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

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Early Predictions 2028: AOC, Whitmer, Newsome or …?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Gotta be a moderate, likeable, smart White male.  Think JFK or Bill Clinton.   Otherwise get ready to the permanent minority party.  [/quote]

This is where Andy Beshear comes in! perfect candidate. handsome. likable. smart. white. moderate. savvy enough.[/quote]

It's a good thing Obama ran for office prior to when the racist took back over and proclaimed only "white" candidates are viable.

Crawl back under your rock![/quote]

Lol. Obama and I are the same race. go judge someone else buddy. It's very clear that America is NOT going to elect a women or person of color for some time. Y'all want white male moderates. so I tossed out one that I thought could actually work well. Reading too much into these post will make you look like an arse![/quote]

Oh yeah, the good ole "I'm not racist, I'm just telling you what racists think" spiel. A woman or POC is just as capable as the elderly white men you idiots are addicted to.[/quote]

then why did two highly capable women lose to a felon? GTFOH with your gaslighting. [/quote]

Because they were bad candidates with some bad policies. I’m pretty sure Nikki Haley would have won in a landslide if she had been the nominee. I also think if Barack Obama was running in 2024 he too would have won in a landslide.

The losing has nothing to do with gender or race. Nothing wrong with Democrats choosing a middle aged white guy, but if it’s bc of race and gender and not charisma and policy, they’re going to lose again.

Democrats haven’t had a free and open primary in a gazilion years. They really need one.[/quote]

I do get what you are saying. it's just really hard to hear or read (Hillary or Kamala) being "bad candidates" with "some bad policies" when Trump is the worst candidate ever with policies that will destroy his own base. I get that the people voting for him don't see that. They see "someone who speaks his mind." "someone that talks plainly." "someone that gives us the feel that America is first." "someone that was a successful businessman."

while not perfect, I do think Hillary and especially Kamala are actually decent human beings [b]who cared about helped EVERYONE not a select few. [/b]Meanwhile Trump DGAF about nobody outside the 1 percent. so comparatively...

and Nikki Haley is actually not even close to being as good as Hillary. but a conservative woman will pass before a liberal one. funny thing is--at the time, Hillary was a lot more moderate than how people painted her. [/quote]

I’m one of the Democrat PPs who knew Trump was going to win easily in 2016 and 2024 and who has been frustrated by the DCUM bubble. I am what you might call an old-school Democrat: pro-labor, pro-education, pro-science (but as the Democrats used to be, not the ideological nonsense that Democratic positions on education and science engage in now). I want the Democrats back in power and I think Trump is destructive and harmful.

So with that as background, can I ask you seriously why on earth you believe the bolded? What makes you believe that is true? To the majority of the voting electorate (and to me) that seems just absolutely delusional.

Of course Trump only cares for himself. But this DCUM bubble around the bolded is crazy-making to me, because it’s just not seen as remotely true by most voters, and I don’t think it is true. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics