Gavin Newsom addresses the nation

  • Thread starter Thread starter dukeman92
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 1K
  • Views: 23K
  • Politics 
Centerpiece said:
Dem Nominee just has to be able to beat Vance, correct?
Unless Pubs successfully get a Trump on the ballot, JD is the opponent, no? (Perhaps, perhaps not. Who was Dan Quayle anyway?)

Somebody mentioned Clinton “fatigue”… and Bush 2 had such a horrible tenure that even a complete unknown black guy with a Muslim name won easily. Bush “fatigue”.

Think about that. Aside from the keynote speech at a convention, a one term Senator, a complete unknown black guy with “Hussein” as a middle name won the Presidency. Wow! Bush 2 had shit the bed that badly. Granted Obama was a great orator which gave him the “it” factor mentioned.

I think Trump 2.0 could possibly leave the country in as bad of shape as W had it in 2008. I think the country will suffer from Trump fatigue, leaving JD with an uphill climb. Recall W’s VP wasn’t the Pub nominee in 2008 (What was his name?).

It’s possible a complete unknown can make it happen for the Dems. But it’s probably got to be somebody that comes close to fitting Calheel’s description. That said, I think the nominee can be in his 60’s (not just 40’s/50s) and can be from a State outside of the South or midWest.

I’m ok with most all the names bandied about thus far - except Fetterman
Click to expand...
Vance isn’t the GOP heir apparent.

He’ll have to win the nomination. He’ll face lots of challengers.

George Herbert Walker Bush faced significant challengers in 1988 (Bob Dole, Jack Kemp, Pat Robertson, Paul Laxalt, Alexander Haig, Pierre DuPont). Bush had been a loyal two-term VP to Ronald Reagan, a shitty President that most Republicans revered and thought was Saint Ronald and the greatest president ever.

The GOP wasn’t enamored with GHW Bush.

The GOP won’t be enamored with Vance.
 
Calheel said:
I know Fetterman is really hated on this board and rightfully so. He really seems like he would be a hit with Joe and Eileen Bailey - ie a Republican.

But strategically, he would be a reaonable candidate for Democrats. On the downside, he has significant physical and mental health questions and he would not generate any excitement from the base. But Biden 2020 did not generate any excitement from the base and also had health questions. Yet he won fairly comfortably.

At some point this board needs to accept that there is very little overlap with the candidates it likes and the candidates that are electable.
Click to expand...
My preference is to a candidate who can win in November 2028. Period.

I’m mocking you because you said the winning candidate had to be a hetero white Christian male from the South or Midwest who is 40-59 years-old.

You compiled a list of 10 names that included several Jews, almost no Southerners or Midwesterners (maybe one, total), and at least one guy 60-plus.
Calheel said:
Trump is brain damaged and was elected twice. Brain damage is not that big of a deal in today’s political environment. Closing churches during Covid is a much bigger issue.
Click to expand...
Brain-damaged is a huge issue for any Democratic candidate. Ditto on adultery or sexual assault.

Those things matter not for a GOP candidate.
 
Calheel said:
Fetterman is a 10x better candidate than Newsom.

If Newsom runs, they will pound that he is anti-religious and cite his restrictions on churches during Covid. There is just so much negative material out there on Newsom. Republicans would vastly prefer to run against Newsom than Fetterman.
Click to expand...
i'm not really a fan of newsom as a candidate, but i think a pretty good rule of thumb these days is that dems should in fact run whomever republicans claim they would "prefer to run against."
 
wmheel1287 said:
Dude....Fetterman isn't a better candidate than anyone. Literally anyone. Tulsi Gabbard as the democratic candidate would be better than Fetterman. Yeah, Trump is batshit crazy but winning the Republican base is very different from winning the Democratic base. Fetterman doesn't appeal to anyone. He's not pragmatic. He's not liberal. He's not conservative. He's just loony and he lacks any charisma. What exactly would be his appeal? That he dresses like Joe Rogan?
Click to expand...
Have you noticed that "generic" democrat always does better in polling than any named democrat? That is because generic has no negatives -- none.

I want a 2028 candidate that is as close to generic democrat as possible. I don't need charisma. I don't need appeal. I want an absence of problems.

Newsom has a boatload of problems. He is basically the worst possible candidate we could nominate. The people that like him on this board aren't thinking about his negatives. They are focusing on his positives. That is the absolute worst way to pick a candidate.
 
Calheel said:
Have you noticed that "generic" democrat always does better in polling than any named democrat? That is because generic has no negatives -- none.

I want a 2028 candidate that is as close to generic democrat as possible. I don't need charisma. I don't need appeal. I want an absence of problems.

Newsom has a boatload of problems. He is basically the worst possible candidate we could nominate. The people that like him on this board aren't thinking about his negatives. They are focusing on his positives. That is the absolute worst way to pick a candidate.
Click to expand...

Trump.
 
Healing said:
Fetterman is about as far from generic as a current pol gets. He’s literally brain damaged. His wife is scared of him. His behavior is reportedly dangerous, impulsive, and erratic. He has a history of near fatal health episodes. He dresses like he’s late for first period.

That had to be a jesting throw-in. Yeah?
Click to expand...
I mentioned he was the worst on my list. But I’d still pick him over Newsom. Fetterman’s negatives could be managed with a good campaign. Newsom’s are baked in and would be deadly in the swing states.

Of course, Fetterman is never going to run and would never win the nomination so it is a moot point. But yeah, give me Fetterman all day over Newsom.
 
Calheel said:
Have you noticed that "generic" democrat always does better in polling than any named democrat? That is because generic has no negatives -- none.

I want a 2028 candidate that is as close to generic democrat as possible. I don't need charisma. I don't need appeal. I want an absence of problems.

Newsom has a boatload of problems. He is basically the worst possible candidate we could nominate. The people that like him on this board aren't thinking about his negatives. They are focusing on his positives. That is the absolute worst way to pick a candidate.
Click to expand...
“I don’t need charisma.”

Since Watergate, two Democrats lacking charisma have won the White House - Jimmy Carter in 1976; he won against boring ass Gerald Ford who had pardoned Nixon; the 1976 election was a referendum on Nixon; Carter won. Then we have Biden in 2020; that election was a referendum on Trump’s botched response to Covid; Biden won.
  • 1980 - Carter was losing. Period. Iranian hostage crisis. Inflation. High interest rates.
  • 1984 - Morning in America. Even a charismatic Fritz Mondale loses in a landslide to Reagan in ‘84. Maybe a guy with charisma wins Massachusetts and keeps North Carolina close enough to defeat Jesse Helms.
  • 1988 - the Democrats nominate someone in Mike Dukakis who managed to make GHW Bush appear likable, charismatic, and erudite. Bush was winning regardless. Eight years of supposed “peace and prosperity.”
  • 1992 - Democrats finally nominate a charismatic candidate. Holy shit. He wins!
  • 1996 - economy holds. Same Democrat wins. Turns out the American people like him. First Democrat in years to pass the “beer test” - who would I like to have a beer with?
  • 2000 - we nominate Al Gore. High on the “people I don’t want to have a beer with” list. Anti-charismatic.
  • 2004 - We nominate someone less charismatic than Al Gore.
  • 2008 and 2012. It’s Barack! Enough said. Coolest mofo to be POTUS or a POTUS nominee maybe ever. Oozes charisma.
  • 2016 - Hillary. More anti-charisma than Gore and Kerry combined.
  • 2024 - Kamala. Biden (and/or his staff put the Democrats in a huge hole). Still, Kamala does not come close to having “it.”
I want a POTUS candidate with “it.”
 
Zoo_View said:
“I don’t need charisma.”

Since Watergate, two Democrats lacking charisma have won the White House - Jimmy Carter in 1976; he won against boring ass Gerald Ford who had pardoned Nixon; the 1976 election was a referendum on Nixon; Carter won. Then we have Biden in 2020; that election was a referendum on Trump’s botched response to Covid; Biden won.
  • 1980 - Carter was losing. Period. Iranian hostage crisis. Inflation. High interest rates.
  • 1984 - Morning in America. Even a charismatic Fritz Mondale loses in a landslide to Reagan in ‘84. Maybe a guy with charisma wins Massachusetts and keeps North Carolina close enough to defeat Jesse Helms.
  • 1988 - the Democrats nominate someone in Mike Dukakis who managed to make GHW Bush appear likable, charismatic, and erudite. Bush was winning regardless. Eight years of supposed “peace and prosperity.”
  • 1992 - Democrats finally nominate a charismatic candidate. Holy shit. He wins!
  • 1996 - economy holds. Same Democrat wins. Turns out the American people like him. First Democrat in years to pass the “beer test” - who would I like to have a beer with?
  • 2000 - we nominate Al Gore. High on the “people I don’t want to have a beer with” list. Anti-charismatic.
  • 2004 - We nominate someone less charismatic than Al Gore.
  • 2008 and 2012. It’s Barack! Enough said. Coolest mofo to be POTUS or a POTUS nominee maybe ever. Oozes charisma.
  • 2016 - Hillary. More anti-charisma than Gore and Kerry combined.
  • 2024 - Kamala. Biden (and/or his staff put the Democrats in a huge hole). Still, Kamala does not come close to having “it.”
I want a POTUS candidate with “it.”
Click to expand...
So 4 democrats have won: Carter, Clinton, Obama and Biden. Only 50% of the winners had "it" per your analysis.

The "it" isn't why any of those candidates won. Each case involved voting against the other party. One thing Carter, Clinton and Obama shared was youth and few negatives due to a meteoric rise. Same with JFK.

Nominating a candidate based on perceived "itness" is a path to political ruin.
 
Calheel said:
So 4 democrats have won: Carter, Clinton, Obama and Biden. Only 50% of the winners had "it" per your analysis.

The "it" isn't why any of those candidates won. Each case involved voting against the other party. One thing Carter, Clinton and Obama shared was youth and few negatives due to a meteoric rise. Same with JFK.

Nominating a candidate based on perceived "itness" is a path to political ruin.
Click to expand...
Tell me how your list of boring ass white guys wins in 2028…..,especially since it’s a list almost devoid of straight, white Christians from the South or Midwest?
 
Zoo_View said:
Tell me how your list of boring ass white guys wins in 2028…..,especially since it’s a list almost devoid of straight, white Christians from the South or Midwest?
Click to expand...
Cal is so dead set against Newsom, his own alternative list of candidates comes back to bite him in the arse. And the whole Fetterman thing has people wondering: WTH happened to Calheel?

I will say, Cal is from California and he knows better than any of us the skeletons in Gavin’s closet. Grant him that. Also, his description of a winning candidate is not totally off base: White. Straight. Male. Not too old. From a part of the Country that’s not going to flip out too many voters (in other words not Cali or NY).

We all want the same thing. A W in 2026, and in 2028. I’m not going to beat up on Calheel just because he thinks there may be better options than Newsom. But I’ll have to assume the Fetterman thing was a red herring to show just how much against Newsom he really is and not really a full throated endorsement of Fett.
 
Southern States (Republican Governors)

• Alabama – Governor Kay Ivey (Republican)

• Arkansas – Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders (Republican)

• Florida – Governor Ron DeSantis (Republican)

• Georgia – Governor Brian Kemp (Republican)

• Louisiana – Governor Jeff Landry (Republican)

• Mississippi – Governor Tate Reeves (Republican)

• South Carolina – Governor Henry McMaster (Republican)

• Tennessee – Governor Bill Lee (Republican)

• Texas – Governor Greg Abbott (Republican)

‘ West Virginia - Governor Patrick Morrisey (Republican)


Midwestern states with current Republican governors:

• Indiana – Governor Mike Braun (Republican)

• Iowa – Governor Kim Reynolds (Republican)

• Missouri – Governor Mike Kehoe (Republican) (took office January 2025)

• Nebraska – Governor Jim Pillen (Republican)

• North Dakota – Governor Kelly Armstrong (Republican)

• Ohio – Governor Mike DeWine (Republican)

‘ Oklahoma - Governor Kevin Stitt (Republican)

• South Dakota – Governor Larry Rhoden (Republican) (since Jan 2025)

And then there are the Congressional Crazies of MAGAWorld

Vance

Noem

Gabbard

&&&&$$$$$$$&&&&&&&

Fetterman’s stances and health are likely to both worsen. They’re already both pretty bad. He was an interesting “Joe the Plumber” type once but that ship sailed and sank.

Newsom’s got 3 years to go - watch how MAGA responds to him and how he responds to that. He’s pretty cardboard to my eyes but there’s a lot of time yet.

There’s still an Obama in the house (a kingmaker and queen). They still serve.

The world isn’t sane enough, and unlikely to get soberer, that you can scoff at Colbert. Or even Stewart.

Buttigieg - man he’s sharp - how traditional are the Independents?

Stein and Beshear are the only Dem Governors. Is Beshear the guy?

Shapiro? Pritzker? Whitmer?

trump’s authoritarianism and attempts to nullify constitutional government will tell the tale. Without an electoral uprising in 2026 the election in 2028 won’t matter. Without both individual effective (and performative) resistance AND collective organizing 2028 won’t matter.
 
Calheel said:
This has nothing to do with who I would personally prefer to be president. If we could just appoint a prime minister, like in a parliamentary system, I’d feel completely different.

But Democrats must win the presidency in 2028. We need the absolute easiest possible candidate to elect. One with as few negatives as possible. I’d be fine with a Congressman or celebrity because inexperience is not a negative in today’s environment.

So this has nothing to do with “liking” a candidate. I “like” Mayor Pete but this is not the cycle for him.
Click to expand...
We disagree. Every candidate is going to have negatives. Lord knows that the democratic party magnifies them brighter than the American facist party.

I believe Newsom messaging outshines his negatives. Assuming we have elections in '28, I have more faith that he will articulate a winning platform after 3+ years of Project 2025 than any candidate this side of Mayor Pete. Mayor Pete would be my preferred candidate, but our country has shown that we still trail the developed world in entrusting someone besides old rich white men.
 
After hearing Senator Slotkin, I think she would make a wonderful first woman President. Same with Amy Klobuchar. Same with Whitmer.
But ladies are a non-starter in this misogynistic country.
People love Mayor Pete. But again, non-starter.
I think Roy Cooper would be an excellent Dem Prez. But he's running for Senate, so...
Despite what Cal says, I think Gavin could get it done.
I still like Gov. Andy. Same with Shapiro.

But of all the politicians whom I've heard or I'm familiar with - I think Jeff Jackson would be the best.
Pragmatic. Great messaging. Perfect in today's tweeting/tiktok/YouTube world. Young. Straight. White. Married with children. Male. Served in the military. He ain't gonna do a John Edwards or Cal Cunningham. Served in Congress. Served in NC State Legislature. Serving as AG in a very large State. (I think NC checks in in the top ten in population as well as in other metrics for measuring "largeness"). And, he's NEVER lost a political race. (Yes, he voluntarily dropped out of a senate race to endorse Beasley, but he didn't lose by the vote. I say Jackson would have beaten Budd had he not acquiesced to Cheri)
Jeff also checks every single box in Calheel's wish list.
 
Centerpiece said:
After hearing Senator Slotkin, I think she would make a wonderful first woman President. Same with Amy Klobuchar. Same with Whitmer.
But ladies are a non-starter in this misogynistic country.
People love Mayor Pete. But again, non-starter.
I think Roy Cooper would be an excellent Dem Prez. But he's running for Senate, so...
Despite what Cal says, I think Gavin could get it done.
I still like Gov. Andy. Same with Shapiro.

But of all the politicians whom I've heard or I'm familiar with - I think Jeff Jackson would be the best.
Pragmatic. Great messaging. Perfect in today's tweeting/tiktok/YouTube world. Young. Straight. White. Married with children. Male. Served in the military. He ain't gonna do a John Edwards or Cal Cunningham. Served in Congress. Served in NC State Legislature. Serving as AG in a very large State. (I think NC checks in in the top ten in population as well as in other metrics for measuring "largeness"). And, he's NEVER lost a political race. (Yes, he voluntarily dropped out of a senate race to endorse Beasley, but he didn't lose by the vote. I say Jackson would have beaten Budd had he not acquiesced to Cheri)
Jeff also checks every single box in Calheel's wish list.
Click to expand...


How tall is Jackson?

Jeff-Jackson-and-Kent-Blevins.jpg

Trying to get a read...he doesn't seem "short" per se -- maybe 5-10, 5-11?
 
This upcoming cycle is awkward for Jeff Actively campaigning for another job while he is serving NC is not a good look-until he is campaigning for a Senate seat for NC perhaps
And being Atty gen of NC is not a platform for the Presidency. Jeff is waaay young...he has time . I have a pair of hiking boots older than Jeff I mean the bottoms are too slick now -but I have them for knocking around..........
 
Centerpiece said:
Cal is so dead set against Newsom, his own alternative list of candidates comes back to bite him in the arse. And the whole Fetterman thing has people wondering: WTH happened to Calheel?

I will say, Cal is from California and he knows better than any of us the skeletons in Gavin’s closet. Grant him that. Also, his description of a winning candidate is not totally off base: White. Straight. Male. Not too old. From a part of the Country that’s not going to flip out too many voters (in other words not Cali or NY).

We all want the same thing. A W in 2026, and in 2028. I’m not going to beat up on Calheel just because he thinks there may be better options than Newsom. But I’ll have to assume the Fetterman thing was a red herring to show just how much against Newsom he really is and not really a full throated endorsement of Fett.
Click to expand...
I certainly hope so....but he also hasn't backed off of that. The inclusion of Fetterman serves to undercut any other value.

Im not a Newsom fan either, but Fetterman is just pure insanity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top