Early Predictions 2028: AOC, Whitmer, Newsome or …?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Valero is taking a 1.1 billion dollar hit just to get out of California by April 2026.

https://x.com/BlackApple/status/2000295581324132741

California will be flat broke next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Valero is taking a 1.1 billion dollar hit just to get out of California by April 2026.

https://x.com/BlackApple/status/2000295581324132741

California will be flat broke next year.

Businesses and high income earners leaving California isn't a new story. What does this have to do with potential 2028 nominees? Californian politicians haven't been popular outside of California for quite some time now and the fact that they have little chance of success running in national elections is well known. The Dems will be heavily favored in 2028 and it's very unlikely they'll risk an easy election victory by nominating a candidate with an inherent weakness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Valero is taking a 1.1 billion dollar hit just to get out of California by April 2026.

https://x.com/BlackApple/status/2000295581324132741

California will be flat broke next year.

Businesses and high income earners leaving California isn't a new story. What does this have to do with potential 2028 nominees? Californian politicians haven't been popular outside of California for quite some time now and the fact that they have little chance of success running in national elections is well known. The Dems will be heavily favored in 2028 and it's very unlikely they'll risk an easy election victory by nominating a candidate with an inherent weakness.

It has to do with Newsom's name keeps getting floated here. When Newsom was elected gov of CA in 2018, CA had a 15 billion dollar surplus with some estimates of up to 21 billion dollar surplus if you include required reserves. This year there is a deficit of 18 billion which the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office reported last month could balloon to $35 billion by fiscal year 2027-28, as spending continues to grow and debts come due.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we please get back to the latest bets on who the democratic candidates will be?

Seems like we have:

- two being fiery, mainstream-ish potentials in Newsome and Kelly,
- a kinda-sorta Trump appeaser in Whitmer who made some bad choices with social media posts but is well-liked in Michigan,
- AOC, a progressive darling, Bernie successor,
- Buttigieg, a milquetoast Midwesterner,
- Shapiro, with the Israel albatross around his neck,
- Harris, with the Biden albatross around her neck,
- ????

I still leave open a possible celebrity candidate.

Kelly has a great resume. And is an honorable and decent man who clearly wants to do the right thing. But he's not good on tv. He doesn't have the charisma that projects - like an Obama or Bill Clinton. And that's a liability in this media-saturated world.

Newsom is like Bill Clinton. Charismatic. Sharp. And he will f%$k anyone in a skirt - the Trump women, his staffers, the wives of his staffers. And in his down time, he spends his hours online trolling, which I get is a useful skill these days. But do we really want to go down this road in 2028? A Newsom candidacy will be an absolute sh%tshow. I'm old enough to remember bimbo eruptions. I get that Trump is many times worse, but do Democrats really want to follow that with a skeezy candidate themselves? I do believe that after Trump, a wholesome family person with a solid marriage is going to be a much stronger candidate.

Pritzker's problem is that he was born a billionaire. He inherited the Hyatt fortune. I think we all recognize that we need less billionaires in politics. His fortune will be put under the microscope, and I'm sure there will be many questionable things. Plus, come on, the middle class is struggling with how to pay the mortgage/rent, food bills, car payments, health insurance, college etc. Pritzker has no idea what that's like. He's too rich to click with middle class issues.

AOC is 36. Too young. And a lightening rod for conservatives. But she is super charismatic and quick. Maybe in some years, after she takes Schumer's seat as senator for NY.

Beshear is the governor you want when your neighborhood has been flooded. Competent. Well-meaning. Clearly a good dude. But there is no gravitas or spine with this guy. He will get wrecked in a meeting with Putin or Xi. The presidency of the United States is not his place.

I don't know what happened to Whitmer. Some serious missteps. It's like she decided to lean into the sorority girl theme. Which was a mistake. Not a credible candidate.

I am not seeing a viable, successful candidate at this moment in time. Democrats aren't running against Trump in 2028. Given the trajectory of his polls, my dog will be able to defeat Trump in 2028. But if Republicans choose someone reasonably sane like a Nikki Haley or Marco Rubio, Democrats really need to come up with someone good to win. Not seeing it yet.

Terrible summary.
Nearly every weakness you ascribe to Democrats could be assigned equally to Republicans. Pritzger is an out-of-touch billionaire? What do you think the entire Republican brand represents? Newsome likes the ladies? MAGA shields child rapists.

Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Democrats ARE running against Trump in 2028. Whoever the Republican nominee is will have to defend his record, since they kneeled to him for the last four years. Nearly any of thd Democrats you list (except maybe for AOC) would be able to dispatch Rubio or Vance with ease.

If you want to start a thread on GOP candidate predictions go ahead. The problem with our party is that we have too many people like you who are stuck on "Republicans are worse." You need to get serious. That is the path that got us Trump, again. Too many in this party are out of touch with every day people. It is disappointing, because the Democratic Party now has too many gatekeepers, keeping people out of the big tent. So, so sad.

Nobody is being “gate kept”. Primaries are open and you can vote for who you want.

You don’t think that the DNC controls who makes the primaries or who gets support from the party?

Absolutely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Valero is taking a 1.1 billion dollar hit just to get out of California by April 2026.

https://x.com/BlackApple/status/2000295581324132741

California will be flat broke next year.

Businesses and high income earners leaving California isn't a new story. What does this have to do with potential 2028 nominees? Californian politicians haven't been popular outside of California for quite some time now and the fact that they have little chance of success running in national elections is well known. The Dems will be heavily favored in 2028 and it's very unlikely they'll risk an easy election victory by nominating a candidate with an inherent weakness.

It has to do with Newsom's name keeps getting floated here. When Newsom was elected gov of CA in 2018, CA had a 15 billion dollar surplus with some estimates of up to 21 billion dollar surplus if you include required reserves. This year there is a deficit of 18 billion which the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office reported last month could balloon to $35 billion by fiscal year 2027-28, as spending continues to grow and debts come due.

Anyone "floating" Newsom's name as a potential 2028 contender for the nominee doesn't have a clue what works and doesn't work in a national election. Those people can be ignored.

[Anonymous]

Yes, there is a difference between who is electable and who will be put forth as the candidate. It isn’t always the same. Best Democrat in the party may not be electable on the national stage, but could still be put forth as the Democratic Party candidate for President.

2028 is the Democrats’ election to lose. Winning should be a slam dunk following Trump 2.0. It shouldn’t matter if the Democratic candidate is Sponge Bob, because it will be a vote against MAGA not for the candidate. If Democrats lose, they’ve really f’d up.

Still, finding a good candidate is impirtant be sure it is really 2032 that is important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully none of those mentioned. We need moderates, it’s a landslide if you put up a moderate.

Problem is the Dem candidate needs to get past the primaries. And for that they're going to have to embrace far left policies and ideals. Mandani was just the beginning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It needs to be a white male. And not Newsome.

There are far too many misogynists and we're clearly not ready for a female POTUS in America.

Why does the sex (or race) of the candidate matter? This is the problem with the Democrats. They make everything about identity politics. America is so tired of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pritzker.
I disagree that we need a moderate. Republicans cast all democrats, moderates or not, as crazy leftist dems. Since moderates are never seen as moderates anyway, let’s put up a candidate that actually IS progressive.

And hence why the Republicans are calling it "Operation Let Them Talk". AOC or Crockett for President!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully none of those mentioned. We need moderates, it’s a landslide if you put up a moderate.

Problem is the Dem candidate needs to get past the primaries. And for that they're going to have to embrace far left policies and ideals. Mandani was just the beginning.

But then, they also need to moderate to be elected President.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It needs to be a white male. And not Newsome.

There are far too many misogynists and we're clearly not ready for a female POTUS in America.

Why does the sex (or race) of the candidate matter? This is the problem with the Democrats. They make everything about identity politics. America is so tired of this.

DP. Because it’s an election? And Americans repeatedly elected Trump against women but he lost when he ran against a man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Valero is taking a 1.1 billion dollar hit just to get out of California by April 2026.

https://x.com/BlackApple/status/2000295581324132741

California will be flat broke next year.

Businesses and high income earners leaving California isn't a new story. What does this have to do with potential 2028 nominees? Californian politicians haven't been popular outside of California for quite some time now and the fact that they have little chance of success running in national elections is well known. The Dems will be heavily favored in 2028 and it's very unlikely they'll risk an easy election victory by nominating a candidate with an inherent weakness.

It has to do with Newsom's name keeps getting floated here. When Newsom was elected gov of CA in 2018, CA had a 15 billion dollar surplus with some estimates of up to 21 billion dollar surplus if you include required reserves. This year there is a deficit of 18 billion which the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office reported last month could balloon to $35 billion by fiscal year 2027-28, as spending continues to grow and debts come due.

Anyone "floating" Newsom's name as a potential 2028 contender for the nominee doesn't have a clue what works and doesn't work in a national election. Those people can be ignored.

I think Newsom will be a disaster for Democrats if that's what they choose. But progressives really like him. And that's a big part of the Democratic coalition. He's not a woman. He's not a POC. But he'll do. And progressives seem to be rallying around Newsom because he has the memes and is good on social media.

But the electorate in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Georgia, North Carolina and so on is not composed of terminally online progressives. Kitchen table issues are what matter. And some California lefty with ten pounds of hair gel that wrecked his state's finances and basically made California an impossible place to live for working and middle class people is not going to resonate with the national population. Newsom is not Obama.

He doesn't have it.

But Democrats and the DNC can reliably be expected to do the wrong thing. So I wouldn't be surprised at all if Newsom is the candidate.

[Anonymous]

Mark Kelly

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mark Kelly

I think he is the most likely, or neck and neck with Newsome, today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Valero is taking a 1.1 billion dollar hit just to get out of California by April 2026.

https://x.com/BlackApple/status/2000295581324132741

California will be flat broke next year.

Businesses and high income earners leaving California isn't a new story. What does this have to do with potential 2028 nominees? Californian politicians haven't been popular outside of California for quite some time now and the fact that they have little chance of success running in national elections is well known. The Dems will be heavily favored in 2028 and it's very unlikely they'll risk an easy election victory by nominating a candidate with an inherent weakness.

It has to do with Newsom's name keeps getting floated here. When Newsom was elected gov of CA in 2018, CA had a 15 billion dollar surplus with some estimates of up to 21 billion dollar surplus if you include required reserves. This year there is a deficit of 18 billion which the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office reported last month could balloon to $35 billion by fiscal year 2027-28, as spending continues to grow and debts come due.

Anyone "floating" Newsom's name as a potential 2028 contender for the nominee doesn't have a clue what works and doesn't work in a national election. Those people can be ignored.

I think Newsom will be a disaster for Democrats if that's what they choose. But progressives really like him. And that's a big part of the Democratic coalition. He's not a woman. He's not a POC. But he'll do. And progressives seem to be rallying around Newsom because he has the memes and is good on social media.

But the electorate in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Georgia, North Carolina and so on is not composed of terminally online progressives. Kitchen table issues are what matter. And some California lefty with ten pounds of hair gel that wrecked his state's finances and basically made California an impossible place to live for working and middle class people is not going to resonate with the national population. Newsom is not Obama.

He doesn't have it.

But Democrats and the DNC can reliably be expected to do the wrong thing. So I wouldn't be surprised at all if Newsom is the candidate.

What is his record on running California? What are the outcomes? They will have to sell Newsom to the whole country, not just CA.

DeSantis trounced him in a head-to-head debate.