2025 & 2026 Elections | Adams drops out in NYC

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 808
  • Views: 28K
  • Politics 
aGDevil2k said:
SC loves their crazy.

It's so wild to me how different of a state it is from North Carolina
Click to expand...
I have some friends in SC and they don't think she'll win the GOP primary, they think the favorite is SC Attorney General Alan Wilson, or maybe GOP Rep. Ralph Norman. The current Lt. Governor, Pamela Evette, is also running, but they think that SC GOP primary voters will prefer Wilson. As I don't live in SC I have no idea who will win the GOP nomination, although I'm quite certain that the candidate that does win the GOP nomination will beat their Democratic opponent and be the next governor.
 
Thought this was an interesting notion.

"Counterargument to this…Whoever Trump gets behind ahead of 2028 will win the GOP primary running away, likely with more than 50% of the vote in early contests—no matter who independents support. It won’t be a real contest because there isn’t a serious debate in the party over ideas. That’s why the contenders are all focused on getting Trump’s support—not the support of his voters. They estimate (likely accurately) that base primary voters will ultimately just do what Trump says. The party is captured.The Democratic primaries on the other hand will most likely be very competitive, involve significant and serious policy disagreements among many candidates, and likely be decided on razor-thin margins relative to the GOP. The Democratic Party is the party seriously redefining itself right now and independents are much more likely to help steer it away from the radicalism of Mamdami/Warren by giving an extra 5-10% to a sober standard-bearer. Independents who engage the Democratic Party in this way do the country an equal service and are more likely to influence the outcome."

 
CFordUNC said:
Thought this was an interesting notion.

"Counterargument to this…Whoever Trump gets behind ahead of 2028 will win the GOP primary running away, likely with more than 50% of the vote in early contests—no matter who independents support. It won’t be a real contest because there isn’t a serious debate in the party over ideas. That’s why the contenders are all focused on getting Trump’s support—not the support of his voters. They estimate (likely accurately) that base primary voters will ultimately just do what Trump says. The party is captured.The Democratic primaries on the other hand will most likely be very competitive, involve significant and serious policy disagreements among many candidates, and likely be decided on razor-thin margins relative to the GOP. The Democratic Party is the party seriously redefining itself right now and independents are much more likely to help steer it away from the radicalism of Mamdami/Warren by giving an extra 5-10% to a sober standard-bearer. Independents who engage the Democratic Party in this way do the country an equal service and are more likely to influence the outcome."

Click to expand...

this is what republicans want to see happen. dems nominate a republican-lite who fails to beat the MAGA candidate at their own game.
 
akillesheel said:
this is what republicans want to see happen. dems nominate a republican-lite who fails to beat the MAGA candidate at their own game.
Click to expand...
That's an interesting point I hadn't considered. I think because I am center-center right on a lot of things (though, obviously, vote Democratic these days), that I extrapolate what appeals to me personally and assign it to the rest of the Democratic voting base. But I can also see why that could be erroneous strategy.
 
I know the non-Republican options for New York mayor are pretty poor, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Elizabeth Warren's endorsement of Zorhan Mamdani is not going to help Democrats chances in 2026.

www.nytimes.com

Elizabeth Warren, Campaigning for Mamdani, Scorns Cuomo and Billionaires

Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic candidate for mayor of New York City, appeared with Senator Elizabeth Warren to highlight his plan for free universal child care.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
 
GoHeelsweeeehoooo said:
The difference between NC and SC is that SC doesn't have anything like Charlotte, the Triangle, or the Triad - basically no urban areas - also SC BBQ is vastly inferior to NC BBQ
Click to expand...
That didn't happen by accident. In 1980 Columbia, SC and Raleigh were about the same size. Greensboro was about 100,000. Charleston, SC had a metro area of 400,000 in 1980.


One state invested in

1. Highway infrastructure

2. Education (Including higher education)

3. Research & Development

4. Emphasized economic development and growth


And the other put mustard in their barbecue sauce!
 
ZenMode said:
I know the non-Republican options for New York mayor are pretty poor, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Elizabeth Warren's endorsement of Zorhan Mamdani is not going to help Democrats chances in 2026.

www.nytimes.com

Elizabeth Warren, Campaigning for Mamdani, Scorns Cuomo and Billionaires

Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic candidate for mayor of New York City, appeared with Senator Elizabeth Warren to highlight his plan for free universal child care.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
Click to expand...
Except no one outside FNC or Newsmax hangs on every word uttered by Sen. Warren.

People care that they are losing health care, the job market is tightening, the rent is too damn high, and there are no summer programs and school lunch for their kids.
 
Duke Mu said:
Except no one outside FNC or Newsmax hangs on every word uttered by Sen. Warren.

People care that they are losing health care, the job market is tightening, the rent is too damn high, and there are no summer programs and school lunch for their kids.
Click to expand...
The exit and post election polling seemed to show that people are becoming aware of details like this, and that it mattered to them.

I suspect things like this will also be on the radar of voters. Dems would be well served to stop with the Hitler/Holocaust stuff. It doesn't seem to work - very "boy who cried wolf".

Texas state Democrat apologizes for comparing GOP redistricting plan to the Holocaust​


www.foxnews.com

Texas state Democrat apologizes for comparing GOP redistricting plan to the Holocaust

Democratic Texas State Rep. Jolanda Jones invoked the Holocaust while discussing state Democrats like herself fleeing the state to avoid a vote on redistricting.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com
 
Healing said:
Generally agree, however, middle-ground Joe was elected largely because he seemed a stable and boring administrator in a time of chaos and incompetence.

I think a presumed ‘28 election will be revolutionary election. Yet, don’t put it past Trump to have this country literally burning in the midst a bird flu pandemic and nationwide measles outbreak. In that case, Roy Cooper might just be the guy.
Click to expand...
trump 2.0 has already done more damage to this country's foundation and future than 1.0 did in his entire term. it was possible to sell voters in 2020 that normalcy was an aspirational thing to return to and that we could just treat trump as an aberration. i can't really see the same being true in 2028 with the lasting damage that he's already done. plus, covid inspired unprecedented voter turnout not just because it was a public health emergency, but because of how strongly absentee/from home voting was advertised and encouraged - can't bank on that again.
 
Totally agree. As much as I can’t stand the policies of the Trump administration, I can’t get too worked up about what may happen in the midterms next year or in 2028 because it will quite simply come down to whether or not enough people care that their health and economic bottom lines – or that of their loved ones – have been so significantly diminished directly by the policies of the Trump administration, that they turn out in overwhelming numbers to vote Republicans out of office.

If people do that, Democrats will win. If people don’t, Republicans will continue their skull fucking of the upper middle, middle, and lower classes. Pretty much as simple as that, IMO.
 
I don't care what the polls say now, or what analysts think is going to happen.

I'm sticking with blue tsunami. I have good reasons for that projection (for one thing, it's historically the norm) and I'm sticking with it. I think it's a sounder basis for projection at this time than "oh, look, the polls about an election 18 months from now don't show Dems with a huge lead)"
 
superrific said:
I don't care what the polls say now, or what analysts think is going to happen.

I'm sticking with blue tsunami. I have good reasons for that projection (for one thing, it's historically the norm) and I'm sticking with it. I think it's a sounder basis for projection at this time than "oh, look, the polls about an election 18 months from now don't show Dems with a huge lead)"
Click to expand...
If the economy is bad, blue tsunami

If the economy is fine, probably about a stalemate, though Dems will be lucky to maintain their current levels in the Senate and House
 
rodoheel said:
If the economy is fine, probably about a stalemate, though Dems will be lucky to maintain their current levels in the Senate and House
Click to expand...
Lucky? 2002 is the only off-year election in modern history in which the incumbent party did not lose seats. And there was that whole 9/11 thing that complicated elections that year.
 
Calheel said:
Lucky? 2002 is the only off-year election in modern history in which the incumbent party did not lose seats. And there was that whole 9/11 thing that complicated elections that year.
Click to expand...
I hear you on the historical factor. I just think we're in a different election paradigm now than we were before; I think stuff that happened 10, 12, 14 years ago is becoming irrelevant, and candidly I would rather assume the worst than the best. And when you look at the Senate map for Dems, you can understand the reason for pessimism.
 
rodoheel said:
I hear you on the historical factor. I just think we're in a different election paradigm now than we were before; I think stuff that happened 10, 12, 14 years ago is becoming irrelevant, and candidly I would rather assume the worst than the best. And when you look at the Senate map for Dems, you can understand the reason for pessimism.
Click to expand...
Not talking Senate, which is largely irrelevant (except for Sup Ct nominations) if you have the House. Unless you have the presidency, one chamber is practically as good as two chambers.
 
rodoheel said:
If the economy is bad, blue tsunami

If the economy is fine, probably about a stalemate, though Dems will be lucky to maintain their current levels in the Senate and House
Click to expand...
If the economy is fine, then it maybe a stalemate depending upon what constitutes a "fine economy " a year from now. I don't think this economy is on a trajectory to be a fine economy.

Inflation ?
Jobs and employment ?
Recession ?

No spike in inflation, no recession, no spike in job losses and unemployment = a decent chance GQPers will hold on to a House majority and the Senate in 2026
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top