I haven't recognized the Republican Party for a real long time, but I recognize that gentleman. He's the sober, intelligent and patriotic kind of Republican I might have had a back and forth with for an hour during lunch, busy disagreeing with him or her on a lot of the issues, and both of us enjoying doing it almost as much as we enjoyed the chicken fried steak we were having at Threadgill's, or one of the other classic eateries that used to exist in Austin. It was a pleasure to see that not all Republicans of his ilk have disappeared. It just seems like it. I think a lot of them just might vote for the Harris/Walz ticket.
Democrats favorite republicans are always the ones that hate republicans. Its the reverse uno card of 40 year old white dudes watching "conservative" black people on youtube talk shite about woke culture.
Something about it hits a little harder when it's a lifelong Republican public official saying these things vs. some random woke-spotting grifter on youtube.
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/tim-wal...4708jaoew6b&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink Is Tim Walz Guilty of ‘Stolen Valor’? His military record isn’t a good reason to oppose his candidacy. By The Editorial Board Aug. 8, 2024 at 5:49 pm ET There are plenty of reasons to criticize Democratic vice presidential candidate Tim Walz, and we’ve told you about several. But the charges leveled so far about his military service look like “thin gruel,” as our friends at the New York Sun put it. J.D. Vance has accused Mr. Walz of “stolen valor” despite his 24 years in the National Guard because the Minnesota Governor didn’t deploy to Iraq with his unit. Before his political career, Mr. Walz rose to the highest enlisted rank of Command Sergeant Major. He retired in May 2005, shortly before the unit was notified in July 2005 that it would be deployed to Iraq. Fox News reports that the Pentagon says Mr. Walz put in his retirement request several months earlier, though it’s fair to ask if he was aware of the possible Iraq deployment. His retirement timing wasn’t ideal, leaving his leadership position when his unit was headed into a war zone. But if he had been deemed essential to the operation, the Guard could have declined to approve it. People retire from service for a variety of reasons. Mr. Walz had served since he was 17 years old and had decided to run for Congress. Mr. Walz has also been accused of lying about his record because he retired one rank below Command Sergeant Major. But that seems to have been a bureaucratic issue since to retire at that rank required longer service in the role and coursework he didn’t complete. So he retired at a lower rank, but there’s no doubt he had reached the higher position while active. Mr. Vance has alleged that Mr. Walz misrepresented his service by referring to weapons he carried “in war.” That may have been a deceptive boast, though a minor one. Iraq war veteran and former Michigan Rep. Peter Meijer posted on X that Mr. Walz “played fast & loose with his military bio to stay above water as his congressional district drifted right.” But that doesn’t amount to stolen valor, and a simple concession by Mr. Walz on that point would put the matter to rest. Republicans are comparing this to John Kerry’s service in Vietnam and the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign that countered Mr. Kerry’s service narrative. But that was far different. Upon his return from Vietnam Mr. Kerry slandered his former comrades in arms as war criminals before Congress, yet in running for President he wanted to use his military service as a credential. The Swift Boat Vets who served with him were correcting the record. By the way, some have demeaned Mr. Vance’s service in Iraq because he served as a Marine correspondent. But his service was also honorable, and more than a few correspondents have been killed in American wars. The U.S. military is a volunteer force and only about 1% of the population serves in uniform. Mr. Walz and Mr. Vance both served their country. There are other and better reasons to oppose Mr. Walz’s candidacy. Appeared in the August 9, 2024, print edition as 'Is Tim Walz Guilty of ‘Stolen Valor’?'.
He endorsed Mark Kelly in 2022, Harris in 2024 and has been mayor (which is non partisan like houston) only since 2017. I don't see this decades long history you are talking about. He can join the ranks of staunch conservatives Ana Navarro and Deckard.
He came out against Trump after the 2020 stop the steal bullshit, so, yeah, I'm not surprised he endorsed Kelly. I can't find much on his public life before mayor, but I'm not willing to take the bet that this BYU grad is just a democrat psy-op playing the long con.
You should be surprised considering Kelly's political positions are completely opposed to conservatism. If the 2020 election was the problem he would have endorsed alternative conservatives like DeSantis, Scott, Haley. Not left wing dem. It isn't really a long con, the guy is a nobody being propped up as a "good" republican ie a Democrat.
1) DeSantis, Scott, and Haley aren't on the ballot. 2) Given that he's been the Mayor of Mesa since 2014, over both Biden and Trump's terms, I assume he's well positioned to make judgments about how each admin has been for his city and to a lesser extent his state. He is also uniquely positioned to see the Trump election fraud grift in action. Seems like he's just another in a long line of Republicans starting in 2015 that are being sacrificed at the altar of Trumpism.
Yeah usually when I disagree with a certain person I change all of my beliefs and first principles on USA politics. That makes a ton of sense. Gr8 logic breh
Maybe your first principles aren't exactly the same as his. But hey, good luck with the ongoing purity purge.
Yeah, "make the tent good and narrow, lash it tight, and repel intruders" is an interesting political strategery. Has the whiff of Guyana punch. (shout out to the Judys)
You can, and that's exactly (technically) what happened. You can also be demoted for other reasons after retirement. Take Ronny Jackson, for example. He's a retired Navy medical officer who initially retired as a rear admiral. After retirement, he was bumped down to the rank of captain due to bad behavior. Despite this, Jackson continued to call himself a retired rear admiral in public speeches. His bio in Congress, on Twitter, and probably elsewhere still said 'retired Navy rear admiral.' When questioned about this, he was made aware that it was misleading and inaccurate, but he refused to make any corrections. In contrast, Walz's bio has been corrected. It's not a big deal. If he had insisted and refused to correct it, that would have been dishonest and would have amounted to doubling down on a misleading label.
He is a McCain Republican who puts country above party. His #1 concern is democracy and the Constitution. It makes complete sense that a lifetime Republican/conservative who values democracy above all else would not only refuse to support Trump and today's MAGA Republicans but would also vote for the other side to ensure democracy is safe. Your questioning of his long history as a Republican is not so different from Trump pushing everyone who isn't MAGA out. As he stated in his short 2-minute speech: "The Republican party has been taken over by extremists who are committed to pushing people who are in the center of the political spectrum out of the party."
endorsing the opposing parties most left wing candidates is not country over party. It's a completely different ideology. Your logic would work if he endorsed a moderate republican or this "I'm a republican but they have gone too far!" hasn't been a thing for decades. see ana navarro.
