Don’t knock it 'til you try it!
“Welcome their hatred” was atypical for FDR, and his policies were hardly far left. And in as much as he did get big and important legislation through Congress, like Social Security, he did it only when he had congressional supermajorities.
Maybe what the Democratic nominee needs is to have a few “Welcome their hatred” type of lines in their speeches, to satisfy the progressives, and then do the best job possible in our normally center/center-right country, following the law, and dependent on whether the Democrats have workable congressional majorities.
An interesting survey found that about one in six Trump voters would not vote for him again. That sounds small but if they reran the election today Harris would win comfortably.
For the time they where as hard to the left as possible in the U.S. and even a bit more so.
Yes, FDR was definitely far left by the standards of the time. Obviously there were people further to his left criticizing him, but for the most part they weren’t winning any elections.
Hey, I’m easy…I’ll settle for forced migration to other countries.
In the immortal words of Darth Cheney, you can’t make an omelet without breaking some eggs. I think we are beyond the point of “healing the harms, getting the country and the world moving forward in a better direction”. A sizable chunk of the ones who voted for tRump three times like the direction the country has taken, regardless of the fact that it has impacted them personally (e.g. farmers…on the verge of bankruptcy thanks to the tariffs and such, but they would vote for tRump for a third term). They are willing to see themselves living in a cardboard box on a street corner if it means shipping immigrants off a third-world country…or to a gas-chamber.
Look upward a few posts: five out of six tRump voters would vote for him again, even given the dumpster fire we are living in today. We are not going to convince these people of the errors of their ways. They are beyond redemption.
Moderating:
I think we have had enough of a conversation for this thread on the rehabilitation of Trump supporters. It is better suited to either of these threads:
or
If specific candidates are discussing how they intend to take defined steps, of course it would be appropriate to mention it here, but let’s keep the focus on the actual campaigning points of the probable frontrunners.
Please tell me what any of that has to do with who will be Democratic nominee in 2028? Other than “I want someone who will satisfy my desire for a purge?”
So recapping where we are sitting with actual possible candidates -
Ossoff is getting buzz and is moving up in betting markets and polling. As potential voters hear about him they generally like him as a fresh face to them. And while he doesn’t say he is running he is showing where someone who is running shows up.
Buttigieg has the advantage and disadvantage of already being known and is also apparently spending time where he woukd need to be spending time as a candidate:
And while head to heads don’t mean too much now they do mean something when people are known. Ossoff, Buttigieg, and Newsome (even as his trajectory falls) do well against Rubio or Vance.
AOC of course has to be taken seriously especially if the center left and establishment lanes get split.
Kelly would be highly electable in a general election I think but not expecting him to get enough traction in the first set of primaries to last. Would be more a spoiler. A better VP candidate maybe?
Pritzker can afford to endure but if Ossoff emerges as leading the lane he should back down.
It’s early yet, but if that head to head data is replicated in other polls, it’s bad news for Harris and AOC. And neither of them, especially Harris, are exactly unknown to most voters at this point.
Personally, AOC will probably always be my top choice if she chooses to run, but Ossoff has emerged as the clear Plan B.
But, but- he lost the election when he ran for president, and was part of the “disastrous” Biden presidency, so he is disqualified- or so some posters claim. 
Ossoff also lost an election once, so he is a LOSER!!!
Harris is leading in early polling-
For Harris- only if Rubio is the GOP candidate, but Vance is much more likely.
According to some posters, Ossoff can not win as he is Jewish.
Newsom generally outpolls everyone but Harris, except that Qantas poll, which is an outlier.
Didn’t Giuliani leads polls in 2007?
September 2007: Fourteen months before the open election, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani was dominating the Republican primary with 32% support from likely Republican primary voters, trailed by the former senator and “Law & Order” star Fred Thompson, who netted 26%. The eventual nominee, Sen. John McCain, had just 14% of primary voters’ support.
On the left, Hillary Clinton was dominating polls with 44% of Democratic primary voters. Her main challenger, Sen. Barack Obama, had 23% of the primary vote in September, but he’d slowly climb through national surveys until March of the next year, when they’d tie in the polls. By summer, he’d bested Clinton by double digits in the polls, leading her to end her campaign in June.
September 2003: A late September pollshowed the Democratic field torn on who would challenge incumbent George W. Bush in his bid for reelection. Howard Dean led the pack with 17%, trailed closely by Gen. Wesley Clark and Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman with 16% each.
The eventual nominee, Sen. John Kerry, had just 11% of the vote.
It is an interesting question really - what is predictive at this point?
I’d WAG unfavorable over 50 is a strong negative.
Next is fav to unfav in general. Can’t be too underwater and win. If those who know if you overwhelmingly don’t like you, not good.
And of course there was the unstoppable Jed! juggernaut of spring 2015. I think you are right that favorability ratings are more important than horse race polls at this point. We can fairly confidently predict that the nominee will be someone most Democrats have at least heard of at this point and who isn’t widely disliked within the Party. That doesn’t really narrow the field much. Are there even any major Democrats who are underwater with Democratic voters?
Well, this source is nearly a year old, but it suggests there are two: Rahm Emanuel and Stephen A. Smith 
That tracks.
Buttigieg is a big outlier with a +75 favorability with only 4% unfamiliar. Second is Bernie, and third is AOC with +56 and 94% familiarity. Harris, of course, has near-total familiarity but is “only” +37. Newsom, Pritzker and Kelly are all in the mid-forties, but Newsom is largely a known quality, while many more voters are still unfamiliar with Pritzker and Kelly, so their potential ceiling is higher.
Comedy relief: the only Republicans underwater with their own Party are Nikki Haley and Brian Kemp. The third most popular potential Republican candidate, after Vance and Rubio, is Tulsi Gabbard. I hate this timeline.
I think it’s way to early for polls to be predictive. But tell me about Ossoff. That name is unfamiliar to me.
Senator from Georgia. He ran as the Democratic nominee in 2020 against incumbent Republican David Perdue, whom he beat in a runoff (neither had a majority of votes in the general election). He was 33 years old when he was elected (he’s now 39), and is running for re-election to the seat this fall.
He’s generally seen as a moderate Democrat on most issues. He’s very critical of Trump, but he also works with Republicans when it comes to doing work for his constituents. He’s an excellent speaker. He is Jewish, and his wife is an OB/GYN physician.
ninja-ed by kenobi_65.
Well, then, why bother to have this thread at all?
Only if that number is still there in 2028. And even so, I do not care if the MAGAs do not like her. They aint voting for any Dem anyway.
…and has explicitly and repeatedly said he is NOT running for president in 2028. While granted that is pretty common boilerplate two years before an election, campaign seasons are getting longer and longer. At some point he would have to throw his hat in the ring in a more direct way or give clear signs he is likely to by hedging his statements more, probably by earlyish 2027. But at age 39 with two kids currently under 5 years old, 2032 when his second senate term ends (if he wins this year, which is likely) would line up a lot more neatly. If I were a betting man, I’d bet Ossoff doesn’t run this time.