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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

+1

Taking the relatively easy 2028 election victory with a legitimate two term worthy POTUS will give the GOP 8 years to flush Trump's influence down the drain so that the GOP can be viable once again. Needless to say, the country is better off when both major parties are functioning adequately.

Taking the 2028 election victory with a Biden 2.0 will open the door for MAGA 3.0 in 2032.

[Anonymous]

Wish Mark Carney met the qualification.

[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.

Which States have early primaries? New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina. None of these are progressive hotspots. You rant about Progressives hijacking the party but there hasn’t been a truly progressive Democrats nominated for President since McGovern. Biden was the “establishment” candidate and Harris was pretty moderate. I think people just like to complain about the evil DNC without taking responsibility for their own vote.

[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.

I heard Newsom for the first time just recently when Ezra Klein interviewed him.

I was very underwhelmed. His voice was grating and he just sounded insincere. I don't know. I don't think he has what it takes and that CA is a liability, not an advantage.

[Anonymous]

This will be the “I told you so” election where swing voters come slinking back to us, embarrassed that they voted for a felon over us in 2024. We told them Trump was bad, they KNEW he was bad. And still they preferred him. Well, not anymore. His polling numbers stink. The voters are with us again.

[Anonymous]

Mayor Pete is the best choice. Newsome seems like a used car salesman. He should be a Republican. He looks like Gordon Gekko with that slicked back hair. But Mayor Pete is the total package: smart, young, wonky, articulate, and a member of an oppressed group (gay/trans). He literally IS Democracy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mayor Pete is the best choice. Newsome seems like a used car salesman. He should be a Republican. He looks like Gordon Gekko with that slicked back hair. But Mayor Pete is the total package: smart, young, wonky, articulate, and a member of an oppressed group (gay/trans). He literally IS Democracy.

I like Buttigieg and I think he is a solid executive but as a political realist I must point out that he has two flaws in his political history that gives me reservations about his strength as a POTUS candidate. He has campaigned vigorously for the POTUS position before and was forced out of the race without being a top 2 or 3 consideration for the nomination and secondly, he was a cabinet member of a very unpopular one term POTUS. Disassociating from close ties with a historically unpopular POTUS has proven to be a difficult thing to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This will be the “I told you so” election where swing voters come slinking back to us, embarrassed that they voted for a felon over us in 2024. We told them Trump was bad, they KNEW he was bad. And still they preferred him. Well, not anymore. His polling numbers stink. The voters are with us again.

Independents will not be slinking back. The problem is that the last few elections have had people trying to correct course. They are not happy with Trump but they’d be equally unhappy if the Dems continued on the same trajectory. I think they’d be equally pissed off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mayor Pete is the best choice. Newsome seems like a used car salesman. He should be a Republican. He looks like Gordon Gekko with that slicked back hair. But Mayor Pete is the total package: smart, young, wonky, articulate, and a member of an oppressed group (gay/trans). He literally IS Democracy.

You lost me at oppressed group and especially at “he IS democracy.” One person is not a democracy. I think you’re confusing that with autocracy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mayor Pete is the best choice. Newsome seems like a used car salesman. He should be a Republican. He looks like Gordon Gekko with that slicked back hair. But Mayor Pete is the total package: smart, young, wonky, articulate, and a member of an oppressed group (gay/trans). He literally IS Democracy.

I like Buttigieg and I think he is a solid executive but as a political realist I must point out that he has two flaws in his political history that gives me reservations about his strength as a POTUS candidate. He has campaigned vigorously for the POTUS position before and was forced out of the race without being a top 2 or 3 consideration for the nomination and secondly, he was a cabinet member of a very unpopular one term POTUS. Disassociating from close ties with a historically unpopular POTUS has proven to be a difficult thing to do.

Third time could be the charm. Maybe he’s learned how to read the electorate better from those last two attempts. Not sure that Biden is as much of an albatross for him as Biden is for Harris.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will be the “I told you so” election where swing voters come slinking back to us, embarrassed that they voted for a felon over us in 2024. We told them Trump was bad, they KNEW he was bad. And still they preferred him. Well, not anymore. His polling numbers stink. The voters are with us again.

Independents will not be slinking back. The problem is that the last few elections have had people trying to correct course. They are not happy with Trump but they’d be equally unhappy if the Dems continued on the same trajectory. I think they’d be equally pissed off.

Democrats don’t need to change trajectory. We are who we’ve always been. It’s the voters who lost their way and flirted with fascism. I think they’ll be relieved to have a chance to repudiate Trump by voting for Gavin Newsom or Pete Buttigieg or Kamala Harris or whichever non-Trump-associated candidate we give them.

[Anonymous]

Mayor Pete’s “liabilities” according to traditional political consultants will be assets in a turn-the-page election.

Too short and young-looking? Better than the past two Octogenarians.

In a gay marriage? Huge percentages of the youngest parts of the electorate identify as LGBTQIA+ these days.

Too “square” presenting to satisfy the (older) gay community? Good, makes him impervious to attacks from conservative culture warriors.

Inexperienced? Good! Incumbents are toxic now. This reminds me of when Clinton/Gore got elected. They were young and the electorate loved their youth.

[Anonymous]

Affected speaking style that he admits he cultivated to sound like Obama? Good! Better than “authentic” Trump’s ramblings or Biden’s mumblings.

Too associated with an unpopular President? Good! Experience and visibility on the national stage is essential now that all politics and news have become national. The consultants will push for a boring white male unknown governor, but that’s a mistake. Mayor Pete is much more well known by the electorate than any of the governors (beshear, shapiro, etc)

[Anonymous]

The secret to success in the next election will be to keep Baby Boomers and political consultants as far away from the decision-making as possible. Their instincts are completely out of touch. They pushed Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Kamala Harris. Enough. Time to step aside and let the next generation pick a better champion for the Party.

[Anonymous]

The interesting thing is there are still no obvious names who seem like likely Presidents. We all have our favorites, and I do hope that any of them could beat a Republican. But no-one stands out as a front-runner. No-one stands out as an heir apparent. The most prominent and well-known Democrats are: Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, AOC, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, Jill Biden, and Pete Buttigieg. It doesn’t *feel* like any of them are likely to be President, does it? I think it will have to be someone new, someone less well-known. At this point in Obama’s second term, Hillary was already a pretty clear front-runner for 2016. We’re not in that situation today. Today we say that Trumpism is dying and Dems will win easily in 2028. But we don’t have any obvious person in mind yet who can do that winning we’re hoping to do.