View Full Version : Democratic Party Candidates for President run in 2028
iris lilies
3-6-25, 11:24pm
Gavin Newsom has made his first step towards a run for the White House in 2028 by striking out against the progressives in his party and saying boys do not belong in girls sports.
I look to him to rethink his position on medicalized gender affirmation for minors in the next year or so.
I heard Mayor Pete backtrack last week on a pet Democratic Party position. I just can’t remember which one it was.
so here they are, coming into the fold of the center in preparation for 2028.
littlebittybobby
3-7-25, 3:41am
okay---hopefully, by this time next year, Der Fuhrer(Heil!)will have acquired Greenland for Lebensraum and the good of the American People, and have deported not only central americans, but also rounded up dissidents and fanatics and people who don't conform to the American norm, and rehomed them in Greenland Territory, USA. Kind of like how people who didn't like Stallen & Socializm were sent to Siberia. So, it's not an aberration or perverse, like same-sex marriage. Problems solved. Thankk mee.
Yeah, the Democrats have some serious work to do. I'm just as upset at the current administration as anyone, but their "resistance" at the SOTU was embarrassing. Disjointed, ineffective--they looked like a bunch of sourpusses. Anger would have been better than douleur. I have respect for Al Green... but then 10 dems censured him.
so here they are, coming into the fold of the center in preparation for 2028.
https://media.townhall.com/cdn/hodl/cartoons/alg030725dAPR-800x0.jpg
Both parties have morphed into aberrations of their former selves. Neither one is worth discussing.
iris lilies
3-7-25, 12:48pm
https://media.townhall.com/cdn/hodl/cartoons/alg030725dAPR-800x0.jpg
Naw, I sincerely welcome Democratic candidates back into the land of rationality. I might even vote for one if the Trump Succession kids turn bad. I would like to see Governor DeSantis promoted in some way, and without his social justice campaign. He plus JD, the JD of old, could be a Dream Team.
But back to Democrats – I will start giving them respect as they drop their Crazy Think that they’ve embraced for the past few years such as Men are Women and the WNBA can beat the Lakers.
iris lilies
3-7-25, 1:00pm
Also, I would like the Democrats to sincerely take up the importance of Free Speech. I worry that these younger generations do not seem to value that. I see this as a topic on which they could gain ground, teach the youngsters why it is important to be able to say what you think.
I heard Mayor Pete backtrack last week on a pet Democratic Party position. I just can’t remember which one it was.
He’s been tergiversating on diversity training lately, comparing it to a “Portlandia” sketch and saying it creates new Republicans.
I think some of the brighter Democrats are starting to realize that doubling down on the crazier culture struggle stuff is not the way to win elections. Unfortunately, I also think the MAGA world has adopted some of the pathologies we used to associate with the left: moral and epistemological relativism, identity politics, zero sum economics, mob psychology and the belief that power justifies itself. We’re seeing a sort of race to the political bottom.
gimmethesimplelife
3-7-25, 2:14pm
Also, I would like the Democrats to sincerely take up the importance of Free Speech. I worry that these younger generations do not seem to value that. I see this as a topic on which they could gain ground, teach the youngsters why it is important to be able to say what you think.Sometimes I DO agree with you, IL, such as here. Given that I am a known dissident, I am very worried about the clamp down on free speech in.this rapidly sinking country. For those hell bent on remaining in the US or unable to leave for whatever reason - it is a valid terror/cause to.work for. I myself even never foresaw things coming to this - but here we are. Imagine that - my takes on the US while not yet quite mainstream, moving towards such with every day. Rob
littlebittybobby
3-7-25, 2:16pm
okay---see this photo of picturesque & scenic Greenland. But yeah---how'd you kids liketa take up residence there? Looks nice, don't it? Plus--you can be neighbors with Babra & Cher & summa them others. But yeah---them houses sitting on a cliff by the water prolly only sell for a couple million(krona); so yeah--move there while property is dirt cheap. Ha. Thankk mee.62646266
littlebittybobby
3-8-25, 4:36am
okay---Big Al posted some cartoons ta help you coupon-cutting kids make sense o' things(thanks, Alfred), so yeah---here's a cxartoon that will help put stuff that you kids say is unwarranted expansionism, into a realistic perspective(see photo)6267
early morning
3-8-25, 12:20pm
I agree that free speech must be protected. Where I have difficulty is how to draw the line between protected free speech, however hateful it may be, and inciting violence, in the "clear and present danger" sense. Different people see threats differently. Those lines are difficult or impossible to draw cleanly, and this issue is one that does not fit into the right/wrong columns, but somewhere in the grey middle, on a case-by-case basis. There are always going to be challenges to free speech, and pushback to those challenges, and the Supremes have a checkered history on this. I don't expect improvement, as we are edging closer and closer to the removal of that free speech (and free press!!) right, by the very people who so recently purported to be its champion.
iris lilies
3-8-25, 1:45pm
I agree that free speech must be protected. Where I have difficulty is how to draw the line between protected free speech, however hateful it may be, and inciting violence, in the "clear and present danger" sense. Different people see threats differently. Those lines are difficult or impossible to draw cleanly, and this issue is one that does not fit into the right/wrong columns, but somewhere in the grey middle, on a case-by-case basis. There are always going to be challenges to free speech, and pushback to those challenges, and the Supremes have a checkered history on this. I don't expect improvement, as we are edging closer and closer to the removal of that free speech (and free press!!) right, by the very people who so recently purported to be its champion.
I too have a hard time distinguishing between protected speech and the “inciting violence” kind of hate speech but one important factor is “imminence.” But I will say that speech like that its pretty far on the spectrum of what is considered “hate “ speech today. It is important to debate how we allow this kind of speech on the far end of the spectrum because that’s how we can expand our knowledge and tolerance.
yes, I think we need to as a society expand our tolerance of protected hate speech. I am shocked at the surveys I see of people who hang out on social media who are quite certain protected speech speech should be shut down by the government. The Nazi protests in Skokie as example? They don’t fly with today’s youth, lock them up. Westboro Baptist Church hanging out with their hateful signs? The Redditors think they need to be shut down by police.
There were university people protesting in St. Louis yesterday on the campus of Washington University to protest the Trump Administration’s reduction in science funding. The St. Louis Reddit sub was all ablaze about how Their opportunities for protesting are being constrained. But I didn’t see that the opportunities were constrained at all, peaceful daytime protesting seemed fine on this private campus as long as the campus administrators allowed it, and they did.
I don’t understand how these young people can’t draw a line between their own protesting and their insistence that Nazis can’t hold signs in a similar protest.
early morning
3-8-25, 4:09pm
It's part of the good/evil, right/wrong slant everything is given at the moment, at least by many. And government figures are leading the way. And there IS evil, at least as I define it, and I struggle mightily with labeling it, calling it out, and being seen as one of the very people trying to shut down "those other" people. Can we have free speech without basic civility? Can we have free speech in a society that is becoming more polarized than ever? Can we support people saying and condoning and even championing ideas we find beyond repugnant, and still have a civil society? How can we re-boot the idea of the common good, especially as schools are not allowed to discuss it, and more and more people want the government to financially support religious bigotry and a return to patriarchy - which we never really even put behind us?? Education used to be the "great leveler" of the playing field, where everyone should have been taught the same basics, with an emphasis on thinking skills. That apparently produced too many people who actually THOUGHT, so now that is being abolished in favor of - what? Sheeple skills. Follow the preacher/leader. Don't ask questions, and don't allow dissenting voices. And above all, OWN the libs! Whatever the hell that means.
Sorry. Sometimes one just needs to rant. Basically, free speech matters, whether you're on the right or the left, and discussion with input from both sides, from people who honestly have the best interests of our Democracy and of We the People at heart, needs to happen. Often. Everywhere. about many things. At all levels of government, society, and economic class. We should not be afraid of what we say in such discussions, understanding that this is at the very heart of our social contract. And right now, I am ashamed to say, I am very afraid to do that. I see too many parallels to other, ah, historically "interesting" times - JP's turnings, as it were.
I agree, early morning, there is already a huge chilling effect. NYT had a story about the list of words now forbidden:
‘Chilling’: NYT reveals list of words banned by Trump’s 'anti-woke' initiativesand it includes such words as "women" and "sense of belonging"
‘Chilling’: NYT reveals list of words banned by Trump’s 'anti-woke' initiatives (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/chilling-nyt-reveals-list-of-words-banned-by-trump-s-anti-woke-initiatives/ar-AA1AvE2k?ocid=BingNewsSerp)
Government censorship of free speech in action, on a massive scale.
I agree, early morning, there is already a huge chilling effect. NYT had a story about the list of words now forbidden:
‘Chilling’: NYT reveals list of words banned by Trump’s 'anti-woke' initiativesand it includes such words as "women" and "sense of belonging"
‘Chilling’: NYT reveals list of words banned by Trump’s 'anti-woke' initiatives (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/chilling-nyt-reveals-list-of-words-banned-by-trump-s-anti-woke-initiatives/ar-AA1AvE2k?ocid=BingNewsSerp)
Government censorship of free speech in action, on a massive scale.
I saw that list. Chilling indeed.
So the paper that forced an editor to resign for having the temerity to print a Tom Cotton OpEd is suddenly concerned about free expression? Where have they been for the last decade or two? When the FBI was jawboning social media to quash stories those in power didn’t like? When the Associated Press stylebook and university administrators were publishing lists of proscribed words? When the government set up a Disinformation Governance Board? When the media was was so servilely complicit in covering up Biden’s rapid mental decline?
You have to wonder about the motivation behind this newfound championing of free speech.
iris lilies
3-9-25, 1:49pm
So the paper that forced an editor to resign for having the temerity to print a Tom Cotton OpEd is suddenly concerned about free expression? Where have they been for the last decade or two? When the FBI was jawboning social media to quash stories those in power didn’t like? When the Associated Press stylebook and university administrators were publishing lists of proscribed words? When the government set up a Disinformation Governance Board? When the media was was so servilely complicit in covering up Biden’s rapid mental decline?
You have to wonder about the motivation behind this newfound championing of free speech.
yes, I was going to ask if those here were at all concerned during the Biden administration when all of that censorship was taking place, some of it at the hands of the government. My guess is no ‘cause I don’t recall any discussion saying this stuff is bad on this forum from those who are now concerned about protected speech and institutions that are closing it down prior to January 2025.
I want to take a moment to promote the new, young, free speech organization called FIRE, The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. They are taking up causes the ACLU once did generations ago, but the ACLU has lost its way.
FIRE concentrates efforts on college campuses for two main reasons. One is that they’re young and new and do not have a large treasury to address all of the free speech issues in our society so they focus on one area.The second one is that they believe so much of thought and speech control starts on campuses and trains up free speech deniers.
They are working both “sides” of the political spectrum meaning they will defend the rights of college Kids for free assembly in protest, and they will defend the Jewish kids who are denied free assembly and entry to their campus libraries by Muslim protesters.
https://www.thefire.org/
So throw them a few bucks. I think in this Trump administration they’re gonna find plenty of material to keep them busy.
yes, I was going to ask if those here were at all concerned during the Biden administration when all of that censorship was taking place, some of it at the hands of the government. My guess is no.
We have always been at war with Eastasia.
Here's another story about word banning, this time from a university reacting to Trump's threat to remove their funding if they did not remove DEI language:
NC university’s first response to DEI ban? Striking use of ‘race,’ ‘equality,’ ‘white’ (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/nc-university-s-first-response-to-dei-ban-striking-use-of-race-equality-white/ar-AA1Adghb?ocid=BingNewsSerp)
One of the schools where I teach canceled a DEI presentation the week after the election.
We have always been at war with Eastasia.
Under His Eye.
early morning
3-10-25, 11:32am
You have to wonder about the motivation behind this newfound championing of free speech.
No shady deep state motivation here, personally speaking. I agree that I am not as concerned about discouraging words/ideas that are mean, hurtful, and aimed to cause dissention and bigotry, as I am about discouraging words/ideas that are inclusive and aimed to further acceptance of people who are/have been marginalized. Yep, that's me, I don't get upset that the N word isn't bandied about with glee, and that women AREN'T commonly referred to as Cs, etc. Nope, not unhappy about that. I AM unhappy that we can't discuss, especially in education, race/religion/patriarchy/misogyny and the subjugation of anyone other than white men. I do see a difference. While I agree that it SHOULD NOT MATTER, in the context of free speech, it does, to me. I'm all for super social stigma and shaming, "guidance", etc. and I think employers should be able to curtail what is said in business matters. I think colleges should be more, not less, open to the free exchange of ideas, but that the students and faculty should retain their right to object, PEACEFULLY, to ideas being presented by outside speakers and groups, regardless of their social/moral/political beliefs. I am NOT for any LEGAL, GOVERNMENTAL actions pertaining to curtailing the speaking of horrible ideas. Up to that "clear and imminent danger" thing. But that's just me. And the crickets. No big conspiracy or hidden motivation.
iris lilies
3-10-25, 12:03pm
Here's another story about word banning, this time from a university reacting to Trump's threat to remove their funding if they did not remove DEI language:
NC university’s first response to DEI ban? Striking use of ‘race,’ ‘equality,’ ‘white’ (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/nc-university-s-first-response-to-dei-ban-striking-use-of-race-equality-white/ar-AA1Adghb?ocid=BingNewsSerp)
One of the schools where I teach canceled a DEI presentation the week after the election.
I promise I will come back and read this, and possibly comment. I just haven’t Had time to move the URL to a Pay wall remover.
I promise I will come back and read this, and possibly comment. I just haven’t Had time to move the URL to a Pay wall remover.
I have never until this past couple of weeks felt that I had to watch what I said in a classroom or a curriculum to avoid being reported on a DOE website, so that the government would withhold funds from my college because I make historically accurate statements about discrimination against women in academics, and I have been teaching since 1981.
The Democrats seem to me to be completely useless as a political party at present.
Somehow they managed to lose the Presidency in this last election, even though it should have been trivial to win. And, seemingly surprised by that loss, they appear completely disorganized and inept at formulating any effective response to the chaos that has resulted from that loss.
It will take them a while to rebuild, if they ever manage to do so. I do not see any candidates amongst the current herd that stand a chance against Trump when he runs for his 3rd term :-)
My local congresscritters seem to think that asking for more funds for their next campaign is the lead message in their communications and town hall meetings. Not a good look.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b3/Progressive_Moose_walking.png/800px-Progressive_Moose_walking.png
I think the democrats could significantly improve their image by giving Schumer and Adam Schiff the hook as representing them in common media. They look like they are bored and reading from a teleprompter script half of the time. They should get some nice attractive energetic media hosts and good looking young women with a lot of make up to improve their image. Well, maybe a little overdone, but they do have some image and age issues even with Biden and Pelosi gone.
The Democrats seem to me to be completely useless as a political party at present.
Somehow they managed to lose the Presidency in this last election, even though it should have been trivial to win. And, seemingly surprised by that loss, they appear completely disorganized and inept at formulating any effective response to the chaos that has resulted from that loss.
It will take them a while to rebuild, if they ever manage to do so. I do not see any candidates amongst the current herd that stand a chance against Trump when he runs for his 3rd term :-)
My local congresscritters seem to think that asking for more funds for their next campaign is the lead message in their communications and town hall meetings. Not a good look.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b3/Progressive_Moose_walking.png/800px-Progressive_Moose_walking.png
I think you’re right about that. Look at that recent congressional address. Trump spent an hour and a half spouting a morally inverted foreign policy and economic plans to gut punch the economy faster than you can say “Smoot-Hawley”, but the Democrats still managed to make him look like the adult in the room.
iris lilies
3-11-25, 9:30pm
I agree, early morning, there is already a huge chilling effect. NYT had a story about the list of words now forbidden:
‘Chilling’: NYT reveals list of words banned by Trump’s 'anti-woke' initiatives
and it includes such words as "women" and "sense of belonging"
‘Chilling’: NYT reveals list of words banned by Trump’s 'anti-woke' initiatives (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/chilling-nyt-reveals-list-of-words-banned-by-trump-s-anti-woke-initiatives/ar-AA1AvE2k?ocid=BingNewsSerp)
Government censorship of free speech in action, on a massive scale.
I skipped the linked article here because it’s by MSN and it’s just a summary of the New York Times article. I found the New York Times article and read it through a paywall remover.
There is a very long list of words that the New York Times says have been flagged as problematic in federal government directives by bureaucrats attempting to follow Trump’s wishes. They are reacting to Trump executive orders that are broadly written, so no one really knows what “words are safe. “
I agree that’s a chilling environment in which to work and people shouldn’t be afraid of the censorial nature of their government although the New York Times article does admit that administrations change the language they use to promote their Points of view.
for example
I’ve been watching social media reporting of how erasure of the word “trans” and all of the words like it (transgender, transsexual) are affecting them. I knew about the removal of trans persons in the write up on Stonewall Riots. According to some gay men, the trans woman named by the National Parks Service was incorrectly given credit for leading the Stonewall riots, and that wrong has been unintentionally righted by a Trump directive. There’s lots of fear and concern about the elimination of “X “as a sex choice in passport applications. These are things the Biden administration put into place, it’s not as though they had existed for a long time and they carried out Biden priorities.
I read today that they scrubbed photos of the Enola Gay off of the DOD website because of the name.
iris lilies
3-11-25, 10:10pm
I read today that they scrubbed photos of the Enola Gay off of the DOD website because of the name.
That’s crazy!
I read today that they scrubbed photos of the Enola Gay off of the DOD website because of the name.
That seemed so nuts I had to check it out. They are saying there have been 26,000 photos removed that had any remote reference to DEI. They claimed one photo was just of a man who's name was Gay. And seemingly references to women in the Services, maybe because they were portrayed in some sort of combat role I could quite get that since the links have been removed already.
https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/national-international/war-heroes-and-military-firsts-are-among-26000-images-flagged-for-removal-in-pentagons-dei-purge/3861030/
iris lilies
3-11-25, 10:19pm
That seemed so nuts I had to check it out. They are saying there have been 26,000 photos removed that had any remote reference to DEI. They claimed one photo was just of a man who's name was Gay. And seemingly references to women in the Services, maybe because they were portrayed in some sort of combat role I could quite get that since the links have been removed already.
https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/national-international/war-heroes-and-military-firsts-are-among-26000-images-flagged-for-removal-in-pentagons-dei-purge/3861030/
the word “gay “isn’t even on the list of forbidden words in the New York Times article.
catherine
3-11-25, 10:58pm
the word “gay “isn’t even on the list of forbidden words in the New York Times article.
Yet, there's this: https://www.yahoo.com/news/defense-department-remove-photos-wwii-122459737.html
"The Department of Defense is planning to remove content related to the historic aircraft, the Enola Gay, as part of Donald Trump's crackdown on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)."
iris lilies
3-11-25, 11:10pm
Yet, there's this: https://www.yahoo.com/news/defense-department-remove-photos-wwii-122459737.html
"The Department of Defense is planning to remove content related to the historic aircraft, the Enola Gay, as part of Donald Trump's crackdown on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)."
Someone is being a leeeetle too enthusiastic in relieving modern society of modern words.
Will they process Marcia Gay Harden’s tax return?
I do wish Bernie was at least 10, and preferably 20 or more years younger! He's been a one-man #resistance show--he's amazing. When he was interviewed on one of the news shows about his "Fight Oligarchy" tour he was asked if he's planning a run for President. He just shook his head and said, "Come on. I'll be 86 years old. I am NOT running for President." But still, he just won't quit.
I do wish Bernie was at least 10, and preferably 20 or more years younger! He's been a one-man #resistance show--he's amazing. When he was interviewed on one of the news shows about his "Fight Oligarchy" tour he was asked if he's planning a run for President. He just shook his head and said, "Come on. I'll be 86 years old. I am NOT running for President." But still, he just won't quit.
There’s good money to be made fighting oligarchy. Plus you never need to dirty your hands actually governing.
catherine
3-13-25, 11:33am
There’s good money to be made fighting oligarchy. Plus you never need to dirty your hands actually governing.
Maybe you missed it, but Bernie has spent a lifetime dirtying his hands governing, for the good of the people, not to line his pockets.
There was talk on Chicago radio yesterday about Raymond Emmanuel running for prez. I laughed. He is very rough around the edges and I don’t think a Jewish candidate will have an easy time of it.
Maybe you missed it, but Bernie has spent a lifetime dirtying his hands governing, for the good of the people, not to line his pockets.
Not governing. Heckling from the sidelines. He’s not even a Democrat; just his own little novelty act. Rather than produce or implement any actionable policies he simply prates away about utopian fantasies he knows he will never have to answer for in the real world. Great entertainment value though.
I’m sure the pocket-lining just sort happened with no effort on his part.
There was talk on Chicago radio yesterday about Raymond Emmanuel running for prez. I laughed. He is very rough around the edges and I don’t think a Jewish candidate will have an easy time of it.
Yeah. That whole Hamas death cult thing would be a problem for him. Also the Chicago teachers union gave him a pretty rough time when he was mayor. He’s probably too smart and practical to survive the Democrats’ primary season.
Not governing. Heckling from the sidelines. He’s not even a Democrat; just his own little novelty act. Rather than produce or implement any actionable policies he simply prates away about utopian fantasies he knows he will never have to answer for in the real world. Great entertainment value though.
I’m sure the pocket-lining just sort happened with no effort on his part.
I don't think Bernie has claimed to be a Democrat. He's sort of broken record, but it's too bad his message about keeping big money out of politics never caught on, as we are seeing.
Now, in Trump's fantasy world where Canada is the 51st state, I'd vote for Doug Ford.
Unrelated, and in American history, Robert Ford was the outlaw who killed Jesse James. Of musical fame in The Ballad of Jesse James, "...that dirty little coward who shot Mr. Howard."
I’m sure the pocket-lining just sort happened with no effort on his part.
Like all of us, he worked for it. His net worth is low compared to most of the other members of the Senate.
As for not governing--he was a hugely successful mayor of Burlington. If not for him, there would be a waterfront condo development instead of the beautiful park and science center that lines the shore now. His affordable housing initiatives, energy programs, and community development programs made Burlington one of the best small cities in the country and models for other cities.
And as far as his "utopian" ideals that he has promoted all these years, those are exactly the ideals that are in practice in most of the developed countries of the world--countries that have figured out how to make things fair for all citizens, not just the wealthy ones. Those programs do work. We just have different values.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.