What exactly is the democratic party going to stand for in 2026 and 2028?

[Anonymous]

I really don't think average is good enough. Biden was a unique case, because Trump is just that bad and COVID. But otherwise, Clinton and Obama were massively talented politicians and the D's need to find someone on that level again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump is going to cause Ds to lose their minds again and they'll put forth someone like AOC when a moderate Newsom would've sealed the deal and we'll be stuck eit president Vance. I don't even know what coalition the D candidate will roll with. Jew hating trannies?

First of all, you sound like a disgusting human being.
Second, most wouldn't consider Newsom (mispelled) a moderate.
Third, if you think AOC will be the nominee then you're profoundly stupid. But see point 1.

You can hurl all the lump twisted insults you want but y'all keep losing your trump so...

This is what Libs do when they lose arguments, they resort to childish insults. This isn’t 8th grade, and no one cares.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really don't think average is good enough. Biden was a unique case, because Trump is just that bad and COVID. But otherwise, Clinton and Obama were massively talented politicians and the D's need to find someone on that level again.

There is nothing wrong with average POTUS level leadership skills. If we could bottle up a next president from the average from all pre-2017 presidents, we'd be doing just fine relative to the past 8 years. Go on Youtube and watch the Trump-Biden debates from 2020 and the one from 2024 and then for comparison sake, watch presidential debates from 2012 back to the 50s and you'll quickly understand the stark difference between presidential caliber candidates and our two most recent presidents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump is going to cause Ds to lose their minds again and they'll put forth someone like AOC when a moderate Newsom would've sealed the deal and we'll be stuck eit president Vance. I don't even know what coalition the D candidate will roll with. Jew hating trannies?

Newsome is not a moderate. His liberal policies destroyed SF and Cali. Given the chance, he will do the same to the USA. Recently, he’s been trying to come off as a moderate to appeal to middle America. We would all be better off if he stuck to sleeping with campaign chief’s wife.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't think average is good enough. Biden was a unique case, because Trump is just that bad and COVID. But otherwise, Clinton and Obama were massively talented politicians and the D's need to find someone on that level again.

There is nothing wrong with average POTUS level leadership skills. If we could bottle up a next president from the average from all pre-2017 presidents, we'd be doing just fine relative to the past 8 years. Go on Youtube and watch the Trump-Biden debates from 2020 and the one from 2024 and then for comparison sake, watch presidential debates from 2012 back to the 50s and you'll quickly understand the stark difference between presidential caliber candidates and our two most recent presidents.

There is nothing wrong with it but the D's need to put someone forward that can actually WIN.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My platform:
All Trump appointees imprisoned immediately, awaiting trial. No bail, nada until their trials. They are all flight risks.
Trump family imprisoned, awaiting trial on grift and many other crimes they've committed, every single one of them. No bail. Flight risks. The minor kids can get moved into foster care.
Total tax reform: 99% taxes on the income of anyone worth more than a billion dollars. Go down from there, but use Scandanavian countries tax systems as a model. Tax rates are about 45% in those nice, clean, safe countries where there are few homeless people, no one starves, free health care, and lots of rich people who live in lovely homes. Only the rich in Scandanavia aren't megabillionaires superrich like the ghastly people here who have so much money they spend it on gawdawful tacky weddings, outrageously huge yachts and screwing their workers and customers.
Smaller government. Reduce the size of our bloated government so we can balance the budget and still offer all Americans free health care and a universal basic income.
Fossil-fuel free in 20 years, no exceptions. Buhbye Exxon and all the other oil, gas and coal company criminals.
There's more, but that's enough for now.

You sound a bit like Stalin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't think average is good enough. Biden was a unique case, because Trump is just that bad and COVID. But otherwise, Clinton and Obama were massively talented politicians and the D's need to find someone on that level again.

There is nothing wrong with average POTUS level leadership skills. If we could bottle up a next president from the average from all pre-2017 presidents, we'd be doing just fine relative to the past 8 years. Go on Youtube and watch the Trump-Biden debates from 2020 and the one from 2024 and then for comparison sake, watch presidential debates from 2012 back to the 50s and you'll quickly understand the stark difference between presidential caliber candidates and our two most recent presidents.

There is nothing wrong with it but the D's need to put someone forward that can actually WIN.

Reasonably popular and successful two term presidents aren't "put forward" by anyone or anything. They emerge based on their own merit and diligence as the leader of a major political party due to their personalized messaging to the American public and the political platform they present to the American people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s time to turn this thread around: What will *Republicans* run on in 2026 and 2028? They’ve just passed a monumentally unpopular budget bill that explodes the debt and cut government programs in red states. Trump’s popularity is cratering, especially with GenZ. What positive message can Republicans run on that would counteract this train crash of an administration?

They are just going to manufacture something fake (like trans rights) and get Russia on it and in 4 years, people will forget this cycle and lap it up again.

If democrats keep insisting that men should play in women's sports, the GOP will have no problems.

I know lots of Democrats and not a single one of them think men should play women's sports. You must live in California or perhaps you need to step out of your bubble and talk to real people.

Then I guess a lot of democrats are out of sync with their own party platform. Seems a reckoning is needed.

There is no nationwide political agenda to make men playing in women's sports a thing. This forum is dedicated to national politics. If you want to discuss what may be happening on local levels in a few parts of the country, find an online forum specific to those locations. The Dem Party currently has no national leader and therefore no national platform. You and some of your low IQ friends may have been duped into to thinking this men in women's sports thing is part of the national Dem Party platform but anyone with an IQ over 90 knows better.

Their first major coordinated action in Congress post-inauguration (other than holding up little signs when Trump spoke) was to vote to protect men in women’s sports. Obviously it is part of the national goals of the Democratic Party and they obviously care deeply about protecting those trans girls and women who want to play in women’s sports.

https://apnews.com/article/transgender-athletes-congress-dfd81b15ebc09409f1bf6c8642f130f3

Yes, Federal level Dem politicians voted to leave it up to states and local jurisdictions to determine if transgender females can compete in men's sports. Suggesting that permitting transgender females in female sports is part of a national Dem Party platform agenda is as ridiculous as suggesting Oklahoma's absurd abortion laws are a part of a national GOP Party platform agenda. You don't want to go there.

PP here. Fine. Take this approach to the voters. See how popular this is with the critical swing state voters we need to win.

This thread is so incredibly aggravating because it feels like none of the Democratic partisans here ever want to actually win a national election again. They want to double down on wildly unpopular policies while letting Trump entirely control the narrative, destroy civil liberties, drive educated immigrants that transform our economy out of the country, and balloon the debt. Great job fighting hard for the trans athletes, Dems! I’m sure we will appreciate your singleminded dedication to that issue above all else when Trump has instituted a dictatorship. 🤦

The Dem Party got rid of their Biden mistake in 2024. They now have a clean slate with no leader and no national platform. GOP politicians running for election and re-election will be hindered by the Trump mistake through at least January of 2029. I can understand why there aren't many confident and proud Dem loyalists in 2025 but those who understand political science and American history know that Dems will have a political advantage through the 2028 election cycle.

I understand political science but consider this time period to be aberrant, and I think your confidence is unwarranted.

If you understand political science you understood why any Dem nominee with a pulse was going to win in 2020 before it happened and why any GOP nominee with a pulse was going to win in 2024 before it happened. Did you? If not, I can see how you are confused about the direction of the political pendulum through the 2028 election cycle. The vote for change swing voters who determine POTUS elections will be in full swing mode by 2028. This isn't rocket science.

I have correctly predicted the winner of the presidential race the spring/summer before the election for every single election dating back to 2008. I’ve literally never gotten it wrong. I predicted Trump would win in May/June 2016.

And I’m telling you, I do not think this is standard political science. If Medicaid does end up getting slashed deeply in swing states, then yes, we are back to normal cycles. Otherwise, I am not nearly as confident as you are. I don’t think you grasp just how deeply unpopular Democrats are now.

Who is the unpopular leader of the Dems you are referring to? Dems have no leader. A leader creates their own messaging and introduces a party platform. If you think a Clinton, Obama, or Reagan caliber of politician would allow the opposition party to pin the crap the GOP has pinned on Dems since 2016, you simply weren't alive and/or paying attention back when we had real presidents.

When you have had no leader and the opposition has been creating your messaging for eight years, you're going to be "unpopular". Sure, there is 15% to 25% chance Trump's presidency evolves to where he isn't the Trump2020/Biden2024 level of unpopular in 2028 and that combined with once again no legitimate Dem nominee emerging could give the GOP 2028 nominee a fighting chance. Anything is possible. We might be able to give 100% assurance of victory by the Dems by summer 2028 but in 2025, we can use common sense, historical fact, and political science to say Dems are a heavy favorite with at least a 75% chance of winning in 2028.

Question for you: did you think Clinton was going to win in 2016?

I knew she was in big, big trouble when I saw Sanders beat her in the Michigan Dem primary while Trump was campaigning his butt off in the mid-western swing states. Trump was the change candidate swing voters were looking for in 2016. I will say that it was difficult to fathom ahead of time how my fellow Americans could be duped into electing someone who I clearly saw mock a physically handicapped person in front of the entire world to see but at the end of the day, Trump's 2016 victory fit the script.

So, the answer is yes, you thought Clinton was going to win. Well, I didn’t. I knew Trump was going to win and I knew it early in June 2016. And yes, that was a horrifying realization.

What I am telling you is that I think it is absolutely foolish to rely on political science norms for 2028, at least at this point. If things continue roughly as they are, Vance will win, even with Trump being very unpopular. Why? Because the Democrats are more unpopular and less trusted. I know, I know, you can’t believe that. But it is true. The Democrats, at this point, are less trusted than Trump. That is appalling, but where we are.

If Trump destroys healthcare access for millions in swing states, this calculus changes. Or, if the economy crashes out (thank you idiotic tariff war). There are a few other black swan type events that I think would change things. But absent those, I don’t see the Democrats winning in 2028. I’m not even sure I see them picking up a lot in 2026, though that’s a much closer call.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s time to turn this thread around: What will *Republicans* run on in 2026 and 2028? They’ve just passed a monumentally unpopular budget bill that explodes the debt and cut government programs in red states. Trump’s popularity is cratering, especially with GenZ. What positive message can Republicans run on that would counteract this train crash of an administration?

They are just going to manufacture something fake (like trans rights) and get Russia on it and in 4 years, people will forget this cycle and lap it up again.

If democrats keep insisting that men should play in women's sports, the GOP will have no problems.

I know lots of Democrats and not a single one of them think men should play women's sports. You must live in California or perhaps you need to step out of your bubble and talk to real people.

Then I guess a lot of democrats are out of sync with their own party platform. Seems a reckoning is needed.

There is no nationwide political agenda to make men playing in women's sports a thing. This forum is dedicated to national politics. If you want to discuss what may be happening on local levels in a few parts of the country, find an online forum specific to those locations. The Dem Party currently has no national leader and therefore no national platform. You and some of your low IQ friends may have been duped into to thinking this men in women's sports thing is part of the national Dem Party platform but anyone with an IQ over 90 knows better.

Their first major coordinated action in Congress post-inauguration (other than holding up little signs when Trump spoke) was to vote to protect men in women’s sports. Obviously it is part of the national goals of the Democratic Party and they obviously care deeply about protecting those trans girls and women who want to play in women’s sports.

https://apnews.com/article/transgender-athletes-congress-dfd81b15ebc09409f1bf6c8642f130f3

Yes, Federal level Dem politicians voted to leave it up to states and local jurisdictions to determine if transgender females can compete in men's sports. Suggesting that permitting transgender females in female sports is part of a national Dem Party platform agenda is as ridiculous as suggesting Oklahoma's absurd abortion laws are a part of a national GOP Party platform agenda. You don't want to go there.

PP here. Fine. Take this approach to the voters. See how popular this is with the critical swing state voters we need to win.

This thread is so incredibly aggravating because it feels like none of the Democratic partisans here ever want to actually win a national election again. They want to double down on wildly unpopular policies while letting Trump entirely control the narrative, destroy civil liberties, drive educated immigrants that transform our economy out of the country, and balloon the debt. Great job fighting hard for the trans athletes, Dems! I’m sure we will appreciate your singleminded dedication to that issue above all else when Trump has instituted a dictatorship. 🤦

The Dem Party got rid of their Biden mistake in 2024. They now have a clean slate with no leader and no national platform. GOP politicians running for election and re-election will be hindered by the Trump mistake through at least January of 2029. I can understand why there aren't many confident and proud Dem loyalists in 2025 but those who understand political science and American history know that Dems will have a political advantage through the 2028 election cycle.

I understand political science but consider this time period to be aberrant, and I think your confidence is unwarranted.

If you understand political science you understood why any Dem nominee with a pulse was going to win in 2020 before it happened and why any GOP nominee with a pulse was going to win in 2024 before it happened. Did you? If not, I can see how you are confused about the direction of the political pendulum through the 2028 election cycle. The vote for change swing voters who determine POTUS elections will be in full swing mode by 2028. This isn't rocket science.

I have correctly predicted the winner of the presidential race the spring/summer before the election for every single election dating back to 2008. I’ve literally never gotten it wrong. I predicted Trump would win in May/June 2016.

And I’m telling you, I do not think this is standard political science. If Medicaid does end up getting slashed deeply in swing states, then yes, we are back to normal cycles. Otherwise, I am not nearly as confident as you are. I don’t think you grasp just how deeply unpopular Democrats are now.

Who is the unpopular leader of the Dems you are referring to? Dems have no leader. A leader creates their own messaging and introduces a party platform. If you think a Clinton, Obama, or Reagan caliber of politician would allow the opposition party to pin the crap the GOP has pinned on Dems since 2016, you simply weren't alive and/or paying attention back when we had real presidents.

When you have had no leader and the opposition has been creating your messaging for eight years, you're going to be "unpopular". Sure, there is 15% to 25% chance Trump's presidency evolves to where he isn't the Trump2020/Biden2024 level of unpopular in 2028 and that combined with once again no legitimate Dem nominee emerging could give the GOP 2028 nominee a fighting chance. Anything is possible. We might be able to give 100% assurance of victory by the Dems by summer 2028 but in 2025, we can use common sense, historical fact, and political science to say Dems are a heavy favorite with at least a 75% chance of winning in 2028.

Question for you: did you think Clinton was going to win in 2016?

I knew she was in big, big trouble when I saw Sanders beat her in the Michigan Dem primary while Trump was campaigning his butt off in the mid-western swing states. Trump was the change candidate swing voters were looking for in 2016. I will say that it was difficult to fathom ahead of time how my fellow Americans could be duped into electing someone who I clearly saw mock a physically handicapped person in front of the entire world to see but at the end of the day, Trump's 2016 victory fit the script.

So, the answer is yes, you thought Clinton was going to win. Well, I didn’t. I knew Trump was going to win and I knew it early in June 2016. And yes, that was a horrifying realization.

What I am telling you is that I think it is absolutely foolish to rely on political science norms for 2028, at least at this point. If things continue roughly as they are, Vance will win, even with Trump being very unpopular. Why? Because the Democrats are more unpopular and less trusted. I know, I know, you can’t believe that. But it is true. The Democrats, at this point, are less trusted than Trump. That is appalling, but where we are.

If Trump destroys healthcare access for millions in swing states, this calculus changes. Or, if the economy crashes out (thank you idiotic tariff war). There are a few other black swan type events that I think would change things. But absent those, I don’t see the Democrats winning in 2028. I’m not even sure I see them picking up a lot in 2026, though that’s a much closer call.

Well he just destroyed healthcare access for millions in swing states, and Hillary won the popular vote. You clearly haven’t been paying attention to local elections this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s time to turn this thread around: What will *Republicans* run on in 2026 and 2028? They’ve just passed a monumentally unpopular budget bill that explodes the debt and cut government programs in red states. Trump’s popularity is cratering, especially with GenZ. What positive message can Republicans run on that would counteract this train crash of an administration?

They are just going to manufacture something fake (like trans rights) and get Russia on it and in 4 years, people will forget this cycle and lap it up again.

If democrats keep insisting that men should play in women's sports, the GOP will have no problems.

I know lots of Democrats and not a single one of them think men should play women's sports. You must live in California or perhaps you need to step out of your bubble and talk to real people.

Then I guess a lot of democrats are out of sync with their own party platform. Seems a reckoning is needed.

There is no nationwide political agenda to make men playing in women's sports a thing. This forum is dedicated to national politics. If you want to discuss what may be happening on local levels in a few parts of the country, find an online forum specific to those locations. The Dem Party currently has no national leader and therefore no national platform. You and some of your low IQ friends may have been duped into to thinking this men in women's sports thing is part of the national Dem Party platform but anyone with an IQ over 90 knows better.

Their first major coordinated action in Congress post-inauguration (other than holding up little signs when Trump spoke) was to vote to protect men in women’s sports. Obviously it is part of the national goals of the Democratic Party and they obviously care deeply about protecting those trans girls and women who want to play in women’s sports.

https://apnews.com/article/transgender-athletes-congress-dfd81b15ebc09409f1bf6c8642f130f3

Yes, Federal level Dem politicians voted to leave it up to states and local jurisdictions to determine if transgender females can compete in men's sports. Suggesting that permitting transgender females in female sports is part of a national Dem Party platform agenda is as ridiculous as suggesting Oklahoma's absurd abortion laws are a part of a national GOP Party platform agenda. You don't want to go there.

PP here. Fine. Take this approach to the voters. See how popular this is with the critical swing state voters we need to win.

This thread is so incredibly aggravating because it feels like none of the Democratic partisans here ever want to actually win a national election again. They want to double down on wildly unpopular policies while letting Trump entirely control the narrative, destroy civil liberties, drive educated immigrants that transform our economy out of the country, and balloon the debt. Great job fighting hard for the trans athletes, Dems! I’m sure we will appreciate your singleminded dedication to that issue above all else when Trump has instituted a dictatorship. 🤦

The Dem Party got rid of their Biden mistake in 2024. They now have a clean slate with no leader and no national platform. GOP politicians running for election and re-election will be hindered by the Trump mistake through at least January of 2029. I can understand why there aren't many confident and proud Dem loyalists in 2025 but those who understand political science and American history know that Dems will have a political advantage through the 2028 election cycle.

I understand political science but consider this time period to be aberrant, and I think your confidence is unwarranted.

If you understand political science you understood why any Dem nominee with a pulse was going to win in 2020 before it happened and why any GOP nominee with a pulse was going to win in 2024 before it happened. Did you? If not, I can see how you are confused about the direction of the political pendulum through the 2028 election cycle. The vote for change swing voters who determine POTUS elections will be in full swing mode by 2028. This isn't rocket science.

I have correctly predicted the winner of the presidential race the spring/summer before the election for every single election dating back to 2008. I’ve literally never gotten it wrong. I predicted Trump would win in May/June 2016.

And I’m telling you, I do not think this is standard political science. If Medicaid does end up getting slashed deeply in swing states, then yes, we are back to normal cycles. Otherwise, I am not nearly as confident as you are. I don’t think you grasp just how deeply unpopular Democrats are now.

Who is the unpopular leader of the Dems you are referring to? Dems have no leader. A leader creates their own messaging and introduces a party platform. If you think a Clinton, Obama, or Reagan caliber of politician would allow the opposition party to pin the crap the GOP has pinned on Dems since 2016, you simply weren't alive and/or paying attention back when we had real presidents.

When you have had no leader and the opposition has been creating your messaging for eight years, you're going to be "unpopular". Sure, there is 15% to 25% chance Trump's presidency evolves to where he isn't the Trump2020/Biden2024 level of unpopular in 2028 and that combined with once again no legitimate Dem nominee emerging could give the GOP 2028 nominee a fighting chance. Anything is possible. We might be able to give 100% assurance of victory by the Dems by summer 2028 but in 2025, we can use common sense, historical fact, and political science to say Dems are a heavy favorite with at least a 75% chance of winning in 2028.

Question for you: did you think Clinton was going to win in 2016?

I knew she was in big, big trouble when I saw Sanders beat her in the Michigan Dem primary while Trump was campaigning his butt off in the mid-western swing states. Trump was the change candidate swing voters were looking for in 2016. I will say that it was difficult to fathom ahead of time how my fellow Americans could be duped into electing someone who I clearly saw mock a physically handicapped person in front of the entire world to see but at the end of the day, Trump's 2016 victory fit the script.

So, the answer is yes, you thought Clinton was going to win. Well, I didn’t. I knew Trump was going to win and I knew it early in June 2016. And yes, that was a horrifying realization.

What I am telling you is that I think it is absolutely foolish to rely on political science norms for 2028, at least at this point. If things continue roughly as they are, Vance will win, even with Trump being very unpopular. Why? Because the Democrats are more unpopular and less trusted. I know, I know, you can’t believe that. But it is true. The Democrats, at this point, are less trusted than Trump. That is appalling, but where we are.

If Trump destroys healthcare access for millions in swing states, this calculus changes. Or, if the economy crashes out (thank you idiotic tariff war). There are a few other black swan type events that I think would change things. But absent those, I don’t see the Democrats winning in 2028. I’m not even sure I see them picking up a lot in 2026, though that’s a much closer call.

You keep saying "Democrats" are wildly unpopular and less trusted. This is the case because of the Biden debacle and the power vacuum created by his absence of leadership. What remains so "unpopular" about the Dems in 2025 is the ghost of Biden which is nothing and no one. Dems have no leader and no power on the national scene and won't until at least 2026. It's all Trump and nothing but Trump who will continue to piss off swing voters until 2029.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s time to turn this thread around: What will *Republicans* run on in 2026 and 2028? They’ve just passed a monumentally unpopular budget bill that explodes the debt and cut government programs in red states. Trump’s popularity is cratering, especially with GenZ. What positive message can Republicans run on that would counteract this train crash of an administration?

They are just going to manufacture something fake (like trans rights) and get Russia on it and in 4 years, people will forget this cycle and lap it up again.

If democrats keep insisting that men should play in women's sports, the GOP will have no problems.

I know lots of Democrats and not a single one of them think men should play women's sports. You must live in California or perhaps you need to step out of your bubble and talk to real people.

Then I guess a lot of democrats are out of sync with their own party platform. Seems a reckoning is needed.

There is no nationwide political agenda to make men playing in women's sports a thing. This forum is dedicated to national politics. If you want to discuss what may be happening on local levels in a few parts of the country, find an online forum specific to those locations. The Dem Party currently has no national leader and therefore no national platform. You and some of your low IQ friends may have been duped into to thinking this men in women's sports thing is part of the national Dem Party platform but anyone with an IQ over 90 knows better.

Their first major coordinated action in Congress post-inauguration (other than holding up little signs when Trump spoke) was to vote to protect men in women’s sports. Obviously it is part of the national goals of the Democratic Party and they obviously care deeply about protecting those trans girls and women who want to play in women’s sports.

https://apnews.com/article/transgender-athletes-congress-dfd81b15ebc09409f1bf6c8642f130f3

Yes, Federal level Dem politicians voted to leave it up to states and local jurisdictions to determine if transgender females can compete in men's sports. Suggesting that permitting transgender females in female sports is part of a national Dem Party platform agenda is as ridiculous as suggesting Oklahoma's absurd abortion laws are a part of a national GOP Party platform agenda. You don't want to go there.

PP here. Fine. Take this approach to the voters. See how popular this is with the critical swing state voters we need to win.

This thread is so incredibly aggravating because it feels like none of the Democratic partisans here ever want to actually win a national election again. They want to double down on wildly unpopular policies while letting Trump entirely control the narrative, destroy civil liberties, drive educated immigrants that transform our economy out of the country, and balloon the debt. Great job fighting hard for the trans athletes, Dems! I’m sure we will appreciate your singleminded dedication to that issue above all else when Trump has instituted a dictatorship. 🤦

The Dem Party got rid of their Biden mistake in 2024. They now have a clean slate with no leader and no national platform. GOP politicians running for election and re-election will be hindered by the Trump mistake through at least January of 2029. I can understand why there aren't many confident and proud Dem loyalists in 2025 but those who understand political science and American history know that Dems will have a political advantage through the 2028 election cycle.

I understand political science but consider this time period to be aberrant, and I think your confidence is unwarranted.

If you understand political science you understood why any Dem nominee with a pulse was going to win in 2020 before it happened and why any GOP nominee with a pulse was going to win in 2024 before it happened. Did you? If not, I can see how you are confused about the direction of the political pendulum through the 2028 election cycle. The vote for change swing voters who determine POTUS elections will be in full swing mode by 2028. This isn't rocket science.

I have correctly predicted the winner of the presidential race the spring/summer before the election for every single election dating back to 2008. I’ve literally never gotten it wrong. I predicted Trump would win in May/June 2016.

And I’m telling you, I do not think this is standard political science. If Medicaid does end up getting slashed deeply in swing states, then yes, we are back to normal cycles. Otherwise, I am not nearly as confident as you are. I don’t think you grasp just how deeply unpopular Democrats are now.

Who is the unpopular leader of the Dems you are referring to? Dems have no leader. A leader creates their own messaging and introduces a party platform. If you think a Clinton, Obama, or Reagan caliber of politician would allow the opposition party to pin the crap the GOP has pinned on Dems since 2016, you simply weren't alive and/or paying attention back when we had real presidents.

When you have had no leader and the opposition has been creating your messaging for eight years, you're going to be "unpopular". Sure, there is 15% to 25% chance Trump's presidency evolves to where he isn't the Trump2020/Biden2024 level of unpopular in 2028 and that combined with once again no legitimate Dem nominee emerging could give the GOP 2028 nominee a fighting chance. Anything is possible. We might be able to give 100% assurance of victory by the Dems by summer 2028 but in 2025, we can use common sense, historical fact, and political science to say Dems are a heavy favorite with at least a 75% chance of winning in 2028.

Question for you: did you think Clinton was going to win in 2016?

I knew she was in big, big trouble when I saw Sanders beat her in the Michigan Dem primary while Trump was campaigning his butt off in the mid-western swing states. Trump was the change candidate swing voters were looking for in 2016. I will say that it was difficult to fathom ahead of time how my fellow Americans could be duped into electing someone who I clearly saw mock a physically handicapped person in front of the entire world to see but at the end of the day, Trump's 2016 victory fit the script.

So, the answer is yes, you thought Clinton was going to win. Well, I didn’t. I knew Trump was going to win and I knew it early in June 2016. And yes, that was a horrifying realization.

What I am telling you is that I think it is absolutely foolish to rely on political science norms for 2028, at least at this point. If things continue roughly as they are, Vance will win, even with Trump being very unpopular. Why? Because the Democrats are more unpopular and less trusted. I know, I know, you can’t believe that. But it is true. The Democrats, at this point, are less trusted than Trump. That is appalling, but where we are.

If Trump destroys healthcare access for millions in swing states, this calculus changes. Or, if the economy crashes out (thank you idiotic tariff war). There are a few other black swan type events that I think would change things. But absent those, I don’t see the Democrats winning in 2028. I’m not even sure I see them picking up a lot in 2026, though that’s a much closer call.

Well he just destroyed healthcare access for millions in swing states, and Hillary won the popular vote. You clearly haven’t been paying attention to local elections this year.

Winning the popular vote is not winning the presidency. Nobody cares that Clinton won the popular vote. The reason I knew Trump would win in June 2016 was because I did the electoral college math. It doesn’t matter if you predicted Clinton won the popular vote. It is irrelevant.

And yes, quite obviously I’m talking about this week’s events with respect to healthcare, but we will need to see how it plays out. If it remains truly destroyed, then yes, I think the Democrats have a good chance on 2028 and 2026.

And I do not care about local elections. I care about the presidency.

Look, I do not get your complacency here, or the complacency of the Democrats in general. I see no competent presidential candidates on the horizon for the party at this point. Vance is weirdly accessible to voters in a way that only AOC manages for the Democrats (maybe now Mamdani too) and as profoundly dislikable as the man is, he is carving out a strong political identity for himself. Trump is unpopular but the Democrats are even more unpopular and have no good national leaders. Maybe one will emerge like Obama did, but absent that or the other events I mentioned, the Republicans will cruise to victory in 2028. The Democrats don’t stand for anything that is popular with voters, they are not trusted by voters, and there aren’t any good candidates for the presidency. It is grim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s time to turn this thread around: What will *Republicans* run on in 2026 and 2028? They’ve just passed a monumentally unpopular budget bill that explodes the debt and cut government programs in red states. Trump’s popularity is cratering, especially with GenZ. What positive message can Republicans run on that would counteract this train crash of an administration?

They are just going to manufacture something fake (like trans rights) and get Russia on it and in 4 years, people will forget this cycle and lap it up again.

If democrats keep insisting that men should play in women's sports, the GOP will have no problems.

I know lots of Democrats and not a single one of them think men should play women's sports. You must live in California or perhaps you need to step out of your bubble and talk to real people.

Then I guess a lot of democrats are out of sync with their own party platform. Seems a reckoning is needed.

There is no nationwide political agenda to make men playing in women's sports a thing. This forum is dedicated to national politics. If you want to discuss what may be happening on local levels in a few parts of the country, find an online forum specific to those locations. The Dem Party currently has no national leader and therefore no national platform. You and some of your low IQ friends may have been duped into to thinking this men in women's sports thing is part of the national Dem Party platform but anyone with an IQ over 90 knows better.

Their first major coordinated action in Congress post-inauguration (other than holding up little signs when Trump spoke) was to vote to protect men in women’s sports. Obviously it is part of the national goals of the Democratic Party and they obviously care deeply about protecting those trans girls and women who want to play in women’s sports.

https://apnews.com/article/transgender-athletes-congress-dfd81b15ebc09409f1bf6c8642f130f3

Yes, Federal level Dem politicians voted to leave it up to states and local jurisdictions to determine if transgender females can compete in men's sports. Suggesting that permitting transgender females in female sports is part of a national Dem Party platform agenda is as ridiculous as suggesting Oklahoma's absurd abortion laws are a part of a national GOP Party platform agenda. You don't want to go there.

PP here. Fine. Take this approach to the voters. See how popular this is with the critical swing state voters we need to win.

This thread is so incredibly aggravating because it feels like none of the Democratic partisans here ever want to actually win a national election again. They want to double down on wildly unpopular policies while letting Trump entirely control the narrative, destroy civil liberties, drive educated immigrants that transform our economy out of the country, and balloon the debt. Great job fighting hard for the trans athletes, Dems! I’m sure we will appreciate your singleminded dedication to that issue above all else when Trump has instituted a dictatorship. 🤦

The Dem Party got rid of their Biden mistake in 2024. They now have a clean slate with no leader and no national platform. GOP politicians running for election and re-election will be hindered by the Trump mistake through at least January of 2029. I can understand why there aren't many confident and proud Dem loyalists in 2025 but those who understand political science and American history know that Dems will have a political advantage through the 2028 election cycle.

I understand political science but consider this time period to be aberrant, and I think your confidence is unwarranted.

If you understand political science you understood why any Dem nominee with a pulse was going to win in 2020 before it happened and why any GOP nominee with a pulse was going to win in 2024 before it happened. Did you? If not, I can see how you are confused about the direction of the political pendulum through the 2028 election cycle. The vote for change swing voters who determine POTUS elections will be in full swing mode by 2028. This isn't rocket science.

I have correctly predicted the winner of the presidential race the spring/summer before the election for every single election dating back to 2008. I’ve literally never gotten it wrong. I predicted Trump would win in May/June 2016.

And I’m telling you, I do not think this is standard political science. If Medicaid does end up getting slashed deeply in swing states, then yes, we are back to normal cycles. Otherwise, I am not nearly as confident as you are. I don’t think you grasp just how deeply unpopular Democrats are now.

Who is the unpopular leader of the Dems you are referring to? Dems have no leader. A leader creates their own messaging and introduces a party platform. If you think a Clinton, Obama, or Reagan caliber of politician would allow the opposition party to pin the crap the GOP has pinned on Dems since 2016, you simply weren't alive and/or paying attention back when we had real presidents.

When you have had no leader and the opposition has been creating your messaging for eight years, you're going to be "unpopular". Sure, there is 15% to 25% chance Trump's presidency evolves to where he isn't the Trump2020/Biden2024 level of unpopular in 2028 and that combined with once again no legitimate Dem nominee emerging could give the GOP 2028 nominee a fighting chance. Anything is possible. We might be able to give 100% assurance of victory by the Dems by summer 2028 but in 2025, we can use common sense, historical fact, and political science to say Dems are a heavy favorite with at least a 75% chance of winning in 2028.

Question for you: did you think Clinton was going to win in 2016?

I knew she was in big, big trouble when I saw Sanders beat her in the Michigan Dem primary while Trump was campaigning his butt off in the mid-western swing states. Trump was the change candidate swing voters were looking for in 2016. I will say that it was difficult to fathom ahead of time how my fellow Americans could be duped into electing someone who I clearly saw mock a physically handicapped person in front of the entire world to see but at the end of the day, Trump's 2016 victory fit the script.

So, the answer is yes, you thought Clinton was going to win. Well, I didn’t. I knew Trump was going to win and I knew it early in June 2016. And yes, that was a horrifying realization.

What I am telling you is that I think it is absolutely foolish to rely on political science norms for 2028, at least at this point. If things continue roughly as they are, Vance will win, even with Trump being very unpopular. Why? Because the Democrats are more unpopular and less trusted. I know, I know, you can’t believe that. But it is true. The Democrats, at this point, are less trusted than Trump. That is appalling, but where we are.

If Trump destroys healthcare access for millions in swing states, this calculus changes. Or, if the economy crashes out (thank you idiotic tariff war). There are a few other black swan type events that I think would change things. But absent those, I don’t see the Democrats winning in 2028. I’m not even sure I see them picking up a lot in 2026, though that’s a much closer call.

You keep saying "Democrats" are wildly unpopular and less trusted. This is the case because of the Biden debacle and the power vacuum created by his absence of leadership. What remains so "unpopular" about the Dems in 2025 is the ghost of Biden which is nothing and no one. Dems have no leader and no power on the national scene and won't until at least 2026. It's all Trump and nothing but Trump who will continue to piss off swing voters until 2029.

PP here. It’s a reasonable theory that Democrats are only distrusted because of the Biden issue. But it’s incorrect, unfortunately. The distrust of the Democrats pre-dates what happened with Biden and is not wiped away by his removal. That’s the fundamental issue I’m concerned about, and what has been the marker of swing state voters for several elections now in a row. Biden won in 2020 because he didn’t have to campaign because of Covid, and the pandemic had people scared, exhausted, and having lost trust in Trump. But that doesn’t indicate a larger trust in the Democrats; if anything, the Democrats took that chance to reestablish the trust they hadn’t had since the first Obama term and and destroyed it. They are even more untrustworthy now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s time to turn this thread around: What will *Republicans* run on in 2026 and 2028? They’ve just passed a monumentally unpopular budget bill that explodes the debt and cut government programs in red states. Trump’s popularity is cratering, especially with GenZ. What positive message can Republicans run on that would counteract this train crash of an administration?

They are just going to manufacture something fake (like trans rights) and get Russia on it and in 4 years, people will forget this cycle and lap it up again.

If democrats keep insisting that men should play in women's sports, the GOP will have no problems.

I know lots of Democrats and not a single one of them think men should play women's sports. You must live in California or perhaps you need to step out of your bubble and talk to real people.

Then I guess a lot of democrats are out of sync with their own party platform. Seems a reckoning is needed.

There is no nationwide political agenda to make men playing in women's sports a thing. This forum is dedicated to national politics. If you want to discuss what may be happening on local levels in a few parts of the country, find an online forum specific to those locations. The Dem Party currently has no national leader and therefore no national platform. You and some of your low IQ friends may have been duped into to thinking this men in women's sports thing is part of the national Dem Party platform but anyone with an IQ over 90 knows better.

Their first major coordinated action in Congress post-inauguration (other than holding up little signs when Trump spoke) was to vote to protect men in women’s sports. Obviously it is part of the national goals of the Democratic Party and they obviously care deeply about protecting those trans girls and women who want to play in women’s sports.

https://apnews.com/article/transgender-athletes-congress-dfd81b15ebc09409f1bf6c8642f130f3

Yes, Federal level Dem politicians voted to leave it up to states and local jurisdictions to determine if transgender females can compete in men's sports. Suggesting that permitting transgender females in female sports is part of a national Dem Party platform agenda is as ridiculous as suggesting Oklahoma's absurd abortion laws are a part of a national GOP Party platform agenda. You don't want to go there.

PP here. Fine. Take this approach to the voters. See how popular this is with the critical swing state voters we need to win.

This thread is so incredibly aggravating because it feels like none of the Democratic partisans here ever want to actually win a national election again. They want to double down on wildly unpopular policies while letting Trump entirely control the narrative, destroy civil liberties, drive educated immigrants that transform our economy out of the country, and balloon the debt. Great job fighting hard for the trans athletes, Dems! I’m sure we will appreciate your singleminded dedication to that issue above all else when Trump has instituted a dictatorship. 🤦

The Dem Party got rid of their Biden mistake in 2024. They now have a clean slate with no leader and no national platform. GOP politicians running for election and re-election will be hindered by the Trump mistake through at least January of 2029. I can understand why there aren't many confident and proud Dem loyalists in 2025 but those who understand political science and American history know that Dems will have a political advantage through the 2028 election cycle.

I understand political science but consider this time period to be aberrant, and I think your confidence is unwarranted.

If you understand political science you understood why any Dem nominee with a pulse was going to win in 2020 before it happened and why any GOP nominee with a pulse was going to win in 2024 before it happened. Did you? If not, I can see how you are confused about the direction of the political pendulum through the 2028 election cycle. The vote for change swing voters who determine POTUS elections will be in full swing mode by 2028. This isn't rocket science.

I have correctly predicted the winner of the presidential race the spring/summer before the election for every single election dating back to 2008. I’ve literally never gotten it wrong. I predicted Trump would win in May/June 2016.

And I’m telling you, I do not think this is standard political science. If Medicaid does end up getting slashed deeply in swing states, then yes, we are back to normal cycles. Otherwise, I am not nearly as confident as you are. I don’t think you grasp just how deeply unpopular Democrats are now.

Who is the unpopular leader of the Dems you are referring to? Dems have no leader. A leader creates their own messaging and introduces a party platform. If you think a Clinton, Obama, or Reagan caliber of politician would allow the opposition party to pin the crap the GOP has pinned on Dems since 2016, you simply weren't alive and/or paying attention back when we had real presidents.

When you have had no leader and the opposition has been creating your messaging for eight years, you're going to be "unpopular". Sure, there is 15% to 25% chance Trump's presidency evolves to where he isn't the Trump2020/Biden2024 level of unpopular in 2028 and that combined with once again no legitimate Dem nominee emerging could give the GOP 2028 nominee a fighting chance. Anything is possible. We might be able to give 100% assurance of victory by the Dems by summer 2028 but in 2025, we can use common sense, historical fact, and political science to say Dems are a heavy favorite with at least a 75% chance of winning in 2028.

Question for you: did you think Clinton was going to win in 2016?

I knew she was in big, big trouble when I saw Sanders beat her in the Michigan Dem primary while Trump was campaigning his butt off in the mid-western swing states. Trump was the change candidate swing voters were looking for in 2016. I will say that it was difficult to fathom ahead of time how my fellow Americans could be duped into electing someone who I clearly saw mock a physically handicapped person in front of the entire world to see but at the end of the day, Trump's 2016 victory fit the script.

So, the answer is yes, you thought Clinton was going to win. Well, I didn’t. I knew Trump was going to win and I knew it early in June 2016. And yes, that was a horrifying realization.

What I am telling you is that I think it is absolutely foolish to rely on political science norms for 2028, at least at this point. If things continue roughly as they are, Vance will win, even with Trump being very unpopular. Why? Because the Democrats are more unpopular and less trusted. I know, I know, you can’t believe that. But it is true. The Democrats, at this point, are less trusted than Trump. That is appalling, but where we are.

If Trump destroys healthcare access for millions in swing states, this calculus changes. Or, if the economy crashes out (thank you idiotic tariff war). There are a few other black swan type events that I think would change things. But absent those, I don’t see the Democrats winning in 2028. I’m not even sure I see them picking up a lot in 2026, though that’s a much closer call.

You keep saying "Democrats" are wildly unpopular and less trusted. This is the case because of the Biden debacle and the power vacuum created by his absence of leadership. What remains so "unpopular" about the Dems in 2025 is the ghost of Biden which is nothing and no one. Dems have no leader and no power on the national scene and won't until at least 2026. It's all Trump and nothing but Trump who will continue to piss off swing voters until 2029.

PP here. It’s a reasonable theory that Democrats are only distrusted because of the Biden issue. But it’s incorrect, unfortunately. The distrust of the Democrats pre-dates what happened with Biden and is not wiped away by his removal. That’s the fundamental issue I’m concerned about, and what has been the marker of swing state voters for several elections now in a row. Biden won in 2020 because he didn’t have to campaign because of Covid, and the pandemic had people scared, exhausted, and having lost trust in Trump. But that doesn’t indicate a larger trust in the Democrats; if anything, the Democrats took that chance to reestablish the trust they hadn’t had since the first Obama term and and destroyed it. They are even more untrustworthy now.

This is the key to Democratic victory in 2026 and 2028 - rebuild trust. Constantly crying wolf or claiming the sky is falling aren't helping - especially when those predictions turn out to be wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump is going to cause Ds to lose their minds again and they'll put forth someone like AOC when a moderate Newsom would've sealed the deal and we'll be stuck eit president Vance. I don't even know what coalition the D candidate will roll with. Jew hating trannies?

Newsome is not a moderate. His liberal policies destroyed SF and Cali. Given the chance, he will do the same to the USA. Recently, he’s been trying to come off as a moderate to appeal to middle America. We would all be better off if he stuck to sleeping with campaign chief’s wife.

+100

But I don’t care if they run him. Hell will freeze over before middle America votes for him and then Vance or whoever will sail to victory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s time to turn this thread around: What will *Republicans* run on in 2026 and 2028? They’ve just passed a monumentally unpopular budget bill that explodes the debt and cut government programs in red states. Trump’s popularity is cratering, especially with GenZ. What positive message can Republicans run on that would counteract this train crash of an administration?

They are just going to manufacture something fake (like trans rights) and get Russia on it and in 4 years, people will forget this cycle and lap it up again.

If democrats keep insisting that men should play in women's sports, the GOP will have no problems.

I know lots of Democrats and not a single one of them think men should play women's sports. You must live in California or perhaps you need to step out of your bubble and talk to real people.

Then I guess a lot of democrats are out of sync with their own party platform. Seems a reckoning is needed.

There is no nationwide political agenda to make men playing in women's sports a thing. This forum is dedicated to national politics. If you want to discuss what may be happening on local levels in a few parts of the country, find an online forum specific to those locations. The Dem Party currently has no national leader and therefore no national platform. You and some of your low IQ friends may have been duped into to thinking this men in women's sports thing is part of the national Dem Party platform but anyone with an IQ over 90 knows better.

Their first major coordinated action in Congress post-inauguration (other than holding up little signs when Trump spoke) was to vote to protect men in women’s sports. Obviously it is part of the national goals of the Democratic Party and they obviously care deeply about protecting those trans girls and women who want to play in women’s sports.

https://apnews.com/article/transgender-athletes-congress-dfd81b15ebc09409f1bf6c8642f130f3

Yes, Federal level Dem politicians voted to leave it up to states and local jurisdictions to determine if transgender females can compete in men's sports. Suggesting that permitting transgender females in female sports is part of a national Dem Party platform agenda is as ridiculous as suggesting Oklahoma's absurd abortion laws are a part of a national GOP Party platform agenda. You don't want to go there.

PP here. Fine. Take this approach to the voters. See how popular this is with the critical swing state voters we need to win.

This thread is so incredibly aggravating because it feels like none of the Democratic partisans here ever want to actually win a national election again. They want to double down on wildly unpopular policies while letting Trump entirely control the narrative, destroy civil liberties, drive educated immigrants that transform our economy out of the country, and balloon the debt. Great job fighting hard for the trans athletes, Dems! I’m sure we will appreciate your singleminded dedication to that issue above all else when Trump has instituted a dictatorship. 🤦

The Dem Party got rid of their Biden mistake in 2024. They now have a clean slate with no leader and no national platform. GOP politicians running for election and re-election will be hindered by the Trump mistake through at least January of 2029. I can understand why there aren't many confident and proud Dem loyalists in 2025 but those who understand political science and American history know that Dems will have a political advantage through the 2028 election cycle.

I understand political science but consider this time period to be aberrant, and I think your confidence is unwarranted.

If you understand political science you understood why any Dem nominee with a pulse was going to win in 2020 before it happened and why any GOP nominee with a pulse was going to win in 2024 before it happened. Did you? If not, I can see how you are confused about the direction of the political pendulum through the 2028 election cycle. The vote for change swing voters who determine POTUS elections will be in full swing mode by 2028. This isn't rocket science.

I have correctly predicted the winner of the presidential race the spring/summer before the election for every single election dating back to 2008. I’ve literally never gotten it wrong. I predicted Trump would win in May/June 2016.

And I’m telling you, I do not think this is standard political science. If Medicaid does end up getting slashed deeply in swing states, then yes, we are back to normal cycles. Otherwise, I am not nearly as confident as you are. I don’t think you grasp just how deeply unpopular Democrats are now.

Who is the unpopular leader of the Dems you are referring to? Dems have no leader. A leader creates their own messaging and introduces a party platform. If you think a Clinton, Obama, or Reagan caliber of politician would allow the opposition party to pin the crap the GOP has pinned on Dems since 2016, you simply weren't alive and/or paying attention back when we had real presidents.

When you have had no leader and the opposition has been creating your messaging for eight years, you're going to be "unpopular". Sure, there is 15% to 25% chance Trump's presidency evolves to where he isn't the Trump2020/Biden2024 level of unpopular in 2028 and that combined with once again no legitimate Dem nominee emerging could give the GOP 2028 nominee a fighting chance. Anything is possible. We might be able to give 100% assurance of victory by the Dems by summer 2028 but in 2025, we can use common sense, historical fact, and political science to say Dems are a heavy favorite with at least a 75% chance of winning in 2028.

Question for you: did you think Clinton was going to win in 2016?

I knew she was in big, big trouble when I saw Sanders beat her in the Michigan Dem primary while Trump was campaigning his butt off in the mid-western swing states. Trump was the change candidate swing voters were looking for in 2016. I will say that it was difficult to fathom ahead of time how my fellow Americans could be duped into electing someone who I clearly saw mock a physically handicapped person in front of the entire world to see but at the end of the day, Trump's 2016 victory fit the script.

So, the answer is yes, you thought Clinton was going to win. Well, I didn’t. I knew Trump was going to win and I knew it early in June 2016. And yes, that was a horrifying realization.

What I am telling you is that I think it is absolutely foolish to rely on political science norms for 2028, at least at this point. If things continue roughly as they are, Vance will win, even with Trump being very unpopular. Why? Because the Democrats are more unpopular and less trusted. I know, I know, you can’t believe that. But it is true. The Democrats, at this point, are less trusted than Trump. That is appalling, but where we are.

If Trump destroys healthcare access for millions in swing states, this calculus changes. Or, if the economy crashes out (thank you idiotic tariff war). There are a few other black swan type events that I think would change things. But absent those, I don’t see the Democrats winning in 2028. I’m not even sure I see them picking up a lot in 2026, though that’s a much closer call.

Well he just destroyed healthcare access for millions in swing states, and Hillary won the popular vote. You clearly haven’t been paying attention to local elections this year.

Winning the popular vote is not winning the presidency. Nobody cares that Clinton won the popular vote. The reason I knew Trump would win in June 2016 was because I did the electoral college math. It doesn’t matter if you predicted Clinton won the popular vote. It is irrelevant.

And yes, quite obviously I’m talking about this week’s events with respect to healthcare, but we will need to see how it plays out. If it remains truly destroyed, then yes, I think the Democrats have a good chance on 2028 and 2026.

And I do not care about local elections. I care about the presidency.

Look, I do not get your complacency here, or the complacency of the Democrats in general. I see no competent presidential candidates on the horizon for the party at this point. Vance is weirdly accessible to voters in a way that only AOC manages for the Democrats (maybe now Mamdani too) and as profoundly dislikable as the man is, he is carving out a strong political identity for himself. Trump is unpopular but the Democrats are even more unpopular and have no good national leaders. Maybe one will emerge like Obama did, but absent that or the other events I mentioned, the Republicans will cruise to victory in 2028. The Democrats don’t stand for anything that is popular with voters, they are not trusted by voters, and there aren’t any good candidates for the presidency. It is grim.

Are democrats unpopular or are their policies unpopular?