· 110 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events Mar 29, 2026 at 11:24 PM

Some Dems' 2028 strategy: a straight, white, Christian man

Posted by icey_sawg0034

🚩 Report this post

110 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
HaroldGreenBandana Mar 29, 2026 +106
Whoever it is better talk about the working class all f****** day. 
106
supervegeta101 Mar 30, 2026 +40
Talk aboht the working class. Condemn the republicans as confederate traitors. Do not bth sides. Do not waste time making overtures to people who will never reciprocate.
40
SelenaMeyers2024 Mar 30, 2026 +1
Definitely this. Learn from Newt Gingrich and mitch McConnell. They are hateful fascist hypocritical confederates and unAmerican. Obama and Biden spent years of wasted energy trying to win them over, and a couple slick anti they/them commericals on the local NFL game is all it takes to Ctrl Z said overture. Motivate those on the left that are seething.
1
SodaCanBob Mar 29, 2026 +5
> Whoever it is better talk about the working class all f****** day. I think it would be way too early for him to run in 2028 and he still has a hill to climb to win the senate, but James Talarico is a straight, white, Christian male whose entire campaign is based on us vs the oligarchs.
5
MaaChiil Mar 30, 2026 +3
His answer about white nationalism may just be the blueprint for Dems in 2028
3
SinisterCroissant Mar 30, 2026 +1
After talking about going scorched earth on the MAGAt corruption. Full disgorgement of any “bets” made during this adminstration, liquidation of the Trump family’s assets (ideally including the gene pool). I can give 2 fucks about the working class - we first need to cut out the cancer.
1
schu4KSU Mar 29, 2026 -4
The working class prefers racism, homophobia, and misogyny in a candidate.
-4
HaroldGreenBandana Mar 29, 2026 +11
Give them a different villain, one that isn’t based on race or gender identities. Trump and Elon and their swamp of billionaires might be a good place to start. But still talk about kitchen table issues all day! Edit: I used the word “villain” because those groups of real everyday Americans are sadly villainized by right wingers. 
11
schu4KSU Mar 29, 2026 +1
Did you see what they did to Tim Walz - a white straight football coach and National Guard veteran? It doesn’t matter.
1
HaroldGreenBandana Mar 29, 2026 +11
He seems genuinely compassionate and I like him, but his debate was brutal. Democrats definitely need to prepare for future debates with mocks against mean spirited sociopaths who don’t care about or even know any facts and have no sense of reality or morality. 
11
SemichiSam Mar 29, 2026 +4
Hear, hear! I don't disagree with the sentiment "when they go low, we go high", but we don't need to go into a debate like sheep to the slaughter. The candidate needs to have an informational **and** aggressive response to every possible question, or (more likely) personal insult that could possibly come up. Remember that the Republican candidate will be smart enough to know how to look stupid enough to earn Trump's trust.
4
Feral_galaxies Mar 29, 2026 +3
That’s elitism.
3
schu4KSU Mar 29, 2026 +3
It’s elitist to not be racist, homophobic, or misogynistic? The college educated segment didn’t vote Trump to power.
3
Feral_galaxies Mar 30, 2026 +3
It’s elitist to generalize the entire working class. Lots of college educated folks are working blue collar jobs and didn’t vote for trump 
3
schu4KSU Mar 30, 2026 +5
This is a political forum. The discussion is about voting blocks. OF COURSE there are differences in individuals.
5
Bittererr Mar 29, 2026 -3
Both Hillary and Kamala focused on empathy and opportunity for the working class. It doesn't work, it's not a good campaign message. The people it applies to vote on emotion, not policy.
-3
seriousofficialname Mar 30, 2026 +4
> opportunity for the working class Well maybe aside from opposing single payer, medicare for all, $15 minimum wage, breaking up institutions that caused the 2008 recession, paid leave legislation, free college, weed legalization, wealth taxes, universal basic income, and the repeal of "right-to-work" laws
4
LaScoundrelle Mar 30, 2026 +1
Democrats do not oppose single payer healthcare. You should actually read about the history of efforts toward healthcare reform. Republicans have been the primary blockers since the mid-20th century. It's similar with these other issues. There has never been a time in our nation's history where having these changes was politically feasible and was opposed by democrats. Rather, they are political longshots and democrats have been pushing to move us closer in that direction, whereas republicans want things to go further from those goals.
1
seriousofficialname Mar 30, 2026 +1
Harris did ultimately oppose it. Clinton insisted it would "never ever" come to pass. Saying "Let's not do that proposal but instead do this other one" is a form of opposition, in fact When a candidate opposes popular policies that hurts their chances. That's just the way it works.
1
LaScoundrelle Mar 30, 2026 +1
Clinton tried to champion it for many years as First Lady, before learning more about why it’s so challenging to change the healthcare infrastructure in the US. Unfortunately, we are now in a system where most of those working in healthcare oppose its reform, because they’d make way less money in a public only system.
1
seriousofficialname Mar 30, 2026 +1
Ok but if a candidate isn't willing to fight for popular policies when they're running, that will affect turnout
1
LaScoundrelle Mar 30, 2026 +1
Then how do you explain Trump? EDIT: And maybe more specifically, which of these issues on her campaign website do you think she shouldn't have included? [https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/#:\~:text=Hillary%20Clinton's%202016%20campaign%20for%20president%20laid,Manufacturing%20\*%20Mental%20health%20\*%20National%20security](https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/#:~:text=Hillary%20Clinton's%202016%20campaign%20for%20president%20laid,Manufacturing%20*%20Mental%20health%20*%20National%20security)
1
LoudAd1396 Mar 30, 2026 +1
Incrementalism has led to regression, not progress. We need candidates to run on those long shots. Promoting those policies as goals (even if not immediately achievable) would do more than the constant "you can't have the big thing, so here are some vague notions toward the general idea" does. But we live in a reality where progress is always "too difficult" or "too expensive" and then mysteriously never happens
1
LaScoundrelle Mar 30, 2026 +1
The Affordable Care Act saved my life. I didn’t have good health insurance for the first two decades of my life, and have gotten so many health issues treated since it was passed. People who think legislation like that doesn’t represent major progress come across as so ignorant to me it isn’t funny.
1
LoudAd1396 Mar 30, 2026 +1
The ACA is the exception that proves the rule. It was a major step, but what more has been suggested other than "protect the ACA". Progress is good, but we shouldn't be accepting 2 steps forward as being the end all be all
1
LaScoundrelle Mar 30, 2026 +1
Protecting the ACA would have been a huge accomplishment, considering republicans started chipping away at it as soon as it was passed, preventing it from ever being implemented fully as intended. Now this year more people are losing benefits again.
1
LoudAd1396 Mar 30, 2026 +1
I agree that it should be protected. Im just saying that having candidates look t the actual future would be a positive force in politics. We shouldn't settle for "keep what we have" if we want to actually progress.
1
LaScoundrelle Mar 30, 2026 +1
Unfortunately, when the opposition party controls congress and the executive branch, then "keeping what you have" becomes the default fight.
1
Vegetable-Error-2068 Mar 29, 2026 +11
No they f****** didn't. Clinton and Harris were both loathe to talk about the raising the wage and only offered extremely limited relief to extremely small cross-sections of the middle class, not the lower class. Most of America is two paychecks away from homelessness. Seeing Dems continue to choose not to change that makes people give up on Dems.
11
Bittererr Mar 29, 2026 +6
Both favored increases in the minimum wage, both favored investment in infrastructure and working class jobs as well as opportunities to upskill. Both pushed health care reform to make care more available and affordable. Clinton famously had a speech about how half of MAGA was only supporting Trump because they wanted any change at all and felt failed by the system. That message does not resonate with working class people. If you offer them better wages and health care on one hand and the ability to hurt their enemies on the other hand they will choose the second option and we have seen this time and again.
6
suprahelix Mar 30, 2026 +1
People just make shit up
1
Wise_Recover_4344 Mar 29, 2026 +2
Wrong. It was because neither of them were real, people saw through their corporate rhetoric. Democrats need someone with honest to god values.
2
Bittererr Mar 29, 2026 +7
Working class people are just incredible judges of character, that's why they picked Trump, right? It couldn't be that they're ignorant and hateful. That's a lot of mental gymnastics to try and avoid the obvious reality.
7
[deleted] Mar 30, 2026 +1
[removed]
1
Bittererr Mar 30, 2026 +1
Wealth is mostly about luck and circumstance, not wisdom. The problem with the Republican base isn't their lack of wisdom, it's their lack of empathy.
1
Wise_Recover_4344 Mar 30, 2026 +1
Then why didn’t you say that originally?
1
AndreLeGeant88 Mar 29, 2026 +1
Empathy and sympathy aren't the same thing, and neither necessarily result in action. Both at best expressed sympathy. 
1
JojenCopyPaste Mar 29, 2026 -3
Hillary's opponent in the 2016 primary focused on the working class. She does not represent that. And neither does Kamala. What you're talking about is nonsense.
-3
bootlegvader Mar 30, 2026 +4
Hillary's opponent in the 2016 primary lost the working class vote in said primary.
4
Bittererr Mar 29, 2026 +4
>Hillary's opponent in the 2016 primary focused on the working class. Her opponent that endorsed her message and strove to get her elected after the primary?
4
ThisOneFuqqs Mar 30, 2026 -1
Nope. That'll scare their donors. They're gonna be as centrist as possible but at least they look straight, white and Christian while doing it. Guess I need the s/
-1
peanutb-jelly Mar 29, 2026 +21
definitely need more successful representation, but f*** this intentionally divisive wording. also the most important thing is getting rich people the f*** OUT of power. most important thing should be flooding normal human beings into the rich a****** playground. take the keys away from the 'political elite' bubble of monsters who can't answer a single f****** question honestly, and yet are still treated like the most valuable people on earth.
21
von_d_von Mar 29, 2026 +18
Just let the primary system do its work.
18
Bittererr Mar 29, 2026 +8
While I agree with you, a bunch of people are going to feel like the primary was unfair if their candidate doesn't win regardless.
8
ikeepmakingmore Mar 30, 2026
Maybe some. But I know in the recent past people felt primaries were unfair because there was obvious meddling. I remember people feeling unhappy with the 2008 primary, but I don't recall the feeling being that the primary was unfair. 
0
bootlegvader Mar 30, 2026 +6
>Maybe some. But I know in the recent past people felt primaries were unfair because there was obvious meddling. Not really, that you claim they were unfair is part of the point.
6
ikeepmakingmore Mar 30, 2026 +2
Emails revealing DNC favoring one candidate over another and taking actions to reflect that in 2016 would mean it is more than just a claim. Or in 2020 when a lot of candidates dropped out at once before super Tuesday after having private conversations. Just to name some of the things that stood out to me.  Will some people always complain about the primary being unfair? Yes. But there have been recent primaries where a large number of people felt the primaries were unfair. This is not always the case. 
2
bootlegvader Mar 30, 2026 +4
What actions did they take? Be specific. There were emails in late April and May that DNC employees were tired of Bernie attacking them and refusing to admit he lost. >Or in 2020 when a lot of candidates dropped out at once before super Tuesday after having private conversations Two candidates. Every primary has candidates drop out before Super Tuesday. It is literally the responsibility for a primary campaign to build a winning coalition. Bernie's strategy of just assuming losing candidates will just stay in and cannibalize votes from Biden so he could win with 32% of the vote was the unusual strategy. That would be like a Cuomo supporter saying the NYC mayoral primary was unfair because Lander cross endorsed with Mamdani and not Cuomo.
4
suprahelix Mar 30, 2026 +1
I loved Bernie supporters screeching “unfair collusion” because Klobuchar and Buttigieg dropped out, while simultaneously calling Warren a snake and a b**** for… not dropping out
1
bootlegvader Mar 30, 2026 +1
I like to present this hypothetical scenario. Lets pretend it is the 2028 primary the candidates are AOC, Fetterman, Tlaib, Buttigieg, Bowman, and Mamdani (lets pretend he could run). In this contest with all candidates you have Fetterman winning with a plurality of 32% compared to AOC having 28%. However, when you combine AOC, Tlaib, Bowman, and Mamdani than you get 52%. The remainder is Buttigieg getting 8%, but polls say if he drops that Fetterman gets 48% of his support and AOC gets 46% of his support. Are they of the opinion that Fetterman should get the primary win because of his slim plurality or should Tlaib, Bowman, and Mamdani should get behind AOC?
1
suprahelix Mar 30, 2026 +1
Also the point about the other candidates having no reason to stay in but to help the guy with a slim plurality pull off his bad campaign strategy
1
Sensitive-Flamingo84 Mar 30, 2026 +1
Problem is most people don’t vote in the primaries, then are upset by the candidate. The people who do vote in the primary often got for whoever they have heard talked about the most, those candidates are usually not the best strategically and are the candidates with the least integrity/most pac backing. Right now most people are hearing/saying Harris or Newsom, please God let us get a Kelly, Beshear, Moore, Ossoff etc.
1
stealthlysprockets Mar 30, 2026 +1
The primary system for president doesn’t matter depending on where you live. My state is so late in the process that the rest of the country has decided for us. Unless it’s neck and neck but that rarely happens.
1
ennuiinmotion Mar 29, 2026 +8
It’s not the identity that matters. That’s the shallowest consultant interpretation. People are craving authenticity and action. Any candidate who can do that stands a chance.
8
Wise_Recover_4344 Mar 30, 2026
Exactly. Look at Obama, he took people from all walks of life and got them to turn out. Then you look at telerico, he coulr do the same. People just want a decent person for working people, it’s not rocket science. Do what you say and be for the middle class and you’ll write your ticket.
0
redalert825 Mar 30, 2026 +4
They need hella to be adamant about bringing accountability and full on consequences to this f****** regime.
4
pomonamike Mar 29, 2026 +8
Fine, once again, I guess this somehow became my job. I’m a 42 year old straight, white, man. Masters of Divinity, ordained Baptist minister, law enforcement background. Military family. Currently a teacher (awarded top teacher in a very big county in the U.S.). I’m gonna get sworn in, make the best damn speech you’ve ever heard… and immediately replace my decoy running mate with another, and then step down so we have the queerest, socialist-iest, v*****-havingest, Blackest president ever.
8
TheNachoSupreme Mar 30, 2026 +1
But honestly... Maybe you should run for office. 
1
Calm_Season_250 Mar 29, 2026 +16
The Dems have spent too long chasing moderates and supporting billionaires growing their wealth for far to long to think they will not totally miss the mark trying to walk the golden mean again, and again. And again.... Forever..  The Democrats only chance of surviving this is to move progressive and help people see the benefit of government and people paying taxes. The greatest time in American history was when the rich were taxed at the highest rate, and unless the Democrats go back to that, it's done.
16
unholyravenger Mar 30, 2026 +1
I'm open to all options, but one thing I wish lefty people would do is prove the case. There are so many elections to experiment with. I want to see a lefty progressive populist win in a state that isn't CA, IL, NY, etc. Can they win a House race in Iowa? Then we can talk about the presidency. Right now, for the most part, only moderates win in purple or slightly red areas, and progressives win in strong blue areas. Then progressives turn around and say well it's because they were moderate. Prove it, then expand it. Don't jump from A->Z, build a movement from the ground up. Start taking House districts and Senate seats in *red* areas. Then point to that and say see we can win outside of NYC. We can win rural areas with left-wing populism. Again, I'm willing to accept this as a strategy; I want to eliminate the Republican Party. If this is the path to do it, I'm in. But I'm also like empirical results. Momdani was a huge win, but it's NYC, and a ton of moderates won at the same time he did by similar margins in harder races.
1
Calm_Season_250 Mar 30, 2026 +1
Lol more milquetoast Democrats will prove it when they do nothing for 4 years like Biden and there pendulum swing to Republicans again.  I am happy to watch the entire thing collapse, I don't f****** care anymore. 
1
X57471C Mar 30, 2026 +1
Biden was an awesome President, though. He worked with Congress to pass incredible bipartisan legislature (CHIPS, his infrastructure bill), and he was the most pro-union President EVER. People ding him because his appointment of Robert Mueller didn't pan out, but hindsight is 20/20 and I believe Biden's motives were to be nonpartisan in regards to the DoJ. I believe he wanted to be a healing, transitional figure for America. A President that could put all the craziness behind us. Obviously that's not what happened. It's easy to criticize looking back, but he really did some great things. Passing those bipartisan bills in this climate is probably the most impressive thing, tbh. Despite those other failings, he'll probably go down as one of the better Presidents. Idk, it's complicated. No one has a crystal ball. We're all just trying to do the best we can.
1
LockNo2943 Mar 30, 2026 -3
Exactly, donny didn't get into office because of the moderate vote. 
-3
bootlegvader Mar 30, 2026 +2
IIRC, exit polls of voters in both 2016 and 2024 had voters saying they saw Trump as more moderate than his opponent.
2
Hoodrow-Thrillson Mar 30, 2026 +6
He literally did.
6
LockNo2943 Mar 30, 2026 -2
If donny's far-right views are "moderate" I need to just kms.
-2
Hoodrow-Thrillson Mar 30, 2026 +5
I really can't stress enough how much of the electorate is kind of unplugged from politics and not ideologically driven. Those are the people who swung the election for Trump.
5
hyper-object Mar 30, 2026 -2
Please make your point w/o hyperbolic suicidal ideation. So unnecessary.
-2
LockNo2943 Mar 30, 2026 -5
So you don't **actually** have a counter-argument then?
-5
hyper-object Mar 30, 2026
Lol. What? What would I be arguing about?
0
LockNo2943 Mar 30, 2026 +1
The far-right as the "moderate" position.
1
hyper-object Mar 30, 2026 +1
What makes you think I believe that?
1
TurnoverMobile8332 Mar 29, 2026 +5
And they’re still funded by AIPAC like any moderately publicized politician…
5
BrobaFett26 Mar 29, 2026 +5
The Epstein class is propagandizing again
5
Scarlettail Mar 29, 2026 +5
They'll run into the same issues, though, as last time if they're considered too centrist or status quo. Putting someone like Newsom out there is asking for another loss.
5
sirgrogu12 Mar 29, 2026 +11
Their race and gender is utterly irrelevant, what matters is how well they can actually do the f****** job. I'm not buying this "America isn't ready for a woman President" c***, Hillary Clinton - a historically unpopular candidate - won three million more votes than Trump in 2016. Kamala Harris came within 1.5% of victory in 2024.
11
Glum_Gate_9444 Mar 29, 2026 +14
You can buy it or not, two women lost to a complete f****** clown while old man Biden beat him.
14
Vegetable-Error-2068 Mar 29, 2026 -2
Because they were corporate, neoliberal ghouls who laugh at actual everyday problems instead of wanting to fix them. Their being women was entirely irrelevant.
-2
Glum_Gate_9444 Mar 29, 2026 +6
Every rationalization to ignore the obvious.
6
Professional-Can1385 Mar 30, 2026
Yet, Harris was too much like Biden for people to vote for her?
0
sirgrogu12 Mar 29, 2026 -1
And had Biden stayed he would've got his ass handed to him worse than Kamala. The only person to take Trump on as an incumbent won, sex don't got anything to do with it
-1
JojenCopyPaste Mar 29, 2026 -2
If Hillary did literally anything at all to be likable she would've won in 2016 and we'd be in a much different place. But here we are.
-2
ianrl337 Mar 30, 2026 -1
I do agree, but Hillary was probably the most hated person in America, but just a little more than Trump. A turnip could have run for either party and probably won that race. Harris was cut short with no primary and Biden deciding to run at the last minute and dropping out halfway through. It was an uphill climb for her to win that race. But also half the country are sexist, racist assholes. So a third try may be hard. I personally would like to see someone like Newsome with a Crockett or another woman at VP. But as VP they stay involved and aren't just a place holder. Then in 2032 or 2036 they run for president with full backing.
-1
Bittererr Mar 29, 2026 +5
>what matters is how well they can actually do the f****** job. That actually doesn't matter at all if they can't win the election. If the person who is the very best person in the world to be the president isn't actually the president then they can't actually do the president stuff.
5
sirgrogu12 Mar 29, 2026 +4
There is absolutely no evidence to suggest a woman can't win a US presidential election. As I've already stated a woman already won the popular vote and another came within a hair's breadth (less than 1.5pp). If Dems think Kamala lost because she has a v***** they're f****** nuts.
4
potchippy Mar 29, 2026 +2
All evidence points to what a candidate says does not matter to 1/3 of the population. The other 1/3 do not care enough unless they are affected negatively. US elections are decided by the protest vote (vibe) not the quality of the candidate.
2
Bittererr Mar 29, 2026 +1
You said what matters is how well they can do the job, but that's just not true. They need to be elected, regardless of whether gender factors into that.
1
sirgrogu12 Mar 29, 2026 +2
Yes, obviously they need to be elected, but I've already explained why I think the "America will never elect a woman" argument is BS
2
Professional-Can1385 Mar 30, 2026
Alas, the popular vote doesn’t make anyone president.
0
zholo Mar 29, 2026 +2
And they both lost.  Because people like you wanted to prove a point.  As a result we have the most incompetent president of all time.  Twice.  All that matters is who can win.  Full stop.  Qualified does not mean electable.
2
sirgrogu12 Mar 29, 2026 +3
"prove a point"? What the f*** are you talking about? Jesus Christ, if your understanding of reality is this lopsided you might as well join the GOP.
3
heroman3 Mar 29, 2026 +4
If the white male christian is Talarico then hell yes.
4
ianrl337 Mar 29, 2026 +2
Partially not wrong. I would love to see a Crockett or AOC in the white house, but can they win in a general election? Half this country is the country that voted in the asshat we have in office now. They are sexist racist assholes, but they do vote.
2
LockNo2943 Mar 30, 2026 +2
Wow, such a bold choice. 
2
PhoenixTineldyer Mar 29, 2026 +1
America is racist and homophobic as hell, so yeah, makes sense.
1
NewTimeTraveler1 Mar 30, 2026 +2
Ok media 🙄 
2
TheFairVirgin Mar 30, 2026 +1
This is dumb. This is the reasoning of a slackjawed misanthrope with neither faith in or connection to their fellow man.
1
Jorgen_G_Pakieto Mar 30, 2026 +1
The demographics aren’t going to do jack squat for the Democratic Party because the actual problem concerns policy ideas and correct messaging around them.
1
dek-tep Mar 30, 2026 +1
ffs last thing anyone needs is another religious nut
1
OkRush9563 Mar 30, 2026 +1
I am so sick and tired of religion. I would vote for an atheist. Keep church and state separate.
1
Potential-Bird-5826 Mar 30, 2026 +1
Well, you wouldn't vote for the white woman, or the black woman. So this is what you get 
1
Pumpkins_Are_Fruits Mar 30, 2026 +1
Seriously, stop going for females…this country is not ready
1
EducatorForward6617 Mar 30, 2026 +1
Not ready for what exactly? A someone with a v***** sitting in an office?
1
Headozed Mar 30, 2026 +1
I want everyone to look at the tone of the comments in this thread. We have not yet been inundated with bots, biased AI, or paid trolls. In a couple months, this thread would have 500 more comments, most of which would be polarizing, racially inflammatory, oversimplifications. When you see those comments come, be sure to call them out so others don’t start to feel like they are the majority.
1
EducatorForward6617 Mar 30, 2026 +1
I'm just gonna keep saying this until someone listens...stop voting....no kings day should be on election day. Why does everyone vote for candidates they dont like, when is that ever the american mentality? Karen's be raising hell up in burger king but everyone goes and votes like they masturbafe...shamefully and in private
1
Vegetable-Error-2068 Mar 29, 2026 +5
Democrats keep ceding ground to Republicans.
5
Smile_Space Mar 29, 2026
Well, it's not the worst strategy given Americans seem to still not respect women enough to allow one to be president. If we want to consolidate power and get stuff done we have to play by the current rules which is straight, white man as president. THEN we fight for diversity again.
0
supervegeta101 Mar 30, 2026 +2
I don't care what their identity is, no one does. NO. MORE. MODERATES. The conservatives have not reciprocated and never will.
2
JonathanQShrimpling Mar 29, 2026 -7
A straight white Christian man? Thats some republican nonsense, they should run a gay black muslim transgender women because thats the right thing to do
-7
HailYurii Mar 29, 2026 -2
Andy is the guy
-2
← Back to Board