• cheese_greater@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    2 months ago

    Can we just take a sec over how great all this Tim Walz narrative-seizing is going? Its awesome and deliciously subversive

  • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Walz is weird. From what I’ve read, he doesn’t own a home, doesn’t own any stocks, and lives off his pension as governor.

    He’s like John Heard in My Fellow Americans, except he really is this folksy, bumbling, lovable weirdo. I’d 100% vote for him as president.

  • bdonvrA
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    2 months ago

    But the expansion of Israel and its proxies is an absolute, fundamental necessity for the United States

    Tim Walz, genocide supporter and cool Grandpa

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      Walz got off to a slow start, accidentally referring to Iran as Israel and vice-versa. “Iran, or I uh, Israel’s ability to be able to defend itself, is fundamental,” he said. Moments later, he said “the expansion of Israel and its proxies is an absolute fundamental necessity for the United States to have the steady leadership there,” presumably mistaking Israel for Iran.

      • bdonvrA
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Walz supports the expansion of Iran and it’s proxies? REALLY? The country we have a trade embargo on and no formal diplomatic mission to? Americans have the most negative view of Iran in the world (BBC World Survey, 2013).

        You’re telling me Walz was talking about THAT Iran instead of Israel, the entity we have supported with billions in weapons and investment?

        Really now. Come on.

        • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Well if he meant Israel I don’t know which proxies he could mean. My reading is that he meant the expansion of Iran and it’s proxies necessitates US leadership in the region. Which is a statement critical of Iran (and, in context, supportive of Israel), and not something I agree with (the US has unilaterally meddled enough in Western Asia), but it’s not a Zionist call for greater Israel. He definitely fumbled his words there, so I might be wrong.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          No, quite clearly he’s saying that it’s important to have stable leadership in the region to prevent Iran and its proxies from acting. It’s pretty apparent in context that he’s tripping over his words.