Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Joe lost the election because he lost his marbles, not because he is a moderate.

DP. A little of both. It’s clear that the name of the game is populism. He did nothing, perhaps because he wasn’t all there, and seeing Trump do so much really just underscores it.

Well, a puppet can do a lot with a vigorous hand in the right place, so, sure.

Biden had his own handlers, they just weren’t interested in any real change. We all saw him sundowning on national television

Hey, it's 2025. Catch up.

Biden's one of the most successful presidents ever, and Democrats want nothing to do with him.

Exactly. Americans of both parties are dumb.

Most people are not one major party or the other. The majority want a rationale person who recognizes their interests. Dems majorly failed on this in 2024.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is the most savage Democrat available? That's who I want.

I want someone with a 'give no fks' attitude. I want them to rule only through EOs. I want someone who will declare MAGA as domestic terrorists & round them up to ship off to another country. I want their social media team to use the official accounts to post unhinged things with captions like CRY HARDER.

I don't want someone who will play nice with the other side. Fk that. We played nice for decades and look where it got us? The GOP put Trump in and opened the door for revenge politics to be on the front burner, so I want someone who will embrace that sh!t. Give me someone who will grill Musky so hard that he's unable to catch his breath from all the crying. I want to see his mommy come back to social media to tell the public to be nicer to him...and then the public rip her to shreds.

You won't like the answer, but Dems have exactly one person like this and his name is Cuomo.

Anonymous wrote:Who is the most savage Democrat available? That's who I want.

I want someone with a 'give no fks' attitude. I want them to rule only through EOs. I want someone who will declare MAGA as domestic terrorists & round them up to ship off to another country. I want their social media team to use the official accounts to post unhinged things with captions like CRY HARDER.

I don't want someone who will play nice with the other side. Fk that. We played nice for decades and look where it got us? The GOP put Trump in and opened the door for revenge politics to be on the front burner, so I want someone who will embrace that sh!t. Give me someone who will grill Musky so hard that he's unable to catch his breath from all the crying. I want to see his mommy come back to social media to tell the public to be nicer to him...and then the public rip her to shreds.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Wow. I’ve never been insulted quite like that. FWIW, I’m a female Dem who worked on the campaigns but I saw Trump’s victories coming in ‘16 and ‘24, and a large part of it is due to know-it-all Dems. You must be a peach.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Joe lost the election because he lost his marbles, not because he is a moderate.

DP. A little of both. It’s clear that the name of the game is populism. He did nothing, perhaps because he wasn’t all there, and seeing Trump do so much really just underscores it.

Well, a puppet can do a lot with a vigorous hand in the right place, so, sure.

Biden had his own handlers, they just weren’t interested in any real change. We all saw him sundowning on national television

Hey, it's 2025. Catch up.

Biden's one of the most successful presidents ever, and Democrats want nothing to do with him.

Exactly. Americans of both parties are dumb.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Exactly. Common sense says Jan 6 should have been a disqualifier but here we are.

If we do a better job reminding voters about J6 than we should have a far better result in 2028.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As PP mentioned, it will be Rubio, not JD Vance who you have to contend with in 2028. And no one mentioned in this thread is that strong vs Rubio, especially in states like AZ, VA, and GA. People in VA and GA do not like Trump because of his personality; his “tell it like it is” boorishness plays better in the Blue Wall, not in the more mannered South, especially in the suburbs. Rubio doesn’t have that problem. Pair him with someone like Tulsi, another relatively young POC who’s a woman with appeal to independents and type of people who vote D but like RFK Jr and listen to Rogan, and Rubio will be very tough to beat. Dems need to remember that they should run really fast away from whoever inside the Beltway pols are routing for because the rest of the country won’t like them.

You're forgetting one thing. Just like Vance, Pence, Harris, Mondale... Rubio is currently and will presumably still be working in the Administration of a very unpopular POTUS in 2028. History tells us, for those that care enough to pay attention, people associated with very unpopular presidents have zero chance of winning a POTUS election themselves; especially when that unpopular POTUS is the current sitting POTUS.

Even if you weren't aware of this history, it's basic common sense. Swing voters in swing states are always sold on the message of change. When the sitting POTUS has a 40% job approval rating, there is absolutely zero chance of enough of these swing voters in swing states jumping on board with someone associated with that POTUS based on their promise of "change". This is why Harris had zero chance of winning in 2024. This is why Vance's political career will be over in January 2029. This is why Pence's political career is over. This is why Mondale got beat 49 states to 1 in 1984.

None of this is rocket science. Think. Read.

Rubio isn't JD Vance. He may be Secretary of State now, but so far he has a separate identity from MAGA nutcases.

He will be a formidable candidate.

Democrats are all Trump, Trump, Trump right now - and doing very poorly in their opposition. And as always, they think they can run lame candidates like a Biden or Harris to beat a Trump redux bc everyone will want change.

But I do think a Rubio or a Haley absolutely destroys Democrats even after four years of Trump. So far, Democrats are offering nothing except an alternative to Trump, which didn't work well last time around. And they have no answer to a competent Republican nominee.

I mean who beats Rubio in Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, and North Carolina?

It's very early, but I too think Pritzker is a strong candidate now. I think AOC is too young, but anyone that can get the Sanders movement going will have a solid chance. A movement candidate. But the people mentioned here - Shapiro, Whitmer, Beshear, Newsome - have no chance against Rubio in the swing states.

Rubio couldn't even look normal drinking some water. What do you think he offers anyone anymore? Turning his back on Cubans and Venezuelans and Afghanis? Stripping students of their visas and throwing them in jail because he didn't like an op-ed?

He's got no charisma, no backbone, and nothing to run on anymore. He can't even offer himself as turning the page on Trump - because he's right there, doing the worst things you can do at Trump's behest.

Haley would be a great gen pop candidate but she'll never make it through the Rs' ludicrous primary.

History and a little common sense tells us no one who is a member of the Trump Administration will have a chance in 2028. Just ask Harris, Mondale or Pence what it is like running for POTUS after you've been associated with very unpopular presidents. That association is never broken in the eyes of way too many voters.

Haley is an example of a potential GOP candidate who could possibly have a chance in 2028 due to her remaining detached from Trump for the most part. Still though, the odds of a GOP candidate winning in 2028 with a historically unpopular sitting GOP POTUS in office are next to nothing. The Dems will have to run someone even weaker than Biden in order for the GOP to have a chance in 2028 and I just don't see that happening.

You might not like Trump, but he is far from "an unpopular President".

Trump, with all of the advantages of being the incumbent seeking a second term, LOST to an unlikable 77 year old bag of bones who had nothing but a prior history of immediate failure when seeking political office outside of Delaware. Let me repeat this, Trump LOST to Joe fricking Biden. Trump followed up that embarrassment by not even being able to secure 50% of the popular vote when running against the a last minute replacement candidate for that unfit bag of bones he LOST to in the previous election. His average approval rating barely tops 40%.

This, my friend, is the biography of one of the most unpopular presidents of all time. Put the crack pipe down and read a book or something.

Look at the polls. Trump is far less popular than Joe Biden was at this stage of his presidency. It’s quite incredible that Trump is this unpopular yet managed to win the presidency again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As PP mentioned, it will be Rubio, not JD Vance who you have to contend with in 2028. And no one mentioned in this thread is that strong vs Rubio, especially in states like AZ, VA, and GA. People in VA and GA do not like Trump because of his personality; his “tell it like it is” boorishness plays better in the Blue Wall, not in the more mannered South, especially in the suburbs. Rubio doesn’t have that problem. Pair him with someone like Tulsi, another relatively young POC who’s a woman with appeal to independents and type of people who vote D but like RFK Jr and listen to Rogan, and Rubio will be very tough to beat. Dems need to remember that they should run really fast away from whoever inside the Beltway pols are routing for because the rest of the country won’t like them.

You're forgetting one thing. Just like Vance, Pence, Harris, Mondale... Rubio is currently and will presumably still be working in the Administration of a very unpopular POTUS in 2028. History tells us, for those that care enough to pay attention, people associated with very unpopular presidents have zero chance of winning a POTUS election themselves; especially when that unpopular POTUS is the current sitting POTUS.

Even if you weren't aware of this history, it's basic common sense. Swing voters in swing states are always sold on the message of change. When the sitting POTUS has a 40% job approval rating, there is absolutely zero chance of enough of these swing voters in swing states jumping on board with someone associated with that POTUS based on their promise of "change". This is why Harris had zero chance of winning in 2024. This is why Vance's political career will be over in January 2029. This is why Pence's political career is over. This is why Mondale got beat 49 states to 1 in 1984.

None of this is rocket science. Think. Read.

Rubio isn't JD Vance. He may be Secretary of State now, but so far he has a separate identity from MAGA nutcases.

He will be a formidable candidate.

Democrats are all Trump, Trump, Trump right now - and doing very poorly in their opposition. And as always, they think they can run lame candidates like a Biden or Harris to beat a Trump redux bc everyone will want change.

But I do think a Rubio or a Haley absolutely destroys Democrats even after four years of Trump. So far, Democrats are offering nothing except an alternative to Trump, which didn't work well last time around. And they have no answer to a competent Republican nominee.

I mean who beats Rubio in Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, and North Carolina?

It's very early, but I too think Pritzker is a strong candidate now. I think AOC is too young, but anyone that can get the Sanders movement going will have a solid chance. A movement candidate. But the people mentioned here - Shapiro, Whitmer, Beshear, Newsome - have no chance against Rubio in the swing states.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As PP mentioned, it will be Rubio, not JD Vance who you have to contend with in 2028. And no one mentioned in this thread is that strong vs Rubio, especially in states like AZ, VA, and GA. People in VA and GA do not like Trump because of his personality; his “tell it like it is” boorishness plays better in the Blue Wall, not in the more mannered South, especially in the suburbs. Rubio doesn’t have that problem. Pair him with someone like Tulsi, another relatively young POC who’s a woman with appeal to independents and type of people who vote D but like RFK Jr and listen to Rogan, and Rubio will be very tough to beat. Dems need to remember that they should run really fast away from whoever inside the Beltway pols are routing for because the rest of the country won’t like them.

You're forgetting one thing. Just like Vance, Pence, Harris, Mondale... Rubio is currently and will presumably still be working in the Administration of a very unpopular POTUS in 2028. History tells us, for those that care enough to pay attention, people associated with very unpopular presidents have zero chance of winning a POTUS election themselves; especially when that unpopular POTUS is the current sitting POTUS.

Even if you weren't aware of this history, it's basic common sense. Swing voters in swing states are always sold on the message of change. When the sitting POTUS has a 40% job approval rating, there is absolutely zero chance of enough of these swing voters in swing states jumping on board with someone associated with that POTUS based on their promise of "change". This is why Harris had zero chance of winning in 2024. This is why Vance's political career will be over in January 2029. This is why Pence's political career is over. This is why Mondale got beat 49 states to 1 in 1984.

None of this is rocket science. Think. Read.

Rubio isn't JD Vance. He may be Secretary of State now, but so far he has a separate identity from MAGA nutcases.

He will be a formidable candidate.

Democrats are all Trump, Trump, Trump right now - and doing very poorly in their opposition. And as always, they think they can run lame candidates like a Biden or Harris to beat a Trump redux bc everyone will want change.

But I do think a Rubio or a Haley absolutely destroys Democrats even after four years of Trump. So far, Democrats are offering nothing except an alternative to Trump, which didn't work well last time around. And they have no answer to a competent Republican nominee.

I mean who beats Rubio in Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, and North Carolina?

It's very early, but I too think Pritzker is a strong candidate now. I think AOC is too young, but anyone that can get the Sanders movement going will have a solid chance. A movement candidate. But the people mentioned here - Shapiro, Whitmer, Beshear, Newsome - have no chance against Rubio in the swing states.

Rubio couldn't even look normal drinking some water. What do you think he offers anyone anymore? Turning his back on Cubans and Venezuelans and Afghanis? Stripping students of their visas and throwing them in jail because he didn't like an op-ed?

He's got no charisma, no backbone, and nothing to run on anymore. He can't even offer himself as turning the page on Trump - because he's right there, doing the worst things you can do at Trump's behest.

Haley would be a great gen pop candidate but she'll never make it through the Rs' ludicrous primary.

History and a little common sense tells us no one who is a member of the Trump Administration will have a chance in 2028. Just ask Harris, Mondale or Pence what it is like running for POTUS after you've been associated with very unpopular presidents. That association is never broken in the eyes of way too many voters.

Haley is an example of a potential GOP candidate who could possibly have a chance in 2028 due to her remaining detached from Trump for the most part. Still though, the odds of a GOP candidate winning in 2028 with a historically unpopular sitting GOP POTUS in office are next to nothing. The Dems will have to run someone even weaker than Biden in order for the GOP to have a chance in 2028 and I just don't see that happening.

You might not like Trump, but he is far from "an unpopular President".

Trump, with all of the advantages of being the incumbent seeking a second term, LOST to an unlikable 77 year old bag of bones who had nothing but a prior history of immediate failure when seeking political office outside of Delaware. Let me repeat this, Trump LOST to Joe fricking Biden. Trump followed up that embarrassment by not even being able to secure 50% of the popular vote when running against the a last minute replacement candidate for that unfit bag of bones he LOST to in the previous election. His average approval rating barely tops 40%.

This, my friend, is the biography of one of the most unpopular presidents of all time. Put the crack pipe down and read a book or something.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As PP mentioned, it will be Rubio, not JD Vance who you have to contend with in 2028. And no one mentioned in this thread is that strong vs Rubio, especially in states like AZ, VA, and GA. People in VA and GA do not like Trump because of his personality; his “tell it like it is” boorishness plays better in the Blue Wall, not in the more mannered South, especially in the suburbs. Rubio doesn’t have that problem. Pair him with someone like Tulsi, another relatively young POC who’s a woman with appeal to independents and type of people who vote D but like RFK Jr and listen to Rogan, and Rubio will be very tough to beat. Dems need to remember that they should run really fast away from whoever inside the Beltway pols are routing for because the rest of the country won’t like them.

You're forgetting one thing. Just like Vance, Pence, Harris, Mondale... Rubio is currently and will presumably still be working in the Administration of a very unpopular POTUS in 2028. History tells us, for those that care enough to pay attention, people associated with very unpopular presidents have zero chance of winning a POTUS election themselves; especially when that unpopular POTUS is the current sitting POTUS.

Even if you weren't aware of this history, it's basic common sense. Swing voters in swing states are always sold on the message of change. When the sitting POTUS has a 40% job approval rating, there is absolutely zero chance of enough of these swing voters in swing states jumping on board with someone associated with that POTUS based on their promise of "change". This is why Harris had zero chance of winning in 2024. This is why Vance's political career will be over in January 2029. This is why Pence's political career is over. This is why Mondale got beat 49 states to 1 in 1984.

None of this is rocket science. Think. Read.

Rubio isn't JD Vance. He may be Secretary of State now, but so far he has a separate identity from MAGA nutcases.

He will be a formidable candidate.

Democrats are all Trump, Trump, Trump right now - and doing very poorly in their opposition. And as always, they think they can run lame candidates like a Biden or Harris to beat a Trump redux bc everyone will want change.

But I do think a Rubio or a Haley absolutely destroys Democrats even after four years of Trump. So far, Democrats are offering nothing except an alternative to Trump, which didn't work well last time around. And they have no answer to a competent Republican nominee.

I mean who beats Rubio in Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, and North Carolina?

It's very early, but I too think Pritzker is a strong candidate now. I think AOC is too young, but anyone that can get the Sanders movement going will have a solid chance. A movement candidate. But the people mentioned here - Shapiro, Whitmer, Beshear, Newsome - have no chance against Rubio in the swing states.

Rubio couldn't even look normal drinking some water. What do you think he offers anyone anymore? Turning his back on Cubans and Venezuelans and Afghanis? Stripping students of their visas and throwing them in jail because he didn't like an op-ed?

He's got no charisma, no backbone, and nothing to run on anymore. He can't even offer himself as turning the page on Trump - because he's right there, doing the worst things you can do at Trump's behest.

Haley would be a great gen pop candidate but she'll never make it through the Rs' ludicrous primary.

History and a little common sense tells us no one who is a member of the Trump Administration will have a chance in 2028. Just ask Harris, Mondale or Pence what it is like running for POTUS after you've been associated with very unpopular presidents. That association is never broken in the eyes of way too many voters.

Haley is an example of a potential GOP candidate who could possibly have a chance in 2028 due to her remaining detached from Trump for the most part. Still though, the odds of a GOP candidate winning in 2028 with a historically unpopular sitting GOP POTUS in office are next to nothing. The Dems will have to run someone even weaker than Biden in order for the GOP to have a chance in 2028 and I just don't see that happening.

You might not like Trump, but he is far from "an unpopular President".

Trump, with all of the advantages of being the incumbent seeking a second term, LOST to an unlikable 77 year old bag of bones who had nothing but a prior history of immediate failure when seeking political office outside of Delaware. Let me repeat this, Trump LOST to Joe fricking Biden. Trump followed up that embarrassment by not even being able to secure 50% of the popular vote when running against the a last minute replacement candidate for that unfit bag of bones he LOST to in the previous election. His average approval rating barely tops 40%.

This, my friend, is the biography of one of the most unpopular presidents of all time. Put the crack pipe down and read a book or something.

Yet Democrats lost to him twice, and refuse to try and figure out why.

Trump was a relentless campaigner with a populist message in 2016 to share with swing voters seeking "change" after 8 years of the opposition party being in power. It's not difficult to figure out how and why he won in 2026. Biden eliminated any chance of a Dem victory with his decision to run for a second term and then his backing out of the race just a few months prior to the election. It's even easier to figure out why he won in 2024.

Trump has been in the right time and place twice. Historians will actually be able make a good case for him being a viable candidate in 2016 but by 2024, he was a joke of a candidate who lucked up to be facing the grandest POTUS election debacle in our history thanks to Biden. Biden could have just as well lucked into two terms just as Trump did but in both cases, they are very, very unpopular presidents who, frankly, were only capable of beating each other in 2020 & 2024. The numbers don't lie. They are what they are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As PP mentioned, it will be Rubio, not JD Vance who you have to contend with in 2028. And no one mentioned in this thread is that strong vs Rubio, especially in states like AZ, VA, and GA. People in VA and GA do not like Trump because of his personality; his “tell it like it is” boorishness plays better in the Blue Wall, not in the more mannered South, especially in the suburbs. Rubio doesn’t have that problem. Pair him with someone like Tulsi, another relatively young POC who’s a woman with appeal to independents and type of people who vote D but like RFK Jr and listen to Rogan, and Rubio will be very tough to beat. Dems need to remember that they should run really fast away from whoever inside the Beltway pols are routing for because the rest of the country won’t like them.

You're forgetting one thing. Just like Vance, Pence, Harris, Mondale... Rubio is currently and will presumably still be working in the Administration of a very unpopular POTUS in 2028. History tells us, for those that care enough to pay attention, people associated with very unpopular presidents have zero chance of winning a POTUS election themselves; especially when that unpopular POTUS is the current sitting POTUS.

Even if you weren't aware of this history, it's basic common sense. Swing voters in swing states are always sold on the message of change. When the sitting POTUS has a 40% job approval rating, there is absolutely zero chance of enough of these swing voters in swing states jumping on board with someone associated with that POTUS based on their promise of "change". This is why Harris had zero chance of winning in 2024. This is why Vance's political career will be over in January 2029. This is why Pence's political career is over. This is why Mondale got beat 49 states to 1 in 1984.

None of this is rocket science. Think. Read.

Rubio isn't JD Vance. He may be Secretary of State now, but so far he has a separate identity from MAGA nutcases.

He will be a formidable candidate.

Democrats are all Trump, Trump, Trump right now - and doing very poorly in their opposition. And as always, they think they can run lame candidates like a Biden or Harris to beat a Trump redux bc everyone will want change.

But I do think a Rubio or a Haley absolutely destroys Democrats even after four years of Trump. So far, Democrats are offering nothing except an alternative to Trump, which didn't work well last time around. And they have no answer to a competent Republican nominee.

I mean who beats Rubio in Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, and North Carolina?

It's very early, but I too think Pritzker is a strong candidate now. I think AOC is too young, but anyone that can get the Sanders movement going will have a solid chance. A movement candidate. But the people mentioned here - Shapiro, Whitmer, Beshear, Newsome - have no chance against Rubio in the swing states.

Rubio couldn't even look normal drinking some water. What do you think he offers anyone anymore? Turning his back on Cubans and Venezuelans and Afghanis? Stripping students of their visas and throwing them in jail because he didn't like an op-ed?

He's got no charisma, no backbone, and nothing to run on anymore. He can't even offer himself as turning the page on Trump - because he's right there, doing the worst things you can do at Trump's behest.

Haley would be a great gen pop candidate but she'll never make it through the Rs' ludicrous primary.

History and a little common sense tells us no one who is a member of the Trump Administration will have a chance in 2028. Just ask Harris, Mondale or Pence what it is like running for POTUS after you've been associated with very unpopular presidents. That association is never broken in the eyes of way too many voters.

Haley is an example of a potential GOP candidate who could possibly have a chance in 2028 due to her remaining detached from Trump for the most part. Still though, the odds of a GOP candidate winning in 2028 with a historically unpopular sitting GOP POTUS in office are next to nothing. The Dems will have to run someone even weaker than Biden in order for the GOP to have a chance in 2028 and I just don't see that happening.

You might not like Trump, but he is far from "an unpopular President".

Trump, with all of the advantages of being the incumbent seeking a second term, LOST to an unlikable 77 year old bag of bones who had nothing but a prior history of immediate failure when seeking political office outside of Delaware. Let me repeat this, Trump LOST to Joe fricking Biden. Trump followed up that embarrassment by not even being able to secure 50% of the popular vote when running against the a last minute replacement candidate for that unfit bag of bones he LOST to in the previous election. His average approval rating barely tops 40%.

This, my friend, is the biography of one of the most unpopular presidents of all time. Put the crack pipe down and read a book or something.

Yet Democrats lost to him twice, and refuse to try and figure out why.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As PP mentioned, it will be Rubio, not JD Vance who you have to contend with in 2028. And no one mentioned in this thread is that strong vs Rubio, especially in states like AZ, VA, and GA. People in VA and GA do not like Trump because of his personality; his “tell it like it is” boorishness plays better in the Blue Wall, not in the more mannered South, especially in the suburbs. Rubio doesn’t have that problem. Pair him with someone like Tulsi, another relatively young POC who’s a woman with appeal to independents and type of people who vote D but like RFK Jr and listen to Rogan, and Rubio will be very tough to beat. Dems need to remember that they should run really fast away from whoever inside the Beltway pols are routing for because the rest of the country won’t like them.

You're forgetting one thing. Just like Vance, Pence, Harris, Mondale... Rubio is currently and will presumably still be working in the Administration of a very unpopular POTUS in 2028. History tells us, for those that care enough to pay attention, people associated with very unpopular presidents have zero chance of winning a POTUS election themselves; especially when that unpopular POTUS is the current sitting POTUS.

Even if you weren't aware of this history, it's basic common sense. Swing voters in swing states are always sold on the message of change. When the sitting POTUS has a 40% job approval rating, there is absolutely zero chance of enough of these swing voters in swing states jumping on board with someone associated with that POTUS based on their promise of "change". This is why Harris had zero chance of winning in 2024. This is why Vance's political career will be over in January 2029. This is why Pence's political career is over. This is why Mondale got beat 49 states to 1 in 1984.

None of this is rocket science. Think. Read.

Rubio isn't JD Vance. He may be Secretary of State now, but so far he has a separate identity from MAGA nutcases.

He will be a formidable candidate.

Democrats are all Trump, Trump, Trump right now - and doing very poorly in their opposition. And as always, they think they can run lame candidates like a Biden or Harris to beat a Trump redux bc everyone will want change.

But I do think a Rubio or a Haley absolutely destroys Democrats even after four years of Trump. So far, Democrats are offering nothing except an alternative to Trump, which didn't work well last time around. And they have no answer to a competent Republican nominee.

I mean who beats Rubio in Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, and North Carolina?

It's very early, but I too think Pritzker is a strong candidate now. I think AOC is too young, but anyone that can get the Sanders movement going will have a solid chance. A movement candidate. But the people mentioned here - Shapiro, Whitmer, Beshear, Newsome - have no chance against Rubio in the swing states.

Rubio couldn't even look normal drinking some water. What do you think he offers anyone anymore? Turning his back on Cubans and Venezuelans and Afghanis? Stripping students of their visas and throwing them in jail because he didn't like an op-ed?

He's got no charisma, no backbone, and nothing to run on anymore. He can't even offer himself as turning the page on Trump - because he's right there, doing the worst things you can do at Trump's behest.

Haley would be a great gen pop candidate but she'll never make it through the Rs' ludicrous primary.

History and a little common sense tells us no one who is a member of the Trump Administration will have a chance in 2028. Just ask Harris, Mondale or Pence what it is like running for POTUS after you've been associated with very unpopular presidents. That association is never broken in the eyes of way too many voters.

Haley is an example of a potential GOP candidate who could possibly have a chance in 2028 due to her remaining detached from Trump for the most part. Still though, the odds of a GOP candidate winning in 2028 with a historically unpopular sitting GOP POTUS in office are next to nothing. The Dems will have to run someone even weaker than Biden in order for the GOP to have a chance in 2028 and I just don't see that happening.

You might not like Trump, but he is far from "an unpopular President".

Trump, with all of the advantages of being the incumbent seeking a second term, LOST to an unlikable 77 year old bag of bones who had nothing but a prior history of immediate failure when seeking political office outside of Delaware. Let me repeat this, Trump LOST to Joe fricking Biden. Trump followed up that embarrassment by not even being able to secure 50% of the popular vote when running against the a last minute replacement candidate for that unfit bag of bones he LOST to in the previous election. His average approval rating barely tops 40%.

This, my friend, is the biography of one of the most unpopular presidents of all time. Put the crack pipe down and read a book or something.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Wow. I’ve never been insulted quite like that. FWIW, I’m a female Dem who worked on the campaigns but I saw Trump’s victories coming in ‘16 and ‘24, and a large part of it is due to know-it-all Dems. You must be a peach.

If you're truly a female and worked on political campaigns, you should first of all know the difference between red and purple states and second of all, you should know better than to insult every other woman in the world with your 1950s view of women.

I truly am. My post was as true as the TWO fundraising texts I got today from Robert Peters, the Dem who holds Obama’s former state Senate seat, Cherlyn Stevenson, DSCC in support of ActBlue, Rep.Maxwell Frost, and one mass email with pix of three candidates. And it is not even 7 pm yet! I meant what I said - we can’t expect to win by just going after purple states and ignoring the red. This is one reason I admire Pete so much.