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

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.

This is just you trying to rationalize lack of moderation. MAGA is making the same mistake leftists make. The majority of the country do not want your fringe politics. They don't want a revolution every 4-8 years. Winning the White House is not a seal of approval on your agenda. We just got sick of the other parties brand of sh** and need a change.

Yes they do, that's why Trump won twice, he's a shakeup. That's what people have been trying for since Obama in 08. The moderate Democratic Party is more like the Conservative Party in any other European country. A moderate won't turn out the vote. Just look at the numbers showing up for AOC and Bernie. The swing states are the only ones that actually decide who ends up as President and they're tired of same old tired politician.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AOC is a bartender, Whitmer just hid her face behind a binder at the White House like a child and French Laundry is so CA slicked back hair cringe.

I'll be interested to hear who the ors are?

She is a multiple time U.S. Representative (AOC), who is incredibly smart and well-spoken, not to mention brave af. So take your misogyny and shove it. Shame on you for trying to reduce her to a "bartender." She is literally the American Dream.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Think outside the Beltway Box.

Mark Kelly probably has the best chance. He ticks a lot of boxes for disenfranchised and/or disgusted Republicans.

By 2028 I think the populace will be fed up with billionaires, in general, and will reject Pritzker on that alone.

Mark Kelly has a great resume, but he doesn't have charisma. Think of Bill Clinton. Or Barack Obama. That's not Mark Kelly. Not happening.

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.

This is just you trying to rationalize lack of moderation. MAGA is making the same mistake leftists make. The majority of the country do not want your fringe politics. They don't want a revolution every 4-8 years. Winning the White House is not a seal of approval on your agenda. We just got sick of the other parties brand of sh** and need a change.

Anonymous wrote:Trump is a historically unpopular president. Democrats could run Elmo and he'd win in 2028, particularly if Vance is the GOP nominee.

But let's say Nikki Haley is the GOP nominee. That's a problem for Democrats.

Democrats are on the wrong side of a lot issues that motivate voters - illegal immigration, violent crime, schools, racial preferential hiring, and yes, the trans thing. Republicans will go to town on all those issues.

I think a lot of people are confusing economic progressives with social progressives. Social progressives are an anvil for Democrats. But economic progressives are a big win for Democrats. If Bernie Sanders was 20 years younger, he'd win in a heartbeat. AOC is only 35. She's too young to fill that space. But if Democrats could find a middle aged governor who's all about the working and middle class, they will do very well.

I personally like Pritzker right now. He's saying and doing the right things. But there is a lot of space for someone to come out of left field and surprise everyone. The usual names - Newsome, Whitmer, Buttigieg, Shapiro, Walz, Harris - are not happening. You only have one chance to make a first impression, and they all failed. They don't have what it takes to win a competitive race against a Haley.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

YES. Osoff! Osoff! He has charisma!

I am fine with Murphy or Pritzker.

Actually I am fine with anyone.

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.

Anonymous wrote:Think outside the Beltway Box.

Mark Kelly probably has the best chance. He ticks a lot of boxes for disenfranchised and/or disgusted Republicans.

By 2028 I think the populace will be fed up with billionaires, in general, and will reject Pritzker on that alone.