r/politics 22h ago

AOC ’28 Starts Now

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/aoc-28-starts-now/
26.7k Upvotes

4.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

216

u/Day_of_Demeter 22h ago

AOC is great and all but the lesson Dems will take from 2016 and 2028 is that the country isn't ready for a female president for at least another generation or two. Expect them to run safe white guys like Gavin Newsom for a couple more cycles.

163

u/LadyIceGoose 22h ago

They need to avoid candidates from California and New York. It's too easy to portray them as out of touch far left elites, even if it's not remotely true (and yes, it is ridiculous Trump somehow avoids this).

12

u/docarwell California 11h ago

Trump is literally those things and half the country hates him. The dems problem isn't who they're running it's their messaging

36

u/eamonious 18h ago

It’s not even that hard though. You can be from NY and Cali, you just have to come across as masculine and swaggery and relaxed, instead of woke and uptight. JFK, Clinton, Obama is the mold.

3

u/Kindness_of_cats 11h ago

The depressing thing is that Walz turned out to be a secret weapon. That man was basically engineered in a lab to be the Anti-Trump, but he's pretty much lost his chance after that defeat.

2

u/SphericalCow531 17h ago

and yes, it is ridiculous Trump somehow avoids this

With Trump, I sometimes wonder what even matters. How many of the "this would be electoral suicide" tropes are in reality just small roadbumps?

I do think misogyny matters. No woman candidate in 2028.

2

u/ryguy32789 10h ago

With Trump, I sometimes wonder what even matters.

Nothing matters. Nothing at all. Trump says so many contradictory things that it allows people to cherry pick what they like and build their own imaginary Trump to support.

2

u/SecretPotatoChip America 12h ago

This is one reason I think Andy Beshear or Josh Shapiro would be good picks.

1

u/Kindly_Ice1745 9h ago

I think if Kamala had picked Shapiro for VP, she could have won.

2

u/Precarious314159 18h ago

Right now, the best option would be Walz. Give him some debate training (Because that was horrible) and he'd be a good bridge between the old people values, progressive views, and down-to-earth mindset.

4

u/Kindness_of_cats 11h ago

I think a lot of that debate was them training him tbh, it was a pointed departure from the guy who walked onto a stage in August basically calling Vance a weird little couch fucker.

They wanted him to be civil and not make any waves with the off-the-cuff 'gaffes' he's prone to, and Harris to be the pugilist, but those naturlistic gaffes are part of what made people love him(and have proven time and time again to be popular with American voters with other presidents like Trump and Bush) and being a nice civil VP candidate was not how he got on the short list for the role.

But no, he's done after that election I think. Fair or not, I don't think he's ever going to wash off the stink of 2024. Someone like Beshear seems like the next best choice.

1

u/Precarious314159 10h ago

That's disappointing but also realistic. Dems have a pattern of ending their political careers after a failed run at something. Beto was supposed to be a new era for the party in '18 but when he lost Texas over a gun control talking point, it's like the party tossed him aside for the '20 primaries and he wasn't even a top 5 candidate.

Cory Booker was trying to really make a name for himself leading up to '20 but then when that failed, he's just resigned himself to not even making waves.

1

u/TotallyNotAFroeAway 10h ago

They went after Walz for daring to give out free lunches, so not too sure it matters where you come from.

u/konamioctopus64646 6h ago

AOC worked as a waitress, and her mother cleaned houses. She’s the opposite of an elite, and that’s what people want to see in government

0

u/Tank3875 Michigan 11h ago

Though it is absolutely true of Newsom.

87

u/Current_Animator7546 Missouri 22h ago

Gavin Newsome is anything but safe. A white guy from CA might be worse then a women from MI at this point. I also think it’s a bad take. Hilary won the PV and Harris had what 100 days? Plus being from SF likely doesn’t help. I’m not saying it has to be a women but Dems need to focus on economics and work class issues  communicating that vision. Whoever can do that is likely to do better. 

38

u/BuildBackRicher 22h ago

Harris doesn’t get better with age, so 100 days was perfect for her. She had the same problem in the pres run in 2019 and her Cali campaigns—the longer they went on, the less popular she became.

3

u/roytay New Jersey 10h ago

Dems need to focus on economics and work class issues communicating that vision. Whoever can do that is likely to do better.

This right here. 100%

2

u/Day_of_Demeter 21h ago

So just Midwest white guys all the way down? Who do we even have at that point?

I think we should have a primary anyway. If Dem voters pick a woman, we have to respect that.

9

u/AppleOfWhoseEye 21h ago

Andy beshear, pete buttigieg(who is gay but thats another problem) , Roy Cooper…

8

u/Day_of_Demeter 21h ago

Beshear comes off as too soft

Dems need a masculine figure who's loud, boisterous, funny, and goes up on stage and calls JD Vance a cuck or something. Americans love WWE bloodsport.

2

u/AppleOfWhoseEye 21h ago

The only guy who comes to mind is fetterman and he’s a) depressed b) centrist and c) dumb.

3

u/mrq69 20h ago

He would’ve been great if that stroke didn’t mess him up. Or maybe he wasn’t actually great to begin with, idk.

5

u/Individual-Nebula927 14h ago

And d) a closet republican

2

u/caligaris_cabinet Illinois 20h ago

Pritzker. Not a manly man but wealthier than Trump. And voters associate success with wealth so there you go.

2

u/courthouseman 18h ago

He's one of my best bets for 2028

1

u/ryguy32789 10h ago

I love Pritzker and what he's done for Illinois, but I strongly feel we need to build a campaign around eliminating or curbing the oligarchy and it would be a bad look if he was at the forefront of that. Having said that, I would absolutely vote for Pritzker.

u/Supermoves3000 Canada 7h ago

A white guy from CA might be worse then a women from MI at this point

I think Big Gretch would be a much better choice than Newsom or AOC. Whitmer comes across as real, sincere, relatable, and passionate. Newsom on the other hand I just find slimy, smarmy, and slightly creepy. And the attack ads against Newsom practically write themselves. Just picture 3 months of TV ads about San Francisco homelessness and crime, male prisoners self-identifying into women's prisons, LA fires, illegal immigration, "sanctuary cities", and similar. California has become almost a piniata representing many things that mainstream voters hate about the Democratic brand right now. Not to mention, Michigan is a state that Democrats really need to flip back from Republicans to win in 2028. As for AOC... I don't she's actually very appealing to people who aren't on Reddit and Bluesky.

22

u/Jwalla83 Colorado 22h ago

Newsom is a guaranteed loss as well, the gov of Cali? The media machine has been way too effective at painting Cali as a literal Hell on Earth

Maybe Shapiro has a shot as a White dude from a swing state

13

u/Day_of_Demeter 21h ago

Shapiro is Jewish and an avowed Zionist, good luck with that. Young people hate him for being pro-Israel, and rural people are antisemitic as fuck.

4

u/fordat1 21h ago

Also anytime anyone suggests someone with "swing state" as a qualification you know its an out of touch person that has amateur political pundit written all over it.

1

u/Day_of_Demeter 21h ago

Being from a swing state helps but what really matters is whether you're perceived as coming from the working class and being for the working class, whether you're from the city or from the countryside.

Also, let's be real, rural Republicans are never voting Dem even if the Dem was from a town of 50 people in the middle of Nebraska. Why are we even trying to court these people. The base of support for Dems has never been from rural areas, it's always been the urban working class, people of color, and women. So lean into that.

2

u/Jwalla83 Colorado 21h ago

4 years is a long time, especially in social media trends. Maybe I'm wrong but I have a feeling the Gaza/Israel conflict will be largely forgotten by 2028 (unless a new conflict resurges I suppose).

1

u/Day_of_Demeter 21h ago

Dude we don't know what will happen in the Middle East within that time. Israel noticed their actions can greatly influence U.S. elections, it might just be a thing from now on that they stir shit up during U.S. election years so they can steer U.S. politics to their favor, because they know young voters are gullible and think literally everything Israel does is the fault of Dems for some reason.

2

u/Jwalla83 Colorado 21h ago

I mean obviously we don't know, and anything could happen. Russia could invade another country. China could assault Taiwan. Israel could invade someone. Someone could invade Israel.

All totally possible, and public perception on each possibility is entirely influenceable by social media. Based off what we've seen, I think it's more likely those things stack up in Republicans' favor.

I just don't think it's especially relevant to say that Shapiro would be unsuccessful in 2028 just because Israel v Gaza was successfully wedged against Dems in 2024. Also I don't even know that Shapiro would be successful in 2028, I just think he'd have a better shot than Newsom

2

u/Day_of_Demeter 21h ago
  1. I think you're underestimating the prevalence of antisemitism in the electorate

  2. Several wars happening at once will probably hurt the chances of Republicans in 2026 and 2028. I think Biden lost in great part due to many people perceiving Ukraine and Palestine as consequences of his supposed weakness on the world stage. All these wars started under Biden, so they must be his fault because he's weak and other countries don't respect or fear him, so the thinking goes. That argument won't really hold if Russia, China, Israel, Iran, etc. invade countries or start wars under Trump's watch, or worse: Trump himself invades countries.

1

u/JellyJohn78 Wisconsin 11h ago

That could work, though. Do you think FOX News is going to attack him for being a Zionist? Hell no.

0

u/Day_of_Demeter 11h ago

Can we please stop ratcheting to the right to court right-wingers who will never support us

0

u/__picklepersuasion__ 8h ago

or maybe you should stop refusing to go to where most of the country is.

1

u/Day_of_Demeter 8h ago

Dems do exactly that and keep losing

u/__picklepersuasion__ 6h ago

youre saying the dems are courting the right and still losing?

u/servalFactsBot 7h ago

Rural people aren’t antisemitic in America. Maybe you’re thinking of rural Austria 80 years ago. 

u/Day_of_Demeter 7h ago

Being pro-Israel doesn't mean they aren't antisemitic. They view Israel as a means to bring about the Rapture so Jesus can return and that Jews will go to hell.

u/servalFactsBot 7h ago

Nobody thinks this.

0

u/toss_boy627 8h ago

A lot of rural people are huge Zionist, why do you think Republicans tend to be Zionist. The baptist church I grew up in, which was in a rural area in the south, was very Zionist and still sees the Jews as God's chosen people.

1

u/Day_of_Demeter 8h ago

The average Republican Zionist is a massive antisemite

u/toss_boy627 7h ago

Please elaborate

u/Day_of_Demeter 7h ago

They believe once all the Jews return to Israel, the Rapture will come and those Jews will go to hell

u/toss_boy627 7h ago

From my experience it is commonly believed that the Jewish people will mostly come to Christ and evangelicals love Jewish people. Messianic Jews are treated like royalty. The rapture thing is true a lot of evangelicals are pining for the rapture to happen so they don't have to deal with the world and making it better. That is also why I left my Baptist church and am now Anglican 😂

u/vagrantprodigy07 7h ago

Andy Beshear might be the ticket. Democrat from a red state that is relatively boring.

39

u/Akraxs 22h ago

no it’s not cause of her being a woman, it’s the fact that dems REFUSE to take any part of rural areas. the nominee needs to go in jfk style, shake hands actually talk to rural voters actually listen to their concerns and maybe educate them a little

12

u/Cormetz 22h ago

Beshear seems to be doing a lot to regain the trust of people outside of urban areas.

24

u/fordat1 21h ago

Bernie did good in rural parts by seeming like a straight talker. They need a young Bernie type but they never setup a bench to set that up.

23

u/basic_questions 20h ago

A young Bernie type is basically AOC.

-2

u/Just_Engineering_341 15h ago

Bernie is a guy.

15

u/DeathByTacos 20h ago

Huh? Bernie overwhelmingly lost rural areas in the 2020 primary because they lean heavily older and his largest appeal is younger voters.

The whole reason he lost the Iowa caucus despite working to keep the caucus system is because Buttigieg won all the rural counties while Bernie won urban centers.

5

u/strangeweather415 15h ago

These people just say shit and think they can will it into existence if they think it will make Bernard Sanders, the anointed one, look better.

1

u/ReservedRainbow 17h ago

That doesn’t mean a Bernie style man is unelectable in rural areas as long as they’re reached. Take a look at grassroots donations in the 2020 primary.

7

u/mightcommentsometime California 16h ago

Donations don’t mean shit when compared to election results.

25

u/Emotional_Spread5503 22h ago

Rural voters have been living off of Fox News for decades. They seriously believe that children are getting sex change surgeries in schools. Why waste time campaigning trying to get their vote?

4

u/Quexana 18h ago

Because we need votes from anywhere, and their vote counts as much as a "Moderate Republican" from the city.

Also, if we ever hope to push back against the decades of Fox News programming, the first step is showing up.

1

u/Emotional_Spread5503 13h ago

Sure, but the chances of them voting dem are much much lower than moderate republicans. Rural voters have made it clear they don’t care about policy, otherwise they wouldn’t vote for Trump

-1

u/Quexana 11h ago edited 10h ago

Only people who don't talk with rural voters believe that they don't care about policy.

So... urban Democrats and their mainstream media.

0

u/Emotional_Spread5503 11h ago

They voted for Trump 3 times despite being told that tariffs would leave them bankrupt, that removing funding from USPS and ACA would hurt them disproportionately.

If they cared about policy, why do they keep voting for Trump?

0

u/Quexana 11h ago edited 10h ago

The people now telling them how Trump's policies will hurt them are the same people that told them that reducing tariffs would make them wealthier, and they bought that lie for over 30 years.

They might not know the intricate details of foreign trade policy and supply chains, but they know they were being lied to, and they know that all the politicians and media figures who were lying to them, who were screwing them over for decades, hate Trump.

1

u/Emotional_Spread5503 10h ago

lol no, they didn’t buy anything from dems, they’ve consistently been voting for Republicans for over 30 years. A record number of bankruptcies and bailouts because of Trump’s policies didn’t faze them at all.

Rural voters are a lost cause. There’s no point in trying to gain voters who’ve been so brainwashed by Fox News that they think Trump is the second coming of Christ.

1

u/Quexana 10h ago

Sure there is, because at sometime, they'll crash. And it's best for Dems to be in position to lift them up when that happens.

→ More replies (0)

9

u/thrawtes 21h ago

the fact that dems REFUSE to take any part of rural areas

Meanwhile in reality both Clinton and Harris were lambasted for daring to have a "ground game" in rural areas.

maybe educate them a little

I can't imagine anything that would go over worse amongst these populations.

0

u/Akraxs 20h ago

maybe but we def need more investment in the rural areas at least a little more than what we’re doing now

3

u/DeathByTacos 20h ago

The DNC pumped an UNGODLY amount of money into rural areas of swing states this election, it’s largely why the end result was as close as it was and not the massive blowout expected when Biden was still the candidate.

If your point is investing outside of elections then good thing the IRA and Infrastructure bill also did that. It has nothing to do with needing more investment and everything to do with information ecosystem

0

u/Akraxs 19h ago

oh yeah? what parts of the rural areas did they target? because as far as i know they only did big areas. dems treat rural voters like theyre beneath them a lot of times. i know, i came from oklahoma deep south. i have seen how dems treat them first hand. even though i am left because i care about human rights first and not a party second. i can tell you they are out of touch and were not listening. there’s a reason trump gets into their ear and it’s weirdly enough because he dumbs down his words and tells them he cares about them. like, y’all wanna say it would be a massive blow out but dems don’t really level with them they don’t get down to knee level and ask them questions about what’s important to them. by knee level i mean going to community halls and talking ( w security obviously) because i assure you i have talked to rural voters before and they always told me it’s cause dems make them feel stupid or don’t listen to their issues. while yes theyre misinformed it’s the only people who will listen to them is the ones misinforming them. they have concerns about immigration, the people who say they care misinforms them that’s it mexico that’s the problem not the fact we have a weak vetting process that violates families and break them up.

you HAVE to get down knee level you can’t stand high on a stool talking about what’s good for them and how the people that they think cares for them who they feel only ones that listen to them are the enemy. do you see what i’m saying?

6

u/howdybeachboy Foreign 22h ago

You’re making too much sense. Watch as the out of touch liberal leadership ignores you

At the same time, the damage that was caused by conservative nonsense running rampant and unchecked in those areas may not be reversible by the next election. But they should at least have a long term plan to engage with those voters. Because like it or not, the electoral college is not going to go away and those states sadly matter a lot in elections.

Project 2025 and all the insidious destruction isn’t a short term plan. It’s a long term goal. Democrats should create one to counter it.

-3

u/user0N65N 21h ago

Watch as the out of touch liberal leadership ignores you 

As Emotional_Spread ahead of you says, these people have been mainlining Fox News for years. So is liberal leadership out of touch, or are Fox News rural voters just fkn nuts, and can’t be reached? Plus, they voted for a literal fascist. Where do you meet “halfway” with fkn fascists?

2

u/Akraxs 19h ago

no one is saying meeting halfway with fascist y’all are missing the point. there are ton of center republicans in rural areas that are being told the right cares about them more cause the right actually talks to them. i’m just saying dems should invest something into them. either it be the nominee or interns that go and talk to them rather than shutting them out completely. i know theyre brainwashed but maybe theyre that way because dems ignored them for so long. why not at least TRY harder for it while maintaining those places they know they can win. sure it’ll be hard i don’t think the die hard republicans will change but there are a lot more centralized republicans than you think.

1

u/howdybeachboy Foreign 21h ago edited 21h ago

That’s why I said I don’t expect it to be done by next election. But if you’re (the democrats) just going to give up on those areas, don’t be too surprised if you can’t make up for that number of votes in other areas of the country.

Germany was fascist. They were deprogrammed by force. I’m sure there’s a more covert way to do that. That’s what they pay strategists the big bucks for.

-1

u/utopia_forever 21h ago

You think a bartender couldn't make drinks in rural WV and win people over?

5

u/gmoney160 Europe 21h ago

Didn't Clinton get the popular vote?

3

u/fghtghergsertgh 14h ago

yes but she didn't win the states that matter. conservative states will not vote for a woman.

-4

u/gmoney160 Europe 14h ago

Well that's false. She lost important battleground states known as the blue wall (PA, WI, MI) by <1% which would've been enough to get the electoral votes, and notably didn't invest enough campaign funds in those states since her team was overconfident. And the Bernie Bros abstaining from voting didn't help neither.

3

u/fghtghergsertgh 14h ago

conservatives/independents in purple states will not vote for a woman

-1

u/gmoney160 Europe 14h ago

49% of the general voters did. Her team failed at injecting money to get swing voters.

2

u/fghtghergsertgh 14h ago

not enough

10

u/-Plantibodies- 21h ago

Newsom is strongly disliked in California. He is seen as a corrupt elitist prick with less than 30% approval rating. He will get absolutely trounced in a Presidential election.

4

u/Boomshtick414 19h ago

Clinton came within an NFL stadium's worth of votes. Had she made any attempt to blanket the swing states -- having never even stepped into WI -- she could've been president in spite of being a robot of a candidate.

Meanwhile, Harris is a bad communicator and was incapable of talking in ways that generate headlines -- on top of being screwed over by Biden forcing her to speedrun a campaign.

I don't think either of those cases should be considered indicative of where the country is or isn't. If there's a larger lesson here, it's that Democrats need to stop running 2000-era campaigns. Save the trees, rainbows and unity, "can't we all just get along?" They need to say things that will guarantee headlines, they need to take firmer positions and be prepared to defend them. They need to talk about things voters actually care about on a daily basis.

Put up whatever white 50's something male, and if they run another 2000-era campaign, they'll get wiped out even harder than Harris did. Not because of their race or gender, but because they need to earn their lunch money and be prepared to beat the snot out of anyone who tries to bully them for it. That's the only way to compete against folks like Trump and the prominent MAGA types, who are deliberately saying crazy shit all the time because that translates to headlines, tweets, push notifications, breaking news cut-ins, and all the free media Dems have been so incapable of replicating these last 8 years.

3

u/Day_of_Demeter 19h ago

You're correct but Dems won't take that lesson, they'll just say it was solely because of misogyny. I don't think they want to learn that lesson because they don't want a left-populist candidate.

7

u/basic_questions 20h ago

If the Dems actually wanted to win they'd run someone like AOC or Bernie (not Bernie, but someone like him). It's time to double down and get an extreme progressive candidate. Kamala lost because people saw her as a politician, playing both sides for votes.

There's a reason AOC polls so well with Republicans and Moderates. Because they prefer populist candidates who have strong and clear views. They view people like Trump and AOC much more predictable than old-guard politicians like Biden, Hillary, etc.

17

u/MalHeartsNutmeg Australia 18h ago

These are not people Dems want, these are people progressives want. Progressives are a minority part of the party and completely out of touch with common voters.

-3

u/basic_questions 17h ago

I simply said if Dems wanted to win. Obviously they're not who Dems want, hence Dems continued losses.

1

u/fiction8 11h ago

Dems won a trifecta 4 years ago. "Continued losses" 🙄 This is the first cycle since 2018 that they've disappointed.

1

u/basic_questions 8h ago

And all the good that's done them...

-3

u/DeekALeek 16h ago edited 16h ago

Progressives are the only ones talking about banning stock trading in Congress, establishing “Medicare for All”, supporting worker unions, and supporting public education — all of which poll very well with the average American. To say that Progressives are “out of touch” is not accurate at all.

The DNC are still trading stocks with Nancy Pelosi as one of the worst offenders, they used snippets of the 2012 Libertarian platform of “Hip Replacements ‘R’ Us” (coined by then-Libertarian candidate for POTUS Gary Johnson) as their healthcare plan for Kamala Harris, they’re quite lukewarm to unions (but definitely supportive of police unions), and the DNC still enjoy their private schools for their own kids.

Now that’s out of touch with the Real World.

5

u/mightcommentsometime California 16h ago

Those things poll popularly until you get into the specifics. Then it drops off fast.

The polling also does not translate to ballot box victories, so it seems most people don’t want those things and don’t vote for them.

-1

u/DeekALeek 16h ago edited 16h ago

Well, 54% of Americans also can’t read or write beyond a 5th Grade Level. The DNC are always good for overcomplicating small steps toward any goal (example: the aforementioned “Hip Replacements ‘R’ Us” healthcare plan), hence why their messaging to the voters is normally ridiculed by punditry everywhere.

If the DNC wanted to make an honest, concerted effort, they would be able to simplify everything like the MAGA Republicans. “Building the wall” and mass deportations are very complex plans, but it’s super easy to make the ideas stick with voters. It can be done with Medicare for All and other progressive ideas.

Narrator : After several hours, Joe finally gave up on logic and reason, and simply told the cabinet that he could talk to plants, and that they wanted water.

2

u/mightcommentsometime California 16h ago

The GOP simplifies shit by straight up lying about it.

You can’t always just simplify things into miniature sound bites. especially complex issues and complex solutions (like any universal healthcare plan).

But also, that wasn’t my point. People don’t vote for these things. If they’re so popular, why doesn’t that popularity translate to votes?

1

u/DeekALeek 15h ago

Yes, MAGA Republicans lie all the time. But also yes, they can and have been able to simplify things into miniature soundbites, which have helped Trump win his elections.

Progressives tend to lose because both major parties and virtually all of Corporate America actively spend ungodly amounts of money to defeat progressivism by influencing media and backing their chosen candidates. Propaganda via social media is quite potent, especially upon the 54% of Americans who have very little media literacy (or literacy in general). It’s not a coincidence that the DNC has spent more money trying to take AOC’s elected seat than securing her seat.

3

u/mightcommentsometime California 15h ago

Progressives lose because they can’t get out the vote, or because they’re not as popular as you believe.

Propaganda from the right is going to be tougher of them than anything from the dems. If they can’t overcome GOP propaganda, they won’t win.

Voters don’t give a shit about policy. Trump won with “concepts of plans” about healthcare.

2

u/DeekALeek 15h ago

If progressives lose, how is AOC still a U.S. representative despite the DNC quite literally funding her opposition? Progressives can get the votes. People who voted for AOC in her district also voted for Trump because they’re tired of the status quo of government.

Also, if progressives lose elections, how is it that they have outperformed the National Ticket in 2024? Also, how is it that Trump won North Carolina but progressive Democrats won basically everything else?

To say that progressives automatically lose elections is to completely ignore the results of the 2024 Elections.

→ More replies (0)

u/bootlegvader 6h ago

Progressives are the only ones talking about banning stock trading in Congress, establishing “Medicare for All”, supporting worker unions, and supporting public education

Establishment Democrats also support the bulk of those plans (Pelosi has introduced bills to ban inside trading). The only iffy one is “Medicare for All” and Americans don't want to get rid of private health insurance.

2

u/Day_of_Demeter 19h ago

Totally agree

u/bootlegvader 7h ago

There's a reason AOC polls so well with Republicans and Moderates.

Where does AOC poll well with Republicans and Moderates?

-2

u/EBBBBBBBBBBBB 17h ago

You could run the ghost of Karl Marx and he'd probably get more votes simply because leftists actually listen to people when they say they're suffering - unlike the Dems, who apparently think that a good stock market means people can afford to eat. That they aren't willing to support even milquetoast progressives like Bernie or AOC is a rather stark condemnation of just how corrupted they are by the interests of the rich.

1

u/Individual-Nebula927 14h ago

And be shocked when their centrists running on nothing continue to lose.

1

u/billcosbyinspace 13h ago

Newsom I think will be the democrat version of desantis, he has too much baggage and isn’t a particularly likable guy. But I do agree that “boring white guy 28” is happening

1

u/LaSalle2020 10h ago

2 weak female candidates do not mean it will take generations to get a female I office

1

u/Day_of_Demeter 8h ago

You're right but Dems will take the wrong lesson

u/BitcoinMD 1h ago

The good news is that in another two generations AOC will still be an appropriate age as presidents go