The Minnesota governor unexpectedly announced this month that he wouldn’t run for re-election.
Walz had said this month that he would not seek re-election as governor — sending shock waves through state and national politics — but he did not go so far as to say he would not consider another elected position down the line.
In explaining his decision Wednesday, Walz talked about the scenes unfolding in Minneapolis between residents and federal officers. He said he found that there are “heroes on the streets that we don’t know their names.”
“They’re never going to run for office, and those grass-tops leaders brought this administration to their knees this week to do something about it. So there’s other ways to serve, and I’ll find them,” he said.
These two lines literally contradict each other… Who the fuck wrote this? Which one is correct, because they can’t both be?
Its a little confusing. At the start of the month he said he’s not running for gov again but would consider other elected offices. Now he is saying hes not running for any elected offices. Reading the full article clears it up.
The paragraph right before says, on Wednesday, he told MSNOW that he wouldn’t run for office again.
The me that you highlighted is something he said earlier this month.
So, he wasn’t running for gov earlier this month, but didn’t say if we would run for something else. Now, he says he won’t run for an elected office ever again.
— I didn’t notice this when I first read it. You pointed out the wording so I had to go back and read it very carefully to catch all that. It’s definitely written in an odd way and is confusing.