Donald Trump fired off an angry middle-of-the-night attack on “highly overrated Jewish Governor” Josh Shapiro after he spoke out against the former president at the Democratic National Convention on Wednesday night.

  • Coelacanth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    4 months ago

    Shapiro would have given him so much material to work with. He would have called him a classic coastal elite, uppity lawyer, dyed-in-the-wool career politician. He would have called him an Obama impersonator.

    Walz is giving him no angles of attack, it’s really an inspired pick.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Walz is giving him no angles of attack, it’s really an inspired pick.

      But it’s the type of politicians the Dem party should always be running…

      Kamala is doing a lot better than Biden, but someone like Walz would be doing the Super Bowl Shuffle all the way to the White House without breaking a sweat.

      He’s the type of candidate our voters want, and how he went from completely unknown to ridiculously popular in like a month just shows that the “name recognition” stuff was always bullshit.

      Walz isnt unique. He’s great, but there’s lots of politicians out there like him. It’s just almost impossible for them to get to the national stage when the DNC, media, billionaires, and lobbists like AIPAC want neoliberals.

      • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        4 months ago

        They’ll never come out and say it openly, but I sense a strong theme in the Harris campaign of “we’re also running to give the republican party the impetus to kick Trump and his cronies to the political nothingness that they deserve to be in”

        With so many people saying “I’m a republican but I’m voting for Harris”, it’s very clear that this election is just as much about Republican’s reclaiming their “grand ole’ party” from the cult of personality that has taken it over. It’s a shame that they have to literally vote with their opponent in order to make that happen. But the thought process seems to be “Let’s get dominated, spend the next four years purging ourselves of Trump and his idiotic sycophants, and then come back in the next election and fight with dignity again.”

        • FrostyTheDoo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          4 months ago

          I don’t disagree with your overall point, but let’s not pretend that the Republicans campaigned with dignity before Trump. Next time they’ll pick someone just as bad for America as Trump but he will be younger and controllable.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Trump wholely controls the RNC, they’re not working against him.

          Republican voters are willing to vote for Harris when they wouldn’t vote Biden, because Biden was just honestly a bad candidate. Now that the candidate is better, more people are willing to cross party lines and vote D.

          It would have happened in 2016 and 2020 too if we ran better candidates.

          Hell, it happened 2008 and 2012 when Obama ran. Not only did people vote for him. He flipped a lot of state governments in “red states” blue.

          Because he changed people’s minds about what the democratic party was.

          • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            I get that. But there’s no way these people stay Democratic in four years time. Their purpose is to take Trump’s loss as a means to wrestle back their party from MAGA. They know that it’s the only way they have a chance to win in four years is IF they start a Republican civil war after this (hopefully) loss of a great deal of power.

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              But there’s no way these people stay Democratic in four years time

              But there is…

              Run more popular candidates and count on Republicans to keep running the same shitty Republicans.

              We went from Obama (who wasn’t perfect as president, but a great candidate) to Hillary and Joe. And regardless of your opinion on them as presidents, most agree they were shit tier candidates.

              We dont have to start running shitty candidates, so we don’t have to lose those voters next election.

              It’s stupidly easy to beat Republicans, the money just doesn’t want what voters want. So the party aims for just popular enough to get elected, but still doing all the shitty stuff the money wants.

              If Republicans win every once and a while. It’s even better for the money, so they just don’t have any downsides.

              It’s why we desperately need to get money out of at least Dem primary’s like Bernie keeps saying.

        • kboy101222@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          I never got the concept of Republicans going back to running honorable candidates. They haven’t since Lincoln. The Republican candidates for just this century have been a certified pedophile, a Mormon, a man who chose Sarah fucking Palin as his running mate, and Bush. Hell, before that you had Reagan, who if you wanna blame America’s problems on one man, he’s the one. You had Bush Sr., who wasn’t completely awful and was granted 1 term for it. You’ve got Nixon and Watergate. You’ve got Eisenhower being almost impressively racist.

          The Republican party hasn’t had a good candidate in decades, if not well over a hundred years. Were they less openly insane before? Sure. Were they actually less insane? Absolutely not. These are the people that manufactured the drug crisis, leading to the pointless deaths and arrests of thousands of black people.

          • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            I don’t disagree. But even the worst candidate (besides Trump) was still a human being. Trump jacked the evil up to a whole new level, because not only does he contain all the worst aspects of ALL of those other people, he doesn’t even have the shame or the tact to hide it behind “politicking”.

            Yes. It’s all a charade. Political candidates are humans who are selfish, arrogant and don’t always have their constituents best interests at heart; especially conservatives. But there was always an unspoken agreement to hide all of that behind professionalism, proper decorum, debate and policy arguments. We do that because the alternative is chaos. When the evil is laid bare for all to see, then civilization itself is no longer truly relevant. If Trump can get away with all this shit, well fuck it, then so can I. The entire country can YOLO.

            We pretend. We and our politicians share a pleasant fiction where they’re “just like us” because everything collapses hard once Pandora’s box is open.

            Trump’s danger lays not in what he says or does. But in the shameless, unapologetic way that he does and says it which emboldens every one of his sycophants to start doing the same. Hold him accountable, in any way necessary, and yes…those assholes are still going to exist in the republican party to some degree (They’re like cockroaches after all). But we might, just might get back to running the country with at least a faux sense of civility and proper debate.

      • Poayjay@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Exactly. No one voted for Kamala. People didn’t vote for Biden, they voted against Trump. Hilary won the primary because Warren split the progressive vote and wouldn’t drop out.

        Dems haven’t put forward a truly clean and charismatic leader since Obama.

        • doctordevice@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Warren ran in 2020. Hillary won in 2016 because of superdelegate bullshit creating an air of inevitable victory before a single vote had been cast and the DNC actively working to suppress the Sanders campaign through smear tactics and a severely limited debate schedule.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yep.

          They saw trump and just saw an opportunity to do whatever they want because trump is terrible.

          So we get stuck with unpopular candidates the country had rejected multiple times. Because the people calling the shots in the party just really weren’t concerned about if trump won.

          Letting a progressive become president means they name the head of the DNC, and that has ripple effects throughout DNC leadership they’ll never be able to reclaim.

          So they’d always prefer a Republican president and them retaining power to a progressive Dem becoming president.

          We ain’t fighting the same fight party leadership is fighting.

      • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        when the DNC, media, billionaires, and lobbists like AIPAC want neoliberals.

        …to add insult to injury, they often play the oppression olympics game at the same time, as if 1) that kind of stupid pandering even matters to most voters, and 2) they think no one will notice their shell game. As if people cannot tell the difference between a Condaleeza Rice and a Bernie Sanders, other than gender and race?

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      4 months ago

      Walz is giving him no angles of attack, it’s really an inspired pick.

      Republicans don’t have a counter for wholesome.

    • ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      No, see Walz has some huge weaknesses that Trump and Vance can expose! He, errr… [checks notes] visited China and got addicted to a video games console for a while?