Whatever, although I doubt LBJ or Truman would have been elected without the incumbent advantage. My point stands - presidential candidates always choose someone less bold and charismatic than themselves as running mate, which is why Vice Presidents are so rarely elected.
To be fair, only 4 sitting VPs have been elected President in our nation’s history:
John Adams in 1796, Thomas Jefferson in 1800, Martin Van Buren in 1836, and George H. W. Bush in 1988.
Which enforces your point, obviously.
I hadn’t realized it was that few. And yet somehow, they almost always end up the candidate.
As I said, a flaw in the system.
Nah I won’t hijack the thread or push it any further. The debate’s been done to death elsewhere. I only mention it as relevant to why I don’t believe Newsom Is our best choice. He might still change his tune.
But I don’t like when this talking point about athletic fairness gets treated as though it’s “common sense,” and I feel it should be called out.
Well, Governor is the top position (20), Senator (17) is more or less tied with Rep (18). But- 15 presidents previously served as vice presidents, right after Senator. Yes, going directly from Veep to Pres- (without a death) isnt that common, but still it is a stepping stone.
But those three stepping stones ahead of Veep just barely ahead.
Look, I agree it is a comment that someone can be held to. But I dont like calling names- “fascist” , “pedophile” , “Communist” etc.- we thro those terms around too loosely. None exactly fit- altho a couple get too close for comfort.
I don’t see what purpose it serves to forgive certain bigoted views just because they’re somehow less bigoted than other ones. “His views are transphobic, but not as transphobic as they could be” still means it’s transphobic.
Likewise it makes no sense to forgive fascists or are less fascist than other fascists. Particularly our fascists, who would love to be a lot more fascist if only we’d let them.
Good thing his views aren’t bigoted, then! 
Good thing his views aren’t transphobic, then!
Mark Kelly was on Rachel Maddow’s show just now. With this short interview, he may have bumped himself up in the queue of possible Democratic presidential candidates. He has a fair amount of gravitas. He’s 61.
He was on Kamala’s short list of potential running mates last year, too.
Well…
Mark Kelly was the top fundraiser on a Democratic donation-processing platform Tuesday morning as the Arizona senator faced threats of retribution from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth over a recent video criticizing unlawful military orders.
HA! Petey unintentionally gave Kelly some free good publicity which led to $$$. Keep it up, Pete! What a doofus.
With the bullshit investigation, Trump and Hegseth are catapulting Mark Kelly onto the list of plausible '28 candidates.
Yeah, I came in to say I don’t know if Kelly was thinking of running but I hope he does. He would be quite a contrast to soul-less sycophant Vance. I would be excited to vote for him.
Unless he grows some charisma, I don’t think Kelly’s a top-notch top-of-the-ticket presidential candidate. His resume is phenomenal, and he was my initial pick for Harris’s running mate, but the more I saw him talk in 2024, the less he impressed me.
Of course I’d donate/door knock/vote for him if he’s the pick, but he’s not my first, second or even third choice.
If Kelly were to call a press conference tomorrow and simply say, “Trump is a fat child molester” and then walk off the stage, he’d stand a chance. But I don’t think he has it in him to be the kind of gloves-off savage that we kinda need right now.
Civility is over. Dead. Done. The next Democrat to be elected president will be someone who is a savage. Someone who won’t sanewash MAGA by engaging with its people as if they’re normal human beings. Anything less will fail to garner the main character energy that is required to win.
Yeah, this.
In another thread, I mentioned that Trump’s Thanksgiving message to America was a long rant about immigration, but at one point he called Walz “seriously retarded”. Walz quote tweeted him and responded, “Release the MRI results”. That’s just weaksauce. A Democrat needs to take the gloves of and hit back.
“I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it”. It is attributed to George B Shaw.
There’s no pig, and there’s no wrestling. We’re in a vicious knife fight with a madman. We can either stab him back or just let him murder us and rape our corpse, which is a closer metaphor to everything that’s going on right now than wrestling and pigs.
In the context of the OP, Democratic presidential nomination in 2028? I don’t think so. Potential nominees need to prepare for 2028, not get pulled into re-fighting 2024; Trump won’t be running in 2028. It’s fine to push back a little, but the Democratic nominee needs to have a clear campaign message. Trump is a troll that is given too much attention already.
Now is the time for candidates to experiment and triangulate their messaging to find the sweet spot between the base and potential undecideds. Triangulate not in the cynical way, but in a sincere way of understanding what resonates most with the voters.
Potential nominees need to find fresh ways of reaching and connecting with voters. Kissing babies, debates, and late night talk shows don’t cut it anymore. I’m not sure what will – Maybe online polls, live streams, live chats, targeted messages.
I’d also like to see candidates revamp their public statements so that they don’t sound like they were written by a team of PR experts and lawyers. The message gets drowned in wordiness and sounds inauthentic to boot.