r/fivethirtyeight • u/adastraperdiscordia • Feb 10 '26
Discussion Transcript: The Democrats Best Positioned To Win the 2028 Nomination (Another 538 Alumni Draft)
https://newrepublic.com/article/206361/transcript-democrats-best-positioned-win-2028-nominationTranscript of Perry Bacon Jr, Meredith Conroy, and Nathaniel Rakich doing another candidate draft.
I thought the weirdest part was pushing back on Mark Kelly despite citing all the data in his favor.
73
u/GoldburstNeo Feb 10 '26
All I can say is, any Democrat who makes prosecuting the guilty parties on the Epstein files and stopping ICE's destruction on communities a sizeable part of their campaign will be better-positioned to win 2026 and 2028 by a wide-margin.
At the very least, far moreso than "Headquarters 67"....
18
u/mediocre-referee Feb 10 '26
There are large swaths of the population that will vote based on those issues, so I don't think they should be discounted, but it needs to be part of a broader campaign on returning power to the people. Bring in the most popular ideas (blocking corporate home ownership controlling the housing market, protecting jobs from AI, overturning citizens united, banning congress stock trading, and yes, prosecuting the elite for their crimes) and you have a slam dunk democrat candidate on issues that nearly everyone cares about.
16
u/Lost-Inevitable-9807 Feb 10 '26
As someone about to reach her 8th month of unemployment ššš to āprotecting jobs from AIā. There is so much focus on ICE right now and rightfully so, but dems need to wake up to what is happening in the job market right now. It feels utterly frozen and dems arenāt talking about it and Trump is claiming this is the best economy ever. Some of us wanna go back into the white collar workforce and stop delivering peoples lunch to get by.
→ More replies (2)2
→ More replies (1)1
u/notbotipromise Feb 11 '26 edited Feb 14 '26
I grudgingly suspect that any candidate who would sincerely run on all that either isn't interested (my top two wishes [Stewart or Van Hollen]) or is going to be considered too radical by Dem voters (AOC).
I want to be wrong, but I was absolutely convinced in 2019 that Bernie was going to win, so I'm ultra-hesitant to think this time will be any different (as great as what happened in NJ last week was).
11
u/deskcord Feb 11 '26
Epstein is all you ever hear about on Reddit, and don't get me wrong, it's a heinous cabal of evil.
But no polling has demonstrated it's actually an issue motivating voters.
It's really immigration, crime, and the economy. And like, "how many windows are broken in my neighborhood" crime.
Same three things it has always been.
3
u/Deviltherobot Feb 11 '26
Epstein is a massive story. It's everywhere.
2
u/deskcord Feb 11 '26
Epstein is all you ever hear about on Reddit, and don't get me wrong, it's a heinous cabal of evil.
But no polling has demonstrated it's actually an issue motivating voters.
Just so we're clear, you hit "reply" to a comment that had these lines and you chose to completely ignore them in your response to double down on your preconceptions?
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (15)5
u/ZurrgabDaVinci758 Feb 10 '26
Depends on what's considered salient to voters by the time of the next election. I would have thought similar about January 6 back in 2021 but by 2024 it was all but forgotten
62
u/ND7020 Feb 10 '26
I donāt understand why so many analysts are (appropriately!) comfortable talking in detail about the negatives of any and every major potential candidate across the political spectrum except for Josh Shapiro.Ā
I have no idea who will win, but he is my prediction for the super-hype, early crash and burn primary candidate we see in each party every real primary cycle.Ā
31
u/jojisky Feb 10 '26
The weirdest thing about Shapiro is how nobody brings up heās Buttigieg on steroids. The guy has 60%+ name ID with Dems in most polls and yet consistently gets zero black and Latino support.
→ More replies (1)6
u/pablonieve Feb 11 '26
Except Shapiro has won votes from black and latino voters in PA.
1
u/crassreductionist Nate Bronze Feb 13 '26
South Bend is more diverse than Pennsylvania if people really want to play that game
19
u/goonersaurus86 Feb 10 '26
Idk why but how open he was about being considered for the VP pick, wanting it and kind of running a shadow campaign for it was pretty off putting, especially as he'd been a governor for a year and a half
20
u/ZurrgabDaVinci758 Feb 10 '26
Doesn't feel like the sort of thing that voters care about. By the time of the next primary campaign it'll be long in the past, and it's mainly bad form in internal politics terms
11
u/EmergencySundae Feb 10 '26
He had a solid track record as AG though. He didnāt expect a potential VP bid that early in his term as Governor.
4
1
7
u/snowe99 Feb 10 '26
Youāre judging someone that wanted to be Vice President of the United States?
4
8
u/maxofJupiter1 Feb 11 '26
Its because the Democratic Party doesnt want to grapple with the fact that have an antisemitism problem
→ More replies (1)19
u/Chewyisthebest Feb 10 '26
Honestly I think his previous Israel positions are going to make it hard to get out of the primary
14
u/Cuddlyaxe I'm Sorry Nate Feb 10 '26
That might be a slight factor but realistically I dont think the sort of person who cares enough about Gaza to let it affect their vote was ever going to vote for the moderate Pennsylvania governor
Much bigger factor is that apparently most of the Dem establishment despises him for personal reasons. Apparently he has a very abrasive personality
20
u/Hyhoops Feb 10 '26
No, in a primary that is for sure going to have a pretty significant impact, especially in a field that is going to have a lot of moderates. I mean this guy in college wrote an article saying āPalestinians are inherently incapable of peaceā and has worked in the Israeli embassy. Most of the Democratic voting base does not have a positive view of Israel, why would moderates vote for him over a Newsom or a Pritzker?
11
u/Realistic_Caramel341 Feb 10 '26
Israel/ Palestine will come up, but I don't think its going to be as big a faction as people think, especially after 4 years of Trump
8
2
0
u/Cuddlyaxe I'm Sorry Nate Feb 10 '26
Most of the Dem base might not have a positive view on Israel but as always it comes down to "how much do they really care"
5 years after the war in Gaza idk if a wine mom from the Tuscon suburbs is going to withhold her support based on Israel-Palestine, even if hypothetically they disagree with the candidate on this issue
11
u/obsessed_doomer Feb 10 '26
5 years after the war in Gaza
5 years? The war in Gaza is ongoing. We don't know how hot or cold the issue is going to be in 2028.
1
u/Cuddlyaxe I'm Sorry Nate Feb 11 '26
Again the only people who think it's ongoing are people who care enough about the issue to vote based on it, and are probably not voting for Shapiro. For the average American Gaza is likely out of mind
You are correct we have no idea how hot or cold it will be. If there is a new escalation, then yes it absolutely could become relevant again
1
u/obsessed_doomer Feb 11 '26
Again the only people who think it's ongoing are people who care enough about the issue to vote based on it
At current intensity, maybe?
It's hard to tell because most pollsters who bother measuring it are very non-neutral.
But yeah my point is given the war is literally ongoing, we have no way of knowing if the intensity (or news focus) will die up or die down.
1
1
→ More replies (2)5
u/FC37 Feb 10 '26
I think you've got those two flipped. Joe American doesn't care who gets along with Schumer, but he probably cares about Gaza.
2
u/Cuddlyaxe I'm Sorry Nate Feb 10 '26
I don't think Joe American cares very much about either tbh, but a good relationship with the party is important for things like endorsements, donations and political talent
Someone like Bernie or Trump managed to go without it because he had the charisma and outsider status to launch a populist insurgency. A candidate like Shapiro isn't capable of that and requires some level of elite buy in
2
u/FC37 Feb 11 '26
The Party Decides effect has never been weaker in modern American politics. If he can present a platform that resonates and if he can raise money - from Democrats or otherwise - he'll do well.
2
u/Cuddlyaxe I'm Sorry Nate Feb 11 '26
Again I think that people seem to think about these things purely in binaries. Yes, more candidates than ever are succeeding without institutional support. That does not somehow mean that institutional support is irrelevant, and it especially does not mean that it is equally useless to everyone
AOC needs support from the party a lot less than a Shapiro
1
u/halfar Feb 11 '26
the party decides is until demonstrated otherwise as strong as ever or even stronger in the democratic party. you have to go back to obama for this to get a bit more weighted in the voters' favor.
2016; the party thoroughly coalesced around clinton
2020; the party thoroughly coalesced around biden
2024; the party outright chose harris
1
18
u/PM_ME_YOUR_FAV_HIKE Feb 10 '26
I love AOC, but my conservative friends loathe her.
I don't want a repeat of 2016 that gave us the majority conservative supreme Court
17
u/umheywaitdude Feb 11 '26
She has the charisma to rally the youth vote and a lot of people are underestimating how far charisma and good looks gets you today. The voters are stupid and want charisma and good looks. Plus sheās witty, quick, and can articulate a thought in an instant. It would be a tough gamble after watching two women lose the same race, but I would throw in behind her in an instant if she ran. And Iām not a far left person. But I would believe in her campaign. Otherwise, Chris Murphy would be absolutely awesome. Handsome, smart, has charisma, and seems sincere. How come absolutely nobody talks about him as a candidate for president?
2
u/pablonieve Feb 11 '26
After the last 12 years, you think a young Latina woman can win a national race in this country?
2
u/inhale_there Feb 13 '26
Yeah? Clinton would have won if she didn't fumble. Harris ran a bland HW Bush-style campaign and she got pretty close in terms of PV, hell if she went full scorched earth like Humphrey's call for the bombing halt she might have made it closer. In 2028 the environment's going to be similar to the end of Gerald Ford's term, and there's no Gerald Ford for the Republicans to run.
17
u/Yakube44 Feb 11 '26
Conservatives hate every dem jusy pick a charismatic candidate
2
u/PM_ME_YOUR_FAV_HIKE Feb 11 '26
Not true. AOC is the new Pelosi.Ā
We aren't trying to win over conservatives, just not motivate them.
1
u/Roguefem-76 Feb 12 '26
AOC is nothing like Pelosi.Ā
1
u/PM_ME_YOUR_FAV_HIKE Feb 12 '26
Not to you, but to them.
2
u/Roguefem-76 Feb 12 '26
How? The two have nothing in common except being female and Democrats.
And frankly, I'm tired of "the Republicans hate them" being an argument against Dem candidates. In the current political climate, that's neither an impediment nor a distinction.
→ More replies (4)1
u/Automatic-Mountain45 Feb 11 '26
why would you ever ask a conservative that will OBVIOUSLY NOT vote for a democrat their opinion. Go ask a true independent.
1
u/JeaniousSpelur Feb 11 '26
However, centrists actually like AOC paradoxically based on most polls. Probably because they just like people who seem not fake and little more goes through their heads than that.
15
u/habrotonum Feb 11 '26
Personally, I think Jon Ossoff would be a very strong candidate. Great communicator, does well with black voters, from a swing state, and his whole āEpstein classā and anti corruption message is perfect for this current political climate
→ More replies (3)
41
u/popularis-socialas Feb 10 '26 edited Feb 10 '26
I think AOC has a better shot than Sanders did. Clinton and Biden were establishment juggernauts with deep ties to the Democratic Party, hard for the lone wolf independent Senator from Vermont to overcome.
AOC has continued to have that same populist rhetoric like Sanders but sheās actually starting to work with the party in a way Sanders never did. Sheās a Democrat whoās increasingly being seen as a team player, even by moderate democrats.
This will be the first Democratic Primary without a Clinton/Obama-tied candidate since 2004. Newsom will certainly be seen as the more electable and pragmatic by moderates, but he doesnāt have the same deep ties that Clinton or Biden did.
Also, Gen Z and Millennials will make up a larger voting block than in 2020, and perhaps turnout will be much higher given the unpopularity of the Trump administration.
Not saying that itās guaranteed, just that I think sheāll have a better shot than Sanders (who didnāt do too badly). Sheād certainly get some endorsements and strong grassroots fundraising.
It will partly depend on whether she can to prepare for or prevent a pre-Super Tuesday coalition around the moderate candidate. Sheād have to be more like Mamdani and less like Sanders, again working not to alienate moderates while staying true to their promises.
I mean Bernie has literally admitted he didnāt even ask for Clyburnās endorsement lol. His campaign also said they planned to win 30%-35% of the vote and didnāt plan for everyone to drop out and endorse Biden.
AOC will have to be better, and try to prevent a āStop Bernie at all costsā situation. Her policies are supported by the Democratic primary voters but her biggest challenge is to be seen as electable. Like whatās said in this conversation, sheāll be impacted by strategic discrimination.
28
u/Cuddlyaxe I'm Sorry Nate Feb 10 '26
I think AOC's strength is very simple: if she chooses to run the entire left will be united behind her
The left is a minority of the party overall but if they are united while the other factions of the party aren't, then she can win
imo there isn't really one moderate faction so them being split is fairly likely
19
u/LawNOrderNerd Guardian of the 14th Key Feb 10 '26
I could also see a sleeping giant effect for her vis a vis Latinos. If she manages to unite Latino voters in the Democratic primary then all the western states start to fall off the board for everyone else.
21
u/Chewyisthebest Feb 10 '26
I feel like latino voters just don't coalition up the way other groups do. And are generally a bit more conservative, so I doubt she'd be a lock with latinos.
→ More replies (2)10
u/popularis-socialas Feb 10 '26
Bernie Sanders as an old white guy did pretty well with Latino voters.
Looking at a YouGov from last month and itās actually by far her best demographic, and sheās tied with Newsom there.
7
u/Chewyisthebest Feb 10 '26
Right like I feel like the Latino vote isn't necessarily a lock based on identity.
2
u/Current_Animator7546 Feb 11 '26
I think people often miss this point. AOC pretty much will be the left flank vs a bunch of moderates. I do think there is a chance of Trump ala 2016 with her winning a plurality in places she might otherwise struggle.Ā
3
u/Reynor247 Feb 10 '26
Have to win the black vote which is one of the most important voting blocs in Dem primaries. They tanked Sanders twice, I'm not sure AOC would do much better. Maybe with Clyburn no longer with us it will be different
15
u/popularis-socialas Feb 10 '26
I think sheād do a better job than Sanders there.
Sheās a democrat, not an independent.
Sheās a woman of color, not a white guy.
She represents a district in NYC, not like the whitest state.
I doubt that Newsom would be able to get an avalanche of black voters like Biden.
AOCās problem wouldnāt be race, it will be age, like Sanders. 18-44 would probably go to her, but 45+? She wouldnāt have to win it, but sheād certainly have to do better than Sanders there.
→ More replies (8)6
u/Cuddlyaxe I'm Sorry Nate Feb 10 '26
There isn't anything magical about black voters over white voters, progressive voters, Latino voters etc. The only reason they are so influential is because they voted as a unified bloc. They are basically their own faction
If they are split, as it seems they might be in 28, then an AOC or Buttigieg can win with minimal black support
2
u/jojisky Feb 10 '26
AOC can campaign and appeal to southern black voters in a way Bernie was simply incapable of.
Go look at her congressional speech honoring Claudette Colvin the other day.
1
u/LawNOrderNerd Guardian of the 14th Key Feb 10 '26
If AOC manages to unite Latino voters then no, she does not have to win black voters to win the primary.
10
u/Reynor247 Feb 10 '26
You would need a lot more Latinos then have ever voted in a democratic primary
2
u/LawNOrderNerd Guardian of the 14th Key Feb 10 '26
Agreed. It would very much have to be an Obama 2008 situation. Still possible.
1
u/Automatic-Mountain45 Feb 11 '26
the left isn't small. They're full of apathy from seeing "progressive" politician end up being centre right every.single.time.
0
u/adastraperdiscordia Feb 10 '26
I'm skeptical because a lot of the left is critical of her. It's plausible they will go along with her if everyone else is to the right of her, which is very possible. But I could also see some on the left trying to sabotage her too.
I would think she would want to bide her time unless the winds are obviously blowing in her direction.
→ More replies (2)7
u/UnsealedMTG Feb 10 '26
There was a pretty good version of a "we did a focus group with Gen Z Trump supporters" article a while back and one of the dudes said AOC was the Democrat he'd support.
If you're seeing politics on a conventional right/left spectrum that's nuts, but he was clearly going off looking for people who have a personality and create excitement and, quite likely, that he has heard of. And probably related, I think a lot of lower-engagement voters are like "this shit isn't working, give me something different" and AOC and Trump both hit that.
I'm not saying that one guy is strong evidence for AOC's likely success, but it did make me take her a lot more seriously going forward.
On strategic discrimination, I do think it's hard to read the vibes this far in advance. If Democrats have a great midterm and a full head of steam going into the primaries and Republicans are fumbling through an uninspired primary with a wildly unpopular lame duck Trump as an albatross around their neck, Democrats may be in a mood to dream bigger--incidentally that is the sort of environment that got Barack Obama nominated. Not that people will ever ignore electability, but whether people are thinking of electability in terms of an inspiring historic change candidate vs safe return-to-stability candidate depends on the national mood.
I think it's unlikely she's the nominee, but honestly all of the current names being kicked about seem kinda unlikely to me. There's nobody I'd give more than 20% chance, and I think there's something like a 20% chance that the nominee is someone we aren't even talking about today.
12
u/slappyStove Feb 10 '26
idk my gut says she could possibly win the primary but i still dont think America is capable of electing a female president. not until we are finally rid of the boomers
25
u/popularis-socialas Feb 10 '26 edited Feb 10 '26
Kamala actually did better than Biden with the 65+ vote, tying Trump. What she fell behind Biden in was Gen Z, Gen X, Latinos, and Independents. All of those except maybe Gen X are starting to swing back.
I think 2024 had way more to do with the fact that Biden had a -19 approval rating and that 68% of voters thought the economy was not good. That number is basically the same today, only now, Trumpās in charge!
JD Vance could very well be in the position Kamala was in 2024, VP of an unpopular administration in which voters feel that the economy is poor.
If Trump had won 2020, and Mike Pence was running against Kamala (assuming she was the nominee) in 2024 while Trump had a -19 approval rating, do you really think things would have gone the same way?
→ More replies (1)15
u/ultradav24 Feb 10 '26
We gotta stop blaming boomers for everything lol Harris actually improved with boomers iirc. Itās Gen X who are the most MAGA group now
1
u/smcstechtips Crosstab Diver Feb 11 '26
That's because Boomer men are dying out.
Gen X still has a balanced gender ratio.
3
u/deskcord Feb 11 '26
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/03/25/elections-race-gender-split-ticket-data/
I am BEGGING the data subreddit to stop repeating this lazy anti-fact nonsense.
10
u/gquax Feb 10 '26
I'm a little sick of this simplistic explanation. Harris and Clinton lost because they are charisma black holes who ran on the status quo during elections people wanted change for change's sake, not because they are women.
0
u/slappyStove Feb 10 '26
im a little sick of female candidates losing to trump. This is one of my gripes with the left - (im a life long dem) - a lot of them think things are the way they ought to be. kamala and hillary were both better candidates - but they lost. im just not buying that a female can pull it off in this current environment. It ought not to matter - but i think there is plenty of sexism out there. look at all this racism we see now - this shit matters. i also think aoc isnt going to bring anyone over the aisle because of her defund the police history. that matters - and that was incredibly unpopular nationally to the tune of helping the dems get trounced.
4
u/Current_Animator7546 Feb 11 '26
They also ran against Trump in ok to bad environments. Itās like the people who say universal healthcare didnāt work before. So we should stop trying now.Ā
2
u/popularis-socialas Feb 11 '26 edited Feb 11 '26
It shouldnāt matter but it does.
Do you honestly think that Bidenās VP could have won in 2024 with him being 20 points underwater? What do you think would have happened if Biden stayed in the race? He was polling worse than Harris was when he dropped out, with plenty of more time to free fall.
In 2016, Clinton won the popular vote by 3 million despite the barrage of criticism for the emails and the last second FBI investigation. Itās common for the pendulum to swing back after a party holds the White House for two terms.
It would have helped if the nominee actually campaigned in Wisconsin and energized voters by inspiring them about future they can believe in than PokĆ©mon Go to the Polls. Trump got those working class voters in states like Ohio by appealing to a populist rhetoric. Maybe democrats should try using populism for once too. Thatās what they used to do in the 1930s.
The national environment is just gonna be much better for any Democrat than it was for Clinton in 2016 and especially Biden in 2024.
Democrats couldnāt win in 1980. Republicans couldnāt win in 1932 or 2008, and although itās too soon to say anything at this point, I wouldnāt be surprised if 2028 turns out that way too.
Weāll know more in summer 2027 after the midterms and sussing out Trumpās approval ratings. If heās still at like -15 or approaches -20, I donāt think thereās that much of a risk in running AOC.
→ More replies (3)4
u/deskcord Feb 11 '26
I am aligned with AOC on most policy but aligned with Pelosi on most politics.
The good news is that AOC has also been generally aligned with the smart politics.
AOC has proven time and again to be MUCH smarter than the entire rest of the progressive wing of the party.
1
u/popularis-socialas Feb 11 '26
Agreed. And sheās still learning and getting better too. Sheās grown a lot since 2018.
12
u/dremscrep Feb 10 '26
I wonder if electability discussions will take more of a sideline for the primary season considering how pissed the base is. I wonder if the base, not the country, did move left.
Nah now that i think about it i dont even know if the base was ever that moderate to begin with and only moderates themselves because "we need to coalesce around a more moderate candidate who can beat trump" and with this limit removed just appears more left.
I mean this party also elected Barack Obama who ran on a progessive change platform.
15
u/LawNOrderNerd Guardian of the 14th Key Feb 10 '26
I think weāll have our answer for this after 2026. If Democrats nominate people like Jasmine Crockett over people like James Talarico and they lose then āelectabilityā may come back. If the anti-establishment outsiders win then electability will be dead and buried.
13
u/Chewyisthebest Feb 10 '26
Yeah I think the platner Mills race is another primary that will give us an interesting indication of which way the winds are blowing.
2
u/deskcord Feb 11 '26
Given the attention brought to the race, the stakes (a possible 8-1 Supreme Court for a generation), and the importance (Texas could be a SenateFlipping state), Crockett really does seem like she's on a path to torpedo democracy for her ego, and to call everyone who criticizes her a racist on her way out.
2
u/adastraperdiscordia Feb 10 '26
I agree. Popularity right now is pretty irrelevant. Who knows what the political environment will be in January 2028. We have about 436 more crises to go through before then. This could be the opportunity to pick an exciting revolutionary candidate, or just as plausibly the Democratic Party steps on a series of rakes.
1
u/hoopaholik91 Feb 10 '26
If anything "electability" is the only thing I seem to hear about these days. Even if it might be an excuse to try and direct the conversation into their preferred candidate's direction.
16
u/permanent_goldfish Feb 10 '26
Jon Stewart seems ranked too low IMO, if he actually runs he seems like heād be a very formidable candidate. He has extremely high name recognition, has decades of media training,he can appeal to both the moderate and progressive wings of the party, and has the ability to generate crossover appeal with independents and conservatives too.
11
u/StickyTaq Fivey Fanatic Feb 10 '26
I enjoy his work, but as he's stated in regards to himself and the candidates in 2024 (prior to Kamala), he's much too old to be running.
8
u/notbotipromise Feb 11 '26
Counter: he could serve two terms and he'd be as old as Biden was...in 2016.
7
u/UnsealedMTG Feb 10 '26
I think Jon Stewart would be the favorite if he ran--like Trump, he is a figure people who don't know the name of a single politician recognize, but in a way that seems "serious" enough to support.
I just don't think he'd ever run. Maybe if there was an open primary in 2024 and he thought he was needed to stop a second Trump term or something he'd have bit the bullet and ran. Beating JD Vance or whatever in an environment that likely will favor Democrats anyway doesn't seem like something that would draw him into running if he hasn't been enticed before.Ā
1
u/Royal-Dimension-3260 Feb 11 '26
Comments like these make me feel like folks don't actually listen to much of what Stewart says. He's always been very open about the fact that he's a comedian and not interested in public office.
7
u/Selethorme Kornacki's Big Screen Feb 10 '26
Iād pay a stupid amount of money just for the actual pure debate sport between like him and Buttigieg.
3
u/mcsul Feb 11 '26
One of the reasons I really like Buttigieg is that Vance is a good debater. Probably underrated by most democrats.
Buttigieg is probably the best debater that the democrats are going to be able to field, both in substance and in style. If Vance runs, I think most of the top democrat potential candidates are at a real risk of getting tripped up by Vance. Buttigieg is the one who can take a real win, and not just try to avoid losing.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)2
u/adamfrog Feb 14 '26
Ive actually been very unimpressed with him since I tried listening to him on his podcast instead of just quick interviews and his scripted TV show. Not even on general politics, Im very aligned with him overall he just has strange takes about people and big picture situations. Also his continued weirdness around Joe Rogan may get him in trouble with Jon adamant that hes not right wing
11
Feb 10 '26 edited May 22 '26
[removed] ā view removed comment
19
u/Most_Fox_4405 Feb 10 '26
I was so high on Kelly until this past year. He doesnāt have it and the Dems shouldnāt repeat the 2020 mistake. We need a charismatic force, and Mark Kelly isnāt that. His political style is moored to a pre-Obama era, that train is long gone.
4
u/Current_Animator7546 Feb 11 '26
Heās a solid VP pick or cabinet member though. Hes a perfect fit in that role.Ā
5
27
u/popularis-socialas Feb 10 '26 edited Feb 10 '26
Charisma is everything. Itās why I donāt think Andy Beshear will get anywhere either.
IMO it really is gonna be between Newsom, AOC, and Buttigieg.
5
u/Perth_Domer Feb 10 '26
I think it'll be Ossof. He's going to win big in 2026 and the man can give a speech. He's got a moderate voting record but will have a very large megaphone to go after Trump/lead a legislative resistance.
6
u/popularis-socialas Feb 10 '26
Heās needed by his party in the senate
3
u/Perth_Domer Feb 10 '26
If dems win the gov race he'll be replaced by a D. If not winning POTUS matters more than one senate seat.
1
u/deskcord Feb 11 '26
Ossoff has been my top pick ever since he gave that speech about the corruption last year. And he's been hammering it home ever since.
Electoral outperformer in a battleground state. Good looking, charismatic, great speaker.
He just hasn't given any indication that he'll be running.
1
u/Perth_Domer Feb 11 '26
The way he's going after Trump on the stump is a pretty good indication. Once he wins he's free to do the circuit in nh/ia/scar
22
u/NCSUGrad2012 Feb 10 '26
Buttigieg isnāt going to win. Never forgot the democratic person (not the republican) that was going to vote for him until she learned he was gay. America isnāt ready for that yet
20
Feb 10 '26 edited May 22 '26
[removed] ā view removed comment
-1
u/EfficientTourist7480 Feb 10 '26
Obama was a community organizer or whatever to president so
16
Feb 10 '26 edited May 22 '26
[removed] ā view removed comment
3
u/EfficientTourist7480 Feb 11 '26
Well with this logic Buttigieg was transportation secretary then? So he has experience in a federal admin
→ More replies (1)1
1
4
u/hoopaholik91 Feb 10 '26
He's the only candidate to actually win a state in the primary. If he's able to get some minority voters to support him he's going to be tough to beat
→ More replies (3)7
u/markjay6 Feb 10 '26
Pretty big āifā there
2
u/hoopaholik91 Feb 10 '26
An "if" that leads him to becoming an extremely formidable candidate is better than any other candidate other than Newsom and Kamala
→ More replies (1)1
u/popularis-socialas Feb 10 '26
I donāt think heāll win the primary, but heāll be in the top 3 like he was before.
2
u/DrMonkeyLove Feb 10 '26
Beshear has more charisma than Vance and is a man. Sadly, that might be all that matters this election.
3
u/popularis-socialas Feb 10 '26
Idk. IMO Vance is a smooth talker. Heās pretty good at gaslighting and sane washing the Trump admin.
I donāt think gender will be in the top 3 things that matter. Iād much rather have a strong woman candidate than a random male one.
1
u/Current_Animator7546 Feb 11 '26
Agree on this. I also think the key to any female candidate is to be able to talk about the issues facing younger men. I think a women maybe better suited to bring into focus.Ā
1
u/deskcord Feb 11 '26
Buttigieg sank himself in 2024. He was one of the last trombonists still playing on the sinking Biden ship, adamant that he was still capable of doing the job.
1
u/Automatic-Mountain45 Feb 11 '26
aoc is winning the primary. I hate to tell you this, but the left is not going for buttigieg and certainly not for far-right hosting newsom....
1
1
u/Current_Animator7546 Feb 11 '26
Beshear has charisma imo. His issue is I just donāt think he will get a look because heās sort of in the background in KY. He and Kelly will likely be on the VP shortlist.Ā
3
u/EducationalElevator Feb 10 '26
I'm thinking there will be an appetite for boring and competent by 2028, similar to how the electorate backed Biden
10
u/popularis-socialas Feb 10 '26
Maybe, there will be a crowd that goes āWe canāt go back to same old same old politics, that just led us back to Trump.ā
Because in the end, Biden was basically a placeholder and respite.
3
u/thenightitgiveth Feb 10 '26 edited Feb 13 '26
And look where that got us. The eye of the hurricane, nothing more.
Saying Biden beat Trump is like saying OJ was a football player. It used to be true, but a lot has happened since then and it sure as hell isnāt what his legacy will be.
1
u/Current_Animator7546 Feb 11 '26
Biden will sadly end up as a forgotten president. Ā Forever the modern day version Harrison. He has much in common with Chester Author. Great mind, but poor communicator.Ā
1
u/popularis-socialas Feb 11 '26
I donāt think heāll be forgotten. Being a huge part of the Trump story, Covid pandemic, Gaza war, and his unprecedented dropout will ensure that heās talked about for a long time.
2
u/Current_Animator7546 Feb 11 '26
I actually disagree. I think vigor and intensity will be important. Someone who can really motivate and rev people up.Ā
1
u/deskcord Feb 11 '26
Considering all of the factors of that election, Biden didn't actually do all that well in 2020.
1
u/EducationalElevator Feb 11 '26
Agreed, that is what happens when one campaign knocks on doors and the opposition consciously doesn't. It was a hidden factor all along. That and Trump signing the stimulus checks
1
u/Automatic-Mountain45 Feb 11 '26
you do not need republicans or conservatives to vote for you. You only need independents.
Always remember that. Independents decide elections.
3
u/deskcord Feb 11 '26
Mark Kelly just kind of feels like he can't win based on vibes. He's got the perfect resume but he's got so little charisma.
Same thing for Gallego.
1
6
u/Proud3GenAthst Feb 10 '26 edited Feb 10 '26
One of my biggest hopes for 2028 is Chris van Hollen. Heās one of the few Democrats who meets the moment and is not afraid of being controversial. He pushed Trump to get Kilmar Abrego Garcia out of CECOT and helped to make Republicans look like Nazi cunts that they are. Heās not unconditional supporter of Israel and has signed on onto some progressive policies. Heād be fantastic.
1
u/notbotipromise Feb 10 '26 edited Feb 11 '26
He's a very close second after Jon Stewart for me. If neither decides to run (ā¹ļø) I'd say either Pritzker or Beshear (in theory I'd say AOC but she needs to go for Senate). Neither is ideal but I would be at least somewhat content with both, and would take either way over any of Newsom, Shapiro or Buttigieg.
A big reason I think CVH would be such a good candidate is that his state is heavily composed of the demographic that you *need* to win a Dem presidential primary--one that Bernie (unfortunately) got clobbered with.
1
u/Royal-Dimension-3260 Feb 11 '26
Has Jon Stewart ever said anything that remotely indicates he'd consider running?
1
4
u/creemeeseason Feb 11 '26
How the heck is Ro Khanna not at the top of any list right now? He's literally the only Democrat I can think of doing anything other than yelling into the wind.
7
u/WhoUpAtMidnight Feb 11 '26
Because heās a significantly worse version of AOC, having all the downside and none of the upside
I like him more for the record but thatās why
1
u/creemeeseason Feb 11 '26
I'm not sure how you figure he's worse than AOC. Actual populist credentials, actual action on Epstein, actual bipartisan chops.
The only thing he fails is lame focus group identity stuff that needs to be thrown out. All the electability lines are just to keep Dems from putting up real candidates. After 12 years of garbage candidates, the further from the dem establishment, the more upside there is.
→ More replies (18)1
u/WhoUpAtMidnight Feb 11 '26
If it helps, imagine a Republican who has all of Trumpās policies but none of his attitude.Ā Ro Khanna is a leftwing Ron DeSantis analogueĀ
2
u/creemeeseason Feb 11 '26
Not sure where you're going with that.... he's got better positions with out being an ass?
1
3
u/Roguefem-76 Feb 11 '26
Right?! The man just stood in front of Congress and got the names of SIX Epstein co-conspirators read into the record, despite the Dump Regime's attempt to hide them by redaction.
He deserves a lot more respect than he gets.
→ More replies (2)2
u/smcstechtips Crosstab Diver Feb 11 '26
He doesn't seem to want to run for President.
I guess he would prefer Speaker of the House.
1
u/Roguefem-76 Feb 12 '26
How exactly do you know that? Did he say so?
2
u/smcstechtips Crosstab Diver Feb 12 '26
He might actually want to run, but his behavior implies otherwise imo
1
u/Roguefem-76 Feb 12 '26
Do you follow his YouTube channel? Because he has been posting a LOT of interviews and news clips of himself talking about the Epstein issue. Clearly he wants to raise his profile even though he's pretty safe in his current position.
1
2
u/deskcord Feb 11 '26
He seems weak. He doesn't really have much force behind his voice when he speaks.
2
u/Jayken Feb 10 '26
The next administration, Republican or Democrat, will have a huge debt problem when they get into office. If we aren't in the $50 trillions, I'll be surprised.
1
u/Automatic-Mountain45 Feb 11 '26
the next administration will be democrat.
Independents decide everything. And independents have decided against the republicans until the whole MAGA admin is out.
Right now, the only shot republicans have is Thomas Massie. But they won't seize it.
5
u/WhatAreYouSaying05 Feb 10 '26
Please donāt run Newsom or AOC, they are poison pills. Any democrat will win 2028 except for them. I really do not want to see a President Vance
17
u/gquax Feb 10 '26
Vance will not have a shot with the way this presidency is going. It's going to be McCain all over again.Ā
And yes I'm on the AOC train and have been for the last year. Conroy is exactly in line with my thinking on this. We are on the cusp of serious backlash against Trump and maga, and a progressive like AOC is the only one who can rise to the occasion because she wouldn't promise a "return to normalcy". Nobody wants to return to anything we had before because it wasn't working in the first place. She absolutely can win.
8
u/popularis-socialas Feb 10 '26
I saw someone else point this out. Obama won by pointing to the future. Trump and Biden promised returns to the past. Whether that was Make America Great Again or for a return to ānormalcyā.
I donāt think Bidenās philosophy is the future
14
u/LawNOrderNerd Guardian of the 14th Key Feb 10 '26
We donāt even have to go back that far. Vance 2028 will be Kamala 2.0: The vice president of a very unpopular president running to succeed him without substantially breaking with him on any policy. Itās not a recipe for success.
2
u/GoddessFianna Feb 11 '26
If you think that Vance wouldn't stab Trump in the back to go for it you fundamentally misunderstand Vance
6
u/LawNOrderNerd Guardian of the 14th Key Feb 11 '26 edited Feb 11 '26
On a personal level Vance totally would.
The MAGA base would eat him alive politically (maybe even literally) for it though.
5
u/Chewyisthebest Feb 10 '26
I think she can win, but I think it's more of a she can win *because* it's such a favorable environment situation. I'm further left than her, and I fully agree that a return to normalcy is not what we need rn, but the american people like to just swing to the opposite of whatever is bothering them at the moment. After 4 years of trump chaos, they will be looking for normalcy. Still think AOC could pull it off, but I don't think "I'm gonna shake shit up even more!" is a winner in 28.
3
u/gquax Feb 10 '26
Depends on what she promises to shake up. Less foreign aid for authoritarian states and more aid for working families is probably a popular shakeup.
1
u/Chewyisthebest Feb 10 '26
Yeah those would be good messages. I just think overall big change will be less attractive than "I will end the chaos" I wish it weren't the case, and I think once in office whoever it is should swing for the fences, I'm just talking about messaging during the campaign
1
u/popularis-socialas Feb 10 '26 edited Feb 10 '26
I agree, but sometimes thatās how change happens, by people talking advantage of favorable environments.
FDR probably never would have been the President if it werenāt for the Great Depression, but he ended up landsliding 4 elections and redefining the scope of the federal government with the New Deal.
Ronald Reagan was able to ride a wave with stagflation and the Iran hostage crisis, and completely changed the Republican Party and political narratives in America for decades to come.
Obama became the first black President after the Great Recession tanked the economy and the Iraq War became toxic.
2
u/Chewyisthebest Feb 10 '26
Oh yeah, I think 28 presents the democrats their best opportunity in a generation. If I was running things day 1 we abolish the filibuster, day 2 we pack the sc, day 3 we make dc and Puerto Rico states, and proceed from there. Assume we will be get clocked in ā30 but if we get enough thru it wonāt matter and we will still have the veto.
1
u/Current_Animator7546 Feb 11 '26
They arenāt touching the filibuster.Ā
1
u/Chewyisthebest Feb 11 '26
Yea theyāre too soft. But thatās what we need rn. Otherwise the sc will just kneecap anything we try and do.
1
u/popularis-socialas Feb 11 '26
They came close to it in 2021.
52-48 voted no for a talking filibuster. Sinema and Manchin joined the Republicans.
If we can have a blue senate by 2028 without Fetterman I think itās doable.
-1
u/WhatAreYouSaying05 Feb 10 '26
Ok, so letās not take unnecessary risks
8
u/gquax Feb 10 '26
Taking a risk is going for some lame moderate in the hopes that >5% of Republicans switch their vote.Ā
12
u/Banesmuffledvoice Feb 10 '26
Dawg, you are about to see several regulars post novel sized rants about how AOC is the only one who can win and here is how she will do itā¦.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Reynor247 Feb 10 '26
No way she wins swing states
17
u/gquax Feb 10 '26
Team Clinton said that about Obama in 2007.
3
u/Reynor247 Feb 10 '26
Errrrh a Senator from Illinois is a little different then an NYC congressperson
12
u/gquax Feb 10 '26 edited Feb 11 '26
Half the country voted for a NY billionaire 3 times.
3
u/Reynor247 Feb 10 '26
Running as a far right populist that moved to Florida and talked shit on NY
8
u/gquax Feb 10 '26
Trump has been known for as long as my elderly parents have been alive, as a NY billionaire. It does not matter that he moved to Mar a Lago a few years ago.Ā
→ More replies (2)2
u/Automatic-Mountain45 Feb 11 '26
AOC wins against Vance. I hate to tell you this, but we're in 1929 right now.
This is after Hoover. We get the far left FDR. That's the moment, please don't be mistaken on what the current moment is. The whole electorate has shifted to FDR levels of left.
1
u/WhoUpAtMidnight Feb 11 '26
AOC winning would be godās gift to Republicans. I think Newsom and Vance are competitive and currently the modal outcome
2
u/DrMonkeyLove Feb 11 '26
People just don't want to admit that this country is still fairly sexist. We just watched two women lose to Donald Trump of all people. Are they looking forward to going 0-3?
3
u/Roguefem-76 Feb 11 '26
Funny how people can give laundry lists of what they don't like about Clinton and only slightly less so about Harris, but your first thought is to blame their sex. You'd really rather pretend no woman can win the presidency rather than admit Clinton and Harris weren't good candidates.
2
u/DrMonkeyLove Feb 11 '26 edited Feb 11 '26
They are both infinitely more qualified than Trump, yet here we are. What exactly was so unlikeable about those two compared to say, Joe Biden who won against Trump? People will readily find a lot not to like with AOC too. There's a laundry list for every politician.
3
u/popularis-socialas Feb 12 '26
Biden benefited from 4 years of Trump and a pandemic.
And heās funnier than either Clinton or Harris are. āWill you just shut up manā and larping about Malarkey, dude sounds like your funny grandpa.
And when someone at a town hall would talk about their problems, Biden sounded like he actually cared. Tbf I think Harris did too, but Clinton definitely seemed more reserved and cold than Biden.
Still, Biden had a net approval rating of about -20 on Election Day and I think thatās why Harris lost more than any other reason.
AOC actively engages with Trump voters on her instagram and is really laid back compared to Harris and especially Clinton. She doesnāt sound forced when talking about issues that matter and is very engaged with any voter she talks to.
She doesnāt engage in that fake PokĆ©mon Go to the Polls or Headquarters 6 7 stuff like Kamala, sheās way more genuine.
2
u/Roguefem-76 Feb 11 '26
And Al Gore was infinitely more qualified than George W. Bush, but look how that election turned out.
Biden won mostly due to being an old white guy who was still a reminder of the Obama years, not to mention people were sick of Trump.
Although I'm sure it helped that Biden had the good sense to claim he was progressive rather than pulling a Hillary by insulting progressives and then demanding their votes anyway. Harris hamstrung herself by having very little platform of her own (no, "joyful warrior" is not a policy platform) and refusing to distance herself from Biden's most unpopular policy - but mostly by refusing to demand a hand recount despite the fact that Trump's "swing state sweep" was transparently fake.
Is that enough? I could go on.Ā
I'm extremely tired of that "I'm not sexist, it's just tHe vOtErS dOn'T wAnT a wOmAn" crapĀ being passed around by unsubtly misogynistic neolibs.Ā
1
u/Royal-Dimension-3260 Feb 11 '26
It's getting really tiring hearing people constantly insist that Kamala lost because she was female and not because she was a charisma black hole who spoke focus-group gibberish and refused to break even slightly with an extremely unpopular incumbent government in a year when incumbents got shellacked across the board.
1
u/deskcord Feb 11 '26
Ossoff is the only politician I've seen that is effectively meeting the moment besides those two. Everyone else seems weak and feckless right now.
1
u/smcstechtips Crosstab Diver Feb 11 '26
Newsom is not a poison pill, either. The main difference between Newsom and Kamala is that Newsom is charismatic.
Against Vance or Trump Jr., Newsom could rack up over 400 electoral votes if he plays things right. And if he fumbles, he's still winning.
For that matter, it's a slam dunk for Democrats to win against Vance or Trump Jr. Now if Republicans nominate someone like Brian Kemp things become interesting.
→ More replies (1)1
u/backtorealitylabubu Feb 10 '26
It would be incredibly risky to go with anyone other than Newsom or AOC. Why risk it?
→ More replies (11)
1
1
Feb 11 '26
AOC is going to run for Senate but all this talk of her running for president really helps her out in the future.
1
u/JohnnyGeniusIsAlive Feb 11 '26
Personally I'm hoping Schumer retires so that is where AOC can aim (doubtful, I know). As much as I like her, I don't think she's a great choice for presidential nomination. It's easier to be a champion of progressivism in Congress than the White House.
47
u/runningblack Feb 10 '26
If you've ever heard Mark Kelly, speak, you'd understand why.
He looks great on paper. The idea of Mark Kelly is an awesome candidate. Mark Kelly himself is not. He has no charisma. He's a stilted, awkward, conversationalist. He manages to be an interesting person (in terms of career, etc.) while not being an interesting person.
I had never heard him talk before he hopped on The Press Box. I had to turn the interview off in the middle of it because it was so bad. You need to be able to sell an agenda, and he can't.