Here's what's missing from this commentary. Why do Democrats want to regain power? What policies will/should they promote? What is it that they want to accomplish if given 4 years? How would that differ from their policies during the past 4 years when they had power? How would that differ from core Republican ideology today, in areas such as immigration, energy, education, the economy, federalism, etc? Saying that Democrats need to "reconnect with the working class" is a demographic conclusion. The question is, what policies will Democrats promote that will convince the working class to leave their recent shift toward Republicans? I have a hard time seeing how Democrats can successfully do this. A majority of the voting public favor the central policies and principles of the Republican party: less intrusive government; deregulation to promote economic growth through free market capitalism; retrenchment from onerous environmental and climate change regulations toward an "all-of-the-above" energy approach; greater school choice; safer communities through enhancement of community police and elimination of recent criminal justice decriminalization and bail reforms; devolution of power to state and local communities, etc. Democrats, on the other hand, are the party of robust government action. They are the party that advocates centralized power across national agencies to advance their economic and cultural agenda. How does a political party whose ideology is oriented around government solutions attract a working majority after the wide-spread aversion to big government during the Biden administration? Once you get to specifics, the approach Ruy advocates is essentially "conservative lite" without details. It's tactical, simply to win elections. But to do what?
While I think your description of the Democratic Party is accurate, your description of the GOP seems to refer to the party as it existed a decade ago. The Trump version doesn’t seem to favor “less intrusive government” or “growth through free market capitalism.” The trade strategy of the Trump Admin seems closer to central planning.
For a Democrat to win the presidency in 2028, he or she is going to have to spend less time and effort compromising and currying favor for the Party's out-of-touch progressive Left wing and more gaining a foothold with Independents and centist Republicans who never liked or have tired of Trump, especially if the GOP continues to lose ground on the economy and other bread-and-butter issues.
Call it a Bounty of the Underwhelming. Most of these candidates are now fleeing Progressivism like they just realized, they are standing on wrong side of the North Korean border. Buttigieg, who owes his entire political career to identity politics, now believes it went too far?
Newsom's reign rendered 37% of CA too poor to provide their own health insurance. A decade after, Gavin championed a CA law that allowed trans girls in female bathrooms, locker rooms and athletic fields. Now Newsom suddenly sees the other side's point? Pritzker? Seriously? Has anyone been in Chicago recently? To be held pretrial in IL now, cops must catch the accused standing over a dead body, holding a bloody murder weapon. Even then, there is still a chance for ankle monitoring, depending on the Judge.
Whitmer is a moderate? She has an authoritarian streak, Putin envies. During Covid, the women locked down Michigan every bit as tightly, as New York and CA. She only escaped blame, because few outside the Midwest ever give Michigan a thought. Like Cuomo, Whitmer sent Covid positive patients back into nursing homes, needlessly killing the elderly. She, literally, dictated which aisles of Home Depot Michiganders could visit. Gretch's vast scientific knowledge, informed her, Covid was lethal in Paint, but benign, two aisles over in Plumbing. Like Newsom, she lectured citizens it was not safe to leave their homes, as she boarded a private jet, to visit her parents in FL.
Polis is not just an open border advocate. He envisions dissolving all of them, while calling himself a Libertarian. Shapiro blatantly lied about supporting school choice, while running for Gov. After he won the election, Josh recanted while dropping his own kids off at their private schools. The same ones, that educated both Shapiro parents. Say what you will about AOC, at least she is not attempting to morph herself into a female Joe Liberman.
What if your dream candidate emerged? I no longer believe there is any relationship between the candidate and governance. Biden was a career moderate. His admin was extreme and insane. The groups won’t go away. No Democrat will tell them “no”. Every moderate will turn into an American Maoist once they take office. The Democratic Party is hopeless and cannot be trusted.
as a conservative who has voted independent for the last several elections, voting R down the line, some of those towards the end of the article sound attractive. I would love a 3rd party to form.
If any of those at the top of the article ran, I'd probably vote R. Shapiro sounds the best, however, don't know how he'd be w/ a D congress...
Shapiro? A bald-faced liar who instantly betrayed voters and knuckled under to the teacher's union? No thanks. And I think Ruy forgot to mention the man's religion and the anti-Semitism lurking in the Dem party.
I just said as those mentioned in the top part of the article he could possibly get the nomination. And as I said, if any in the top won as nominee, I'd still most likely vote R - sure wish Vance could somehow not be the nominee... just say'n... I liked him yrs ago, & he didn't have any skeletons in his closet prior to the election but he's saying some idiotic stuff now that will be used against him
GALLEGO: He only looks good because he ran against a nut-case (Kari Lake). Plus, he is a self-described progressive who went after Sinema (who we liked and would have voted for). No thanks.
It sounds like a much longer version of Carville's pithy remarks. I mean that as high praise, not criticism.
For myself, would like Rahm Emanuel or someone like him to emerge. Am not sure anything else can save the Democrat party for at least a decade otherwise.
Since it all seems to be based on how the Republicans will do, what chances do the Dems have based on partial success of the Republicans. Betting against the Republicans is not that all far fetched. However, if you can't delineate, as others on here have said, a difference in policies, no one of voting importance will listen to anything that is being said.
In the end, can anyone nominated by the Dems win a general election? I'm betting until the Dems lose more elections, no one will find the balls to challenge the progressives so winning the general is the number one priority. The first problem with that is, convincing anyone that any change in policies is anything more than a ploy to gt elected and then showing, once again, they haven't. Bernie's frank admission about kamala and bidengate will test how long memories are.
Love the clown show at the DNC, starring David Hogg and Kalyn Free, who claims David won in a "fatally flawed election" that violated the DNC charter of "gender diversity." So many oppressed, so few available positions LOL. As long as the Dems continue with this kind of identity politics, they will remain a joke to the working class.
He's a manner of centrist far more suited to the rhetorical spirit of the times. Shapiro, Whitmer, and even Beshear still speak and emote in a way more suited to the media environment Obama worked in.
Ossoff communicates in the offbeat, extemporaneous style that suits the age of social media. And as should go without saying given the current president, personality, rhetoric and showmanship are far more important than policy or legislative accomplishment when running for the presidency.
Ruben Gallego had the unbelievable luck to run against Kari Lake - probably the most unlikeable human in Arizona. A tree stump could have won that race.
I think one of the real unknowns is what's going to happen this summer? With dolts like Pritzker urging people to take to the streets, you know all the crazies will be out in force. What will the Dem party do when things turn violent?
AOC or Harris would be a pre-cooked disaster. My view is that the rest remain malleable enough in terms of image that any of them could be nominate, or even elected if conditions are right and the messages are not alienating to moderate and low-information voters. The virus to be combated is the militants on each issue, who are likely to start undermining the viable candidates for being insufficiently militant or too nuanced or too pragmatic: getting the militants, activists and puritans to wake up to that will be a challenge. Another challenge will be keeping the vital substance of the most existential issue, viz. climate, as a focus: that can be done with the message of building the economy of the future, which Trump is handing to China. But it won't be easy.
Cuomo. They got a tough guy, we need a tough guy. Baggage? Didn’t hurt Trump any. He’s got the pedigree, the optics, the political instincts. Some feel good types will be turned off by his persona, but whoever runs as a Dem is going to turn off a bloc or 2 - that’s the Democratic party. He could appeal to the working class just by showing up. Dems would be wise not to rule him out.
Here's what's missing from this commentary. Why do Democrats want to regain power? What policies will/should they promote? What is it that they want to accomplish if given 4 years? How would that differ from their policies during the past 4 years when they had power? How would that differ from core Republican ideology today, in areas such as immigration, energy, education, the economy, federalism, etc? Saying that Democrats need to "reconnect with the working class" is a demographic conclusion. The question is, what policies will Democrats promote that will convince the working class to leave their recent shift toward Republicans? I have a hard time seeing how Democrats can successfully do this. A majority of the voting public favor the central policies and principles of the Republican party: less intrusive government; deregulation to promote economic growth through free market capitalism; retrenchment from onerous environmental and climate change regulations toward an "all-of-the-above" energy approach; greater school choice; safer communities through enhancement of community police and elimination of recent criminal justice decriminalization and bail reforms; devolution of power to state and local communities, etc. Democrats, on the other hand, are the party of robust government action. They are the party that advocates centralized power across national agencies to advance their economic and cultural agenda. How does a political party whose ideology is oriented around government solutions attract a working majority after the wide-spread aversion to big government during the Biden administration? Once you get to specifics, the approach Ruy advocates is essentially "conservative lite" without details. It's tactical, simply to win elections. But to do what?
While I think your description of the Democratic Party is accurate, your description of the GOP seems to refer to the party as it existed a decade ago. The Trump version doesn’t seem to favor “less intrusive government” or “growth through free market capitalism.” The trade strategy of the Trump Admin seems closer to central planning.
For a Democrat to win the presidency in 2028, he or she is going to have to spend less time and effort compromising and currying favor for the Party's out-of-touch progressive Left wing and more gaining a foothold with Independents and centist Republicans who never liked or have tired of Trump, especially if the GOP continues to lose ground on the economy and other bread-and-butter issues.
Good luck getting the nomination that way.
Probably. Though at some point even Democrats may figure out that being the nominee means a whole lot less if you can't win the presidency.
Call it a Bounty of the Underwhelming. Most of these candidates are now fleeing Progressivism like they just realized, they are standing on wrong side of the North Korean border. Buttigieg, who owes his entire political career to identity politics, now believes it went too far?
Newsom's reign rendered 37% of CA too poor to provide their own health insurance. A decade after, Gavin championed a CA law that allowed trans girls in female bathrooms, locker rooms and athletic fields. Now Newsom suddenly sees the other side's point? Pritzker? Seriously? Has anyone been in Chicago recently? To be held pretrial in IL now, cops must catch the accused standing over a dead body, holding a bloody murder weapon. Even then, there is still a chance for ankle monitoring, depending on the Judge.
Whitmer is a moderate? She has an authoritarian streak, Putin envies. During Covid, the women locked down Michigan every bit as tightly, as New York and CA. She only escaped blame, because few outside the Midwest ever give Michigan a thought. Like Cuomo, Whitmer sent Covid positive patients back into nursing homes, needlessly killing the elderly. She, literally, dictated which aisles of Home Depot Michiganders could visit. Gretch's vast scientific knowledge, informed her, Covid was lethal in Paint, but benign, two aisles over in Plumbing. Like Newsom, she lectured citizens it was not safe to leave their homes, as she boarded a private jet, to visit her parents in FL.
Polis is not just an open border advocate. He envisions dissolving all of them, while calling himself a Libertarian. Shapiro blatantly lied about supporting school choice, while running for Gov. After he won the election, Josh recanted while dropping his own kids off at their private schools. The same ones, that educated both Shapiro parents. Say what you will about AOC, at least she is not attempting to morph herself into a female Joe Liberman.
What if your dream candidate emerged? I no longer believe there is any relationship between the candidate and governance. Biden was a career moderate. His admin was extreme and insane. The groups won’t go away. No Democrat will tell them “no”. Every moderate will turn into an American Maoist once they take office. The Democratic Party is hopeless and cannot be trusted.
as a conservative who has voted independent for the last several elections, voting R down the line, some of those towards the end of the article sound attractive. I would love a 3rd party to form.
If any of those at the top of the article ran, I'd probably vote R. Shapiro sounds the best, however, don't know how he'd be w/ a D congress...
Shapiro? A bald-faced liar who instantly betrayed voters and knuckled under to the teacher's union? No thanks. And I think Ruy forgot to mention the man's religion and the anti-Semitism lurking in the Dem party.
I just said as those mentioned in the top part of the article he could possibly get the nomination. And as I said, if any in the top won as nominee, I'd still most likely vote R - sure wish Vance could somehow not be the nominee... just say'n... I liked him yrs ago, & he didn't have any skeletons in his closet prior to the election but he's saying some idiotic stuff now that will be used against him
There is no one.
GALLEGO: He only looks good because he ran against a nut-case (Kari Lake). Plus, he is a self-described progressive who went after Sinema (who we liked and would have voted for). No thanks.
It sounds like a much longer version of Carville's pithy remarks. I mean that as high praise, not criticism.
For myself, would like Rahm Emanuel or someone like him to emerge. Am not sure anything else can save the Democrat party for at least a decade otherwise.
Since it all seems to be based on how the Republicans will do, what chances do the Dems have based on partial success of the Republicans. Betting against the Republicans is not that all far fetched. However, if you can't delineate, as others on here have said, a difference in policies, no one of voting importance will listen to anything that is being said.
In the end, can anyone nominated by the Dems win a general election? I'm betting until the Dems lose more elections, no one will find the balls to challenge the progressives so winning the general is the number one priority. The first problem with that is, convincing anyone that any change in policies is anything more than a ploy to gt elected and then showing, once again, they haven't. Bernie's frank admission about kamala and bidengate will test how long memories are.
Love the clown show at the DNC, starring David Hogg and Kalyn Free, who claims David won in a "fatally flawed election" that violated the DNC charter of "gender diversity." So many oppressed, so few available positions LOL. As long as the Dems continue with this kind of identity politics, they will remain a joke to the working class.
Poignant and potent. Classic Teixeira.
Too soon. Whoever emerges first will peak to soon.
Dark horse: Jon Ossoff.
He's a manner of centrist far more suited to the rhetorical spirit of the times. Shapiro, Whitmer, and even Beshear still speak and emote in a way more suited to the media environment Obama worked in.
Ossoff communicates in the offbeat, extemporaneous style that suits the age of social media. And as should go without saying given the current president, personality, rhetoric and showmanship are far more important than policy or legislative accomplishment when running for the presidency.
Bill Clinton and Barak Obama exuded power. Trump exudes power.
Who today on the Democratic side radiates a type of power that attracts people to them above and beyond their policies?
Ruben Gallego had the unbelievable luck to run against Kari Lake - probably the most unlikeable human in Arizona. A tree stump could have won that race.
I think one of the real unknowns is what's going to happen this summer? With dolts like Pritzker urging people to take to the streets, you know all the crazies will be out in force. What will the Dem party do when things turn violent?
AOC or Harris would be a pre-cooked disaster. My view is that the rest remain malleable enough in terms of image that any of them could be nominate, or even elected if conditions are right and the messages are not alienating to moderate and low-information voters. The virus to be combated is the militants on each issue, who are likely to start undermining the viable candidates for being insufficiently militant or too nuanced or too pragmatic: getting the militants, activists and puritans to wake up to that will be a challenge. Another challenge will be keeping the vital substance of the most existential issue, viz. climate, as a focus: that can be done with the message of building the economy of the future, which Trump is handing to China. But it won't be easy.
Cuomo. They got a tough guy, we need a tough guy. Baggage? Didn’t hurt Trump any. He’s got the pedigree, the optics, the political instincts. Some feel good types will be turned off by his persona, but whoever runs as a Dem is going to turn off a bloc or 2 - that’s the Democratic party. He could appeal to the working class just by showing up. Dems would be wise not to rule him out.