MSNBC Shockingly Uses Data to Throw Cold Water on Tim Walz's Supposed Working-Class Appeal
With Tim Walz officially on the ticket with Kamala Harris, conversations about what kind of impact he'll have are raging. Most Republicans see it as a gift. A far-left governor from a non-swing state with a radical record and countless soundbites to work with.
For Democrats, the picture is murkier. While the press tries to present Walz as a "centrist" simply because he's white and from the Midwest, progressives in the party are overjoyed with his selection. What does that tell you? It tells you that if Jamaal Bowman and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are excited, then Walz is the socialist he's previously claimed to be.
The Press Rush to Put Lipstick on the Pig, but the Tim Walz Pick is a Disaster for Democrats
Still, the idea that Walz appeals to the "working class" and will bring in rural Rust Belt voters quickly became a talking point. MSNBC's election analyst Steve Kornacki threw some cold water on that.
What the data shows is that despite Walz supposedly looking the part, he didn't gain any ground with rural, working-class Minnesotans in 2022. On the contrary, he lost a bit of ground compared to what Joe Biden won in 2020. That certainly doesn't look like Walz has any special appeal to the demographic Trump is planning to make hay with. Further, Walz's overall margin in 2022 was greatly reduced from his prior first-term victory, showing a surprising vulnerability in a state that is solidly blue and has been since 1972.
None of this is really surprising, though, is it? Walz's record is chock full of wild far-left nonsense, from making Minnesota a "sanctuary" for "gender-affirming care" for children to giving illegal immigrants driver's licenses. He is a true radical's radical, and rural, working-class voters aren't stupid enough to be gaslit otherwise.
Here's the thing about Walz. He's the liberal Beltway dweller's idea of what someone who is blue-collar is. He's a caricature of the working class created by wealthy elites who wouldn't know "normal" if it punched them in the face. He doesn't actually have any extra appeal. He just seems like it to a select demographic who live in a bubble. I'm talking about the Tom Nichols and Jennifer Rubins of the world.
That's the key, and it's what the press are missing. They desperately want to paint him as a likable centrist, but Walz really exists on the ticket to soothe the souls of affluent, white, female liberals. Does that really add to the Democrat coalition? I wouldn't think so, but Kamala Harris doesn't exactly have a history of making sound political judgments.
Post a Comment