Walz dropping out of the governor's race is obviously a big deal but I don't want to spend a lot time right now rehashing what is currently being highly hashed. Instead I want to focus I've seen of sloppy takes floating around recently and so I wanted to clear things up.
Despite claims to the contrary there is zero evidence that Walz was "connected to" or "involved in" or "committed" fraud (for example I saw Mike Pesca's claiming this on Twitter). What clearly has happened was there was a bunch of fraud while he was governor and this became a real political problem because the mainstream media here turned into a big running story (as in "MN FRAUD CRISIS" every night on local news) and many DFL people basically told Walz he should hang up his spikes. Add it whole " the buck stops here" ethos and his position became increasingly untenuous.
Personally I think Walz deserves some props from Democrats for doing the strategic and non-selfish thing by deciding to quit long before the primary because there are stronger candidates to take his place. This is also evidence of the Democrats actually learning real lessons from the last 10 years, like the idea of leaving on the high note rather than fighting epic political death battles for personal reasons (see also lots of very old Democratic House members decided to retire).
This is also good reminder that if Biden had dropped out a year earlier he'd probably be remembered by his party and a lot of the media in a pretty different light. Even though it's still quite likely the Dems lose in 2024 (probably with Harris as the nominee because being the VP gives you real advantages in the McGovern-Fraser system and Dems just really like nominating VP's, see Gore and Mondal and...Biden) because that's what happened to pretty much every incumbent party in a developed democracy in 2024.
Walz will be a punching bag for a week or two and then everyone will move on to Trump bombing Havana or whatever and he'll probably leave office with a above water approval rating.
I know a lot of members of the chattering classes will see this as a distinction without difference but the details do matter in my opinion.
I'll also say that I do think Walz still could have won anyway, and the predictions of doom were a bit overblown. Candidate effects are real, but they are also fairly small, especially with a known quantity like an incumbent governor. The main driver here isn't media cycles or interview skills, it's structural things like Trump dismal aproval rating, the public souring on the economy, and the very real dreaded "Six Year Itch" . And by those metrics 2026 is shaping up to be a banner year for the Dems for structural reasons. In other words if it does turning into "Klobberin' Time" the odds of the DFL holding the mansion in St. Paul went from like 75% to 98% or insert numbers of your chosing. Which is why Walz dropping out, should actually make DFLers feel glad, if personally frustrated.
Despite claims to the contrary there is zero evidence that Walz was "connected to" or "involved in" or "committed" fraud (for example I saw Mike Pesca's claiming this on Twitter). What clearly has happened was there was a bunch of fraud while he was governor and this became a real political problem because the mainstream media here turned into a big running story (as in "MN FRAUD CRISIS" every night on local news) and many DFL people basically told Walz he should hang up his spikes. Add it whole " the buck stops here" ethos and his position became increasingly untenuous.
Personally I think Walz deserves some props from Democrats for doing the strategic and non-selfish thing by deciding to quit long before the primary because there are stronger candidates to take his place. This is also evidence of the Democrats actually learning real lessons from the last 10 years, like the idea of leaving on the high note rather than fighting epic political death battles for personal reasons (see also lots of very old Democratic House members decided to retire).
This is also good reminder that if Biden had dropped out a year earlier he'd probably be remembered by his party and a lot of the media in a pretty different light. Even though it's still quite likely the Dems lose in 2024 (probably with Harris as the nominee because being the VP gives you real advantages in the McGovern-Fraser system and Dems just really like nominating VP's, see Gore and Mondal and...Biden) because that's what happened to pretty much every incumbent party in a developed democracy in 2024.
Walz will be a punching bag for a week or two and then everyone will move on to Trump bombing Havana or whatever and he'll probably leave office with a above water approval rating.
I know a lot of members of the chattering classes will see this as a distinction without difference but the details do matter in my opinion.
I'll also say that I do think Walz still could have won anyway, and the predictions of doom were a bit overblown. Candidate effects are real, but they are also fairly small, especially with a known quantity like an incumbent governor. The main driver here isn't media cycles or interview skills, it's structural things like Trump dismal aproval rating, the public souring on the economy, and the very real dreaded "Six Year Itch" . And by those metrics 2026 is shaping up to be a banner year for the Dems for structural reasons. In other words if it does turning into "Klobberin' Time" the odds of the DFL holding the mansion in St. Paul went from like 75% to 98% or insert numbers of your chosing. Which is why Walz dropping out, should actually make DFLers feel glad, if personally frustrated.
Don't you think Dems risk allowing the GOP to dictate the terms of race when they respond to these manufactured crisis? While this fraud problem is real, first, I don't know that the particular programs had a higher level of fraud than compared to say tax fraud, or other government programs, and second the state and federal government responded with investigations and prosecutions. Meanwhile, the president car pardon drug dealer (Hernandez) and facilitators of child predation (CZ) just to name a a few.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I don't disagree with Gov Walz decisions. I am more curious about your thoughts above.