Nearly half of all Democrats want Kamala to run again in 2028

It’s just name recognition at this point. Nothing more.

I would love it but she will be too old. We need a Millenial.

[quote]Nearly half of all Democrats want Kamala to run again in 2028

So does JD Vance.

Give Al Gore another shot.

No thanks, sweetie—been there, done that.

Hopefully we'll have primaries. I mean, will there even be another election cycle?

She ran a fairly good campaign, but the next candidate needs to be a brilliant communicator, and that is Harris' biggest weakness.

^ No

No one will be running again in 2028.

I love Kamala; she's qualified, but--NO!

I want the Dems to win, and we cannot nominate a woman, black or gay. The country does not have the appetite.

Sorry, we need a strong, electable, white male, possibly Southern.

Tim Walz

Walz will go the way of Tim Kaine.

Losing twice would be so humiliating. Been there done that.

Not that dud Tim Walz. I had a sense the election was over when Vance owned Walz in the debate.

R10 Bet Wes Moore could win.

Stupid idea

Nope.

Pete Buttigieg.

I don't think anyone cared about the debate

I think women like Kamala and Hill got caught up in their heads when they ran for president. Because they were charming otherwise. Then they transformed into being “demure”. And JOY has never been apart of KH’s brand UNTIL she ran for president. Just fucking be real. Wear a skirt. Show off that body. It’s like they developed complexes after years of sexism.

[quote] I would love it but she will be too old. We need a Millenial.

Oh, dear.

It's going to be a straight white man. With Pete as VP.

Pete cannot get elected in ANY state for ANY statewide office. And Kamala couldn't even win a single swing state. These two are losers. We need someone new.

Someone who calls the other side “demagogues” and “hillbillies”. Regularly dumps leaked info that can be confirmed from multiple sources. Calls out court convictions of the opponent. Points out the conflicts of interest. Questions why their spouse isn’t on their side on the campaign trail. Leaves word salad in the dusts. Oh, what if, what if….

Could DL fave/villain Owen Jones have the answer?

With Trump heading for the White House, the Democrats must learn these lessons – and fast

They're just a fucking bunch of dumb cunts.

[bold] The Republicans will NEVER give up the White House again. I am not kidding. They will get another Supreme Court seat, maybe two. Trump is old. He isn't the problem. His successor will come from his cabinet. They will control the military. Within 2 years we will be living in a totalitarian state. The first "unrest" that comes up under Trump 2.0 is going to see tanks rolling thru not just a local police response. Wait and See. That will be the first wake up call and probably come sometime in 2025. [/bold]

maybe some sort of pills would clear up your mental illness r26

R24 Stop taking AMERICAN political advice from ugly British guys. He's like a midget.

The primaries will pick a candidate and it won’t be Harris. She’s a poor communicator. Plus what will she be doing the next few years to stay relevant?

Because Trump is already screwing up, any white man can beat him. This is especially true if his administration terrifies and is a shitshow.

Kamala came close and for all we know won. Many don’t believe she lost all 7 swing states unless they cheated.

[quote]Bet Wes Moore could win.

R15. I wouldn't take the chance with Wes Moore. Sorry, no women, blacks or gays a presidential candidate in 2028. The bigots and discriminatory assholes in this country will not elect anyone in those groups.

The Dems need a moderate, while male. I liked Gavin Newsom, but now I don't want him as a presidential candidate. I am from California. Newsom is a good governor. I like him, but being from California, he could likely be viewed as too slick. So, No to Gavin at least for now.

Possible Democratic candidates for 2028:

Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut or Gov. Andy Beshear of Kentucky.

R24 = Here is your hero, posting from a bar. And HE wants to tell DEMOCRATS what to do? um, no thank you.

What we need is a Dennis Kucinich type.

We aren't leaving. We have tanks.------------->>GOP 2028

No women. No blacks. No LGBTQ. No California.

We did not lose because of Harris.

We lost because a large part of the country thinks the economy is bad (it isn’t), unemployment is high (it isn’t), crime is rising (it isn’t), and that Trump can solve these problems (he can’t). Democrats are not reaching the low information voters that Trump managed to capture. But the good news is that they don’t usually vote in midterms and that they probably won’t vote for someone not named Trump. Democrats do need a better messaging ecosystem, but that is a multi year project.

Harris made the swing states competitive with her ground game.

R37 is a moron.

Beshear screams Jimmy Carter loser.

Said one on the losing end, R18.

Oy vey, R30.

Beshear doesn’t have any of the charisma that, yes, the 1976 Jimmy Carter had. The then-non loser Jimmy Carter who won against a sitting president.

We really need to sort out why 7-11 million voters from 2020 did NOT vote in 2024, which is inexcusable considering the potential challenge to Democracy.

best picks: 1. Maddow/Walz 2. Winfrey/King 3. Newsom/Winfrey 4. Buttagig/Maddow 5. Walz/Scarborough

This always happens, the Dems all wanted Al Gore to try again at this time in late 2000…

As there won't be a 2028 election, nothing to worry about here.

I'm thinking if Biden had stayed in the race he would have won. People just didn't know this woman.

Well since he only served one term, he can certainly run again in 2028.

[quote]Democrats are not reaching the low information voters that Trump managed to capture.

Because Harris didn’t know how to communicate to them.

[quote]We really need to sort out why 7-11 million voters from 2020 did NOT vote in 2024, which is inexcusable considering the potential challenge to Democracy.

I think most of these were Never-Trump Republicans who voted Biden in 2020, but didn’t like either candidate this time so didn’t vote.

It wasn’t just Harris being unable to communicate with the low information voters. It was a problem across the board. Nearly the whole nation shifted to the right. Local, state, and federal levels were all impacted. It was going to happen whether it was Biden or Harris. I wouldn’t be surprised if an analysis down the line found that Harris tempered some of the rightward vectoring.

4% want Ocasio-Cortez to run..... they really are out of touch. Kamala would be a much better option that that. Ocasio-Cortez would be toxic for a vast number of voters and turn off the ones in the centre most.

R24 Owen Jones is actually right about this for once - the Democrats need to drive home a message of support for the working poor hard and fast. Not often I agree with him but I do here. He's wrong about not going at least a little bit rightwards on a few popular policy areas though, like illegal immigration and crime, they were basically already there but failed to communicate that clearly. Again that would win votes in the centre like those R50 alludes to, people who may have liked one or two of Trumps policies but otherwise hated the man and everything he stands for

[quote]No women. No blacks. No LGBTQ. No California.

No east coast, no Harvard, no New York................... in other words : no arrogance.

We also need to get better at sound bites that resonate with voters. Regretfully, tRump is a master at this.

Eating my popcorn.

I'll run her next campaign.

So what, who cares ?

Kamala's been hiding out in my house in Miami since the election, as we've been best friends since childhood, and she already picked me to be her new campaign manager for 2028. She said keep that Sunny Hostin bitch far the hell away from me. She cost me the election with her 'October Surprise' on the show last month.

I can only hope R44 was being whimsical. If not, why not add Tim Kaine to the mix?

A Ben Affleck/Jennifer Aniston ticket would win Gen X.

If trumpy can run 3 times & lose the pop. vote each race then why can't she run again OP?

She's much younger than fossil Hillary.

Trump didn't lose the popular vote this time, R61. He just didn't exceed 50% of the vote. And he's now won twice.

Are you fuckin nuts!

IT'S HILLARY'S TURN!

They thought that shoplifting had been deccriminalized (it wasn'; anywhere), they thought that doctors are performing random sex hange opreations, that doctors are killing newborns. They thought a lot of stuff that no average 10 year old would think are true. Because they would say anything to justify their vote, but the real reason for it is simple: racism and sexism. Period.

Only a white man is allowed to lose a major election and then cause a resurrection and then re-run for president and WIN. If Jesse Jackson pulled a stunt like that he and his entire rainbow coalition would have been the locked the fuck up and maybe charged with treason. There would have been about 2 dozen dead black bodies in Congress. Thats why I think its likely some type of conspiracy with Biden. I don’t care if I’m crazy. Why didn’t he force his AG to fucking put him on trial. That’s all you talked about and how evil it was.

If only JB would get on Ozempic.

Pritzker/Buttigieg 2028 if not sooner.

r65 can you just fucking OD already?

R43 There is nothing to figure out. So either “stop the steal” happened then or vote tampering happened NOW. Imma need my cyber gays to find the answers.

Or 10 million Democrats woke up on election day, decided that they were racist and went back to bed.

R69 That’s statistically impossible. It’s simply impossible. The 2020 numbers do not make sense.

Oh FFS. Let’s have a completely open Democratic primary process in 2027-28. And let’s decide THEN who the D nominee should be.

This all needs a 2 year break, minimum.

R47- Joe Biden polled as one of the most unpopular Presidents ever. He would’ve lost.

[quote] It’s just name recognition at this point.

Name recognition is very important. There is no individual in the Democratic field with broad appeal who has name recognition. It was because of this deficit that we were stuck with Biden as the nominee until the last 100 days. I was prepared to vote for Biden but I am much happier that I got to vote for Harris. She ran a strong campaign against odds that were insurmountable for anyone not named Obama. I am very bitter over the loss but not enough to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Harris is the presumptive candidate for 2028. Four years is just the right amount of time for her to get her house in order and prepare for her run. The next four years will be a horror show and the people that voted for Trump will suffer the most. Trump is term-limited and he does not care about the Republican party or making sure they can continue to control government when he's not there. By the time of the next election Harris will be a "white knight."

However, I am prepared to vote for any Democrat.

R73 Great post and I like the way you think but we have to be pragmatic. It cannot be her. Only white males, preferably ugly, are allowed to fail upwards. It needs to be a millennial. Hell maybe a pop culture type figure who has been involved in politics for at least a decade. What sport stars are out there who know Washington and have worked in politics. They don’t have to have served in elected office. Trump facilitated that no longer being a requirement.

R68, don't disagree at all.

R74, Trump 2.0 will enable Democrats to rebuild its traditional coalition. Union-busting, higher unemployment, lower wages, diminished SSA and Medicare, higher cost of living will bring back the critical blocs of Democrat voters that fell for MAGA in 2024. However, we cannot abandon the backbone of the party -- a culturally and ethnically diverse coalition of progressive voters. We had better have a candidate that can capture the base, it will likely not be another white Christian male. We'll be ready for a female president in 2028 and a female of color will ignite the liberal/progressive Dem base.

For those saying Biden should run again, my god, he'll be like the same as age Dorothy's grandmother when she colonized Venus.

[quote] Only a white man is allowed to lose a major election and then cause a resurrection and then re-run for president and WIN. If Jesse Jackson pulled a stunt like that he and his entire rainbow coalition would have been the locked the fuck up and maybe charged with treason.

In fact, my friend, only Jesus Christ has pulled off a resurrection and I have it on good authority it was profoundly successful, and personally, I harbor doubts that he was a white man.

R77 Anybody saying that Biden should run again is a MAGA mole or basement troll. It doesn’t even deserve a response.

R78 That is one good looking Jesus yo. I’m buying that picture and putting it in my living room.

R49 Or because she only had 3 months to reach around 300 million people in an enormous expanse of diverse concerns and levels of political engagement. Trump has been campaigning for president for a decade. I have no doubt that if Biden had dropped out before the debate or even just after it that Harris could have found a way to reach them all.

Harris could have done it with a sufficient window -- 9 months or more. She had Drumpf and his team on the ropes for 100 days. They were as surprised and confounded as everyone else on election day.

[quote]Only a white man is allowed to lose a major election and then cause a resurrection and then re-run for president and WIN.

So, the nominee must be a white man then. It's solved.

She had tremendous support from people who would have voted for anyone against Trump. She won’t have that boost in 2028. Also, she would still be a second Biden term in the mind of voters.

Bareshare appeals to me.

[quote] They were as surprised and confounded as everyone else on election day.

Link, please. I believe her when she always said she was the underdog. It's quite a challenge to win the presidency directly from the vice presidency, especially when the president has such low approval ratings.

"Run again 2028". Oh, that's amusing. Like there's going to be anything left in 2028.

I don’t want her anymore

The Democrats need to choose a loud, lily-white, makeup-encrusted, barely coherent sexual predator who is willing to fellate microphones while pretending to be a Christian and actually being the antithesis to everything Jesus preached.

America wants what it wants.

I heard the DNC is putting Jimmy Carter forward again on a ticket with Nancy Pelosi. Well, why not?

Some Dems need to realize that Josh Shapiro, Pete Buttigieg,Gavin Nesom, and AOC are types of people who have very little chances of being elected POTUS.

It's way too soon to write the presidential obituaries of the likes of Shapiro, et al. Circa 2016, I never thought that Joe Biden would be elected president.

Anti-semitism and Christian Nationalism are reasons why Shapiro and other Jewish Dems like Jon Ossoff and Elissa Slotkin would never be elected POTUS.

AOC seems to have ditched some of her far left beliefs. But, it's possible that her relationships with Rashida Tlaib and other progressives have soured due to AOC campaigning for Harris/Walz. If she attempts a presidential run, people will spill tea on her.

[bold] Spoiler Alert! [/bold] We aren't leaving. Ever. Why would we? Also we have tanks. -------GOP 2028.

r72, that is sad because her really delivered for Americans.

that is sad because he really delivered for Americans.

sorry, fixed it.

OP, what a stupid-ass idea. She isn't going to win. It sucks but we will need another white man to step up and take lead. Only then will we have a chance at attracting conservative Democrats and moderate Repugs. Which we NEED to get the ball over the goalpost.

Please stop this craziness. At some point the lives of people affected by Repugs, who are currently in control of the country, has to be more important than making a damn statement.

We cannot afford to loose. If we get another chance to vote, and we may not, then we need to vote in someone who will win over the majority.

I just cannot understand why Dems only care about looking cool and progressive instead of keeping many from suffering under fascism. Why is it always about the optics with them and never about doing what is necessary and saving our country from fascism?

Horrible idea.

And I bet she’ll precisely attempt to do it again then, as a result.

[quote]Some Dems need to realize that Josh Shapiro, Pete Buttigieg,Gavin Nesom, and AOC are types of people who have very little chances of being elected POTUS.

I believe the Jew-hating wing of the Democratic party can be defeated and so Shapiro can earn the nomination. If he's nominated, he will win in the general.

Shapiro won't win a general election.

R99 It isn't just the Jew-hatings Dems. The majority of Repugs hate Jews too. He cannot win

[quote]We cannot afford to loose.

Oh, Dear.

[quote]Bareshare appeals to me.

Oh, Fucking Dear.

The Dems need to become stronger, tougher, more butch , less fem , less sensitive , less triggered , less pussies as they are now viewed by the majority of Americans.

Many Dems showed their views on this already when they stayed home or voted for trump.

Bill Clinton was correct but the Harris campaign did not listen or did not act.

[quote]The Dems need to become stronger, tougher, more butch , less fem , less sensitive , less triggered , less pussies as they are now viewed by the majority of Americans.

“Tough on crime” would be a good place to start. People are done with the Sanctuary Cities, and Defund the Police. Bill Clinton passed that crime bill and easily got reelected.

[quote]The Dems need to become stronger, tougher, more butch , less fem , less sensitive , less triggered , less pussies as they are now viewed by the majority of Americans.

In other words, stop kowtowing to woke politics, brought to us by eastern liberal arts females.

It's gonna be quite the challenge to be "less fem" in a party so dominated by women.

Pritzker could use Ozempic

Or get Penny to run. But they'd have to keep her away from interviews.

Here we go again, talking about the midterms, this isn't a competition, it's people's fucking lives, let them suffer, there will be collateral damage, it is necessary, people need to feel pain, they really do, let their little shitty children suffer too. They need to pay.

[quote] It's gonna be quite the challenge to be "less fem" in a party so dominated by women.

The Dems should utilize tough butch straight woman Elissa Slotkin instead of pretty dumb girl AOC. Slotkin was in the CIA and is a likely a sociopath who was recruited for that reason.

Slotkin needs to get on Ozempic and get a slight makeover, but still retain her butch straight woman persona.

[quote] let them suffer, there will be collateral damage, it is necessary, people need to feel pain, they really do, let their little shitty children suffer too.

Just curious, do you 1) acknowledge that you are an extremely evil person, or 2) do you falsely claim that you are not?

[quote] Also, she would still be a second Biden term in the mind of voters.

By 2028, a second Biden term will seem like paradise to the poor, working-class and middle-class MAGAts whose lives are about to be upended by their orange savior and his carnival of chaos.

[quote] OP, what a stupid-ass idea. She isn't going to win. It sucks but we will need another white man to step up and take lead.

That is too short-sighted. It's how we ended up with an older mediocre white man (Joe Biden - God bless him!) who was not viable for a second term. He was no one's choice. There was no enthusiasm for him in 2020, he was just a vote against Trump. Dems need to put forth a charismatic, galvanizing leader like Obama.

Just another sign that she didn't lose this election. Where is the 'apathy' for her the MSM keeps telling us about?

[quote]Slotkin needs to get on Ozempic and get a slight makeover, but still retain her butch straight woman persona.

Stay out of my lane, bitch.

[quote] Just another sign that she didn't lose this election. Where is the 'apathy' for her the MSM keeps telling us about?

Oy veh.

Winning is literally everything. All of us Dems with ashes in our mouths should know this. No women, no blacks, no gays. I loathe Trump, but he is super masculine. America wants a macho leader. And no gays, for the love of god. Not even as Veep. Are you people fucking crazy?

The fact that so many would lazily choose the candidate who just lost does show some apathy about the whole thing.

About 1/2 million who voted for. Biden stayed home in NYC and didn’t vote for Harris. FYI.

[quote]I loathe Trump, but he is super masculine.

Wes Moore over Buttigieg. America would probably except a buff, attractive black man over a gay man.

Great ideas. Really super. Keep it up and good luck.

It's only been a couple of weeks and the dust is still settling, so it's far too early to discuss 2028 or even the midterms in 2026. We need to gain a data-backed understanding of how and why she lost, but it isn't hard to see and I believe the data will back up the assertion that she lost because angry white Christian men (and the women under their spell) are still angry over the pandemic and the economic upheaval wrought by multi-month shutdowns and interruptions in their lives ultimately underlined by inflation.

The issue is that the Trump campaign was able to focus that anger like a laser on Democrats. I mean, it was the Democrats who pushed for science-based action to the pandemic, and science tells us exactly how the pandemic would play out. The opportunity to stop the spread of an infectious disease ended when it was allowed to gain a foothold in the population because Trump's leadership was woefully inadequate, purposefully so when you understand that they did the opposite of what public health officials told them right from the beginning. Obama left Trump a well-reasoned, field-tested playbook because they saw that a pandemic was inevitable (although I think they really thought it was decades away); Trump was so dismissive and racist that his guiding philosophy was to just do the opposite of whatever Obama would do, and since Obama followed science, they did the opposite of what the science told them.

Regardless, when the opportunity to raise prices with no risk of having to take responsibility for doing so presented itself to big business, of course they were going to take it. One of Kamala's failures of communication was that she didn't draw a direct line between the inflation rate and the incredible increase in corporate profits, not to mention the ample evidence provided by corporate leaders admitting to the deed. The reason inflation was 9% was because corporations took greater profits. Either the Democrats needed to take control of the problem when it happened by instituting some pandemic price controls, or prepare the message to hold those responsible accountable. They did neither.

So we had a nation of angry white Christian men ready to blame anyone and everyone not white and male for their declining economic situation. The Republicans had done a good job of turning one of the best presidents we've ever had into one of the worst in the minds of these angry white Christian men; as we've all said over and over, the economy is booming, unemployment is at historic lows, manufacturing is coming back, wages are up, and people are too busy bitching about inflation while putting their $500 Halloween skeleton decorations in their front yards to notice that the economy has never been better. It's easy to think the world has gone to Hell when you're paying 50% more for groceries. Republicans held Biden accountable for inflation, painting him as old and out of touch because he didn't do something about a problem that they created

And then, because his loss was all but guaranteed, and the stakes were so incredibly high, party leaders convinced Biden to drop out. But it was too late. And his VP would inherit all of the issues that plagued Biden, excepting for the age issue. But his age was only part of the reason he was disqualified. The Republicans were shocked when he dropped out; Shady JD even termed it "a sucker punch". So, they turned to tried-and-true racism and misogyny, and it worked. Again. Despite being whip smart, capable, experienced, and ready to govern on day one, angry white Christian men (and crucially, their sycophants) chose the unqualified, criminal, corrupt and ridiculously unintelligent and unhinged mobster. The message was loud and clear: their worst is still better than our best.

What this tells us is pretty simple: the next Democratic nominee must be white, male, and Christian. Given what Trump and the broligarchy are going to do to the nation and the worldwide economy, not much else is going to matter because at our core, we are deeply racist and misogynistic.

“ What this tells us is pretty simple: the next Democratic nominee must be white, male, and Christian. Given what Trump and the broligarchy are going to do to the nation and the worldwide economy, not much else is going to matter because at our core, we are deeply racist and misogynistic”

After Kamala lost, I spent the next day going a little OCD on which Dems have won a first term and which Dems failed. It turns out there’s a set of conditions.

If you want the Presidency and you’re a non-incumbent Democrat, you need to run when the GOP incumbent and/or the GOP as a party have been in power and the voters are feeling restless and discontent.

That is the pattern that connects Jimmy Carter ‘76, Bill Clinton ‘92, Barack Obama ‘08 and Joe Biden ‘20.

Can a Democratic woman win? We don’t actually know yet, because the two who tried did not compete under the favorable conditions. No white Christian male Dem has won without them, why should we have expected a woman to do it?

This likely sets us up well for 2028.

Low-information voters just picked the loudest one who told them the most lies. Now their ignorance will come back to haunt them.

"About 1/2 million who voted for. Biden stayed home in NYC and didn’t vote for Harris. FYI."

Where did all the votes go?

R74 it should be a millennial. Fuck Gen X.

[quote]The opportunity to stop the spread of an infectious disease ended when it was allowed to gain a foothold in the population

^ This is such bullshit. The virus gained a foothold in every nation on earth and it ain't because of Trump.

[quote]Despite being whip smart, capable, experienced, and ready to govern on day one, angry white Christian men (and crucially, their sycophants) chose the unqualified, criminal, corrupt and ridiculously unintelligent and unhinged mobster.

55% of Latino men voted for Trump.

Will it be the most important election of our lifetime?

[quote]What this tells us is pretty simple: the next Democratic nominee must be white, male, and Christian.

Why do you completely ignore the fact the Barack Hussein Obama won the Presidency twice.

[quote]The virus gained a foothold in every nation on earth and it ain't because of Trump.

The virus was not detected early because Trump pulled our doctors and scientists out of China, saying it was a boondoggle and waste of money. Yes, I know that Trump has already tried to refute this by putting the blame of Redfield, but who told Redfield to end our program of working with the Chinese? Why did Trump do that? It was only a few million-dollar effort to put Americans in China to observe, work with and develop relationships with Chinese doctors and scientists. But he mocked it and made light of it, telling stupid Americans that we were paying scientists a lot of money to play with bats in caves... which made no sense to average flyoverstans who have still not figured out that the reason we "play with bats in caves" was to test them for highly infectious diseases about to enter the human ecosystem rather like a canary in a coal mine. But it was too late. Nevertheless, they completely forgave Trump's malfeasance and chalked the pandemic up to China, bad timing or other such nonsense.

Before you tell me I'm wrong, answer this one question: Do you have smoke detectors in your house? Why? They won't stop a fire. They won't do anything other than emit a loud, ear-piercing siren. They're expensive, require routine maintenance and replacement, are annoying as hell when the low battery alert goes off at 3:00 am, and are a right royal pain in the ass. But when a fire starts in the middle of the night...

If our people had been in China in 2019, we would have been made aware that the virus had escaped the Wuhan lab and quarantined it there. But Trump destroyed and threw away our early warning system. And then when stories of a strange airborne infectious disease started cropping up, instead of stopping travel from China to the US (and the rest of the world), he used it to issue a travel stop order targeted at brown people. And then it spread across our nation like wildfire, and all the Trump administration did was try to leverage it against blue states. Their plan failed when [italic]science[/italic] inevitably asserted control and the virus spread like... a virus always spreads. Scientifically. Predictably. Destructively. Everywhere. Indiscriminately.

So don't tell me the most powerful man on Earth in the most powerful nation on Earth had no responsibility for an entirely preventable pandemic. And replace the battery in your smoke detector because if the insurance company's investigation finds you disconnected it rather than buy batteries, they won't cover your losses and you are shit out of luck.

She was suitable enough but I'm not really a fan of anyone who loses an election running a second time, for any office.

Let's get fresh blood in the DNC and get some new strong faces and names in there.

[quote]Let's get fresh blood in the DNC

As the notorious Roseanne Barr once quipped: "Let's get fresh blood in the White House--every 28 days"

R126 about half of the missing NYC voters left the city. But Harris still had around 250K not bother to vote for her. Trump picked up 95K voters many from Queens. There is no one in sight but a strong Republican like Bloomberg could easily be elected Mayor in 2025. Low income areas where migrants are dumped are VERY unhappy about it.

R131 Bullshit.

It was announced in December of 2019 that Predict would end in March 2020. And it was given an extension.

Furthermore, Covid was spreading through Europe by November 2019. And there are scientists who believe it had entered Europe by the Summer of 2019

[quote] Will it be the most important election of our lifetime?

Yes, and must be described as existential with several exclamation points. Likewise, with all the elections after that.

No way. She's an idiot. She doesn't know her ass from a hole in the ground. The have 4 years to bring forward an candidate that can answer hard questions and have a vision. That's not her.

I love my Momala for life. She should have won. Fucking non college educated dopes. Fuck em all I care. I don’t care.

[quote] Low-information voters just picked the loudest one who told them the most lies. Now their ignorance will come back to haunt them.

It's already starting to haunt them. For the past couple of weeks, YouTube and TikTok content creators have been making "Fuck Around and Find Out" videos in reference to Trump voters who are either regretting their votes or finding out that Trump's proposed policies are going to negatively effect them. A bunch of dumb fuck Trump supporters didn't understand how tarrifs work and are losing Christmas bonuses because companies/factories they work for are buying/stocking up on materials ahead of time before Trump takes office. Some people will probably lose their jobs. There are Trumpster morons who don't/didn't understand that Obamacare and ACA are the same thing. They are idiots posting on social media that "they hope Trump cuts Obamacare, but not ACA because they need health insurance.

[quote] A bunch of dumb fuck Trump supporters didn't understand how tarrifs work and are losing Christmas bonuses because companies/factories they work for are buying/stocking up on materials ahead of time before Trump takes office.

Is that this:

For all the claims of buyers regret, Trump's approval rating - as it was during the campaign - is still much greater than it was in his first administration. In the last week, he was at 54%.

R140 Yup, it's that. I'm leaning that the claim is true. I think once December rolls around we are going to be hearing/getting similar stories.

R142, such a viral claim and the company still has not been found and identified? Would you say that your hope in its validity may have affected your leaning to the claim being true?

I "lean" toward the claim being true because I know southwestern PA, and have no doubts that most of those people don't have the sense God gave a flea, so them not understanding tariffs or, really, anything other than wiping their own asses isn't a surprise.

r130, that is what provoked the KKK/Fox response against Democrats. White racists, and those who do not believe themselves to be racist but who are devout Fox viewers, will only vote for White Men. Joe got the crossover in 2020. America has to be sufficiently minority for a black woman to be elected. All of Trump's corruption was not enough to overcome that.

Pritzker/Buttigieg 2028

[quote] No way. She's an idiot. She doesn't know her ass from a hole in the ground. The have 4 years to bring forward an candidate that can answer hard questions and have a vision. That's not her.

We’ve had two Bushes, Reagan, and Trump. Harris would never win the presidential idiot sweepstakes no matter how many times you say it.

Anyone who says that Kamala Harris, noted prosecutor and courtroom closer, suffered from word salad, is a person who only saw her on Fox and edited.

Idiot is too strong. Anyone who couldn’t answer the question how she’d be different than Biden is just very dumb.

[quote] Pritzker/Buttigieg 2028

Pritzker is Jewish. America is still too anti-Semitic to elect a Jewish person POTUS.

Ah, now we know why Turd did the Bronx rally. So he could later say he changed hearts and minds that day.

[quote]Anyone who says that Kamala Harris, noted prosecutor and courtroom closer, suffered from word salad, is a person who only saw her on Fox and edited.

No. We saw Chuckle Head Harris speak in own words.

R151=brainless moron. Nobody could watch a Trump speech and imagine him in control of nuclear weapons. His rambling incompetence and severe mental illness were on full display every day for hours a day.

[quote] What this tells us is pretty simple: the next Democratic nominee must be white, male, and Christian.

Sounds like a losing plan.

White Christian males would never vote for a Democrat, and Democrats are probably done with voting for white Christian males.

Democrats will only vote for black, Muslim women? Good luck with that.

R135, go back and read my post. Posting that cases were thought to have been found in September 2019 in Italy completely comports with what I've written. Trump pulled the doctors out of China well before 2019; it was one of the first things he instructed the CDC chief to do (Redfield?) and they started in 2017. I think the number pulled out of China by the time the Pandemic struck was something like 47, leaving only 14 US CDC personnel in China, none in Wuhan where the Institute of Virology was located. There were doctors there earlier... the ones Trump mocked for chasing bats in caves.

This thread has become tiresome

[quote]Anyone who says that Kamala Harris, noted prosecutor and courtroom closer, suffered from word salad, is a person who only saw her on Fox and edited.

She’s fine when she’s the one asking the questions and cross-examining. But when she’s giving the responses, it was indeed often word salad.

R157. She had no trouble answering questions during the debate.

Is concepts of a plan not word salad because it’s uttered by a man?

[quote]She had no trouble answering questions during the debate.

And yet she had enormous trouble during interviews with simple predictable questions.

But one question she did answer directly and succinctly was when asked what she would have done differently from Biden: “There is not a thing that comes to mind.”

LOL.

It’s best to keep a sense of proportion. She did struggle sometimes with answering questions. That was one of the weaker points in an otherwise strong campaign. She did not struggle enormously.

And if you think she ever sounded remotely as befuddled, inarticulate, stupid, and confused as Reagan, Trump, or the two Bushes? Your partisan, sexist, uninformed, or insane.

She didn't exactly answer the first question she got at the debate, R158.

she's a failure...it's over. deal with it. we need someone else. not her

No need to worry, R162. It won't be her.

Oh, please, she's not a failure. She lost an election that we'll be studying for decades. And as the votes are finally being fully counted and certified, she didn't even lose by that much. If you look at the deciding factors — the swing states — it came down to fewer than 250,000 votes spread across 7 states and the popular vote margin was under 1.5%. Don't get me wrong: she lost an election that Democrats should have and could have won had Biden done what he promised in 2020, to be a transitional president, and not thrown his hat in the ring 2 years ago. Now, note I said "Democrats", not "Kamala" because the underlying reason she lost was that she's female and Black.

I agree it would be insane to nominate her again, but her loss was the first time I was saddened that the losing democratic candidate wouldn’t be my president. In all other cases, I was only saddened that the Republican opponent had won. Hopefully, she will find some other role in public life. I wonder if a democratic president would appoint her to the Supreme Court.

[quote]Now, note I said "Democrats", not "Kamala" because the underlying reason she lost was that she's female and Black.

That had nothing to do with it. It's a lame excuse.

Americans vote for women all over the country.

13 women are serving as Governors in blue as well as red states. And there are currently 424 mayors that are women. And of all races.

R166. But they don’t seem to vote for them for president. There is a big difference. And the substantial presence of women in public office is quite a recent phenomenon.

WHhy, yes, of course, R166. The fact that we've run and lost with two women is just hyperbole.

You might as well have pointed out that other countries across the planet have elected female presidents/prime ministers. True, but not relevant.

R168. And republicans haven’t even managed to nominate one in the fifty or so years since women began to enter political life. A bit bizarre that we’ve not managed to elect any female president of either party in a country of such stunning open-mindedness

[quote]But they don’t seem to vote for them for president.

Certainly not Hillary or Kamala. That's for sure.

[quote] 13 women are serving as Governors in blue as well as red states. And there are currently 424 mayors that are women. And of all races.

The ladies have 26 percent of the governor positions. And almost a third of the mayor positons! And many are even colored! Can they stop bitching now and making excuses???!

[quote]And republicans haven’t even managed to nominate one in the fifty or so years since women began to enter political life.

Both parties can only select from the relatively small number of candidates who throw their hat in the ring. Do you think Republicans should have selected Michele Bachmann when they had the chance, instead of Mitt Romney?

It doesn't matter at all who any party has on the bench. It only matters who is willing to run.

R172. Makes sense. So, it’s mostly a lack of initiative on the part of the. ladies. Thanks for the prompt response!

[quote]I agree it would be insane to nominate her again, but her loss was the first time I was saddened that the losing democratic candidate wouldn’t be my president.

Just curious, were you also saddened in 2019 when Democrats had a choice of multiple candidates and Harris dropped out having only single digit support? She could have used some of the current love back then.

What is a woman anyway?

Pete didn't win anything either R124, but he really grew up in the succeeding four years.

R174. Just curious whether you were saddened by the embarrassing total failures of Biden In multiple campaigns. Or Trump’s previous joke campaign.

Simply curious—since I have a highly logical , non-cliched sense of curiosity.

[quote] She’s fine when she’s the one asking the questions and cross-examining. But when she’s giving the responses, it was indeed often word salad.

In her defense...she does not need one but...she was obviously VERY constrained in what she could say about the current administration, she was essentially running for Biden's second term. She could not be openly critical of key decisions made by Biden, even those where she didn't agree. While everyone knows the VP does not make policy or run the administration, Drumpf's campaign made her Biden-by-attribution and they were aided enormously by the mainstream, so-called legitimate media.

[quote]2019 when Democrats had a choice of multiple candidates and Harris dropped out having only single digit support? She could have used some of the current love back then.

She polled poorly among Blacks when she ran the first time. That should have been a warning.

[quote]Pete didn't win anything either [R124], but he really grew up in the succeeding four years.

He still couldn’t win anything.

If Pete continues living in Michigan. I doubt he would be able to win a gubernatorial race or a US senate or congressional seat.

[quote]she was obviously VERY constrained in what she could say about the current administration, she was essentially running for Biden's second term. She could not be openly critical of key decisions made by Biden, even those where she didn't agree.

There was no rule that she had to be Biden’s second term. It was her choice to pursue that strategy. She would have done better if she’d been honest and critical of some of Biden’s policy failures.

Way too early for this. Polls now are meaningless.

[quote] There was no rule that she had to be Biden’s second term. It was her choice to pursue that strategy. She would have done better if she’d been honest and critical of some of Biden’s policy failures.

Well, yes, if she had been in a primary opposing him. However, she was his anointed successor, she had 100 days, so she couldn't be honest or critical.

I guess it was too hard to say Biden did an excellent job but in this area….inflation..we could have done better.

[quote]she was obviously VERY constrained in what she could say about the current administration, she was essentially running for Biden's second term.

Exactly.

She didn't lose because she was a black woman.

She lost because of a failed strategy i.e. running for Biden's second term.

Yes, R186. That's why Trump made such a big deal out of her "turning black." And why they went after young men, Black men and Hispanic men, clearly not a male v. female thing. Not at all. And funny how she repeatedly said she wasn't Joe Biden and she wasn't running for his second term but her first. And how she defended her agenda as separate, new, and leadership for a new generation. Clearly an admission that she was running for Joe's second term. As a Black woman.

^ On "The View" when she was asked whether there was anything she would have done differently than Biden over the past four years:

“There is not a thing that comes to mind"

R187 Ya gotta love the Democrat's winning strategy: "The US is racist and misogynist....so let's run a black woman for President!"

Her messaging was muddled: "America is ready to turn the page!" "I wouldn't change anything!"

This is about way more than Kamala Harris. Democrats need to realize that trump is a brand. People have familiarized themselves with the brand.

Nancy Pelosi is right. You cannot have the Dem candidate declare their candidacy mere months before the election and expect a miracle. It now takes YEARS to energize the voter base. We need to know who's going to be the chosen one by 2026.

And Democrats also have to address is the issue of voter apathy. We will never win if people simply don't want to vote. Republicans already control much of the voting process in the United States, so we have to depend on people showing up to actually vote.

This is just outright idiocy

The real problem is that Americans liked trump more than Harris and that might be because there are more registered GOP than Dems,

Who takes credit for that shift so that the Dems are now the minority party, the Dems or the gop you can decide for yourself .

Nancy Pelosi is a crypt keeper. She is not right. Trump is not a brand. NOBODY likes hiim.

Absurd. This will never happen.

r191, which is why if Biden were reelected, he would have made building her brand paramount.

I think that Harris is our best bet for rebranding. All she had to do is run on her record and Trump's, the killer of 600k American's, record.

Fox never let anyone get close to Trump's record, but we are confronting it daily now in is appointments. He's running on his record NOW.

Kamala Harris is the presumptive Democratic nominee for 2028. I am happy to support her candidacy, in 2 years she will be much improved and more effective when unencumbered by the last four years. However, if someone more charismatic and glittering emerges in the next two years, we'll support that candidate and Harris will have to step aside.

It's not going to be Harris, Whitmer, Shapiro, Newsom, Beshear, or any of the names are constantly mentioned. The nominee will end up being someone that no one is talking about now.

When’s the last time a dark horse candidate won the Dem nomination, R198? Everybody in recent memory was someone already on our radar.

Obama.

Bill Clinton was not the favorite in the years leading up to the ‘92 election. Jimmy Carter was even more of a dark horse.

[quote]All she had to do is run on her record and Trump's, the killer of 600k American's, record.

Oh please.

She needed to say "Look, we all know Biden sucks. That's why I replaced him."

If you do not believe that Trump's failed and fucked Pandemic Response policies didn't KILL AMERICANS, then please go fuck yourself, r202.

What she need to do is become governor of California so we can just leave this garbage can ass country. Only Washington and Oregon are welcomed to join us.

[quote]If you do not believe that Trump's failed and fucked Pandemic Response policies didn't KILL AMERICANS, then please go fuck yourself,

Per percentage of the population, Covid deaths in the US were on par with the UK and Italy. And taken as a whole (per population) US deaths were not much more than the European Union.

I wonder if the name "Kamala" hurt her. Curious what a name like Elizabeth or Susan or Mary or Joanie or Nancy would have done for her?

R207 A different name probably wouldn't have helped her.

Joanie for President!

I want whoever has the greatest chance of winning to run. As much as I like Kamala, I don't think she's it.

Obama won twice, and Hillary won the popular vote. So stop with this antiquated "straight white male" nonsense. How old are some of you, 100?

Kamala did extremely well for someone who had a couple of months to campaign. Had she had longer, she would have won hands down. Blame Biden for fucking that up.

[quote]which is why if Biden were reelected, he would have made building her brand paramount.

He sabotaged her his first term, but he would have done an about face and made Kamala his priority for the second? Yeah, right.

And Biden would have lost in a landslide had he run again. Many democrats were not voting for him. But they voted for Harris.

[quote]Joanie for President!

I LOVE HER!!!

R207 Doubtful

[quote] Kamala did extremely well for someone who had a couple of months to campaign. Had she had longer, she would have won hands down.

She definitely was running against history. Had she won, she would have been the first Democratic vice president to immediately succeed his or her president since 1836. And I bet Andrew Jackson's "approval ratings" were greater than Joe Biden's.

Now that she doesn't a billion dollars on name recognition, she needs to run for the next 4 years.

She needs to kick ass over the midterms.

If Trump can run in his shitty brand for 8 years, Kamala can prosecute his ass in public for the next 4.

We’ll see how she does in the Dem primaries. She’ll have to have new ideas to get voters to support her. She won’t have billions of dollars in the bank and be running against Trump.

There will be no more appetite for Kamala redux than there was for popular vote winner Hillary. This is not the 1950s.

^ Oops.

I don’t think that I have it in me to vote again for a president. Done with politics.

We can arrange for that, R219.

On CNN: Former President Bill Clinton blaming the culture wars for Vice President Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton’s presidential race loss, predicting the first woman president will likely be a Republican.

And your point is? Clinton was wrong about liberalism and he's wrong about this.

And you know Clinton is wrong about this, which has not happened yet , exactly how?

The NYT has another excellent article about what’s happened to the Democratic base. The groups that switched to Trump were voters 18 to 29 and non white voters without college degrees. It points to the 2022 midterms as the turning point. That’s when Congressional losses in NY gave Congress to the Republicans. I remember posting then that crime was a big issue and that unless Dems addressed it, they would lose elections. I got incredible pushback…it was worse back in the day, crime wasn’t so bad, NY would never vote for Republicans, who cares if everything at CVS was under lock and key.

Well you were wrong and I was right! And 2022 set the blueprint for 2024. so I want to congratulate myself for being amazing,

[quote] Clinton was wrong about liberalism

You must be too young to remember how adrift the Democrats were pre-Clinton. Not only had they lost three straight presidential elections - five of the last six - but they had been drubbed in each of them. The same was expected in '92, leading many would-be presidential hopefuls to sit out that year.

We’re pretty adrift now. It almost seems like they fucked up on purpose.

[quote] She’ll have to have new ideas to get voters to support her.

Or spend two years tearing Trump apart before she compiles her NEW agenda. Democrats do not need to reinvent themselves.

The old-fashioned spending money on Americans for healthcare and social security and child care subsidies, is enough.

Plus, she can go further with real immigration reform when Trump implodes. Same with gun safety.

Plus prosecuting Trump.

R227 and saving democracy. You should not forget saving democracy along with charging trump because all can see what a winning approach that has been so far.

And guns. I can’t think of a better way to under cut trumps support than to go after guns.

I bet you are a California liberal?

There will be a proper primary to sort it out.

I afraid to trust the Democrats again. As much as I despise the Republicans, I can only hold the Democrats in medium esteem.

[quote] For all the claims of buyers regret, Trump's approval rating - as it was during the campaign - is still much greater than it was in his first administration. In the last week, he was at 54%.

Voters approve of Trump transition by a 59%-41% margin.

I support taking anybody telling the Democrats how they lost 2024 and dunking them in a large vat of hydrochloric acid.

Americans are racist idiots. They were fed a torrent of absolute horseshit on the Dem candidate and they believed it.

R231 how then do you account for the fact that someone on DL read some comments on the Internet from a few trump supporters that were not totally happy?

And as R232 points out the dems had the winning campaign but the American voters stole it from them with racism. Although that racism did not stop so many black and Hispanic voters from fleeing the party and supporting the trump.

I blame the gop and the american voters for trumps victory. It was certainly not the Dems fault. A perfect effort.

File this comment under lesson learned for 2028.

R233, too many Democratic voters sat it out, especially in the swing states, to exempt them from fault.

R234 guess I must brush up on my tongue in cheek posts.

Yes the Dems did not show up in enough numbers. Their actions spoke almost as loud as those many American voters that decided to vote for trump. America decided it was not going to be Harris .

Maybe Harris did not have a perfect effort?

And the way back to democratic victory can’t be as idiotic as just calling everyone who votes against the Dems a racist. That is beyond stupid and an approach that a party might take that wants to get a lot smaller.

[quote] And the way back to democratic victory can’t be as idiotic as just calling everyone who votes against the Dems a racist.

Calling half the country Nazi supporters turned out not to be a winning move either.

[quote] the vice president has been instructing advisers and allies to keep her options open — whether for a possible 2028 presidential run, or even to run for governor in her home state of California in two years. As Harris has repeated in phone calls, “I am staying in the fight.”

She was humiliated in this election. What makes anyone believe that she will be successful in 2028? Her presidential run is dead! Just give it up already.

She should run for Governor and bow out of Presidential politics. She could be a future AG in someone else’s Administration.

Get somebody new and young to be the nominee. Clinton and Obama were both in their 40s when they won big.

This is because people were fired up for her and it’s basically absurd that Trump got elected over her. I mean, come on, I don’t need to elaborate I don’t think why that’s a ridiculous outcome.

As time goes on, we will move on. It might be Newsom or even Pete.

[quote] She should run for Governor and bow out of Presidential politics.

I would hope - & expect - that she would pull herself out of the '28 presidential race if she were to become a candidate for governor. To run for president after elected governor would require her to start running mere months after being inaugurated as governor.

She’s tainted now from having lost to Trump. The Trump stench never washes off.

No we don’t trust us … you couldn’t beat a convicted treasonous 77 year old - you lost, move on write a book, host a podcast whatever!

Kamala is keeping quiet and hasn't mentioned anything which is smart. She's a class act.

Hillary was the same way. Never wallowed in self pity. She got up and kept moving. She was nothing but a picture of grace and she didn't even really lose.

[quote]along with charging trump because all can see what a winning approach that has been so far.

He has to be bankrupt and thrown in jail, first. If Trump weren't so rich, he would be rotting in jail as we speak. As we can see, Trump gets to play catch me now because his cash has allowed time to delay.

Who knows, he might be one of those exdictators who take it on the lam and die in exile.

Mark Cuban/Andy Beshair

Mark Cuban/Gavin Newsom

I mean that's the only recognizable billionaire we have on our side

Pritzker

Trump is never going to end up in prison. The best we can hope for is that he suffers a debilitating stroke and is left wheelchair bound and spends the last years of his life in agony.

Well I want Mayor Pete to sit on my face and wiggle, but that's not going to happen either.

It’s all so sad and unfair. I’m sixty years old and I feel like I’m in high school and not understanding how I failed at math. Because I don’t understand what happened.

[quote]Hillary was the same way. Never wallowed in self pity. She got up and kept moving. She was nothing but a picture of grace and she didn't even really lose.

She didn't waste any time detailing who she blamed for her loss.

R250 = Chasten

I doubt she has any interest in running for POTUS again.

[quote] There will be no more appetite for Kamala redux than there was for popular vote winner Hillary. This is not the 1950s.

I know you know that Kamala Harris received 8 million more votes than HRC. Harris' loss was not because she was disliked or made missteps (like HRC). The nation is in turmoil and she was tainted by Biden.

That is before Trump mounted his 4 year candidacy.

Trump has changed the rules,

R254, it’s been said that formaldehyde is the only cure for presidential fever.

R255, Kamala’s presence in the ‘28 race wouldn’t scare off any potential opponent. Reminiscent of ‘72, when Humphrey tried unsuccessfully to reclaim his ‘68 nomination. At least Humphrey, with his long record in public life, could lay claim to a particular constituency. Kamala cannot. Her most basic claim to higher office is her affiliation with an unpopular president.

There are just too many low information people in the country who just viewed her as a San Francisco elite snob. You were never gonna convince them she was anything but. And they have done such a masterful job of demonizing California that they are political national poison.

No they don’t…

R101 Wrong. The Republican’s do not have the Jew hate that festers in the Democratic Party. Jews are players in their end game. The second coming.

No, Mr. Superfluous apostrophe at R261, Jew hate ("the Jews will not replace us") definitely is a feature, not a bug, in today's Trump party. To them, Israel is a mere incidental player in the coming Apocalypse. The faction of the far left that chanted "Genocide Joe" are not Democrats. They did not vote for Harris. And when, at an outdoor April Trump rally in Pennsylvania, these anti-Semitic chants could be heard, Trump stopped himself to not once but twice turn to those around him to say, "They're not wrong." The actual leader of the party subscribing to "Jew hate."

Wealthy white people seldom get what they deserve. But they are white, and most white Americans are completely comfortable with maintaining that status quo. It’s what they’re used to, even if it goes against their best interests.

Hope is dead.

R263, the educated - if not "wealthy" - whites turned out for Harris. They responded to the Liz Cheney overtures. They weren't the problem. Harris lost because traditional Democratic groups, e.g., non-whites, either sat it out or voted for Trump.

[quote] And when, at an outdoor April Trump rally in Pennsylvania, these anti-Semitic chants could be heard, Trump stopped himself to not once but twice turn to those around him to say, "They're not wrong."

The chant was “Genocide Joe”, which is a term the left has used to criticize Biden and which the Trump supporters were mimicking to also criticize Biden. That was specifically to what Trump commented, “They’re not wrong”. I doubt the pro-Israel crowd at the rally meant it the same way as the pro-Palestinian mobs have meant it.

After the civil war splits the US into two territories Kamala will win the blue states just fine.

And the inbred crackers posting here can vote for their favorite straight white male in suburban Dumbfuckistan.

Kamala/Tim Thanksgiving message to supporters:

Gay men are tired of Far Left Democrats running the party and embracing T ideology.. I doubt Kamala learned that lesson. I doubt the DNC learned that lesson.

R268

The gay men I saw make comments in that article were saying just the opposite. They are saying trans was NOT the reason the Dems lost.

Sucha lie Mr. Singer R251. None of the Christian nationalists promoting Israeli elimination of the west bank is pro-Jewish.

[quote]Gay [bold]Quislings[/bold] are tired of Far Left Democrats running the party and embracing T ideology..

Fixed your typo, hon.

You're welcome.

[quote] There are just too many low information people in the country who just viewed her as a San Francisco elite snob. You were never gonna convince them she was anything but. And they have done such a masterful job of demonizing California that they are political national poison.

No. It was sexism and racism. The same reason South Carolina's conservative darling, Nimrata Haley, couldn't beat Trump in their primary. Don't ascribe any reasoned belief system to America's electorate. Two terms of a Black president drove them to insanity. White people are terrified that a person of color will turn the tables, and undermine the privilege and pronounced sense of entitlement they publicly deny but personally relish.

Or maybe that it's just historically very difficult for a vice president to succeed his or her president, especially an unpopular one such as Biden.

[quote] [R101] Wrong. The Republican’s do not have the Jew hate that festers in the Democratic Party. Jews are players in their end game. The second coming.

ISRAEL is a player. Not Jews. All of the imagery of Jesus as a blue-eyed blonde should tip you off that when they say that Jews killed Jesus they mean it. They do indeed hate Jews.

On second thought, one more revision.

[quote]Gay [bold]Nazis[/bold] are tired of Far Left Democrats running the party and embracing T ideology..

[quote] Gay Quislings are tired of Far Left Democrats running the party and embracing T ideology..

That’s an illogical statement. A gay “quisling” would not be tired of it. If anything, they would encourage it, to keep the wing and the issue damaging the party.

I am confused , are the gays that supported the T the quislings , or the gays that are on DL attacking the T now the quislings?

And which group helped to lose the election quicker?

R272, if you believe everything is about race, you should give up, Whites are the majority group and will continue to dominate even as the US becomes a minority majority country. Latinos seem to be aligning with whites. So your world view is defeatist,

I think economics trumps race personally.

I think that the antisemitic college kids and all the trans people are what people think of when they think of the left. That was unbelievably damaging. The transsexuals in jail thing was devastating.

r277, that may change dramatically when Trumpstarts undoing Naturalized American Citizenship.

He has stated he wants to, and you know that means a simple trip to the corrupt Leo/Crow Supreme Court and VOILA, Trump has a new power.

Oops r278 ^^^

Kamalas staff went on Pod Save America......Even THEY didn't know how to deal with the T Ideology.........

The hysterical tranny gestapo did more damage to this country’s social consciousness than liberals will ever admit to.

NO they didn't R283. They haven't changed since 1971.

The Democrats’ full-on embrace of all things Tranny with no-pushback allowed is what turned people against them.

None of us may live to see a truly liberal progressive WH again. It may swing more right or the George Bush model may now be seen as a liberal govt.

Blaming the Trannies is like blaming Willie Horton.

Wise up to the Advertising and Marketing of the sugarcoated bag of shit known as Donald Trump.

Trannies were just the wedge second class citizens of this election.

You notice that they never went after the solid Gays and Lesbians?

That is why they may go after the Sodomy Laws, but not gay marriage.

Odd how these White Nationalists split all citizens whom they want to make second class.

They really succeeded in turning Latinos against "Illegal Immigrants".

All marketing and advertising to kill minority votes.

R287 = I don't want to fight you. But the T Ideology turned so many voters away, especially gay men. The GOP was successfully able to show off both Harris and her families ties to DM and the rest of the T Community. Then she picks Walz who was not only feminine but pranced around and made his state a T Refuge. [bold] If Kamala had won, EVERY restroom and every sport would have been open to men in dresses to insist they be called MAM---and we all know that's exactly what would have happened. Not to mention taxpayers picking up the tabs on hormone treatments. [/bold] She was trying to force us to go FAR left. No thank you.

No wants to be reminded of losing. That’s why any Harris ‘28 campaign is DOA.

Does anyone seriously think big donors are going to give her any more money?

[quote] Bill Clinton was not the favorite in the years leading up to the ‘92 election. Jimmy Carter was even more of a dark horse.

I think there is a small chance we will see another Bill Clinton or Obama dark horse. I have wondered if Martin Heinrich could be a dark horse, but I doubt most Americans would ever vote for a guy from New Mexico as POTUS.

Not this time, r278. Economics doesn't explain why Trump was the party nominee after his disastrous first term.and 2020 defeat. He leans hard into racism and white nationalism that's why Nimrata, Vivek and Tim Scott couldn't beat him. They have the same substantive economic platform minus the overt racism.

[quote] No wants to be reminded of losing. That’s why any Harris ‘28 campaign is DOA.

Harris didn't lose, we did. It is a very different mood than in 2016. We have been betrayed by our neighbors.

It’s a different mood than in ‘16, R293, because we thought Trump’s election that year was a fluke. Succeeding elections seemed to bear that up. This election, though, showed ‘16 was no fluke.

[quote] Does anyone seriously think big donors are going to give her any more money?

Yes! I remember a long lunch in June with colleagues where we lamented Biden's anticipated loss in November. We discussed the absence of any reasonable alternatives and the likely inevitability of Harris as his replacement with no enthusiasm. We are Californians and were very familiar with her, and her shortcomings as a statesman.

Everything changed when Biden stepped aside and endorsed her. SHE changed. She became a Kamala Harris none of us had seen before. She ignited the base overnight. Big donors threw money at her because they knew she was qualified to be President. She decisively won their only debate -- she terrified him. We were thrilled and we donated time and money to her campaign. Still, it was clear it was uphill. She was unfairly tethered to a deeply unpopular President, who was deeply unpopular even before he was President. Harris had no time to prepare and run a successful campaign. Also, this whole 2024 election cycle was suffocated by Drumpf and his lies as well as his billionaire agents of chaos and disinformation, aided and abetted by media of all political stripes.

I do not rule out that a popular, viable Democratic candidate other than Harris will emerge for the 2028 election cycle. However, I am also excited by how she can overhaul and refine her image and platform in two years. She will be a killing machine without the albatross of Biden around her neck. I get that it's easier to be a pessimist and wallow in self-pity -- or to deride her for irrational reasons -- but Harris can run and win in 2028.

[quote] We have been betrayed by our neighbors.

Actually the Far Left betrayed all of us. They tried to steal the entire DNC. [bold]They used the T Playbook----->>>Shove OUR views into everyones faces. [/bold]That didn't work out so great. I know a lot of gay men who either didn't vote for Kamala or who openly voted for Trump.

Far left twats like AOC and her pals shouldn't be trusted.

[quote] I know a lot of gay men who either didn't vote for Kamala or who openly voted for Trump.

That's no surprise. Some white gay men would be nazis if the nazis would have them (i.e Thiel, Milo, the Cockgobbler, etc.) At the same time, there were Black people who were victims of Dump lies and disinformation, and/or their own homophobia and xenophobia, who also voted against their interests. What was lost on these factions is they will ALWAYS be the main targets of bigotry. Trump's win may have been publicly abetted by an anti-Trans platform but the day after his victory his base was emboldened to show their anti-LGB and anti-Black sentiments as well.

Making the nation safe for the traditional victims of bigotry and demanding equal economic opportunity must always be the cornerstone of the Democratic platform. That is a powerful incentive for the great majority of those who are routinely discriminated against to align with Democrats.

I’m disappointed in the Democratic leadership. Heads should be rolling right now. But they won’t be. Because they are not concerned with the needs of their constituents. It’s all about power and favors and cushy jobs and rimming corporate donors. Fuck all of them on both sides.

What happened the day after his victory that was anti gay and anti black? There has been pushback to DEI for awhile. It wasn’t a surprise to black voters that MAGA is against it?

Big NYT story today about how Harris lost so many Dem voters in big blue cities. Blacks in Atlanta and especially Latinos in NY, Los Vegas and Houston did not come through. Dems have to address this and not by the usual insults that they’re all racists and Nazis.

..Las Vegas.. add Arabs in Detroit to that mix.

[quote] Dems have to address this and not by the usual insults that they’re all racists and Nazis.

Or just let the inevitable Trump shitshow take center stage.

R303 translated

We have no chance to bring them back with our Dem policies let’s wait for the GOP led country to crash and burn because that is our only chance now,

And what range of proposals did Trump offer voters that would reduce the price of groceries, R304?

Kamala needs to start her campaign on January 20, 2025, by prosecuting the tRump presidency - she's really good at that. Unlike other former Presidents that fade out of the limelight, tRump did none of that. I think I saw it noted up thread that he was running through the entire Biden presidency and that was entirely true. Why should Kamala be any different - and there would no longer be a connection to the Biden presidency either.

Please, stop with the Kamala '28 talk. We're not going back.

[quote] What happened the day after his victory that was anti gay and anti black? There has been pushback to DEI for awhile. It wasn’t a surprise to black voters that MAGA is against it?

I spent too much time on social media. The comment sections of EVERY post on X, IG and Youtube were littered with the most vile racist and homophobic vitriol I've read since this time in 2016. I don't recommend it.

Those most up in arms about DEI hires don't seem to have any qualms about the lack of relevant qualifications of so many of Trump's post-election nominees. Quelle surprise.

R406, Trump changed the parameters. Kamala can run for 5 years if Trump ran for 10.

Plus,it will take a high profile Candidate to rub Trump's shit in his face. I would like her to give the State if the Union rebuttal as well. Don't think of it as a campaign but accountability counter programming.

Never forget, we are running against Trump, Congressional Republicans, White Christian Nationalists AND Fox, Newsmax and OAN.

^^^r306, oops

No.

[quote] Never forget, we are running against Trump, Congressional Republicans, White Christian Nationalists AND Fox, Newsmax and OAN.

And yet somehow, Kamala still lost. When you have a knife that won’t even cut through soft butter, it’s time to look at the knife.

Fetterman, Pete B or Ritchie Torres should give the Dem rebuttal. Someone who won't say the usual predictable pablum.

[quote] Or just let the inevitable Trump shitshow take center stage.

Indeed. A Trump term unencumbered by a plan, experience, knowledge, temperament, restraint or antagonism is our greatest strength for victory in 2028.

[quote] Never forget, we are running against Trump, Congressional Republicans, White Christian Nationalists AND Fox, Newsmax and OAN.

...and X, 'bro' podcasts, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC.

[quote] And yet somehow, Kamala still lost. When you have a knife that won’t even cut through soft butter, it’s time to look at the knife.

Oh, honey...it only appeared to be soft butter to the uninitiated and naive. That butter churned for ten years. But hey, if you have a knife that can cut it, we're all ears.

Needs to be two straight white guys - at least one with military service.

I disagree with the poster who said the Democrats need to become "more butch". That is heterosexist bullshit.

Nobody wants this.

Beyonce is the best option.

I was not initially a Kamala fan, but she grew on me and I happily voted for her (I admired Joe, but his best days are far behind him—they may have been over halfway through his term). But, Nixon aside (please), it’s rare for someone who’s lost the presidential election once to win later. I think it would take Trump and Vance fucking up the country even more than I expect them will for Kamala to win in 228, even as an anyone-not-Republican candidate.

Josh Shapiro will crush her in a primary.

r322, not with two years of hard campaigning against Trump.

I'm not seeing the election appeal of Josh Shapiro.

Only the worst possible candidates could lose to Trump. Despite proving that in 2016, Democrats in 2024 were gung-ho about doing it again. Will Democrats again pull from the bottom of their reservoir in 2028?

Trump would have crushed any dem this year with “ maybe” the exception of one or two guys who cannot run again.

The Dems are now the minority party. And the Dems only hope for 2028 is a massive fuck up for the country.

And even then when things turn bad it’s often the enemies from within that are blamed and hunted. ,

In some ways the Dems in 2024 are now like the German army in March 1945 planning massive counter attacks to turn things around. While many officers are planning to kill other German officers as traitors

Many Dems do not realize how the country at this moment is not with them,

Fortunately, R326, we’re a two-party system. And we’re living through a worldwide phenomenon where the people are unhappy & booting the in-party out every chance they get. It’s now the Republicans time in the barrel.

To my point, Tom Friedman, writing about "the coming A.I. storm," recently noted the following:

[quote] President-elect Trump, if you think blue-collar workers without college degrees are facing challenges today, wait until four years from now.

In addition to all the much talked about anticipated horrors of the next four years, we will have the most anti-science administration in modern history. With the explosion of A.I., what could possibly go wrong?!

Are you suggesting the Dems don’t have significant problems to fix and we just got caught up in a world wide shift R327 ?

We are a two,party system. And once the GOP won 6 straight presidential elections. The Dems had a 28 year long run of wins of their own.

Not counting the FDR and Truman run.

And often in history when things did turn really bad it was almost never the moderates that were turned to fix things. Often they turn much harder Right.

And other times they turn really harder Left as they did in 1917.

I believe that the country has changed it’s just a question of how.

GQP has their special weapon: Miss Lindsey. The media loves her, and anchors and reporters won’t dare ask her a hardball question.

R329, we haven't had three consecutive close presidential elections since the 19th century. So I don't see this election as a referendum on either party. We're just a very divided country.

She’d better not. I am weary of the current Democratic leadership. It’s their self seeking and mercenary ways that played a role in what we’re facing now.

The MAGAs are not going to commit the same mistake that the North made.

They are going to crush the Democratic Party to protect their Capitalist overlords.

Wonder when they are going to realize they have OWNED THEMSELVES.

By 2026 or by 2046 or 2054 at the latest.

None of us know for sure R333

[QUOTE] In some ways the Dems in 2024 are now like the German army in March 1945 planning massive counter attacks to turn things around.

MARY.

[QUOTE] But, Nixon aside (please), it’s rare for someone who’s lost the presidential election once to win later.

Um, are you forgetting that Trump lost in 2020 and then won?

All the more reason for Kamala to keep in the public eye.

Oh she's in the Eye, honey. Did you see her Thanksgiving speech?

R336, an advantage Trump had, apart from running against a vice president of a very unpopular president, is that he already had been president. And as is often the case with former presidents, his presidency was viewed more favorably in the rear view mirror. Having never been president, Harris would not have that advantage.

Biden was SOLD as a "very unpopular" president, even though he fixed Trump's economy.

Funny that when you have a Fox-Advertizing/Marketing/Analytics machine with a client of ONE, you CAN sell a bag of Trump sugarcoated shit.

Biden was the most successful President since Johnson. And MAGA wants to erase all of Johnson's progress.

[quote]Biden was the most successful President since Johnson.

So succesful he handed over the country to Trump by not keeping his word that he was limiting his Presidency to one term.

Biden was the most disliked President in decades.

And that perception had nothing to do with Fox News.

[quote]by not keeping his word that he was limiting his Presidency to one term.

Can someone give me the link to this? Did Biden say he was a transition President and everyone took it to mean one term when he really didn't say that? Like Harris being a Border Czar when it was FOX who said that. I keep hearing it, but is this just another repeated lie that MAGA wants taken as fact?

[quote] Biden was the most successful President since Johnson

This is a frequently repeated cliche but it is absurd. Nixon, Reagan, and Obama all had much broader and influential policy achievements than Biden. No policy Biden enacted will be remembered or substantially affect the lives of the general public.

[quote] by not keeping his word that he was limiting his Presidency to one term.

[quote] Can someone give me the link to this? Did Biden say he was a transition President and everyone took it to mean one term when he really didn't say that?

There will be no link because he never said he intended to be a one-term president. But some people took his statement that he would be a transitional figure to mean he would not run for a second term.

Not Fox News. It was the conservative blogosphere R341. They were absolutely rabid, as were the preachers.

[quote]No policy Biden enacted will be remembered or substantially affect the lives of the general public.

I have a feeling that Harris will fully explain The TWO TRILLION DOLLAR, ARPA and PPP Trump Recovery Plans that only Democrats voted for.

They are the reason people stood around with thumbs up their asses wondering why they weren't feeling the recovery. YOU KEPT YOUR JOBS ASSHOLES!

Significant Biden policies that were not hi lighted because of the HORRIFIC rise in the price of eggs,

R336. But he had already won once (like Cleveland).

[quote]There will be no link because he never said he intended to be a one-term president. But some people took his statement that he would be a transitional figure to mean he would not run for a second term.

It was certainly implied.

"So Biden never explicitly made a one-term promise during the campaign, but he certainly implied it with the language of “transition.” You don’t typically think of eight years in office as a “transition.” And he had surrogates talking to their pals in the press planting the seeds of a single term, for a Democratic electorate that never saw Biden as their first choice, just as an acceptable consensus pick to take out the hated incumbent." - The Hill 06/13/24

And this from Politico:

[quote]It was certainly implied.

Implications are like assumptions...

They are never true until proven true.

If it was implied, why was there not a groundswell of opposition to his candidacy? Why did no major candidate at least launch an exploratory committee?

And who ever defined a transition as only 4 years not 2 or 8 years ?

r350, exactly. Nobody in the Democratic Party pulled a Teddy Kennedy when they had the chance.

OK, more MAGA propaganda. Just like Harris was the Border Czar when she wasn't.

Got it.

[quote] Nobody in the Democratic Party pulled a Teddy Kennedy when they had the chance.

Dean Phillips tried.

Who? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

There were many warning signs.

First, the 2020 Democratic primary veered so far to the left that it seemed to be a cartoon. In particular, Elizabeth Warren destroyed anyone who could actually win votes. And this - with the George Floyd protests - is what many Trump voters see as the Democratic Party.

Second, Biden made a selfish deal to secure the nomination quickly. Not only did he commit to a black female VP, but he chose one that he didn’t trust with power. Real bright when you are pushing 80.

Third, running for a second term when it was clear he wouldn’t win and would be lucky to still be alive.

Of course, Trump is now following nearly the same playbook.

The Democratic Party never veered so far left. That was all MAGA Propaganda.

Except for the .6% of American trannies and MAGA hating us for not stomping on them like kittens, ther was no extremee.

Economic policies were solid.

Trump fucked the best border bill since Reagan's amnesty.

But the EGGS!!!

[quote] Second, Biden made a selfish deal to secure the nomination quickly. Not only did he commit to a black female VP, but he chose one that he didn’t trust with power. Real bright when you are pushing 80.

What in earth is wrong with choosing a black woman?

What vice-president other than Cheney has had any power whatsoever?

Elizabeth Warren proposed fairly extensive changes to our economy, supported by a legally dubious wealth tax that her own party would not have supported. She wanted the secretary of the perhaps soon to be defunct Department of Education to be some one who met the approval of a young trans student.

I didn’t ssy anything was wrong with a black female VP. The problem is that Biden didn’t think she was qualified to hr president, which was one reason he insisted on staying in the race.

R358. My God. Biden confided to you his reasons for running again? Please, tell us more.

I think it’s case closed on Warren taking the county far left. Well researched and argued!

[quote] What vice-president other than Cheney has had any power whatsoever?

How soon they forget.

[quote]And who ever defined a transition as only 4 years not 2 or 8 years ?

You're being disingenuous. A transitional President would imply one term. Not completing a term and running again.

[quote]OK, more MAGA propaganda. Just like Harris was the Border Czar when she wasn't.

“She is the most qualified person to lead our efforts with Mexico and the Northern Triangle in stemming the movement of so many folks to our southern border," Joe Biden March 24, 2021

Note the words: to LEAD our efforts. She was appointed the leader.

"Czar" is not, and never has been an official position, it is a moniker. And it was applied to Harris in 2021 regarding the border.

"Several media organisations, including the BBC, described Ms Harris as a “tsar” in news reports." - BBC 13 August 2024

Imply to you. To me it implies a transition from one thing to another with something in the middle.

Donors will not be enthused about backing her for President again.

Says you.

Were Republicans held hostage?

Cut with the nonseense. Kamala ran a great campaign. It's a problem when you're running not against a political party but a criminal mob who will say ANYTHING to get elected and who have learned how to k eep their followers isolated from the truth. Kamala ran as the only candidate with a positive message who can unite everyone. What we needed of course was a laser-focus on the corruption of the Republicans and Trump specifically, but it still would not have worked. You have to separate the cultists from their daily reinforcement for that to work.

R365 You're over-estimating how much of Trump's support was the whackadoos. A big chunk were people who didn't care about all of the controversy over Trump, or actually enjoyed watching the incumbent party work itself into a froth.

"I'm voting for Trump because Fuck You Dems!"

Yes, if Trump actually burned the country to the ground, you might have some of his supporters "get it", but would it really be worth it?

Laser focus on corruption…NO. Focus on people’s actual concerns..inflation, crime, culture wars where white men are the enemy…

Take it back.. once Trump and Company start stealing and rigging the system again people will notice that.

Correction to the title: The majority of Democrats do NOT want Kamala to run again in 2028.

We shall see, r369...

But I do want her to give the response to his SOTU address IF HE GIVES ONE.

No R367 Republican corruption is the enemy. They are literally worse than the politicians in Argentina and Brazil right now, and that's saying a lot.

For 2028, dust off Bernie to run yet again. Those Bern-Bros will then be in their late 40s and early 50s, delivering Pizza and/or working for DoorDash, and still anticipating that free tuition.

Fuck off R31,R36 with your pathetic white male cock sucking. You online bitches aren't fooling anybody. You're Incel MAGA gays.

[quote]No women. No blacks. No LGBTQ. No California.

It's kind of funny: the Democrats consider the US racist and misogynist...so what do they do? They run a black woman for President!

And then they're surprised that she lost.

That's good advice from R36. It's good advice if you want to win next time.

So many filthy people post here.

Biden 2028!! Let's make it happen, people!!

Ritchie Torres/Tammy Duckworth 2028

[quote] Josh Shapiro will crush her in a primary.

I am prepared for ANYONE to crush her in a primary. I want Dems to find a candidate who generates excitement in the base. Despite our optimism and best intentions it never happens. That's how we ended up with Biden in 2020. Biden was fine but he was not liked, even by Democrats. I would not be surprised, or disappointed, if Harris was our candidate in 2028. 4 more years of Trump and his MAGA foolishness will destroy the Republican party's prospects for keeping the White House. With a 4 year long launchpad, Harris can run and win in 2028.

The Dems will choose a black woman to deliver the Dem response to the State of the Union address.

Please god no. Just let white men lead like god intended.

So the Democrats have bigoted cunts in their ranks just like Republicans. Thanks r382.

R381 It will probably be Jasmine Crockett.

"Bleach blonde, bad-built, butch body!" *mic drop*

If Democrats want to take over the brand, Kamala should give the SOTU reply. To keep her, finally, on the offence, like Trump was the last 4 years.

WELCOME TO THE TRANSITION.

[quote] It will probably be Jasmine Crockett.

Democrats probably need to hit rock bottom before they reform, but Crockett isn’t the bottom, so they could do worse.

[quote] If Democrats want to take over the brand, Kamala should give the SOTU reply.

Maybe they could just play her unsettling valedictory video she made for her supporters.

The response to the SOTU address is traditionally delivered by an up-and-coming politician for that party, not failures. As was the theme this year, " We won't go back," you can't have a reminder of the wipeout; it would be a bad look. NO, the response must be done by a white, male. Considering the state of the party, might I suggest Aidan Maese-Czeropski, a man of daring and bold decision making?

No, the brand needs to keep app;lying pressure by ridiculing Trump and his Un-American policies.

[quote] The response to the SOTU address is traditionally delivered by an up-and-coming politician for that party, not failures. As was the theme this year, " We won't go back," you can't have a reminder of the wipeout; it would be a bad look. NO, the response must be done by a white, male.

Sarah McBride checks all the boxes, and she’s someone that inspires Democrats.

Ritchie Torres or Fetterman (if he’s capable of giving a speech.)

Or Bernie for the fun of it. I know he’s not really a Dem.

[quote]I do not rule out that a popular, viable Democratic candidate other than Harris will emerge for the 2028 election cycle. However, I am also excited by how she can overhaul and refine her image and platform in two years. She will be a killing machine without the albatross of Biden around her neck. I get that it's easier to be a pessimist and wallow in self-pity -- or to deride her for irrational reasons -- but Harris can run and win in 2028.

She can and I think she would have a shot. She ran a great campaign this time, it wasn't her fault that Biden stayed in place so long.

There will of course be a robust primary season, and whoever wins will be the candidate. Harris is just as good as anyone to participate, let her compete and see.

The "It has to be a straight, white, midwestern man" nonsense needs to stop. We heard that about Kamala's VP pick and it gave us Tim Walz, who was dull as dishwater and brought nothing to the ticket.

[quote] Sarah McBride checks all the boxes, and she’s someone that inspires Democrats.

A part of me would love for this to happen because it would make Nancy Mace have a meltdown.

[quote]Sarah McBride checks all the boxes, and she’s someone that inspires Democrats.

Agree. It will definitely be the Tranny.

Sad not one Dem name that strikes a cord or gets anyone actually excited,

“ so they could do worse”

seems to be about where the Dems are.

We already have a Billion Dollars invested in HALF of a Kamala Harris Campaign.

She needs to laugh at Trump all the way to the midterms.

R368 is Susan Collins

Kamala should have chosen Josh Shapiro. I supported her and voted for her but she is always so canned with her responses. Her speeches were very repetitive. Her campaign management was horrible too. So many poor decisions, She could have won.

R401 Increasingly I think she wanted Shapiro but they knew she couldn’t win. Actually I know he was the top pick. Somehow it fell through though.

Didn’t Shapiro’s oversized imagining of his role in a Harris Administration make his pick impossible?

[quote]Didn’t Shapiro’s oversized imagining of his role in a Harris Administration make his pick impossible?

Even the people who vetoed Shapiro for being Jewish knew that wouldn't sell well, thus the need to create stories like the one you mention as cover.

I’m still depressed about Kamala. It’s not going to happen. We need a hot straight white man with a wife and young kids.

R405 Yes, with thick dick face and proven fertility - we'll all want to spread our legs and take him inside us.

It’s sad but true. I just wish they had picked Gavin instead of Kamala. I don’t know why Gavin wants to wait until 2028 to run.

I am so heartbroken and angry about all of this. I trust no politician, news pundit/talking heads or any of the news outlets. They handed the election to TURD like a virgin island girl to the volcano.

R407 the sad sad losers lament.

It’s a universal cry by those who have been crushed in life . Life is unfair.

If Gavin had run Harris would still have a political future.

R408 has really bad breath.

Shapiro is all in for 2028. It’s better he’s not tainted with the stink of losing to Dump.

That stench you smell covers the entire party. We were just not that popular. Harris was just the one to take the actual beating.

It’s very possible the Dems will be less prepared for 2028, less liked, less important, more fringe and the gop doing quite well.

And please I don’t want to hear from anyone that says I am wrong if they were promising a Harris win a few short weeks ago.

Miss Miss Lindz will do anything to suck [up to] Trump.

Trump is now walking back some of his harsher campaign rhetoric and even co-opting some of the more popular Democratic ideas, such as offering citizenship to "Dreamers" and those here in the US for lengthy periods of time.

He's so desperate to be liked and popular, look to him to try more of this type of thing, even at the expense of angering some of his rabid base. It could bring him cross-over appeal, and make it more difficult for Dems to gain a foothold in 2026/8.

Trump’s appeal is a cult of personality. There’s no one else who will fire up his MAGA base in 2028. DeSatan tried to copy him and failed miserably. Jaydine Vance is a total dud too.

r413, no, he is deflecting to wishful thinking before he lowers his cruel cudgel again.

Trump only cares about himself. He has no empathy and everything is a cold, calculated move.

THEY ARE EATING THE DOGS!

She ain't going away. They just never learn.

See R257, R416.

^ Or vice-versa.

Don’t knock Harris she is as important to the dem future as Al Gore is today.

Al Gore was always a big liar and hponey. In 1984 he made numerous antigay comments to get elected.

I am starting to hate the Democrats as much as I hate the Republicans, and that’s saying a lot. Self serving pricks and grifters, the lot of them.

R420 we agree then that Harris and Gore have the same position of power in the dem party today. And have the same national future.

Lissen. If the enemy can convince us, using the media, that Kamala Harris is damaged goods, not qualified, not good enough , they win. Kamala Harris is a powerhouse. She was an amazing candidate. Look how they bullied and trashed Biden. The psych ops game is to make you feel embarrassed that you'd even consider someone like her. It's a peer pressure kind of thing. The Republicans have repeatedly shown us that they can serve us a plate of shit, and convince people it is Prime Rib. It is about messaging. Searching for a candidate is bullshit. And they there are the dumbasses in the media who sit there discussing "policy." It's not about policy. It is about manipulating voter behavior. We have got to start a massive re education program, to stop people from voting against themselves.

Harris had a dismal primary showing in 2016. Was she an amazing candidate then? I agree her campaign was much better than I expected. Still Dems stayed home compared to 2020 so how amazing was she? A massive re-education program? She had billions of dollars to spend. and couldn't get the job done.

[quote] Al Gore was always a big liar and hponey. In 1984 he made numerous antigay comments to get elected.

It was 1984! It was in Tennessee!

[quote]Kamala Harris is a powerhouse. She was an amazing candidate.

So amazing she couldn't beat the convicted felon. Even after blowing through well over a billion dollars. That how AMAZING she was.

R424 I don’t believe they stayed home. Why were the lines so long. Either cyber hacking or and I’m leaning towards the latter, something fishy went down with 2020

R427, family and friends have derided me for saying that the election was rigged but I still think it’s possible. But if anyone on the left says that, then the MAGATS will say that they are lying, just like we accused them of lying.

We’re fucked. There is no coming back from this. My retirement, like a lot of others, is going to be rough. We don’t have enough democrats to fight for us. Not that they care. Their pensions will be paid and they will survive this uncertain future. They will give themselves raises like they always do.

there aren't going to be any more presidential elections but if things go better than they should the dems are absolutely suicidal if they choose anything but a moderate liberal populist (in the usa this is called extreme radical left wing marxism/communism)

r429 bernie sanders is a moderate liberal for example - aoc is great but she'll die on the trans hill and many other petty things perceived as 'woke' and fussy by the general public. i mean in comparison to trump i'd be thrilled with joe manchin or mitt romney. what concerns me is that there isn't a younger democrat emerging that is in the sanders wing economically who similarly to bernie isn't preoccupied with identity issues that americans have clearly rejected. not one that's obvious to me anyway.

MAGA and Progressive's coming together linking arms as brothers in like political though one sure the 2020 election was stolen and the other sure that the 2024 election was stolen. Not both.

Good lord saying both were stolen would make you a both sides being equal troll.

Losers just can’t believe they lost. I understand I still do not believe that Villanova beating GT in the finals ever actually happened.

r430 AOC has already dropped her pronouns from her social media profile/s. She seems to be moving towards a more centrist stance on trans issues. She has been very slowly moving away from the hard left stances over the past year or so - she isn't as chummy with the "Squad" as she used to be, either.

She has her eyes on bigger things than being the pesky young popular radical liberal in Congress. She wants Committee Chairs, and possibly the Speaker's seat in the future. She knows she has to move mainstream in order to achieve this.

R432 The squad was nervous as shit they were going to lose their seats to primaries like that midwestern sista who seem to care about more Palestine then the constituents in her own fucking district, all while lining her husband’s pockets via nepotism.

r422, had Gore had known what his largess had created he might not have been so easy to relinquish power.

Harris had a BILLION dollars placed in her run for President. It amounted to a Trump first term in terms of running on a record.

The Murdoch Propaganda Machine is thirsty in sending her to the bins of history, but she has a record to run on and Trump, or his successor, only has destruction. She was a great candidate in 2020, and that was the reason Biden picked her for VP. She is the face of Multicultural America. SHe4 needs to give the SOTU response as a salvo that she is not going away. I am waiting to see what the balances on the Harris Presidential Campaign is end of this quarter.

She needs to start endorsing Democrats for the 2026 midterms.

Dems

Dead men walking

many Dems not smart enough to realize that.

r436, keep saying that and maybe more MAGAs will believe it.

MAGA don’t need to believe it the Dems do. Fuck last time I checked maga won the senate, the WH, the House and owns the courts.

The maga don’t have to believe shit.

See you at the midterms, r438.

And MAGA does believe in shit.

Let's get a grip. It's not as if Trump the Sequel will be any more popular than the original.

Harris-Waltz 2028 they are the future. They are the best. Hang tough.

If there was some way to pressure Chief John Roberts to resign, Biden ought to appoint Kamala Chief Justice of SCOTUS. He could get Senate approval for it if he does it now. Before January 3rd.

Why stop at Roberts, R442? If you’re engaging in idle wishcasting, why not think about getting the five other conservatives to resign, too?

[quote]Yet despite her manifest intelligence and poise, Harris revealed few instincts for how to climb out of that hole. In an election in which she was running to succeed an unpopular president, she struggled to articulate what, if anything, she would do differently as president. The defining theme of the campaign was Americans’ negative feelings about the economy — that, despite cooling inflation, everything still felt too expensive. But Harris lacked a clear economic message that reflected an understanding of the cost-of-living crisis.

She ran a great campaign under extremely challenging circumstances, if she had more than 107 days and Democrats hadn’t been doing a month of circular firing squad before that then she might have pulled it off. The fact she came so close shows you her talent and charisma. It’s not a bad idea for her to run again, although I’d make Buttigieg the VP pick next time.

The only other prominent Dems (as of this moment) I see as viable 2028 contenders are Whitmer or Wes Moore. It will NOT be Newsom no matter how much he wants it or how much Nancy Pelosi keeps trying to crown him king. It’s also not going to be Shapiro unless the far left is totally crushed before then.

[quote] She has her eyes on bigger things than being the pesky young popular radical liberal in Congress. She wants Committee Chairs, and possibly the Speaker's seat in the future. She knows she has to move mainstream in order to achieve this.

If Dems ever get control of the House, AOC will never get the Speaker's seat. She still has plenty of enemies within the Dem party. Not all centrist or liberal Dems will buy into her bullshit or "sudden change".

[quote] The only other prominent Dems (as of this moment) I see as viable 2028 contenders are Whitmer or Wes Moore. It will NOT be Newsom no matter how much he wants it or how much Nancy Pelosi keeps trying to crown him king. It’s also not going to be Shapiro unless the far left is totally crushed before then.

Shapiro could win a primary, but he would lose in a general election. Same with Whitmer.

Maybe, Wes Moore would have a chance with Ruben Gallego or Elissa Slotkin as a running mate.

R447 Shapiro won’t even win a primary as long as far leftists are poised to spin the one month he spent on a kibbutz as a teen into him being an IDF mercenary. It’s the major reason he was never a real contender for the VP slot this time around.

That may not be such a big factor next time around but we’ll see.

Not mad at the other ticket combos you suggested.

[quote] The only other prominent Dems (as of this moment) I see as viable 2028 contenders are Whitmer or Wes Moore.

Whitmer is my governor, but there are gonna be a lot of gun shy Dems, myself included, about nominating a woman in '28. I would include Raphael Warnock on the list.

Pritzker is too rich. Look at hoow they slammed John Kerry. They love it when they run against an elite.

Keep playing their game. Keep being guided by the pundits and Media assholes. I'm going to keep repeating my mantra. It has nothing to do with a candidate. It has everything to do with messaging, and strategy, and resources. Learn from the Republicans. They served us shit on a platter and 52% of Americans believed it was Prime Rib. They lie, trick people mislead, sow fear, divide us from one another, and convince people to vote against their own interest. We're the Democrats. We're still practicing politics like it's 1968. It isn't. Policy, issues, qualifications??>Those are the things the media only ever brings up when discussing Democrats.

If trump and the country truly crash and burn I and the next dumbest person on DL could win in 2028

Of course if trump and the country don’t crash and burn or the wmd is found to be Bidens then a combination of FDR and JFK and Obama could not win in 2028.

[quote]Of course if trump and the country don’t crash and burn or the wmd is found to be Bidens then a combination of FDR and JFK and Obama could not win in 2028.

I think starting with the coming term, the pattern of having a party control the White House for two consecutive terms will resume. I expect the Republicans (but not Trump) will win again in 2028, followed by the Democrats in 2032.

Don't be ridiculous R453. Their propaganda machine has already overextended themselves. If the election were held again tomorrow, they would lose.

I don’t know what the blocked R453 posted, R454, buy you really are in a bubble. Trump’s popularity numbers have never been higher.

It really depends a lot on who the Republican candidate is. The biggest problem the Dems had this time around is the campaign was run by Obama staffers who insisted upon running like they were up against McCain when the party of McCain is dead. They weren’t dealing with their actual opponent.

I don’t see Vance as a strong candidate, he was pulled along by the Trump cult.

A lot also depends on whether the oligarchs running the GOP manage to tank the economy quickly, and how quickly. It is what they want, but if they are smart and patient they will do it slowly (they’re not that smart or patient though).

R456 They weren’t dealing with their actual opponent.

👏 👏 👏

I keep hearing people say, "If only Biden had dropped out sooner," or "If only we'd had a primary or an open convention..." It wouldn't have mattered. First of all the "issues" they used to get into the heads of the voters were "Inflation" and Immigration with a heavy emphasis on crimes committed by immigrants. The Republicans have never stopped complaining about immigration and using fear and division attaching to the issue. The fact that they killed legislation that would have addressed these problems was ignored by voters.

As for inflation, the shills in the media, and even advertisers of products, mentioned inflation a million times for TWO YEARS prior to election day. Adjacent issues were "the economy." So t he Republicans' winning issues were already softening up the voters. They were setting the table. They never, not one time offered solutions or plans to address the problems. But they had Project 2025 ready to roll out. They thought we wouldn't notice. But we did. But it only had a marginal impact.

Unfortunately, they just kept pounding away at their issues. Abortion and Reproductive Rights? That issue had traction for a while. They told us not to worry it was a state issue...because they knew it was hurting them, and voters listened. When Trump and his minions told them abortion rights was no longer a problem, that it was "going away" voters were reassured...by the very people who cause reproductive freedom to be threatened.

As for Joe dropping out earlier? He was always going to endorse Kamala Harris. She was the Vice President. Unless there's a very public reason, you do not step over your vice president. and especially an historically significant Vice President. The Black women voters would have deserted the election. An open convention would have been an opportunity for mischief. Factions in fighting and sabotage would have been a toxic stew. And the deep pockets of Republicans would have had a lot of fun infiltrating and screwing things up. Their friendly media helpers would have trashed the Dems openly. Theoretically a convention always sounds good. Primaries always sound good. But the Republicans and friends would have seen to it that they were destructive.

We need to remember 2020. Remember the primaries. No one emerge as a leader. No one. If Clyburn hadn't taken folks to school and told them it had to be Biden, we would have lost in 2020. Biden was familiar. He was Obama's VP. He was gonna get us through this. And he did. And all the "Thank you, President Biden!" Shit quickly evaporated after about 2 years once the Republican hate machine kicked into gear. He was bullied, mocked, misrepresented and shit on by the Media. The Afghanistan pull out was his disaster. Explaining how Pompeo and Trump set him up was useless. The visuals and the casualties were all people wanted to know.

And finally Elon Musk, Putin's new BFF. His injection of $100 Million in the final days of the campaign, came at just the right time, and his financing, and staffing the GOTV operations and his Starlink, did the rest. Jesus Christ could not have overcome it. So all the people who in hind sight believe we could have won completely missed the point. We were running one kind of campaign, they were running another. We have to do better in understanding how they won. HOW is important. If we don't begin to understand voter behavior and really dissect this campaign properly, no matter who t he candidate is, even Michelle Obama, than we will not win national elections.

She will never succeed in politics again. Our girl is done. She will do well in the private sector.

Blah blah blah.

The country put a man in the White Hous they ALL knew to be mentally ill and mentally incompetent. You haven't explalined that and you certainly haven't explained how that is the Democrats' fault because it isn't.

And Biden wasn't mentally incompetent? And the Dems left him as their candidate until the last minute. Can you explain how that isn't their fault?

If working men were dissatisfied with their lot in '24, just imagine how they'll feel in the next four years when A.I. becomes more of a factor in their lives.

[quote] The Republicans have never stopped complaining about immigration and using fear and division attaching to the issue. The fact that they killed legislation that would have addressed these problems was ignored by voters.

The uproar in NYC and Chicago and other places came from the local residents, mostly Democrats, not Republicans. The residents in those places were able to feel the full effect of open borders, perhaps for the first time. Assuming a voter followed the legislative history of the immigration bills in the last Congress, they would have known that Republicans passed their own bill, HR2, and did not kill their own bill. In light of that, the line that Republicans killed “the” immigration bill didn’t have legs.

[quote] If working men were dissatisfied with their lot in '24, just imagine how they'll feel in the next four years when A.I. becomes more of a factor in their lives.

The first casualties would likely be writers, teachers, and creative types. Working class would be less likely to feel it in the next four years.

The Democrats have consistently owned, and still own, the messaging around "Sanctuary Cities" and the whole associated promotion of mass immigration. The party's been very public and insistent around this.

The Republicans own the messaging around "build the wall," "you have to go back," etc.

Why would an average voter feel the need to delve deeply into legislation history when both parties have been very forward with their messaging? Voters were essentially confronted with two choices: "Sanctuary Cities" or "Send 'Em All Back." Sure, some nuance would have been nice, but voters traditionally don't do nuance. They had those two choices, and they chose the one they hated least.

What I don't get is why the Business leaders and billionaires all love Donald. Or any Republican.. Because the Democrats have historically been better for the economy. The Stock market thrives, and the economy is strong. This was true for Clinton, Obama and Joe Biden. It's the Republicans who wreck the economy.

I wonder if the next Democratic nominee will ever be mentioned on Fox/Marketing/Advertising /Analytics?

Murdoch learned so well, not mentioning TWO BILLION DOLLARS IN DIRECT ASSISTANCE TO AMERICANS.

R466 the Democrats have always tried to do right by the working and middle classes. The Republicans have usually done the bidding of the wealthy. On the surface anyway. It’s seemingly different now. Both sides kowtow to their corporate masters.

That's bullshit to post election bothsiderism.

It is the reason Soros is a known commodity.

And Democrats are losing Corporate Democrats.

Bye bye Sinema, and Manchin.

You should thank Sinema and Manchin for fighting to keep the filibuster. Can you imagine the disasters ahead if Repubs needed a simple Senate majority to pass all their new awful laws.

THANK YOU.

[quote] You should thank Sinema and Manchin for fighting to keep the filibuster.

They were the only two adults in the caucus room.

You are basing an assumption that Democrats would have passed legislation that would have enabled a second Trump Administration.

We will never know.

[QUOTE] Shapiro is all in for 2028. It’s better he’s not tainted with the stink of losing to Dump.

I guess I don't understand how electing yet another Zionist shill to this job is going to effectuate positive change in the nation.

R473 is right! Running a box checker Zio-candidate after four years of Dump? Not what America wants or needs. Democrats never learn anything.

Shapiro is very ambitious but he cannot win. Hate me for this but I want Amy Klobuchar to run with Andy Beshear as her VP.

Sadly, a woman at the top of the ticket is too risky.

Excuse my ignorance but being 3 senators shy of convicting Trump in the Senate, does anyone know if Sinema and Manchin were on board would it have been possible to do a carve out to not require 10 Rep senators to convict or does this apply solely for legislation?

I think I read somewhere that if the Senators were not present and voting then the numbers would change. So technically, the Senate could have voted to impeach Trump and the scaredy cats and cowards could have just chosen not to show up that day and they could have passed it.

I meant CONVICT not"impeach". The House voted to impeach him, but the Senate crapped out.

Not clear about what you’re asking, R477, but I believe all the Democrats, Manchin & Sinema included, along with independents King & Sanders, voted to convict. But conviction requires a 2/3 vote, not a mere 60 votes, so, even with the seven republicans voting to convict, a conviction lacked 10 votes.

I am sick of the Democrats never learn, crap.

Democrats need a Murdoch like megaphone.

MSNBC is to logical and rational.

THEY'RE KILLING GRANDMA. THEY'RE KILLING KIDS EITH CANCER. NOW THEY ARE BRING KILLED.!

Democrats do not know how to fight. They're ridiculous. They need to act like Republicans.

Soros has never been a Democrat. He was largely responsible for W's "career" such as it was. Republicans have historically not done anything on immigration because it lowers wages, which they support. And Trump also supports. During GWB's first term not one employer was prosecuted for hiring illegals. Not one.

[quote]Republicans have historically not done anything on immigration because it lowers wages, which they support. And Trump also supports. During GWB's first term, not one employer was prosecuted for hiring illegals. Not one.

Capitalists love slaves. Nikki Haley said, the Civil War was fought on how the states do business. People need to connect the dots to today's immigration policies. Republicans HATE that slaves, former slaves and brown immigrants have pathways to citizenship and voting.

Plantation owners and Capitalists are still fighting the Lost Cause, which isn't a lost cause to the. 50 years of relocating 1965 is paying off.

Let's see if Trump will succeed in turning the US into Germany, with many generations of permanent residents who do not have the right to vote.

[quoute]Republicans have historically not done anything on immigration

Trump vs Biden

[quote]In normal circumstances, a party that fell short of preventing a crisis like that would be expected to engage in real introspection about what went wrong. Leadership changes would be expected. Like Republicans in the aftermath of 1960 or even 2008, the party would radically re-evaluate the decisions that led to this moment.

[quote]Not so in this Democratic Party, where long-time leaders are trudging forward as if nothing happened. From former Harris campaign staffers dissociating in the press to Capitol Hill leadership elections that reject even the premise that anything should change, Democrats are choosing to close their eyes to structural problems at the top of their party. Accountability, it seems, is for other people.

[quote]That won’t fix anything.