier to get elected in NYC as a Democrat), but you're really representing the mores of your local bunch of ethnics, which aren't the mores of progressive activist-y types. (And of course, these local ethnic communities are, collectively, much much larger than the neighborhoods where Vox writers live.)
I doubt any of those communities would be against universal free school lunches or increased paid family leave or free college, which is what Walz did in MN.
Yes, they may not support more identity-centric policies, but economically progressive policies tend to be extremely popular across the political spectrum.
From over here in New Zealand - it feels like there are now some actual humans running against the freak show that is Trump. This is encouraging.
The race has certainly become more interesting!
Interesting that you feel that this is still Trump's to lose. I feel differently.
I'm not excited about Harris. I don't think she's a great candidate. But, I do think that the shakeup that has happened will excite a lot of people and get them up to vote just to be part of history... and I think those people are likely to vote Harris. I am predicting there will be high turnout, and Harris will do better than polls suggest.
I mean, I was going to go vote, but leave the top of the ticket blank because I sure as hell wasn't voting for another old white man. Now, however, I will vote for Harris. I suspect there are others like me, and others like what I described above, who will just be more aware and more excited now that this shakeup has happened.
But we'll see. I am just as likely to be totally wrong.
I definitely think the turnout will be higher now that it's not Biden v Trump 2.0, but I think that would have been a historic low turnout.
I would be happy to be wrong! I think a big part of Trump's advantage is because of the Electoral College. Also, it's worth remembering that in 2020 he got the second most votes of any candidate in US history, so he does have a lot of supporters. It also doesn't matter if Harris gets 90% of the vote California, New York, and MN if she loses by 2k votes in Michigan and Wisconsin. I think Walz gives her a fighting chance at a lot of state where she was probably going to lose, though.
So really, it doesn't matter if voter turnout is really high, unless the right voters turn out in the right places. Which is, you know, a demonstration of a broken system. But it's the one we've had for over 200 years, so you'd think the Democrats would have a strategy besides hoping for the best.
That's fair. Unfortunately, Republican or Democrat, they're all just idiots with only their continued struggles for power and personal wealth in mind. I wouldn't hold your breath for a change that's designed to improve the system.
I also want to point out how unfair it is that we were robbed of what could have been the greatest presidential race of all times:
Donald Trump/George Santos vs. Kamala Harris/Marianne Williamson
Now that would've been a sight to behold!
Sadly, I agree.
"The people of California and New York may wonder why their huge Democrat majorities don’t lead to progressive policies."
I can't speak for California (or even upstate NY), but in NYC those huge Democrat majorities are illusions - if you live in Chinatown/Little Haiti/Orthodoxjewishstan/whatever, you're probably a Democrat (because it's easier to get elected in NYC as a Democrat), but you're really representing the mores of your local bunch of ethnics, which aren't the mores of progressive activist-y types. (And of course, these local ethnic communities are, collectively, much much larger than the neighborhoods where Vox writers live.)
I doubt any of those communities would be against universal free school lunches or increased paid family leave or free college, which is what Walz did in MN.
Yes, they may not support more identity-centric policies, but economically progressive policies tend to be extremely popular across the political spectrum.