2028, who ya got?

Shapiro is a super long shot. His choice would mean having to cancel the far left anti Israel stance of most of the D party. I doubt they are willing to do that, they weren’t even willing to give him second chair and set him up for the future this time around.

What about Pete? He’s been so successful as transportation secretary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
What about Pete? He’s been so successful as transportation secretary.

They may go that route, but I doubt it. If the D’s have any sense at all they will far remove themselves from anybody that served in the Biden administration. Pete was a failure in a failed administration, he’s damaged goods.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Caculator
What about Pete? He’s been so successful as transportation secretary.
I was shocked he took that job. It isn't a high-profile cabinet position and it only gets in the news when something goes wrong (and a lot has gone wrong while he's presided in that office). His career would have been better off just getting an MSNBC show or doing a podcast or something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
Pete wouldn't stand a chance.
Maybe, but he's the most naturally gifted politician since Obama or Bill. He's the real deal, but happens to be gay. If he can ever get the Black vote he has a chance.
 
Maybe, but he's the most naturally gifted politician since Obama or Bill. He's the real deal, but happens to be gay. If he can ever get the Black vote he has a chance.
He's absolutely nowhere near their league. Very few are, especially Bill.
 
Maybe, but he's the most naturally gifted politician since Obama or Bill. He's the real deal, but happens to be gay. If he can ever get the Black vote he has a chance.

While I do think the gay thing would hurt him a little his biggest anchor is no record of success. What's he going to run on, his time as mayor of South Bend?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gandalf
The party will go back to the center, as has every other party in the past that got over its skis. So I think Whitmer, Shapiro, Kelly. Given his role in combat operations, depending on how far south things go in Europe and Ukraine, I can see him presenting an interesting contrast.
While what you posit here makes sense just dropping some possible names the party landscape is more problematic. The R's in general, meaning lots of them that don't necessarily think Trump is all that great, can nevertheless pretty much ride along regarding lots of policy and what makes up the majority of their media sphere doesn't have to jump through too many hoops to stay on message.

The D's on the other hand have a lot more people really ideologically captured. Mind you I'm not saying there aren't crazy types on both sides, there absolutely are, but no small part of the D's crazy types are loud and right out front. For the Dems to bring their message more back to the middle they're going to have to drag a bunch of people who want nothing to do with the "middle" with them and that includes a lot of people that have been carrying their water.
 
He is definitely the smoothest debater I have seen since Clinton or Reagan. He is calm almost to the sociopath level lol.

I don't mind the sociopath part, I just don't trust that he would buck the establishment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEO
While I do think the gay thing would hurt him a little his biggest anchor is no record of success. What's he going to run on, his time as mayor of South Bend?
I don't think it is necessarily the record of no success (plenty of politicians have run on that and still won); I think it is more he hasn't held prominent positions. Obama was a US Senator for a couple of years, not really doing all that much, then became President. Hillary wasn't thought of as a particularly successful or distinguished politician before she ran either time, but she had name recognition and had occupied a number of prominent positions.

It is mostly a matter of the political skill the person has and does what they bring to the table fit the "moment."
 
  • Like
Reactions: PEPPERJAX
Maybe, but he's the most naturally gifted politician since Obama or Bill. He's the real deal, but happens to be gay. If he can ever get the Black vote he has a chance.
It’s not being a homosexual as much as he is in your face with the goober smooching. naturally gifted won’t play when you are living unnaturally
 
I don't think it is necessarily the record of no success (plenty of politicians have run on that and still won); I think it is more he hasn't held prominent positions. Obama was a US Senator for a couple of years, not really doing all that much, then became President. Hillary wasn't thought of as a particularly successful or distinguished politician before she ran either time, but she had name recognition and had occupied a number of prominent positions.

It is mostly a matter of the political skill the person has and does what they bring to the table fit the "moment."
Obama's campaign in 2008 was highly impressive too.
 
Vance/Gabbard tics a lot of campaign boxes for a broad appeal.
I like Tulsi but her past gun control policies might not work for a lot of people in the base. Noem would be good with Vance IMO; not sure that dog would hunt either though.
 
While I do think the gay thing would hurt him a little his biggest anchor is no record of success. What's he going to run on, his time as mayor of South Bend?
He was successful there. And he's done an okay job in the cabinet. A lot of the issues attributed to him were not even in his scope. Now, he put himself in position for blowback by being in the public eye so much, but he's not the gigantic failure some make him out to be. He's among the good ones.
 

VN Store



Back
Top