2028 Official Speculation Thread

[LateToCult 41,880]

Tis the season of shadow campaigns and exploratory committees. This is the 2028 speculation thread meant to discuss and vent about the people who might jump into the race!

Edited June 11 by LateToCult

[gagzus 23,219]

Not really up to date on US politics, but how likely is a Democratic winner this time around? (since thank god Dump can’t run anymore)

[LateToCult 41,880]

2 minutes ago, gagzus said:

Not really up to date on US politics, but how likely is a Democratic winner this time around? (since thank god Dump can’t run anymore)

History would say good, but the reality is it’s up in the air. The Republican Party is making a fool of itself, but the Democratic Party is also hated because it’s seen as incompetent, shady, and immigrant-first. 

[Ladle Ghoulash 53,427]

8 minutes ago, LateToCult said:

immigrant-first. 

Wouldn’t really define illegal immigration as a core issue leading into 2028, given the blowback to Trump’s ICE policies + the state of the economy, war with Iran, and US ties to Israel have dominated the political conversation. I would say the view most have of Dems is feckless more than it is necessarily malicious and that could change depending upon whether or not a Dem Tea Party can gain momentum with candidates like Platner and Mamdani potentially defining the party nationally instead of Jeffries and Schumer. 

[REALITY 80,174]

I want AOC so bad, but I feel like Dems are gonna push Newsom

[Ladle Ghoulash 53,427]

17 minutes ago, gagzus said:

Not really up to date on US politics, but how likely is a Democratic winner this time around? (since thank god Dump can’t run anymore)

Ngl I’d say if the Dems ran a populist candidate, it could be a slam dunk. People are pissed off about the state of the economy as a consequence of the war with Iran and rising inflation in general, so if the Dems ran on affordability and tackling corruption, it would be very difficult for a Trumpian MAGA candidate to win. IMO, best case for the Dems would be the GOP nominates someone from Trump’s admin (Vance, Rubio) because, in that case, it would be easier for the Dems to win even if they nominated someone that’s more of an empty suit establishment type (Harris, Newsom, Buttigieg to a lesser extent) just by hanging all of Trump 2.0’s myriad failures and catastrophes on the GOP candidate.

Their worst case scenario is someone like Tucker Carlson running on a right wing populist agenda hitting both Trump and corporate Dems where they’re the weakest (corporate lobbying, lack of interest in working class economy, unwavering support of Israel). If Carlson runs and wins the nomination (which appears increasingly possible), their best recourse would be to run a genuine populist who can both outflank Carlson on economic issues but also offer an antidote to the authoritarian policies Carlson would be likely to Trojan horse through right wing populism.

[LateToCult 41,880]

5 minutes ago, Ladle Ghoulash said:

Wouldn’t really define illegal immigration as a core issue leading into 2028, given the blowback to Trump’s ICE policies + the state of the economy, war with Iran, and US ties to Israel have dominated the political conversation. I would say the view most have of Dems is feckless more than it is necessarily malicious and that could change depending upon whether or not a Dem Tea Party can gain momentum with candidates like Platner and Mamdani potentially defining the party nationally instead of Jeffries and Schumer. 

I was referring more to how right-wingers have pretty successfully painted the Democratic Party as favoring immigrants over the American working class through deceptive propaganda. Maybe immigrant-first isn’t the correct way of saying it. “Anti-American” perhaps? I think it’s a very serious issue the party has with that group of people in middle America that has shifted to the right.

[gagzus 23,219]

17 minutes ago, Ladle Ghoulash said:

Ngl I’d say if the Dems ran a populist candidate, it could be a slam dunk. People are pissed off about the state of the economy as a consequence of the war with Iran and rising inflation in general, so if the Dems ran on affordability and tackling corruption, it would be very difficult for a Trumpian MAGA candidate to win. IMO, best case for the Dems would be the GOP nominates someone from Trump’s admin (Vance, Rubio) because, in that case, it would be easier for the Dems to win even if they nominated someone that’s more of an empty suit establishment type (Harris, Newsom, Buttigieg to a lesser extent) just by hanging all of Trump 2.0’s myriad failures and catastrophes on the GOP candidate.

Their worst case scenario is someone like Tucker Carlson running on a right wing populist agenda hitting both Trump and corporate Dems where they’re the weakest (corporate lobbying, lack of interest in working class economy, unwavering support of Israel). If Carlson runs and wins the nomination (which appears increasingly possible), their best recourse would be to run a genuine populist who can both outflank Carlson on economic issues but also offer an antidote to the authoritarian policies Carlson would be likely to Trojan horse through right wing populism.

Im not sure how things work in the states entirely but id say someone like the current Mayor of NY would make an excellent candidate for an opposition considering how he’s basically benefitted the state of NY so much it seems. Making his views and way of doing things on a National scale could benefit a lot I think.

I’m interested in this election because the US politics always trickles down to us in the UK. So a Dem or leftist win would probably change our politics too in the long run.

[gagzus 23,219]

17 minutes ago, LateToCult said:

I was referring more to how right-wingers have pretty successfully painted the Democratic Party as favoring immigrants over the American working class through deceptive propaganda. Maybe immigrant-first isn’t the correct way of saying it. “Anti-American” perhaps? I think it’s a very serious issue the party has with that group of people in middle America that has shifted to the right.

Sadly I think in 2026 patriotism is just white nationalism dressed up in disguise. I am always confused about Americans objection to immigration since they’re 1) a nation of immigrants from Europe and 2) they made an existence built on being “the land of the free” and wanted people to come live and work in their country.

[Samwilliam 88]

I follow US politics a lot so I have a lot of thoughts on this topic.  First of all, the climate could not be better for a democrat to take the White House in 2028 especially if things with the economy continue to go in a bad direction (high inflation etc.).  Whoever the democratic candidate in 2028 is they have to have concrete proposals and can't just be an anti-trump candidate (trump won't be on the ballot) and the voting electorate is starving for substance.  I also think people hunger for an articulate and optimistic candidate who can communicate well.  This country has endured 10 years of nonsense from the Republican Party.  Even before Trump began his mental decline he barely made sense when he spoke.  I also disagree that a gay candidate could not win the White House.  Barack Obama ran a campaign on hope and change and was an incredible orator and inspired a coalition that comfortably won him the presidency twice.  I believe a candidate who inspires can do that again regardless of sexual orientation.  I believe Pete Buttigieg could be that candidate. I would also add Jon Ossoff as a strong candidate who could inspire new excitement in the Democratic Party for 2028.  

[LateToCult 41,880]

27 minutes ago, Ladle Ghoulash said:

Their worst case scenario is someone like Tucker Carlson running on a right wing populist agenda hitting both Trump and corporate Dems where they’re the weakest (corporate lobbying, lack of interest in working class economy, unwavering support of Israel). If Carlson runs and wins the nomination (which appears increasingly possible), their best recourse would be to run a genuine populist who can both outflank Carlson on economic issues but also offer an antidote to the authoritarian policies Carlson would be likely to Trojan horse through right wing populism.

The way Tucker is putting in WORK to rehabilitate his image from right-wing fear monger to “level-headed” anti-elitist should definitely sound alarms within the Democratic Party. He sees the direction a lot of Americans are headed in and is creating an accommodating space that he can use to influence them in a direction that he likes. It’s the right taking the Dems lunch money AGAIN. I don’t know if he’ll actually run though. He gives me the vibe of someone who doesn’t want to be directly in the crosshairs.

[gagzus 23,219]

6 minutes ago, Samwilliam said:

I follow US politics a lot so I have a lot of thoughts on this topic.  First of all, the climate could not be better for a democrat to take the White House in 2028 especially if things with the economy continue to go in a bad direction (high inflation etc.).  Whoever the democratic candidate in 2028 is they have to have concrete proposals and can't just be an anti-trump candidate (trump won't be on the ballot) and the voting electorate is starving for substance.  I also think people hunger for an articulate and optimistic candidate who can communicate well.  This country has endured 10 years of nonsense from the Republican Party.  Even before Trump began his mental decline he barely made sense when he spoke.  I also disagree that a gay candidate could not win the White House.  Barack Obama ran a campaign on hope and change and was an incredible orator and inspired a coalition that comfortably won him the presidency twice.  I believe a candidate who inspires can do that again regardless of sexual orientation.  I believe Pete Buttigieg could be that candidate. I would also add Jon Ossoff as a strong candidate who could inspire new excitement in the Democratic Party for 2028.  

I think sadly because of anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment being at a high having a gay man run would put off right wing straight voters immediately because they’d assume he was JUST for LGBTQ+ people, and leftists would grill the life out of him if he didn’t make being gay a selling point of him and putting queer rights (especially trans rights) at the forefront of his campaign. So he’d be screwed.

And I know that for a fact because The Green Party here in the UK is probably the only party who is on the side of queer people anymore, and for that alone a lot of queer people are voting for them but their getting opposition at every turn because people refuse to hear their points beyond this and a few misinformed takes from the party leader.

[LateToCult 41,880]

24 minutes ago, Samwilliam said:

I follow US politics a lot so I have a lot of thoughts on this topic.  First of all, the climate could not be better for a democrat to take the White House in 2028 especially if things with the economy continue to go in a bad direction (high inflation etc.).  Whoever the democratic candidate in 2028 is they have to have concrete proposals and can't just be an anti-trump candidate (trump won't be on the ballot) and the voting electorate is starving for substance.  I also think people hunger for an articulate and optimistic candidate who can communicate well.  This country has endured 10 years of nonsense from the Republican Party.  Even before Trump began his mental decline he barely made sense when he spoke.  I also disagree that a gay candidate could not win the White House.  Barack Obama ran a campaign on hope and change and was an incredible orator and inspired a coalition that comfortably won him the presidency twice.  I believe a candidate who inspires can do that again regardless of sexual orientation.  I believe Pete Buttigieg could be that candidate. I would also add Jon Ossoff as a strong candidate who could inspire new excitement in the Democratic Party for 2028.  

Pete Buttigieg’s biggest hurdle is the primary. Right now, the South has a huge influence on who goes on to win the Dem nomination. Black voters there are a litmus test. If you can win them over, you’re seen as a viable candidate to support. And Pete knows this. You can tell he’s thinking about running because he’s frequently flying down there to get his name and image on the minds of people. Unfortunately for him, he’s still not doing too hot among the demographic he needs. 
 

On paper, Jon Ossoff could be a force of a candidate ngl. 

Edited June 11 by LateToCult

[Roughhouse Dandy 13,659]

The last thing we need for the democrat party is an establishment "moderate" who accepts AIPAC funds like Buttegieg. Just about everyone is sick of democrat candidates including people registered as democrat. We're at a point where the DSA is more favored than ever before. Now is the time to put forward an actual progressive. 

[LateToCult 41,880]

7 minutes ago, Roughhouse Dandy said:

The last thing we need for the democrat party is an establishment "moderate" who accepts AIPAC funds like Buttegieg. Just about everyone is sick of democrat candidates including people registered as democrat. We're at a point where the DSA is more favored than ever before. Now is the time to put forward an actual progressive. 

I think there’s a higher chance of a left leaning Republican becoming president than someone from the DSA. Talk about dysfunctional circle jerk. A leftist movement for 2028 could be built from anywhere EXCEPT the DSA.