The shock to me is that Kamala Harris is in the poll at all. What rallies is she hosting? Is she even making any media appearances? I wouldn't be surprised though if the DNC pull out the super delegates to say AOC has lost day 1 if there is even going to be a 2028 election at all.
Does it matter tho?
Y'all know that if they say vote Kamala, y'all will vote Kamala, like it or not
And the "democrats" know that y'all will vote blue no matter who anyways
Ok look I voted for Kamala but if a candidate fails can we please run someone one else? You don't run the same person over again because the same people who felt like she was forced down their throats are still going feel like she's being forced down their throats.
And the same bs that was used against her will be used again. But people eat yhay shit up which is why it works.
And her tactics of bring out appealing to Republicans again is probably whay she'll do again and that's going to lose more dem voters.
The corporate Dems need to go away.
Why does the Democratic party have a hard on for running failed politicians? Kamala lost, let others step up. AOC would do great in the Dem Primaries
Please god give us AOC in 2028. Shes the FDR 2 we need when this is all over.
FDR threw 100,000 Americans into concentration camps because of their race. Trump is FDR 2.
Wait why is Harris even running again? I don't think she's that bad but I can't vote in US elections - the electorate rejected her.
Tim Walz is a white dude. Democrats need to stop fucking around. We're back to a place in history where women nor people of color are winning a presidential election. It's the unfortunate truth.
I don't agree with this take. Most of the people who wouldn't vote for a woman of color for that reason wouldn't vote for Dems in the first place.
The failure of Kamala and Hillary was in trying to pander to the so-called moderate swing voter crowd which largely doesn't exist.
Refusing to run a strong woman candidate to appease racists is not how you win.
I don’t agree with this take. Most of the people who wouldn’t vote for a woman of color for that reason wouldn’t vote for Dems in the first place.
They know. It's just an excuse to shut out progressives.
Obama is one of the most popular presidents in my lifetime. Hillary won the popular vote. The problem wasn't being a woman or a person of color, their problem was being shitty candidates that the public doesn't like, running terrible campaigns.
Dems just need to have a primary. In a perfect world, some kind of ranked choice or popular vote. AOC wins the primary, great. If Walz wins, also great. We just need a primary dude
A poll looking 3 years ahead is about as accurate as an astrological chart (and just to be clear, those are worthless).
AOC would receive my vote.
I'd vote for AOC over Kamala, 100%.
I mean, I still voted for Kamala, but I wasn't excited about it.
So the "democrats" have no incentive to improve in your case
You'll just vote whoever they choose on the ballot
Yes. If that vote helps at all in preventing something like Trump happening again.
She's an amazing candidate. I'd vote for her. I dunno about the rest of the country tho. They seem to really appreciate white men when it comes time to vote. All other issues be damned.
The fact that Kamala is even going to try to run again shows how fucked that party is.
Welcome to American politics, when the 2028 election begins in 2024 and the 2028 primary began in 2020.
I'm so tired.
-
Stop with this shit. It's 2025. This is stupid.
-
Women can't be president in America. We have a shitty culture that prevents that from happening. We keep trying, we keep failing. If you want to win, find another candidate with a dick. That's a requirement in America. Not saying I like it. Just saying that's reality.
Is this wise? As an outside observer I had the impression that Harris lost in part because of systematic, subtle and overt racism and sexism. All this applies to AOC, too. Do the Democrats want to lose? Don't they have some sort of JFK look-alike, people actually want to vote? It's not as if appearance wasn't way more important in the US than things like the actual political agenda.
As another outside observer I'd disagree that was the reason she lost. Yeah there's racism and sexism issues in the US, but in the last US election both AOC and Bernie got a lot of votes to elect them as senators on the senator ballot from people who also voted Trump on the presidential ballot.
AOC and Bernie did some polls on social media asking these people why they voted for both them and Trump. The responses were typically like "you're not part of the political elite" and "you say it how it is" and "you seem like you genuinely care about Americans".
IMO, Kamala is considered too close to the democratic political establishment and that the American public is desperately craving some more (mostly economically) progressive politics which AOC and Bernie have been talking about for years.
If the DNC run Kamala in 2028 then the Trump administration will project it as "Biden, Harris, and the elites want to be president forever, so why not pick me instead".
Second place to Harris??? Holy fuck we deserve our fate.
Edit: upon reading the article (I know...) AOC has the best net favorability. So a little more hopium there.
yeah, zero interest in supporting kamala "keep arming isreal" fucking harris again.
If Harris was a leader she would be out there touring like AOC. Shes not a leader. She had her shot to prove otherwise and didn't.
Jfc here we fuckin go again. Lemme guess DNC, this will totally be an open primary right? Anyone can win?
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News