Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrats don't have a snowball's chance in hell because the oligarchs they take orders from are the ones who are pushing all of the policies that normal Americans find repulsive. Democrats cannot retreat from these losing positions because then the flow of money from these oligarchs will stop.

For instance, the Pritzker billionaire who now goes by "Jennifer" was a Republican donor for over 30 years before he came out as an alleged "woman" in his 60s. At that point, as he himself has said on the record, all of his money was not enough to stop Republicans from marginalizing him out of disgust. He then crossed over to the Democratic side of the aisle, where he found people even more morally bankrupt than Republicans who are willing to help men take over women's spaces and push transgenderism for money. He is a democratic donor literally for one reason and one reason only: to push his personal fetish and give it the force of law.

So, Democrats are trapped. If they drop all of the horrible agendas they've been pushing, they might win over society, but their oligarch funding will disappear. If they keep pushing all of this madness to keep the money coming from the deeply unwell billionaires funding various agendas, voters will continue to say no thank you.

Selling out has its down side!

The political landscape you describe was the same in 2020 and still yet the GOP incumbent nominee LOST to a 77 year old clown. I don't have high expectations for any Trump endorsed GOP idiot in 2028. It's called common sense. Find some.

"Common sense" holds that, because of 2020, Democrats can win in 2028 on a platform that had them losing all seven swing states in 2024? Interesting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

She’s not my favor but Whitmer is a moderate and she’s mentioned right there in the thread title. She won by 11 points in a swing state.

The Right will never elect a woman. We need someone who can win Red states.

Dems don't need red states to win a POTUS election. They need a few purple states. Whitmer is a multi-term Governor of a purple state you sexist two-bit fool.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as the Dems kick out all the moderates they will win. No more Schumer or other Vichy democrats.

The “moderates” are the reason we are here. If the Dems push the same old moderates out it shows they want the status quo.

No more hiring behind senate rules like the filibuster. Law and order need to be aggressively reestablished. Trump, his family, maga, corrupt judiciary, DOJ, etc must be punished.

As a dem, I do not support this. Enough with extremes. This county will go bipolar if we keep swinging far right and far left, it’s a terrible terrible idea. What we need is moderates on both sides.

lol you live is a fantasy world. There are no moderates on the Republican side. Disarming and throwing yourself on the none existent mercy of maga is a fools game. That is what you do when you vote for moderates. Remember how the democrats controlled the senate but were unable to even investigate SCOTUS’s corruption? That was moderates in action.

For democracy to work both sides must believe in it. The republicans do not believe in it. So go vote for Schumer, Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, etc. you will be putting the nail in your own coffin.

The moderate Biden approach failed. The country needs fighter not appeasers.

I think Democrats are pretty lost. Most people's experience with Democrats is at the local level. Think DC Council and school boards. Absolutely no one wants more social progressives. And that is the brand that Democrats are rolling with.

If Republicans go with a Adam Kinzinger, Mitt Romney, Nikki Haley kind of candidate, Democrats are toast. I honestly think the GOP is more fixeable at this moment in time. Democrats have lost the plot on a lot of issues. But I'm happy to see Sanders and AOC focusing on the working and middle class. I think economic issues are where it's at for Democrats. But they are going to be sucked into all the progressive BS, so it will be difficult for Democrats to connect with average American families.

Democrats could totally go left on economic issues. But encouraging illegal migrants, DEI, restorative justice, soft on violent crime, out of control public schools, young white men are terrible, and not even acknowledging that women are women is going to hit them. The biggest message Democrats have for most people is We Don't Like You. And you don't win elections that way.

Democrats need to find a candidate that can reject the progressive garbage that's killing them and get back to health care, the environment, income disparity and so on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

She’s not my favor but Whitmer is a moderate and she’s mentioned right there in the thread title. She won by 11 points in a swing state.

The Right will never elect a woman. We need someone who can win Red states.

Anonymous wrote:

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

She’s not my favor but Whitmer is a moderate and she’s mentioned right there in the thread title. She won by 11 points in a swing state.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should all Primary and see who makes it out. I'd vote for AOC in the Primary. I'll vote for whoever the Dem nominee is in the general.

Silly. Democrats don't do free and open primaries. As always, Democrats will go with whoever the DNC and billionaire donors select.

This won't be the case in 2028. The people's voice will be heard. Guaranteed.

Anonymous wrote:Ossoff! I started the fan hype in SignalGate thread when he sliced and diced Tulsi & Ratsh|t.

Anonymous wrote:I wish Kinzinger would run as an Independent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our party is out of touch with the voters. Reading this thread with the various possible candidates mentioned…it’s clear we’re screwed. Pritzker? Buttigieg? AOC? Beshear? I mean….screwed. The Obama divorce is going to be the final straw that utterly takes the wind out of our sails. The next party to take the White House from Republicans will have a different name.

Do you seriously think they are getting divorced?! And why would that even matter anyway.

They aren't and it wouldn't. This is some MAGA garbage trying to take the attention off of Trump's unpopularity once again making it very easy for the Dems to be successful in 2026 and 2028. History repeating itself.

Trump and the GOP are much more popular than the Democrats are.

Lol... it's 2025. Dems were more popular than that GOP in 2021 and the GOP was more popular than Dems for a brief period during Trump's 1st term. Unpopular, unfit elderly sitting presidents serve up electoral losses for their party. This is an absolute proven fact that we have just seen play out on more than one occasion during the past 8 years. Pay attention people!!

The degree of the difference in approval ratings matter. The Democrats unfavorability ratings are at an all time high and their approval ratings not only much lower than Trump’s but also lower than the GOP’s (see Quinnipiac, WSJ, NBC - all show same thing). That’s flashing red alarm bells for the party.

Good thing for the Dems it's 2025 and Trump is actively tanking the GOP just like he did during his 1st term. Numbers don't lie and history repeats itself; especially in politics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Some Dems claim AOC, Whitmer, and Newsome are moderates, some do not. This is a problem.

The only one making the rounds is Pete. He will once again be a major factor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gavin Newsom is tall, handsome, has a commanding voice, and gives off strong alpha vibes. There is no one in the field even remotely on his level in terms of national politics on the Dem field. He’s the only one who has a chance against Little Marco.

Disqualifying feature: He's a San Francisco liberal. And we saw how that worked out.

Anonymous wrote:People are animals and the masses for people based on primal instincts, not policy. People want an alpha to win, just like our ancestors did eons ago. It’s not that complicated.

Pritzger is too fat, short, and gives off very weird vibes like he has a lot of stuff going on in the closet.

Mayor Pete is too short and comes off as a beta.

Whitmer is okay but does odd stuff like taking communion with Doritos and hides her face with a binder in the Oval Office.

Tim Walz is a goofball.

Shapiro is Jennifer Jason Leigh in Single White Female. Obama needs a restraining order. Gross.

Fetterman has mental issues and dresses like a slob.

Gavin Newsom is tall, handsome, has a commanding voice, and gives off strong alpha vibes. There is no one in the field even remotely on his level in terms of national politics on the Dem field. He’s the only one who has a chance against Little Marco.

Anonymous wrote:Osoff. I encourage everyone to start listening to him and researching him.

He's a powerful speaker. He's a good age. I like what he stands for so far.

I could also get behind Buttigieg. However, none of my gay male liberal friends like him. Like, at all, and they say most gay men do not like him. If you can't even count on the gay votes, there's no way you'll carry the nation, IMO. Same.

The Dems need a ticket without a woman as the Presidential nominee. The US is too ass-backwards to elect a female right now or for at least the next 20 years, IMO.

The Dems also need to get off the trans train. They make up less than 2% of the population. They need to broaden their focus to equal human rights for all. If they had ran on that platform with Harris and geared it toward including Palestinians, Harris would have gotten more of the liberal Gen Z vote and possibly won.

Anonymous wrote:Pritzker and Beshear are two that come to mind.

Dems historically like Governors and both have their pluses.