Who appeals to INDEPENDENTS for president right now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an independent. I want to see a legit change candidate — but one whose idea of change involves a laser focus on what helps ordinary people.

I know people will flip but what you describe already exists and has proven themselves capable and moral... AOC.

She identifies as a democratic socialist, which is by definition progressive. I do not believe progressive approaches work because they are a reverse form of trumpism — a “I want what I want now so tear everything down for me to make it happen.” Incremental steps are needed to get long-term buy-in. Progressives hate that.

American progressives are to the left of European progressives on social and immigration issues. While they may be perceived as better than trump or even moderate Democrats on the international front, they are naive and therefore dangerous. Freedom is not free, so simply gutting the military is not a winning strategy. (Going to war like trump has done is also not winning.) Consider also how AOC handled questions about Venezuela and Taiwan. So nope, nope, nope on AOC.

-OP

lol you have no clue.

You think most independents want AOC? If so, you are the one who is clueless.

She is strongly anti Israel and wants billionaires to be held to account. That is what independents are looking for in a candidate. Look at Trump. He is far more naive and much more leftist with his tariffs, planned economy, taking equity shares in private companies, farm subsidies, oil subsidies, etc.

It is you who are clueless.

DP. I’m an independent and those are def NOT my top issues.

Restoration of American institutions and rule of law #1.

Marginalizing the extreme left and extreme right #2.

Curious what you think an ‘extreme left’ position is?

DP. Trans and Immigration sunk the Democrats in 2024. The perception of so many illegals getting more than our own citizens. I actually know how many of the fraud issues happened. Federal money controlled and doled out by the states, and in some cases there were states that didn't verify the stipulated accreditations in order to provide money to its immigrant populations that they want/need.

I believe this is why so many voters went Trump. The feeling that Dems have been disingenuous about saying that the GOP doesn't care about the American poor, when the dems only "seem" to care about the immigrant poor. Both sides have been captured by the extremes in their parties. Hence, many of us wanting an Independent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need to win in 2028, and that means being pragmatic.

Nobody from inside this insanely corrupt administration, no matter how uncomfortable they look sitting on the sofa in the Oval.

Nobody who has provided cover for this administration or stayed silent in the face of the corruption - which rules out pretty much every establishment Republican.

If this nation wouldn't elect Hillary or Kamala, it's not electing AOC either. We need a pragmatic candidate who is not deeply in bed with AIPAC.

Says the fruitcake who puts two corporate owned politicians in the same bucket as AOC. You have a lot to learn about politics, my friend. AOC could not be more different politically than Harris or Clinton.

DP. Only an actual fruitcake would claim that AOC could win the presidency. You are not a serious person.

Dp. No horse in this race but you should know using this phrase is seriously cringe. It had a moment several years back with Succession and is now really embarrassing to use

[Anonymous]

Scoop: DeSantis "begging" Trump for prime role in administration

https://www.axios.com/2026/04/21/desantis-trump-administration-attorney-general

Anonymous wrote:

[Anonymous]

Anyone voting independent is not serious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need to win in 2028, and that means being pragmatic.

Nobody from inside this insanely corrupt administration, no matter how uncomfortable they look sitting on the sofa in the Oval.

Nobody who has provided cover for this administration or stayed silent in the face of the corruption - which rules out pretty much every establishment Republican.

If this nation wouldn't elect Hillary or Kamala, it's not electing AOC either. We need a pragmatic candidate who is not deeply in bed with AIPAC.

Says the fruitcake who puts two corporate owned politicians in the same bucket as AOC. You have a lot to learn about politics, my friend. AOC could not be more different politically than Harris or Clinton.

DP. Only an actual fruitcake would claim that AOC could win the presidency. You are not a serious person.

Dp. No horse in this race but you should know using this phrase is seriously cringe. It had a moment several years back with Succession and is now really embarrassing to use

Says the person using "seriously cringe."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need to win in 2028, and that means being pragmatic.

Nobody from inside this insanely corrupt administration, no matter how uncomfortable they look sitting on the sofa in the Oval.

Nobody who has provided cover for this administration or stayed silent in the face of the corruption - which rules out pretty much every establishment Republican.

If this nation wouldn't elect Hillary or Kamala, it's not electing AOC either. We need a pragmatic candidate who is not deeply in bed with AIPAC.

Says the fruitcake who puts two corporate owned politicians in the same bucket as AOC. You have a lot to learn about politics, my friend. AOC could not be more different politically than Harris or Clinton.

I'm not a fruitcake, poster. I'm a nearly 60 year old American woman who has a PoliSci degree, a law degree, and decades of experience closely following and working in politics. I doubt very much you know more about how our political system works than I do. And you seem to be massively ignorant of the misogyny that prevails in our society and political system, even though it stares you in the face every single day in the news cycle. The USA is not ready to elect a woman, sad as that is. She could be so far out of the political establishment as to be from Venus, and our sick misogynistic patriarchal strangleheld society WOULD NOT ELECT HER.

Now I'm sure you can imagine what I'm wishing for you and your nastiness right now. Go dial up some porn and do it.

Dp. Are you the one who also called AOC an airhead? Yeah, you’re likely not any of the things you claim to be. My guess is you are someone who’d like people to believe that AOC is ‘just not electable’. Why? Because she is the most dangerous to you.

AOC is certainly no airhead. In fact, she is one our brightest members in Congress and one of the very few who hasn't sold out to mega-donors. Her populist rhetoric is favored by a vast majority of Americans. Her problem is not electability. Her problem is nomination ability. A major party nomination of a true populist candidate is extraordinarily unlikely anytime soon because the ultra-wealthy entities in control of our political system will fight tooth and nail against the nomination of anyone threatening to close the wealth divide. We've seen how this plays out in recent elections. The money wins and the American people lose.

Citation for the bolded? Thanks.

Common sense, Bernie Sanders popularity and noise made in the 2016 and 2020 primaries without the support of mega donors and the Dem establishment and Trump's 2016 victory while campaigning with a populist message. Paying attention to what is happening and what has happened combined with common sense is citation for some of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need to win in 2028, and that means being pragmatic.

Nobody from inside this insanely corrupt administration, no matter how uncomfortable they look sitting on the sofa in the Oval.

Nobody who has provided cover for this administration or stayed silent in the face of the corruption - which rules out pretty much every establishment Republican.

If this nation wouldn't elect Hillary or Kamala, it's not electing AOC either. We need a pragmatic candidate who is not deeply in bed with AIPAC.

Says the fruitcake who puts two corporate owned politicians in the same bucket as AOC. You have a lot to learn about politics, my friend. AOC could not be more different politically than Harris or Clinton.

DP. Only an actual fruitcake would claim that AOC could win the presidency. You are not a serious person.

Dp. No horse in this race but you should know using this phrase is seriously cringe. It had a moment several years back with Succession and is now really embarrassing to use

Says the person using "seriously cringe."

You can try to deflect if you want. But you’re embarrassing yourself and your troll peers. Part of your job is to stay current on American lingo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an independent. I want to see a legit change candidate — but one whose idea of change involves a laser focus on what helps ordinary people.

I know people will flip but what you describe already exists and has proven themselves capable and moral... AOC.

She identifies as a democratic socialist, which is by definition progressive. I do not believe progressive approaches work because they are a reverse form of trumpism — a “I want what I want now so tear everything down for me to make it happen.” Incremental steps are needed to get long-term buy-in. Progressives hate that.

American progressives are to the left of European progressives on social and immigration issues. While they may be perceived as better than trump or even moderate Democrats on the international front, they are naive and therefore dangerous. Freedom is not free, so simply gutting the military is not a winning strategy. (Going to war like trump has done is also not winning.) Consider also how AOC handled questions about Venezuela and Taiwan. So nope, nope, nope on AOC.

-OP

lol you have no clue.

You think most independents want AOC? If so, you are the one who is clueless.

She is strongly anti Israel and wants billionaires to be held to account. That is what independents are looking for in a candidate. Look at Trump. He is far more naive and much more leftist with his tariffs, planned economy, taking equity shares in private companies, farm subsidies, oil subsidies, etc.

It is you who are clueless.

DP. I’m an independent and those are def NOT my top issues.

Restoration of American institutions and rule of law #1.

Marginalizing the extreme left and extreme right #2.

Curious what you think an ‘extreme left’ position is?

DP. Trans and Immigration sunk the Democrats in 2024. The perception of so many illegals getting more than our own citizens. I actually know how many of the fraud issues happened. Federal money controlled and doled out by the states, and in some cases there were states that didn't verify the stipulated accreditations in order to provide money to its immigrant populations that they want/need.

I believe this is why so many voters went Trump. The feeling that Dems have been disingenuous about saying that the GOP doesn't care about the American poor, when the dems only "seem" to care about the immigrant poor. Both sides have been captured by the extremes in their parties. Hence, many of us wanting an Independent.

Ok I hear this. I don’t totally disagree. I’ll admit that I found Harris disappointing even though I voted for her. The ‘nothing different’ comment, it seemed like her grand idea for helping regular people was trying to prevent price gouging - such a tiny piece of the puzzle- and then of course throwing Biden under the bus on her glam book tour while the country she says she wants to lead is burning.

I will not vote for her or anyone like her. Hope the Dems listen this time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an independent. I want to see a legit change candidate — but one whose idea of change involves a laser focus on what helps ordinary people.

I know people will flip but what you describe already exists and has proven themselves capable and moral... AOC.

She identifies as a democratic socialist, which is by definition progressive. I do not believe progressive approaches work because they are a reverse form of trumpism — a “I want what I want now so tear everything down for me to make it happen.” Incremental steps are needed to get long-term buy-in. Progressives hate that.

American progressives are to the left of European progressives on social and immigration issues. While they may be perceived as better than trump or even moderate Democrats on the international front, they are naive and therefore dangerous. Freedom is not free, so simply gutting the military is not a winning strategy. (Going to war like trump has done is also not winning.) Consider also how AOC handled questions about Venezuela and Taiwan. So nope, nope, nope on AOC.

-OP

lol you have no clue.

You think most independents want AOC? If so, you are the one who is clueless.

She is strongly anti Israel and wants billionaires to be held to account. That is what independents are looking for in a candidate. Look at Trump. He is far more naive and much more leftist with his tariffs, planned economy, taking equity shares in private companies, farm subsidies, oil subsidies, etc.

It is you who are clueless.

DP. I’m an independent and those are def NOT my top issues.

Restoration of American institutions and rule of law #1.

Marginalizing the extreme left and extreme right #2.

Curious what you think an ‘extreme left’ position is?

DP. Trans and Immigration sunk the Democrats in 2024. The perception of so many illegals getting more than our own citizens. I actually know how many of the fraud issues happened. Federal money controlled and doled out by the states, and in some cases there were states that didn't verify the stipulated accreditations in order to provide money to its immigrant populations that they want/need.

I believe this is why so many voters went Trump. The feeling that Dems have been disingenuous about saying that the GOP doesn't care about the American poor, when the dems only "seem" to care about the immigrant poor. Both sides have been captured by the extremes in their parties. Hence, many of us wanting an Independent.

Ok I hear this. I don’t totally disagree. I’ll admit that I found Harris disappointing even though I voted for her. The ‘nothing different’ comment, it seemed like her grand idea for helping regular people was trying to prevent price gouging - such a tiny piece of the puzzle- and then of course throwing Biden under the bus on her glam book tour while the country she says she wants to lead is burning.

I will not vote for her or anyone like her. Hope the Dems listen this time.

You hope the dems listen? You think the elite dems give a hot damn about you or your views?

To the elite dems you are one of the unwashed little people to be directed, controlled, and moved about the chess board.

No they are not “listening” to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an independent. I want to see a legit change candidate — but one whose idea of change involves a laser focus on what helps ordinary people.

I know people will flip but what you describe already exists and has proven themselves capable and moral... AOC.

She identifies as a democratic socialist, which is by definition progressive. I do not believe progressive approaches work because they are a reverse form of trumpism — a “I want what I want now so tear everything down for me to make it happen.” Incremental steps are needed to get long-term buy-in. Progressives hate that.

American progressives are to the left of European progressives on social and immigration issues. While they may be perceived as better than trump or even moderate Democrats on the international front, they are naive and therefore dangerous. Freedom is not free, so simply gutting the military is not a winning strategy. (Going to war like trump has done is also not winning.) Consider also how AOC handled questions about Venezuela and Taiwan. So nope, nope, nope on AOC.

-OP

lol you have no clue.

You think most independents want AOC? If so, you are the one who is clueless.

She is strongly anti Israel and wants billionaires to be held to account. That is what independents are looking for in a candidate. Look at Trump. He is far more naive and much more leftist with his tariffs, planned economy, taking equity shares in private companies, farm subsidies, oil subsidies, etc.

It is you who are clueless.

DP. I’m an independent and those are def NOT my top issues.

Restoration of American institutions and rule of law #1.

Marginalizing the extreme left and extreme right #2.

Curious what you think an ‘extreme left’ position is?

DP. Trans and Immigration sunk the Democrats in 2024. The perception of so many illegals getting more than our own citizens. I actually know how many of the fraud issues happened. Federal money controlled and doled out by the states, and in some cases there were states that didn't verify the stipulated accreditations in order to provide money to its immigrant populations that they want/need.

I believe this is why so many voters went Trump. The feeling that Dems have been disingenuous about saying that the GOP doesn't care about the American poor, when the dems only "seem" to care about the immigrant poor. Both sides have been captured by the extremes in their parties. Hence, many of us wanting an Independent.

Ok I hear this. I don’t totally disagree. I’ll admit that I found Harris disappointing even though I voted for her. The ‘nothing different’ comment, it seemed like her grand idea for helping regular people was trying to prevent price gouging - such a tiny piece of the puzzle- and then of course throwing Biden under the bus on her glam book tour while the country she says she wants to lead is burning.

I will not vote for her or anyone like her. Hope the Dems listen this time.

You hope the dems listen? You think the elite dems give a hot damn about you or your views?

To the elite dems you are one of the unwashed little people to be directed, controlled, and moved about the chess board.

No they are not “listening” to you.

There are maybe a handful of GOP and Dem politicians out there that don't accept donations from mega-donors. 98% of them do and they are beholden to those wealthy entities and therefore the American citizen priorities are put on the back burner. This isn't a party specific dynamic. GOP politicians are just as likely to be corrupt as Dem politicians and as a whole, our Congress is not "listening" to us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AOC is certainly no airhead. Anyone who has watched her in committee hearings knows that. She's very sharp.

But I don't think AOC as a presidential candidate is likely to win Pennsylvania, Michigan, Nevada and the other battleground states. I'd rather see her take Chuck Schumer's seat as Senator of New York.

AOC would kill it in Midwestern swing states with her populist messaging just like Sanders did with much less funding than his opponents. Where AOC isn't favored is with the wealthy party financiers and until she sells out to them, she will seriously compete for nothing more than Senate and House seats.

I will never understand why Bernieheads think that because he won a few Democratic primaries in a few states that he would automatically win those states in a general election.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AOC is certainly no airhead. Anyone who has watched her in committee hearings knows that. She's very sharp.

But I don't think AOC as a presidential candidate is likely to win Pennsylvania, Michigan, Nevada and the other battleground states. I'd rather see her take Chuck Schumer's seat as Senator of New York.

AOC would kill it in Midwestern swing states with her populist messaging just like Sanders did with much less funding than his opponents. Where AOC isn't favored is with the wealthy party financiers and until she sells out to them, she will seriously compete for nothing more than Senate and House seats.

I will never understand why Bernieheads think that because he won a few Democratic primaries in a few states that he would automatically win those states in a general election.

A populist candidate like Bernie or the 2016 version of Trump is more popular with the swing voters in swing states than are corporate owned politicians like HRC and Biden. The majority of the folks in blue collar Midwestern swing states who determine elections have no interests in supporting politicians who prioritize their wealthy donors first. None of this is rocket science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need to win in 2028, and that means being pragmatic.

Nobody from inside this insanely corrupt administration, no matter how uncomfortable they look sitting on the sofa in the Oval.

Nobody who has provided cover for this administration or stayed silent in the face of the corruption - which rules out pretty much every establishment Republican.

If this nation wouldn't elect Hillary or Kamala, it's not electing AOC either. We need a pragmatic candidate who is not deeply in bed with AIPAC.

Says the fruitcake who puts two corporate owned politicians in the same bucket as AOC. You have a lot to learn about politics, my friend. AOC could not be more different politically than Harris or Clinton.

I'm not a fruitcake, poster. I'm a nearly 60 year old American woman who has a PoliSci degree, a law degree, and decades of experience closely following and working in politics. I doubt very much you know more about how our political system works than I do. And you seem to be massively ignorant of the misogyny that prevails in our society and political system, even though it stares you in the face every single day in the news cycle. The USA is not ready to elect a woman, sad as that is. She could be so far out of the political establishment as to be from Venus, and our sick misogynistic patriarchal strangleheld society WOULD NOT ELECT HER.

Now I'm sure you can imagine what I'm wishing for you and your nastiness right now. Go dial up some porn and do it.

Dp. Are you the one who also called AOC an airhead? Yeah, you’re likely not any of the things you claim to be. My guess is you are someone who’d like people to believe that AOC is ‘just not electable’. Why? Because she is the most dangerous to you.

AOC is certainly no airhead. In fact, she is one our brightest members in Congress and one of the very few who hasn't sold out to mega-donors. Her populist rhetoric is favored by a vast majority of Americans. Her problem is not electability. Her problem is nomination ability. A major party nomination of a true populist candidate is extraordinarily unlikely anytime soon because the ultra-wealthy entities in control of our political system will fight tooth and nail against the nomination of anyone threatening to close the wealth divide. We've seen how this plays out in recent elections. The money wins and the American people lose.

Citation for the bolded? Thanks.

NP here. Just look at the 2024 election and Trump's messages of populism. (of course he lied, but that was the platform he ran on).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AOC is certainly no airhead. Anyone who has watched her in committee hearings knows that. She's very sharp.

But I don't think AOC as a presidential candidate is likely to win Pennsylvania, Michigan, Nevada and the other battleground states. I'd rather see her take Chuck Schumer's seat as Senator of New York.

AOC would kill it in Midwestern swing states with her populist messaging just like Sanders did with much less funding than his opponents. Where AOC isn't favored is with the wealthy party financiers and until she sells out to them, she will seriously compete for nothing more than Senate and House seats.

I will never understand why Bernieheads think that because he won a few Democratic primaries in a few states that he would automatically win those states in a general election.

A populist candidate like Bernie or the 2016 version of Trump is more popular with the swing voters in swing states than are corporate owned politicians like HRC and Biden. The majority of the folks in blue collar Midwestern swing states who determine elections have no interests in supporting politicians who prioritize their wealthy donors first. None of this is rocket science.

I agree with this. Anti-establishment candidates like Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump didn't come out of nowhere. There is a general revulsion with both the Democratic and Republican parties. And even in 2026, both parties still seem all in with their billionaires. It's like choosing between an Epstein billionaire or a Silicon Valley billionaire.

[Anonymous]

It may be time to take a second look at Ron DeSantis. He's back to pronouncing it Dee-Santis (i.e., with a long e, instead of Dih-santis) and a lot of people are feeling pretty enthused.

Anonymous wrote: