It's Walz
-
Don't be mad that Minnesota is ranked #4 and Virginia is #13!
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings
Semi-kidding. I come from a completely anecdotal place. I know the parks are amazing, I moved specifically into the best school district in the state, there is a surplus in the state budget that they have recently passed into areas like education in 2023, sure I'm not "downtown" but there is almost zero crime that I hear or see, the job market is full, health care is up there with the best... how much this has to do with Walz? Probably not much, just as the President doesn't really impact as much as we think, either.
wrote on 13 Aug 2024, 15:52 last edited by taiwan_girl... how much this has to do with Walz? Probably not much, just as the President doesn't really impact as much as we think, either.
:couple_with_heart:
@George-K @Jolly
You can't have it both ways. The president is the president, both for good and bad. You can't say that the "good things" that happens while he was president were BECAUSE of him, and any "bad things" were IN SPITE of him.If I can put words in @89th mouth (which I agree with), it is never so black and white. Some of the good things that happened in President Trumps term were due to President Obama (of President Bush, or) policies, some due to President Trump, and some due to things that are outside the control of the US completely.
-
"I'm proud of that work because, look, I was the football coach," he said.
No, Gov Walz. You were not THE coach. You were AN assistant coach.
wrote on 13 Aug 2024, 16:07 last edited by"I'm proud of that work because, look, I was the football coach," he said.
No, Gov Walz. You were not THE coach. You were AN assistant coach.
Well, thankfully he wasn't a couch as Vance would have fallen in love....
-
Maybe he means the war on poverty, or war on drugs, or war on illiteracy, or war on wokeness.
Actually, I don’t know if he has been to those other wars either.Good point.
It's possible, just possible, that he carried a weapon in those wars (though I doubt it for the last one in your list).
Here's a fact checked summary of some of Walz's military statements btw:
https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/08/12/walz-military-service/
wrote on 13 Aug 2024, 16:07 last edited byHere's a fact checked summary of some of Walz's military statements btw:
https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/08/12/walz-military-service/
Having served in the Guard for 24 years, Walz was free to retire when he did.
Yes he was. He did nothing illegal or dishonorable, unless you want to call going over his direct superior's head to get an early retirement. His contract was 6 years, he served four.
Walz has never claimed to have served in a combat role in war. Such allegations are based on a single misstatement and are undercut by his consistent transparency about not seeing combat in other interviews.
That's true as well. However, when people spoke about him serving in Afghanistan (Ms. Pelosi), he did NOT correct her. He's willing to let the lie...lie.
Walz served as a command sergeant major, but did not retire at that grade because he did not complete the required training. The Guard has said, on numerous occasions, that it is accurate for Walz to state that he has served at that rank.
Few people know the difference. But, again, it's misleading. You can say you "served as a colonel" even though you were demoted to a lieutenant.
It's not just these facts. It's a pattern, as evidenced by him saying he "coached" a football team. Yeah, he was A coach, but not THE coach. It gives a false impression. It's just oily and though not dishonest, is deceptive. This is not an accident or a misstatement.
-
"I'm proud of that work because, look, I was the football coach," he said.
No, Gov Walz. You were not THE coach. You were AN assistant coach.
Well, thankfully he wasn't a couch as Vance would have fallen in love....
-
wrote on 13 Aug 2024, 16:08 last edited by
So then because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth". - Jesus
-
So then because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth". - Jesus
wrote on 13 Aug 2024, 16:51 last edited by -
89th? Paging 89th....
Just got back from a lake vacation with the family (vacation = just a trip where we relocate the bedtime routine with kids) so I haven't read this thread or most other threads but....
Under Walz it seems we have a surplus (but also higher taxes), great schools, great parks, free school lunches for all kids, and one of the higher ranking states in most categories. So in my direct personal life, aside from the higher income taxes, he's done a great job. In terms of things that don't really impact me but I disagree with... his support for trans and abortion support and other liberal policies is not preferred.
In 2019 the state ranked 10th in the nation in public education. Today it's ranked 15th. That's called a trend https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/public-school-rankings-by-state
Economic growth has trailed the national average by damn near 50%
Crime rates started spiking in Minnesota in 2019, before anybody ever heard of George Floyd, and continued to rise through 2021. It's come down some following 2021, but is still above the 2020 levels during the Floyd riots.
It still might be a great place right now, but is it as good as it was before Walz took office?
wrote on 13 Aug 2024, 17:29 last edited by Doctor Phibes@LuFins-Dad said in It's Walz:
In 2019 the state ranked 10th in the nation in public education. Today it's ranked 15th. That's called a trend https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/public-school-rankings-by-state
Do you really want to use public school rankings as a basis for determining which party is doing a better job with education?
I mean, it seems like an obvious thing to do, but still....
-
@LuFins-Dad said in It's Walz:
In 2019 the state ranked 10th in the nation in public education. Today it's ranked 15th. That's called a trend https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/public-school-rankings-by-state
Do you really want to use public school rankings as a basis for determining which party is doing a better job with education?
I mean, it seems like an obvious thing to do, but still....
wrote on 13 Aug 2024, 18:28 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in It's Walz:
@LuFins-Dad said in It's Walz:
In 2019 the state ranked 10th in the nation in public education. Today it's ranked 15th. That's called a trend https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/public-school-rankings-by-state
Do you really want to use public school rankings as a basis for determining which party is doing a better job with education?
I mean, it seems like an obvious thing to do, but still....
Why limit it to public schools? Why not include private and homeschooling?
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in It's Walz:
@LuFins-Dad said in It's Walz:
In 2019 the state ranked 10th in the nation in public education. Today it's ranked 15th. That's called a trend https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/public-school-rankings-by-state
Do you really want to use public school rankings as a basis for determining which party is doing a better job with education?
I mean, it seems like an obvious thing to do, but still....
Why limit it to public schools? Why not include private and homeschooling?
wrote on 13 Aug 2024, 18:39 last edited by Doctor Phibes@LuFins-Dad said in It's Walz:
@Doctor-Phibes said in It's Walz:
@LuFins-Dad said in It's Walz:
In 2019 the state ranked 10th in the nation in public education. Today it's ranked 15th. That's called a trend https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/public-school-rankings-by-state
Do you really want to use public school rankings as a basis for determining which party is doing a better job with education?
I mean, it seems like an obvious thing to do, but still....
Why limit it to public schools? Why not include private and homeschooling?
You're the one who brought up the state rankings for public schools, not me, and surely the point of the discussion is to make a direct comparison between similarly managed schools with different political affiliations. Comparing public schools in Massachusetts with private schools in Oklahoma wouldn't make much sense, since you're then comparing apples with rocky mountain oysters. You need one variable, which in this case is political party.
-
wrote on 13 Aug 2024, 18:40 last edited by LuFins Dad
But let’s start with public schools…
Oh look, Florida’s 1, Utah’s 2. I think those are safely on the Republican/Conservative Side. Mass and NJ are 3 & 4, solid blue. Colorado and Wisconsin are 5 & 6. They are purplish. I’ll give you Colorado and take Wisconsin. Wyoming (R) is 7 and Connecticut (B) is 8. NH and VA are 9 & 10. Purplish…
So red gets the Gold and Silver, blue gets the Bronze and Runner Up. The rest is a mishmash.
-
@LuFins-Dad said in It's Walz:
@Doctor-Phibes said in It's Walz:
@LuFins-Dad said in It's Walz:
In 2019 the state ranked 10th in the nation in public education. Today it's ranked 15th. That's called a trend https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/public-school-rankings-by-state
Do you really want to use public school rankings as a basis for determining which party is doing a better job with education?
I mean, it seems like an obvious thing to do, but still....
Why limit it to public schools? Why not include private and homeschooling?
You're the one who brought up the state rankings for public schools, not me, and surely the point of the discussion is to make a direct comparison between similarly managed schools with different political affiliations. Comparing public schools in Massachusetts with private schools in Oklahoma wouldn't make much sense, since you're then comparing apples with rocky mountain oysters. You need one variable, which in this case is political party.
wrote on 13 Aug 2024, 18:43 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in It's Walz:
@LuFins-Dad said in It's Walz:
@Doctor-Phibes said in It's Walz:
@LuFins-Dad said in It's Walz:
In 2019 the state ranked 10th in the nation in public education. Today it's ranked 15th. That's called a trend https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/public-school-rankings-by-state
Do you really want to use public school rankings as a basis for determining which party is doing a better job with education?
I mean, it seems like an obvious thing to do, but still....
Why limit it to public schools? Why not include private and homeschooling?
You're the one who brought up the state rankings for public schools, not me, and surely the point of the discussion is to make a direct comparison between similarly managed schools with different political affiliations. Comparing public schools in Massachusetts with private schools in Oklahoma wouldn't make much sense, since you're then comparing apples with rocky mountain oysters. You need one variable, which in this case is political party.
My point is not about the actual rankings, but the slippage during his term. If they were 48 when he took office and were 44 when he left, he’s doing better than going from 12-15. It’s about the direction, not the actual ranking.
-
But let’s start with public schools…
Oh look, Florida’s 1, Utah’s 2. I think those are safely on the Republican/Conservative Side. Mass and NJ are 3 & 4, solid blue. Colorado and Wisconsin are 5 & 6. They are purplish. I’ll give you Colorado and take Wisconsin. Wyoming (R) is 7 and Connecticut (B) is 8. NH and VA are 9 & 10. Purplish…
So red gets the Gold and Silver, blue gets the Bronze and Runner Up. The rest is a mishmash.
wrote on 13 Aug 2024, 18:45 last edited by@LuFins-Dad said in It's Walz:
But let’s start with public schools…
Oh look, Florida’s 1, Utah’s 2. I think those are safely on the Republican/Conservative Side. Mass and NJ are 3 & 4, solid blue. Colorado and Wisconsin are 5 & 6. They are purplish. I’ll give you Colorado and take Wisconsin. Wyoming (R) is 7 and Connecticut (B) is 8. NH and VA are 9 & 10. Purplish…
So red gets the Gold and Silver, blue gets the Bronze and Runner Up. The rest is a mishmash.
I think there may be some controversy regarding those numbers. If you look at the original map you posted, Florida didn't score nearly so well.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in It's Walz:
@LuFins-Dad said in It's Walz:
@Doctor-Phibes said in It's Walz:
@LuFins-Dad said in It's Walz:
In 2019 the state ranked 10th in the nation in public education. Today it's ranked 15th. That's called a trend https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/public-school-rankings-by-state
Do you really want to use public school rankings as a basis for determining which party is doing a better job with education?
I mean, it seems like an obvious thing to do, but still....
Why limit it to public schools? Why not include private and homeschooling?
You're the one who brought up the state rankings for public schools, not me, and surely the point of the discussion is to make a direct comparison between similarly managed schools with different political affiliations. Comparing public schools in Massachusetts with private schools in Oklahoma wouldn't make much sense, since you're then comparing apples with rocky mountain oysters. You need one variable, which in this case is political party.
My point is not about the actual rankings, but the slippage during his term. If they were 48 when he took office and were 44 when he left, he’s doing better than going from 12-15. It’s about the direction, not the actual ranking.
wrote on 13 Aug 2024, 18:49 last edited by Doctor Phibes@LuFins-Dad said in It's Walz:
My point is not about the actual rankings, but the slippage during his term. If they were 48 when he took office and were 44 when he left, he’s doing better than going from 12-15. It’s about the direction, not the actual ranking.
I know, it's election year. We're all looking for data to support our beliefs.
Still, I'd rather send my kids to school in bluest of the blue Massachusetts, and what's more I put my money where my mouth is. We didn't move into considerably more affordable (although admittedly equally Democrat dominated) Rhode Island until after they both graduated from High School.
All this being said, I don't actually think it's got much to do with politics if I'm honest. It's mostly about affluence.
-
wrote on 13 Aug 2024, 21:46 last edited by
My high school was number 1 in the state, so all the others were losers.
It was the first Nixon administration, he defeated Hubert Humphrey.
-
My high school was number 1 in the state, so all the others were losers.
It was the first Nixon administration, he defeated Hubert Humphrey.
wrote on 13 Aug 2024, 21:56 last edited byMy high school was number 1 in the state, so all the others were losers.
It was the first Nixon administration, he defeated Hubert Humphrey.
...and that State was the only one to vote against him in the next election, which could be used to suggest that a good education does add some value.
-
wrote on 13 Aug 2024, 22:00 last edited by
George McGovern was a good man, a combat pilot flew a B24 in WWII.
Both parties had reasonably good, experienced and qualified candidates.
Although Mr. Nixon's goodness faded somewhat.
-
wrote on 18 Aug 2024, 03:40 last edited by
You know, the guy is sixty.
Doesn't look a day over 75.
-
wrote on 18 Aug 2024, 09:07 last edited by
Yeah he’s only six months older than Harris. Looks decades older.
