The Way Too Early 2028 Election

hskrpwr13 said:
Yes, "disdain" is a feeling, identity politics is not.
Click to expand...




Identity politics is absolutely a feeling.

"They're erasing my culture" is a feeling.

"The systems will never give me a chance because of my skin color" is a feeling.

"They hate me as a woman" is a feeling.

"They're disrespecting this sacred institution we've held dear for so long" is a feeling.

"They just want handouts when I worked hard and earned everything I got" is a feeling.

"They don't care about those of us who make up the real America in the heartland flyover states" is a feeling.

The left is certainly good at employing identity politics on behalf of the oppressed, creating a feeling, and the right (especially in the era of MAGA) has gotten quite good at employing similar identity tactics on behalf of nationalism, ethnic pride and a narrative of the forgotten and maligned silent white working class majority. 

 
Lorewarn said:
Identity politics is absolutely a feeling.

"They're erasing my culture" is a feeling.

"The systems will never give me a chance because of my skin color" is a feeling.

"They hate me as a woman" is a feeling.

"They're disrespecting this sacred institution we've held dear for so long" is a feeling.

"They just want handouts when I worked hard and earned everything I got" is a feeling.

"They don't care about those of us who make up the real America in the heartland flyover states" is a feeling.

The left is certainly good at employing identity politics on behalf of the oppressed, creating a feeling, and the right (especially in the era of MAGA) has gotten quite good at employing similar identity tactics on behalf of nationalism, ethnic pride and a narrative of the forgotten and maligned silent white working class majority. 
Click to expand...


Right. And everyone has these feelings, even if they don't say them out loud or stop to put them in words. That's where the rhetoric comes in. Somebody in charge of political rhetoric found the pithy phrase you've been feeling inside, then had it repeated a million times across every media channel. We may care about issues, but all we have to work with is rhetoric. Inflation is real. "Kamala broke it" is rhetoric. Life was better under Trump is a feeling. 

I think conservatives have been better at this than progressives. If you really stop to think about it, our feelings aren't so far apart or even partisan. That's why they don't want you to stop and think about it. 

 
One thing we have to remember about the 2028 election is that the party that owns the White House will also own the 2030 census.  The attorney general at that time can/will challenge  any state that realigns their districts in ways not favorable to that of the administration.  This could end up defining Congress for the next decade - especially as blue states like Calif, NY, Ill, and Pa are expected to lose seats and red states like FL. GA, TX are expected to gain seats.   The Dems could find themselves in an electoral sinkhole that they can't get out of. 

 
TGHusker said:
One thing we have to remember about the 2028 election is that the party that owns the White House will also own the 2030 census.  The attorney general at that time can/will challenge  any state that realigns their districts in ways not favorable to that of the administration.  This could end up defining Congress for the next decade - especially as blue states like Calif, NY, Ill, and Pa are expected to lose seats and red states like FL. GA, TX are expected to gain seats.   The Dems could find themselves in an electoral sinkhole that they can't get out of. 
Click to expand...
We can only hope!! Build that big beautiful red coalition!!

 
Loe Doesnt Know said:
We can only hope!! Build that big beautiful red coalition!!
Click to expand...
If only "red" meant what it used to.  It is no longer a conservative movement.  It is no longer about slow and thoughtful change.  It is no solely based on disruption and destruction rather than repairing and responsible legislation.  

It is sad what the MAGA movement has changed the Republican party into with the permission of "conservatives".  But hey, at least abortion was returned to the states.

 
funhusker said:
If only "red" meant what it used to.  It is no longer a conservative movement.  It is no longer about slow and thoughtful change.  It is no solely based on disruption and destruction rather than repairing and responsible legislation.  

It is sad what the MAGA movement has changed the Republican party into with the permission of "conservatives".  But hey, at least abortion was returned to the states.
Click to expand...
Again, I don't place the label conservative on any of today's GOP.   Reagan would not recognize the party ....  wait he would. He would remember in his early years the govt of Spain, Italy, Germany - governments run by fascists.  This is what Reagan would see in today's republican party.  

 
I hope the Dems do better than Pete and Gavin.  Pete has the smarts but the GOP turns a run by Pete into a Woke/Social/DEI quagmire.

Gavin will be painted as a Calif lefty looney who poorly managed the burning of LA.   

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/13/pete-buttigieg-michigan-senate-run-00227583

Pete Buttigieg is expected to announce Thursday he will not run for Michigan’s open Senate seat, according to a person briefed on his decision, clearing a path for a potential presidential campaign instead.

His decision was framed by several allies and people in his inner circle as putting him in the strongest possible position to seek the presidency, and based on a belief it would be exceedingly difficult to run successive campaigns in 2026 and 2028.
Click to expand...


https://www.wsj.com/politics/gavin-newsom-election-2028-e878c02e

As Gavin Newsom prepared to launch his new podcast, the governor reached out to Kimberly Guilfoyle, his ex-wife and President Trump’s pick to be ambassador to Greece, asking to be connected with two conservatives reviled by Democrats: Charlie Kirk, a 31-year-old conservative activist, and Steve Bannon, 71, a longtime Trump adviser.

Last week, with Kirk on his podcast, Newsom broke with many in his party on the issue of transgender women in sports and played down the notion that Democrats had overly focused on how people use pronouns. Then, in a podcast that aired Wednesday, the governor sat down with Bannon, who made false statements—such as claiming that Trump won the 2020 election—that Newsom let go unchecked.

The governor also hosted conservative commentator Michael Savage for an episode. And amid his foray into podcasting, he angered environmentalists when he ordered state regulators to start over on their negotiations to phase out single-use plastics, a law he had signed.

Newsom rose to prominence fighting Republicans from his perch leading one of the nation’s Democratic meccas. But after Trump’s win in November, the governor—widely seen in the party as a potential 2028 candidate for president—isn’t just arguing with conservatives, he is occasionally agreeing with them.
Click to expand...

 
Just to revive this thread, Democrats are going to go down one of two paths. I think the party is going to undergo a bit of a revolt, with partisan Democrats extremely angry at their leadership - such as Schumer being public enemy #1 by funding government. There are two paths they take from here. 

1. A progressive revolt, with current members of the party being primaried by the Progressive wing (the most angry) of the party. I think you can see elements of this brewing when you see the success of the Bernie Sanders rally tour. I think this is the most likely AND the worst thing that could happen. 

2. The Party owns its failures and rebrands around what has been called the Abundance Agenda, which I've included a clip of Klein talking about here. This represents a radical new direction for the Party, which I personally hope they do. But it would be painful, and would be similar to how MAGA flushed the old guard of the Republican Party and transformed it in a relatively short period of time. 

Fellow Democrats, what do you think gives them the best chance to win in 2028?

 
Dr. Strangelove said:
Just to revive this thread, Democrats are going to go down one of two paths. I think the party is going to undergo a bit of a revolt, with partisan Democrats extremely angry at their leadership - such as Schumer being public enemy #1 by funding government. There are two paths they take from here. 

1. A progressive revolt, with current members of the party being primaried by the Progressive wing (the most angry) of the party. I think you can see elements of this brewing when you see the success of the Bernie Sanders rally tour. I think this is the most likely AND the worst thing that could happen. 

2. The Party owns its failures and rebrands around what has been called the Abundance Agenda, which I've included a clip of Klein talking about here. This represents a radical new direction for the Party, which I personally hope they do. But it would be painful, and would be similar to how MAGA flushed the old guard of the Republican Party and transformed it in a relatively short period of time. 

Fellow Democrats, what do you think gives them the best chance to win in 2028?
Click to expand...




I think the DNC will find a way to not take either of those paths, and will do some song and dance about improving their branding and messaging, not realizing that it's not the branding that people are rejecting, it's the corporatist entity the branding is serving. 

Until their top leadership is replaced or has a change in priorities to actually be a party that has a vision for serving Americans well instead of special interests, I'm not optimistic about them accomplishing anything more than possibly barely kinda sometimes having enough power to obstruct Trump's agenda.

 
Lorewarn said:
I think the DNC will find a way to not take either of those paths, and will do some song and dance about improving their branding and messaging, not realizing that it's not the branding that people are rejecting, it's the corporatist entity the branding is serving. 

Until their top leadership is replaced or has a change in priorities to actually be a party that has a vision for serving Americans well instead of special interests, I'm not optimistic about them accomplishing anything more than possibly barely kinda sometimes having enough power to obstruct Trump's agenda.
Click to expand...
This is a bit pessimistic and ignores the reality that - for better or worse, political parties are a representative of the individuals who elect them.

If the median Democrat primary voter really felt like the DNC was led by and pursed the interests of corporate elites, they'd vote differently. The reality is that the average Dem Primary voter likes the party and is mad that they lost.

It's not like the Republican Party wanted a hostile takeover by MAGA. They openly talked about how it would be a disaster, and it has cost Republicans a lot. They should be sitting on a 60 house majority and 58+ Senate seats, but instead they barely hold what little dysfunctional political power they have and they're going to get taken to the woodshed in the 2026 midterms - and they're going to have a mediocre tax bill and dozens of losing lawsuits to show for it. They're fumbling political power because their constituents are and want to vote for morons.

 
Dr. Strangelove said:
This is a bit pessimistic and ignores the reality that - for better or worse, political parties are a representative of the individuals who elect them.

If the median Democrat primary voter really felt like the DNC was led by and pursed the interests of corporate elites, they'd vote differently. The reality is that the average Dem Primary voter likes the party and is mad that they lost.

It's not like the Republican Party wanted a hostile takeover by MAGA. They openly talked about how it would be a disaster, and it has cost Republicans a lot. They should be sitting on a 60 house majority and 58+ Senate seats, but instead they barely hold what little dysfunctional political power they have and they're going to get taken to the woodshed in the 2026 midterms - and they're going to have a mediocre tax bill and dozens of losing lawsuits to show for it. They're fumbling political power because their constituents are and want to vote for morons.
Click to expand...




Making the correlation between who people vote for and that they liked voting for that person is a massive stretch, imo. I didn't like voting for Hillary Clinton, or Joe Biden, or Kamala, or most (but not all) of my congressional reps. I did it nonetheless, as a compromise towards harm reduction. Outside of Obama's two terms with great messaging and underwhelming results, the experience of voting democratic is only and ever a harm reduction vote, as opposed to a vote with the real belief that there will be any substantive change and progress.

The MAGA movement isn't as much a hostile takeover as it may seem. The tides had been turning amongst the GOP's base, media apparatus and donors for a decent chunk of time. It's not like Project 2025 or the Heritage Foundation were some plucky rogue usurping forces - this has been being worked on for decades. Trump and Co. became the successful vehicle because they promised something fundamentally different, and while voters are stupid and can't tell the difference between actual populism and scam faux-populism, they also deeply felt that government was not working for them or serving them. 

Where is the Dem's unified, comprehensive political playbook and vision for America? They have no Project 2025. There's absolutely zero imagination or energy towards a real progressive framework, there's just, "well yeah insurance companies are robbing you but we'll subsidize some of that and cut you a check".

 
Lorewarn said:
Making the correlation between who people vote for and that they liked voting for that person is a massive stretch, imo. I didn't like voting for Hillary Clinton, or Joe Biden, or Kamala, or most (but not all) of my congressional reps. I did it nonetheless, as a compromise towards harm reduction. Outside of Obama's two terms with great messaging and underwhelming results, the experience of voting democratic is only and ever a harm reduction vote, as opposed to a vote with the real belief that there will be any substantive change and progress.

The MAGA movement isn't as much a hostile takeover as it may seem. The tides had been turning amongst the GOP's base, media apparatus and donors for a decent chunk of time. It's not like Project 2025 or the Heritage Foundation were some plucky rogue usurping forces - this has been being worked on for decades. Trump and Co. became the successful vehicle because they promised something fundamentally different, and while voters are stupid and can't tell the difference between actual populism and scam faux-populism, they also deeply felt that government was not working for them or serving them. 

Where is the Dem's unified, comprehensive political playbook and vision for America? They have no Project 2025. There's absolutely zero imagination or energy towards a real progressive framework, there's just, "well yeah insurance companies are robbing you but we'll subsidize some of that and cut you a check".
Click to expand...
That's because the Democratic Party is much more of a coalition of groups that are often at odds and dislike each other, while the Republican Party is mostly homogeneous. You feel like voting for Democrats doesn't serve your interests because the makeup of the Party makes it fairly difficult to deliver a legislative agenda that makes all members of the coalition happy.

But Obama used his political capital to deliver a massive healthcare bill that has caused the rate of people going without insurance to plummet. Biden used his political capital to pass the largest climate bill in US history, while navigating the economy through some pretty difficult times. To you, these may have not served your interests - and voting for them was simply harm reduction - but for certain groups in the coalition it matters a lot.

Republicans don't have the same coalition problems.

 
Dr. Strangelove said:
This is a bit pessimistic and ignores the reality that - for better or worse, political parties are a representative of the individuals who elect them.

If the median Democrat primary voter really felt like the DNC was led by and pursed the interests of corporate elites, they'd vote differently. The reality is that the average Dem Primary voter likes the party and is mad that they lost.

It's not like the Republican Party wanted a hostile takeover by MAGA. They openly talked about how it would be a disaster, and it has cost Republicans a lot. They should be sitting on a 60 house majority and 58+ Senate seats, but instead they barely hold what little dysfunctional political power they have and they're going to get taken to the woodshed in the 2026 midterms - and they're going to have a mediocre tax bill and dozens of losing lawsuits to show for it. They're fumbling political power because their constituents are and want to vote for morons.
Click to expand...
I think a lot of us vote Dem because we refuse to vote for the current GOP.  Radicalizing the DNC will probably cost more votes than it gains.

 
Back
Top