2028 ELECTION THREAD

That seems like a perfectly reasonable question to ask given that the Palisades fire started 4 days ago. 🙄

https://www.newsweek.com/california-wildfires-torch-gavin-newsoms-presidential-ambitions-2013257

Newsweek

California wildfires torch Gavin Newsom

Not only is it reasonable but you can write whole articles about it even.

Yeah, the article with the clickbait title doesn't make me any less convinced that it's a silly thing to ask this early on. But I'm sure it will be asked many more times way too early, because that's the place we're in, where a man that's going to become president again in just 9 days spends his time name calling and hammering the Governor of a state devastated by current events. It's the "jump to conclusions" and blame game world we're living in now. Doesn't mean I have to like it or agree with it. It's ridiculous.

That said, I appreciate you using the word "reasonable" as I should have - fixed my post, thanks. 😀

We can only hope not

The Democratic governors like Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker are the front runners for 2028 this early out because, like yeah, they are governing in good times and bad.

I'm not going to bet because it's four years away, but if someone wanted to take three names for the Democratic nominee (or the GOP nominee) for the 2028 election and give me the field, I think I would have the best of it by a decent margin.

No senator is good enough to be on par with them?

Democratic members of both the senate and house face the headwind of not being the majority party. And off the top of my head, I can't think of any speeches at the the Democratic convention that introduced a rising star for the future.

Obviously it's going to be Elon Musk.

Is there a betting market on whether there will be an election in 2028?

There might actually be enough potential for that.

That is precisely why now is the time to bet. (If you're the type to bet on these things.

There seem to be a TON of centrist Democrat types who said that Trump winning means we will no longer have legitimate elections again. I don't know if they actually believe their own hype; if I thought this way, I'd be leaving the US immediately, but extremely few of them actually do so.

I find it very unlikely that the oligarchs would accept the huge shock to capital and the entire system that letting Trump act as King would entail. There's also the legitimate chance that Trump's own arteries cancel him out before too long. But I've been wrong before.

Anyway, my point is that I think there would definitely be a betting market here, at least once we start getting closer, like after the midterms.

it's very funny

On one hand, the aforementioned centrist libs will literally say stuff like "WE ARE IN GERMANY CIRCA 1936", "TRUMP WILL RULE INDEFINITELY", etc., and then on the other hand, when somebody asks if they'll leave the country NOW, while they still have near-complete freedom to move, they go "come on man I have a family! And a job!"

They have multiple years to figure out how to load grandma on a plane, sure, but the logistics are just too tricky to attempt to actually flee from the Orange Reich!

Bolded is mostly mischaracterization. What rational people have said is:

1) Trump's has authoritarian instincts.
2) Trump actively sowed mistrust in election results for personal gain.
3) Trump attempted a strategy that was designed to allow him to remain in office despite losing the 2020 election. (Admittedly, this strategy had a low probability of success.)
4) Most Republicans in Congress were complicit in 3.
5) Trump has eased the way in the future for someone even worse than him.

I don't know a single centrist Democrat who thinks there is more than a remote possibility that Trump can change the country quickly enough to remain in power after his second term. And as you say, he is quite old and won't be around forever. Nevertheless, 1-5 (none of which are debatable imo) mark a significant degradation in American democracy.

I have seen dozens of posters with this EXACT sentiment, no exaggeration whatsoever. They say it in this matter-of-fact tone, which makes it even worse; like their dystopian future is inevitable. Just spend some time on that 2p2 split-off politics forum from a few years back. If I wanted to, I could quote TWENTY different posters there overtly saying stuff like "we will no longer have functioning elections in the US again". And not even in immediate, emotional reactions to the election or whatever, they make this claim regularly.

I haven't mischaracterized ****.

Why are you so mad here? You won! The centrists are on their way out.

I think some of your points are heavily debatable

1) is objectively false, he had 2 major crisis which would have allowed him to use emergency powers in absurd ways and he didn't, showing he is actually FAR LESS authoritarian than most politicians. He could have done infinitely more to use violence against BLM rioters (*as asked to by many republicans i might add*), and he didn't. And he could have wielded insanely more power thanks to covid. He didn't, he was criticizing by the same left for doing too little jfc, which is literally the opposite of being an authoritarian.

He also made the patrioct act expire, one if not THE most authoritarian piece of federal legislation passed in decades, a violent, unjustified, illegitimate fascist approach to security and law enforcement in general. He threatened to veto the nth renewal and it expired.

So Trump is provenly a lot LESS authoritarian than usually politicians are.

2) yes
3) yes
4) some not most
5) no, he actually allowed the system to fix some potentially exploitable loopholes (clarifying VP roles for example, and at the state level clarifying procedures to certify electoral votes)

In talking about these libs that oh-so-rarely flee the country in these cases, I'm just illustrating the comical degree by which people will oh-so-extremely-rarely take the logical next steps they arrive to as a conclusion of their worldview, all in the name of personal convenience.

People from all across the ideological continuum do this. Take hardcore Christian, so-called pro-lifers. They quite literally believe that abortion is baby murder. If a rational person lived in a country in which they think half the population are BABY MURDERERS and BABY MURDER SUPPORTERS, there's zero chance they could just go about their daily lives in peace. If I were one of these anti-choice religious maniacs, I would feel completely obligated to be some kinda holy warrior Christian jihadist living on the very edges of this deeply Satanic society that I would pray hourly gets immediately raptured. Instead, nearly all of them... post dank internet memes where Jesus and Satan are playing one-on-one basketball, in between working their normal jobs alongside any number of BABY MURDERERES AND BABY MURDER SUPPORTERS.

Another reason why Aaron Bushnell or Luigi Mangione is braver than everyone in this forum combined.

I can only speak to what I have seen here, and the people I talk to irl. I don't visit UP often.

Are you doing a bunch of revolutionary stuff on the reg?

huh?

Democratic centrists being replaced by even-more-evil Republican centrists isn't a victory for anybody with left politics. And that's what a ton of people serving under Trump are. Centrist conservatives.

Do you think that the median conservative in the next Congressional term is much different than the median conservative in Congress during the Iraq War, PATRIOT ACT days? They ain't.

This is an insane glass half-full perspective. In terms of paving the way for others, undermining public faith in elections completely swamps the stuff you mentioned.

You stopped Genocide Joe! What more did you want?

No, which is exactly why I didn't exclude myself from "everyone in this forum combined". I'm most definitely part of the same hypocrisy.