Progressives who are optimistic now should look back to 1988 to see how quickly fortunes can shift. Dukakis started with a double digit lead, and ended up losing in a landslide. A blue state liberal destroyed by Republicans’ emphasis on crime, foreign policy, and patriotism.
Dems have one basic problem, with their historic opportunity. The only thing less popular than Blue state policies is Trump. He is 80 years old and term limited. By the time midterms roll around, Trump will have a scant 26 months left on his political career, assuming he continues to defy mortality stats.
Meanwhile, the repercussions from Blue State policies, seem without end. Recently, scenic Colorado was included in the 5 states Americans are fleeing fastest. Palantir's simultaneous escape from their Rocky Mountain lair to Miami, was ignored by the Press and Dems alike. Palantir's AI will not only be instrumental in shaping future American defense, but our politics and lives.
One of the most important AI companies on the planet fled Colorado, after it fled CA, and not a single Dem leader could be bothered to notice, let alone comment. Blue States didn't just forfeit the Palantir Golden Goose. They lost all the future golden goslings, on top of the eggs. The notion none of the Mag 7 will do the same, during the next tech downturn, market correction or CA tax hike is a big bet of questionable odds.
As for specific Dem prospects, the NBA route of international recruiting could help, but at least for the moment, Dems still pay lip service to the quaint notion a US President should be born on US soil.
Shapiro spent his Sunday morning on TV channeling his inner George Wallace. He informed viewers Penn was executing a plan to prevent ICE from operating in his state. I evidently slept thru the secession. This is on top of Josh's heritage, that is likely disqualifying for most Dems.
Beshear is the ultimate nepo baby and Trojan thoroughbred, all rolled into one. Andy's main problem is no one outside of KY gives a flying fig who his father was. Kept in check by a bright Red legislature, Beshear, like Talarico, covers his radicalism in Scripture, but is no less Progressive than AOC.
Whitmer is another Dem nepo baby, not ready for prime time. Whitmer's handling of Covid was no better than Newsom's and Cuomo's fiascos, but Michigan generated less Covid press. Gretchen's perpetual deer in the headlights signature look, is not going away anytime soon. The mid 50's is generally a bit late, to develop an intellect.
Kamala, seriously? Mayor Pete was the mediocre Mayor of 100K people. Then, an MIA Transport Sec, who would not exist, but for DEI. Kahanna is the CA version of Macron. Dems have one real option, Fetterman, but they refuse to say his name. It is as if, John is the Democratic Bettlejuice, rather than their best bet for avoiding obsolescence.
If 24 months from now - primary season already begun - political conditions are identical to what they are now, here's what will happen. Democrats will nominate a blue state progressive like Newsom. The crazed Left that controls Democratic primaries won't accept a genuine moderate. This nominee will pose as a moderate on some issues, and a compliant media will try to convince the voters of that bogus claim. The Democrats' big hope is that Trump is so unpopular by 2028 that almost any Democrat could beat any Republican candidate.
However, it is unlikely that political conditions in 2028 will be identical to conditions in 2026. We will be that much closer to the projected shortfalls in Social Security and Medicare by 2032/2033: the next President will have to face up to that problem. There could be foreign policy/military debacles that crater support for Trump among all but his hardcore followers. Many other unforeseen events will likely influence the 2028 elections.
A moderate liberal would be very strong in 2028, moderate being someone who is genuinely opposed to the extremes of DEI, transgenderism, open borders, and other issues that the far Left is obsessed with. But who is that genuine moderate liberal, i.e. not a phony moderate like the new Governor of Virginia?
I agree with much of the above, but there is an alternative possibility, although admittedly less likely.
Trump is no longer with us, or his bets pay off. Iran and Venezuela both have actual elected leaders. 130 million people will have been released from decades of bondage, largely thanks to Trump. 50% or more of the world's oil production and reserves, would be held by nations friendly to the US.
Farage, the AdF and a Le Pen disciple are running England, Germany and France by the end of 2028, or 2 of the European Big 3. NATO is not floundering, but experiencing a Renaissance unseen since the days of Reagan, Thatcher and Kohl.
New factories are running, especially in Rust Belt Swing States, and SCOTUS has gutted Section 2 of Voting Rights Act handing Reps better chances in 10- 20 reworked House districts.
For many Dems, loathing all things even Trump adjacent, and his ICE optics, have foreclosed the possibility of any Trump wins down the road. That may or may not end up being accurate.
Democrats will pick up seats in the mid term election, that was always a given. As for Trump's policies being unpopular,,, is anyone really paying attention? Iran and Puerto Vallarta have my attention, that and the price of tech stocks. Democrats might win in 28, hard to tell, there's a lot of pressure from corporate Republicans to revert to their old ways too. For now, there is only one party that has embraced any sort of populism, and in a Democracy, the policies that appeal to the most people, wins.
The unknown is if a candidate spoke up in an emperor no clothes kind of thing the way Trump did in 16, could that Democratic candidate win in the primaries. In 16 everyone was predicting Trump would fail in the primaries. Could the Democrats vote for someone who shoots down unpopular Democratic orthodoxies like immigration, DEI, or trans craziness? If it could be done convincingly, they'd have a chance of a sweep. If not it's lots of lost elections, if not this time then next. At some time the magic of FDR will wear off if it hasn't already.
I think this is a well reasoned post. Of course, it's still two years out so there are many things we can't anticipate that will change the dynamics of the 2028 race, but this is the sort of thinking Democrats need to be engaged in.
However, Mr. Vassallo's focus is principally on political geography and individual political affiliations (mostly more or less progressive). What will be equally important is a strategy to get the party leadership to coalesce around a core platform that progressives can accept as adequate for the moment but that represents a consensus of the big-tent center-left party. The most important elements might concern issues such as the specific design of a functioning immigration solution, focused on a theme that America's shrinking population represents the greatest long-term threat to its economic well-being; addressing problems of AI and social media access for minors and the importance of fostering local in-real-life community to slow the atomization of American society and protect the spiritual well-being that seems to be fading nationally; and, of course, clearly stated good-government principles that will highlight the financial corruption of the present administration and the need for reform, as well as non-radical long-term tax solutions to slow and then reverse the growth of an American oligarchy (which is likely to be the principal bulwark of financial support for GOP campaigns).
I think there is already, in the post-pandemic era, a sense in America that we have crossed some boundary into a new historical era, and no matter which side of the political divide voters are on there is considerable fear. A party that can generally unite around the theme of how America can respond to a new world through a combination of old values and policy innovations will help support whatever individual personality emerges from the primary scrum and begin the essential process of rebranding the party in a constructive way. In that sense, the one thing I'd disagree with in the post is the statement that the Democrats don't need a "Project 2029." I think they'd benefit from something along those lines that is party-based and the product of inclusive thinking, rather than the expression of an extremist faction trying to impose an ideological program.
I may be a nut, MG, but that's a shell I don't feel comfortable in. I don't think we're ready for horse race handicapping yet, and if we were then I'd be behind the curve because there are a number of promising candidates I haven't yet studied enough to form a good sense of their strengths and weaknesses.
I do think it's pretty obvious that Harris would not be a good choice and that circumstances and her political positioning would have to change quite a bit for Ocasio-Cortez to be a good choice. (I think she's a smart cookie and might accomplish that by, say, 2036.) I hope we don't wind up with a chameleon like Newsom, but just because he is such a chameleon he might turn out to be a good choice. I'm very interested in looking more closely at the purple/red state governors and senators -- they are the people who seem best positioned to unite the party around a successful platform right now, but projected personality is critical and I haven't seen enough of most of them (Whitmer, Shapiro, Gallego, Ossof, Beshear, etc.). I read an interview with Ro Khanna the other day -- not someone I expected to react positively towards -- and was very impressed with his intelligence and thoughtfulness. It reminded me that these candidates are real people and may have valuable character elements that headline news doesn't capture with its two-dimensional caricatures.
Arizona Senator Mark Kelly seems to fit some of this criteria, particularly being a guy who has demonstrated chops with the purple-red electorate. Hopefully, one or two stars surface quickly, as Newsome may come around, but needs some serious contenders soon.
Leftists got the memo from 2025: full steam ahead on Spanbergering the nation!
I can't believe anyone believed she was a moderate to begin with. Same with Shapiro or Brashear or Moore.
Progressives who are optimistic now should look back to 1988 to see how quickly fortunes can shift. Dukakis started with a double digit lead, and ended up losing in a landslide. A blue state liberal destroyed by Republicans’ emphasis on crime, foreign policy, and patriotism.
Dems have one basic problem, with their historic opportunity. The only thing less popular than Blue state policies is Trump. He is 80 years old and term limited. By the time midterms roll around, Trump will have a scant 26 months left on his political career, assuming he continues to defy mortality stats.
Meanwhile, the repercussions from Blue State policies, seem without end. Recently, scenic Colorado was included in the 5 states Americans are fleeing fastest. Palantir's simultaneous escape from their Rocky Mountain lair to Miami, was ignored by the Press and Dems alike. Palantir's AI will not only be instrumental in shaping future American defense, but our politics and lives.
One of the most important AI companies on the planet fled Colorado, after it fled CA, and not a single Dem leader could be bothered to notice, let alone comment. Blue States didn't just forfeit the Palantir Golden Goose. They lost all the future golden goslings, on top of the eggs. The notion none of the Mag 7 will do the same, during the next tech downturn, market correction or CA tax hike is a big bet of questionable odds.
As for specific Dem prospects, the NBA route of international recruiting could help, but at least for the moment, Dems still pay lip service to the quaint notion a US President should be born on US soil.
Shapiro spent his Sunday morning on TV channeling his inner George Wallace. He informed viewers Penn was executing a plan to prevent ICE from operating in his state. I evidently slept thru the secession. This is on top of Josh's heritage, that is likely disqualifying for most Dems.
Beshear is the ultimate nepo baby and Trojan thoroughbred, all rolled into one. Andy's main problem is no one outside of KY gives a flying fig who his father was. Kept in check by a bright Red legislature, Beshear, like Talarico, covers his radicalism in Scripture, but is no less Progressive than AOC.
Whitmer is another Dem nepo baby, not ready for prime time. Whitmer's handling of Covid was no better than Newsom's and Cuomo's fiascos, but Michigan generated less Covid press. Gretchen's perpetual deer in the headlights signature look, is not going away anytime soon. The mid 50's is generally a bit late, to develop an intellect.
Kamala, seriously? Mayor Pete was the mediocre Mayor of 100K people. Then, an MIA Transport Sec, who would not exist, but for DEI. Kahanna is the CA version of Macron. Dems have one real option, Fetterman, but they refuse to say his name. It is as if, John is the Democratic Bettlejuice, rather than their best bet for avoiding obsolescence.
If 24 months from now - primary season already begun - political conditions are identical to what they are now, here's what will happen. Democrats will nominate a blue state progressive like Newsom. The crazed Left that controls Democratic primaries won't accept a genuine moderate. This nominee will pose as a moderate on some issues, and a compliant media will try to convince the voters of that bogus claim. The Democrats' big hope is that Trump is so unpopular by 2028 that almost any Democrat could beat any Republican candidate.
However, it is unlikely that political conditions in 2028 will be identical to conditions in 2026. We will be that much closer to the projected shortfalls in Social Security and Medicare by 2032/2033: the next President will have to face up to that problem. There could be foreign policy/military debacles that crater support for Trump among all but his hardcore followers. Many other unforeseen events will likely influence the 2028 elections.
A moderate liberal would be very strong in 2028, moderate being someone who is genuinely opposed to the extremes of DEI, transgenderism, open borders, and other issues that the far Left is obsessed with. But who is that genuine moderate liberal, i.e. not a phony moderate like the new Governor of Virginia?
I agree with much of the above, but there is an alternative possibility, although admittedly less likely.
Trump is no longer with us, or his bets pay off. Iran and Venezuela both have actual elected leaders. 130 million people will have been released from decades of bondage, largely thanks to Trump. 50% or more of the world's oil production and reserves, would be held by nations friendly to the US.
Farage, the AdF and a Le Pen disciple are running England, Germany and France by the end of 2028, or 2 of the European Big 3. NATO is not floundering, but experiencing a Renaissance unseen since the days of Reagan, Thatcher and Kohl.
New factories are running, especially in Rust Belt Swing States, and SCOTUS has gutted Section 2 of Voting Rights Act handing Reps better chances in 10- 20 reworked House districts.
For many Dems, loathing all things even Trump adjacent, and his ICE optics, have foreclosed the possibility of any Trump wins down the road. That may or may not end up being accurate.
Democrats will pick up seats in the mid term election, that was always a given. As for Trump's policies being unpopular,,, is anyone really paying attention? Iran and Puerto Vallarta have my attention, that and the price of tech stocks. Democrats might win in 28, hard to tell, there's a lot of pressure from corporate Republicans to revert to their old ways too. For now, there is only one party that has embraced any sort of populism, and in a Democracy, the policies that appeal to the most people, wins.
The unknown is if a candidate spoke up in an emperor no clothes kind of thing the way Trump did in 16, could that Democratic candidate win in the primaries. In 16 everyone was predicting Trump would fail in the primaries. Could the Democrats vote for someone who shoots down unpopular Democratic orthodoxies like immigration, DEI, or trans craziness? If it could be done convincingly, they'd have a chance of a sweep. If not it's lots of lost elections, if not this time then next. At some time the magic of FDR will wear off if it hasn't already.
I think this is a well reasoned post. Of course, it's still two years out so there are many things we can't anticipate that will change the dynamics of the 2028 race, but this is the sort of thinking Democrats need to be engaged in.
However, Mr. Vassallo's focus is principally on political geography and individual political affiliations (mostly more or less progressive). What will be equally important is a strategy to get the party leadership to coalesce around a core platform that progressives can accept as adequate for the moment but that represents a consensus of the big-tent center-left party. The most important elements might concern issues such as the specific design of a functioning immigration solution, focused on a theme that America's shrinking population represents the greatest long-term threat to its economic well-being; addressing problems of AI and social media access for minors and the importance of fostering local in-real-life community to slow the atomization of American society and protect the spiritual well-being that seems to be fading nationally; and, of course, clearly stated good-government principles that will highlight the financial corruption of the present administration and the need for reform, as well as non-radical long-term tax solutions to slow and then reverse the growth of an American oligarchy (which is likely to be the principal bulwark of financial support for GOP campaigns).
I think there is already, in the post-pandemic era, a sense in America that we have crossed some boundary into a new historical era, and no matter which side of the political divide voters are on there is considerable fear. A party that can generally unite around the theme of how America can respond to a new world through a combination of old values and policy innovations will help support whatever individual personality emerges from the primary scrum and begin the essential process of rebranding the party in a constructive way. In that sense, the one thing I'd disagree with in the post is the statement that the Democrats don't need a "Project 2029." I think they'd benefit from something along those lines that is party-based and the product of inclusive thinking, rather than the expression of an extremist faction trying to impose an ideological program.
So in a nutshell, who do you think can unify the party and win national elections?
I may be a nut, MG, but that's a shell I don't feel comfortable in. I don't think we're ready for horse race handicapping yet, and if we were then I'd be behind the curve because there are a number of promising candidates I haven't yet studied enough to form a good sense of their strengths and weaknesses.
I do think it's pretty obvious that Harris would not be a good choice and that circumstances and her political positioning would have to change quite a bit for Ocasio-Cortez to be a good choice. (I think she's a smart cookie and might accomplish that by, say, 2036.) I hope we don't wind up with a chameleon like Newsom, but just because he is such a chameleon he might turn out to be a good choice. I'm very interested in looking more closely at the purple/red state governors and senators -- they are the people who seem best positioned to unite the party around a successful platform right now, but projected personality is critical and I haven't seen enough of most of them (Whitmer, Shapiro, Gallego, Ossof, Beshear, etc.). I read an interview with Ro Khanna the other day -- not someone I expected to react positively towards -- and was very impressed with his intelligence and thoughtfulness. It reminded me that these candidates are real people and may have valuable character elements that headline news doesn't capture with its two-dimensional caricatures.
Arizona Senator Mark Kelly seems to fit some of this criteria, particularly being a guy who has demonstrated chops with the purple-red electorate. Hopefully, one or two stars surface quickly, as Newsome may come around, but needs some serious contenders soon.