I don't find someone knowing my hopes, desires and problems as a qualification. I do appreciate people having empathy for others, but it isn't determinative to me.
As for Walz' time in Congress, I agree he has experience in office but experience =/= policy or accomplishments. It just means he has been elected to office. I haven't been given a single accomplishment he actually spearheaded or achieved that makes me consider him worthy to be 1st in line succession to the presidency.
A Governor? O.K., I admit I like voting for governors. Executive experience is can be worthwhile. It also provides a record of how a leader performs when in the crucible. I think Walz had significant failures during his terms as governor, but I would hope he would have learned from those - specifically his failures as a leader during the summer riots. ('Cuz I don't see us getting better as a nation.)
I guess I am saying that I still don't see where Walz has policy or accomplishments to stand on. You did provide examples of his experience, and I find that to be relevant also, I am just not sure the experience you cited gives me confidence in Walz to be an effective leader.
Regardless of our different assessment of Walz, I do sincerely appreciate your response to my post, and I respect that you did it without the vitriol that often manifests here on the board when we discuss these issues. Thank you.
I guess I land here after last night's debate: of the 4 candidates on the two tickets, I wish I could vote for Vance. He has his flaws, but he showed himself to be thoughtful, articulate, persuasive, compassionate and in command. I did not see the "weird." I also found him to be someone who has engaged in self-reflection; someone who is willing to admit he has grown ("evolved", if you prefer.) All the other candidates seem to run from that as if it is a character flaw rather than a strength.
