[Poll] Whom Should Dems Run in 2024?

[geezer]

So the Yankee RINO Governor (whose name escapes me) is out? Talk about standing up to BS...that guy should switch parties immediately since he probably doesn't recognize the GOP anymore. The little bit I've heard him, really liked the cut of his jib.

Depending on his 2a stance, I would totally vote for him (who shall remain nameless because Googling is hard).

Plus, that is a crazy, bold ballsy move, somethign we sorely need right now (going back to the Hail Mary analogy here). Have someone whose party totally betrayed them via radicalization fight back. Many of those types are SUPER angry at having their political worldview party hijacked by a bunch of know-nothing nutjobs, and know how to fight the beast better than D's probably.

Charlie Baker has shown no indication of further political ambitions. Doesn't mean he'll never be back, but for now he seems inclined to write his memoir and make a ton of money. Go out on a high note and leave 'em wanting more.

At this point, just being able to leave with your integrity intact is a feat. And yes, Charlie Baker is who I was thinking of, thanks.

Yes, yes, yes! I stopped beating that drum because I didn't think anyone was listening. But if the Dems ran Charlie Baker against Trump (or even DeSantis), I think this country might have a shot.

Also, on Baker's 2A stance:
Gov. Baker: Washington Should ‘Look to Massachusetts' for Gun Reform Guidance

Charlie Baker backs Massachusetts’s strict gun laws as a national model

Baker supports federal assault weapons ban, would advocate Mass.-style gun laws to national GOP

Serious question - what makes Charlie Baker a Republican?

[Kraken]

So the Yankee RINO Governor (whose name escapes me) is out? Talk about standing up to BS...that guy should switch parties immediately since he probably doesn't recognize the GOP anymore. The little bit I've heard him, really liked the cut of his jib.

Depending on his 2a stance, I would totally vote for him (who shall remain nameless because Googling is hard).

Plus, that is a crazy, bold ballsy move, somethign we sorely need right now (going back to the Hail Mary analogy here). Have someone whose party totally betrayed them via radicalization fight back. Many of those types are SUPER angry at having their political worldview party hijacked by a bunch of know-nothing nutjobs, and know how to fight the beast better than D's probably.

Charlie Baker has shown no indication of further political ambitions. Doesn't mean he'll never be back, but for now he seems inclined to write his memoir and make a ton of money. Go out on a high note and leave 'em wanting more.

At this point, just being able to leave with your integrity intact is a feat. And yes, Charlie Baker is who I was thinking of, thanks.

Yes, yes, yes! I stopped beating that drum because I didn't think anyone was listening. But if the Dems ran Charlie Baker against Trump (or even DeSantis), I think this country might have a shot.

Also, on Baker's 2A stance:
Gov. Baker: Washington Should ‘Look to Massachusetts' for Gun Reform Guidance

Charlie Baker backs Massachusetts’s strict gun laws as a national model

Baker supports federal assault weapons ban, would advocate Mass.-style gun laws to national GOP

Serious question - what makes Charlie Baker a Republican?

New England Republicans are socially liberal and fiscally conservative. There used to be a lot more of them. Massholes elect Republican governors as a check on our otherwise one-party state. Other R governors in recent times include Mitt Romney (before he fancied himself presidential material...remember Romneycare?), Paul Cellucci, and Bill Weld. (Jane Swift wasn't elected so she doesn't count.)

Some believe that Baker declined to run for reelection because he wouldn't have survived the primary. The Mass. GOP, now run by MAGAts, opposes him despite his overall popularity and his status as their only successful statewide candidate. Their favored candidate is a trumpster, which ensures that Democrat Maura Healey will win in November.

"FIscally conservative" is what distinguishes him from N.E. Democrats, who never met a program or agency they didn't want to fund.

[naednek]

I think Newsom may be a governor best admired from afar. I have some friends in California who, despite leaning decisively to the left, can't stand the guy.

He was married to Kimberly Guilfoyle for 5 years, FFS. Pardon if I question his judgement. And undoubtedly she will turn up with loads of dirt if he runs.

On the other hand, Newsom's dunking on Don Jr. will be EPIC.

That he would. He is quick witted and smart. But also dumb when it comes to optics. And apparently dumb for being married to the cackling hen

[Pyperkub]

He was really ambitious like she was when they got married afaik. I do think she would have pulled out the dirt when he ran for Governor tho - GOP would love to flip CA again and would use just about any tactic they could.

He has said he won't run for President, but Biden said that too.

I don't know if he could win tho, but with nobody but Mayor Pete really stepping up to challenge the GOP lies and general incompetence at Governing for anyone but donors (including foreign dark money donors) he may have to run.

I'd probably rather Harris run (I did in 2020), but she isn't stepping up like he is. Ideally she'd be out front of every piece of GOP bullshit and be the public attack dog face for the Dems on what Good governing for all Americans is (and requires) and use the VP bully pulpit, while Biden gets to play more to the middle. This would raise her profile nationally in case Biden doesn't (or can't) run.

I have zero clue why she isn't, and I think Newsom is fed up with the lack of serious pushback too.

[malchior]

I'd probably rather Harris run (I did in 2020), but she isn't stepping up like he is. Ideally she'd be out front of every piece of GOP bullshit and be the public attack dog face for the Dems on what Good governing for all Americans is (and requires) and use the VP bully pulpit, while Biden gets to play more to the middle. This would raise her profile nationally in case Biden doesn't (or can't) run.

I have zero clue why she isn't, and I think Newsom is fed up with the lack of serious pushback too.

It's beyond her capabilities most likely. This statement is partially based on her general invisibility as VP and multiple poor media performances. For example, she was seen swinging and missing at softballs tossed at her by Dana Bash on CNN recently. It didn't get much attention which is lucky because her performance was weak at best. The GOP did use some her clumsy responses in that appearance to paint her as inept but that's mostly preaching to the choir. It appears she was much more effective as a Senator.

[Carpet_pissr]

I'd probably rather Harris run (I did in 2020), but she isn't stepping up like he is. Ideally she'd be out front of every piece of GOP bullshit and be the public attack dog face for the Dems on what Good governing for all Americans is (and requires) and use the VP bully pulpit, while Biden gets to play more to the middle. This would raise her profile nationally in case Biden doesn't (or can't) run.

I have zero clue why she isn't, and I think Newsom is fed up with the lack of serious pushback too.

It's beyond her capabilities most likely. This statement is partially based on her general invisibility as VP and multiple poor media performances. For example, she was seen swinging and missing at softballs tossed at her by Dana Bash on CNN recently. It didn't get much attention which is lucky because her performance was weak at best. The GOP did use some her clumsy responses in that appearance to paint her as inept but that's mostly preaching to the choir. It appears she was much more effective as a Senator.

Yeah, no matter the reason, she's been nearly invisible, except a few instances where she got some negative press early on IIRC. And that's me, hard core supporter of all things political lefty saying/remembering that. We just need a complete, clean break from the current administration. I also feel very shaky about the DOJ under Biden honestly. Or maybe that's systemic shakiness that has nothing to do with him supposedly being at the helm.

[Pyperkub]

I'd probably rather Harris run (I did in 2020), but she isn't stepping up like he is. Ideally she'd be out front of every piece of GOP bullshit and be the public attack dog face for the Dems on what Good governing for all Americans is (and requires) and use the VP bully pulpit, while Biden gets to play more to the middle. This would raise her profile nationally in case Biden doesn't (or can't) run.

I have zero clue why she isn't, and I think Newsom is fed up with the lack of serious pushback too.

It's beyond her capabilities most likely. This statement is partially based on her general invisibility as VP and multiple poor media performances. For example, she was seen swinging and missing at softballs tossed at her by Dana Bash on CNN recently. It didn't get much attention which is lucky because her performance was weak at best. The GOP did use some her clumsy responses in that appearance to paint her as inept but that's mostly preaching to the choir. It appears she was much more effective as a Senator.

Yeah, no matter the reason, she's been nearly invisible, except a few instances where she got some negative press early on IIRC. And that's me, hard core supporter of all things political lefty saying/remembering that. We just need a complete, clean break from the current administration. I also feel very shaky about the DOJ under Biden honestly. Or maybe that's systemic shakiness that has nothing to do with him supposedly being at the helm.

IMHO, the Invisibility piece is by the Biden Administration's plan, for whatever reason. Basing that off of her performance in the 2020 Primary debates where she was able to make big splashes while making good points. I think she's capable, but they've made a choice not to do that (a really *stupid* choice, IMHO). At a minimum she should be the face of forcefully and repeatedly calling out Dobbs and the various GOP States turning themselves into Gilead from the Handmaid's Tale.

See this. It should be a freaking slam dunk:

In every demographic but white evangelicals, the Dobbs decision is somewhere between "unpopular" and "brutally unpopular." The total abortion bans the GOP is rapidly enacting poll at a universal 10%. Even among white evangelicals, they poll a whopping 20%.

Dems, this is a gimme.

It's as if they are so afraid of losing they won't do what it takes to win.

[Pyperkub]

LA Times lays out their reasoning for Newsom *not* running in '24:

Many of them seem to think there’s a magical way of reinstating the constitutional right to abortion and passing major gun safety legislation, which doesn’t exist when Democrats have only nominal control of Congress.

At the least, they’d like President Biden to seem a lot angrier and more upset than he appears, which might make Democrats feel he’s trying to channel their outrage.

But it’s not as though his fist-shaking can suddenly change the political reality.

Isn’t that frustration an opportunity for Newsom?

Not really. There is no time in modern history that a challenger wrestled the nomination away from a president seeking reelection.

There are, however, numerous instances when a president lost reelection because he was weakened during the primary season by a challenger within his own party.

Would Newsom risk pariah status and the end of his political career by waging a long-shot bid to oust Biden, then suffer the wrath if — in all probability — he cost Democrats the White House in 2024?

That seems quite unlikely. At age 54, Newsom has plenty of other, better opportunities to run for president.

*not* becoming Nader in 2000 and imposing what would actually be worse than W. Bush on us is a strong factor in NOT blowing up the 2024 race.

[LordMortis]

My opinion of Booker just hit the skids. He's appealing to Elizabeth Holmes character, that she should have a fair sentence, which is to serve no jail time, according to the defense, for the fraud she put on clients/patients and investors and for a company that was truly shitty to its employees, knowing they were a fraud but not wanting to expose their fraudulent ways to their own staff.

I guess, I, myself am not a good judge. Booker was 2nd favorite in 2020 and a top choice for 2024 for me. In one decision, he is now off the table for me.

https://freebeacon.com/democrats/booker ... -sentence/

I just reluctantly changed my vote to Biden as a place holder for the moment... Maybe Harris, who has been quiet or Buttigeg... who has not.

[LawBeefaroni]

My opinion of Booker just hit the skids. He's appealing to Elizabeth Holmes character, that she should have a fair sentence, which is to serve no jail time, according to the defense, for the fraud she put on clients/patients and investors and for a company that was truly shitty to its employees, knowing they were a fraud but not wanting to expose their fraudulent ways to their own staff.

I guess, I, myself am not a good judge. Booker was 2nd favorite in 2020 and a top choice for 2024 for me. In one decision, he is now off the table for me.

https://freebeacon.com/democrats/booker ... -sentence/

I just reluctantly changed my vote to Biden as a place holder for the moment... Maybe Harris, who has been quiet or Buttigeg... who has not.

Yeah, why would he weigh in on that?

It doesn't matter how cute she looked in childhood photos or how her family loves her or which politicians are sucked into her personality cult. She knowingly committed massive fraud. Full stop. Go to fucking jail.

[Kraken]

I changed my vote to Buttigieg (from Warren), as he's gained experience and demonstrated competence at the federal level now. But I'd like to see some fresh names come up.

[Jaymann]

I'm changing my vote to Gavin Newsom. He won as biggly in CA as Florida Man (Dos) did in Floriduh.

[Carpet_pissr]

I think Newsom would turn off a lot of voters who aren’t in the Left Coast sphere of influence.

[El Guapo]

Look, it's going to be Biden unless he suffers some massive stroke or something. Especially coming off of these midterms. If there had been a massive red wave, probably the knives would have come out, but not now.

[El Guapo]

I think Newsom would turn off a lot of voters who aren’t in the Left Coast sphere of influence.

Yeah, this is the thing. The Democratic Party in the best of times is still a fairly broad and fragile coalition. There's no one other than Biden that wouldn't lead to a bitter and divisive intra-party fight.

[Carpet_pissr]

Buttigieg

[malchior]

I like Buttigieg but he is simply not electable.

[El Guapo]

I like Buttigieg but he is simply not electable.

Yeah I'm on the same page on him. I'd love for him to take a run at the presidency in the 2030s, though, if we're still a democracy by then.

[Smoove_B]

The actual answer is a Millennial. Someone that embodies everything that motivated the <30 crowd to come out and vote during the midterms.

[LordMortis]

The actual answer is a Millennial. Someone that embodies everything that motivated the <30 crowd to come out and vote during the midterms.

The LoveZero Crowd?

I think you mean Gen Z. Millennials are like X in that there is dearth of division based on lineage, geography, etc... At least for the moment, it's Gen Z who came out and said, Screw RvW? Screw the environment? Screw health care? CRT What? Ignoring murder in schools on a weekly basis? How about screw you, it's voting time. Youth saves us again. Let's not lose another generation. They turned the red wave into a red wading pool.

Ask Keri Lake what she thinks of Gen Z turnout in Arizona?

Also Gen Z are the majority of the under 30 crowd now. Millennials are moving into their 30s or are already toward or in their 40s.

DeSantis is on the Millennial side of being X.

[Smoove_B]

Anyone in Gen Z would be too young to run for President.

You need a younger millennial that connects with them. And it really was people under the age of 30 that outvoted Boomers and the awful people in Gen X that voted for fascists. I am so disappointed to learn our generation has turned to crap.

[LawBeefaroni]

The actual answer is a Millennial. Someone that embodies everything that motivated the <30 crowd to come out and vote during the midterms.

The LoveZero Crowd?

I think you mean Gen Z. Millennials are like X in that there is dearth of division based on lineage, geography, etc... At least for the moment, it's Gen Z who came out and said, Screw RvW? Screw the environment? Screw health care? CRT What? Ignoring murder in schools on a weekly basis? How about screw you, it's voting time. Youth saves us again. Let's not lose another generation. They turned the red wave into a red wading pool.

Ask Keri Lake what she thinks of Gen Z turnout in Arizona?

Also Gen Z are the majority of the under 30 crowd now. Millennials are moving into their 30s or are already toward or in their 40s.

DeSantis is on the Millennial side of being X.

GZ is 25 and under. Half of them can't vote. Millennials are 26-41.

[LordMortis]

I am so disappointed to learn our generation has turned to crap.

You and me both.

GZ is 25 and under. Half of them can't vote. Millennials are 26-41.

And the vast majority of under 30 voters, who voted in larger numbers than normal by a wide margin and in large enough blue numbers to not be around 50/50.

[Blackhawk]

Gen-X end up becoming Xtremely like the people we railed against when we were young.

[Zarathud]

Gen-X end up becoming Xtremely like the people we railed against when we were young.

It’s the residual influence of Reagan and Alex P. Keaton (Family Ties). X watched Happy Days and Beaver, and tasted the nostalgia kool-aid.

[Defiant]

The actual answer is a Millennial. Someone that embodies everything that motivated the <30 crowd to come out and vote during the midterms.

The thing is, I'm skeptical on how much the <30 crowd voted. The data is still preliminary, but while it looks like it was higher than historically, it also looks like it was less than 2018, and, while you can't directly compare midterm turnout to a presidential election, it looks like the <30s made a much smaller share of those who voted compared to 2020 based on the exit polls (12% vs 17% in 2020). And this was after Biden's policy on student loans and marijuana, two issues I would think are important to the under 30 crowd.

Here's more evidence:

[LordMortis]

I honestly don't know how to read that. I tried but I came up with nothing.

I am getting my reference from things like this.

https://www.wgbh.org/news/politics/2022 ... n-for-2024

John Della Volpe: When I talk about Gen Z, Jeremy, first of all, they're not all even eligible to vote right now. So this is still a burgeoning voting bloc. But I'm talking about the youngest voters in the electorate, generally people under 30: teens, mid-20s, up until 30. That group, mostly Gen Z with some Millennials, have really changed and transformed politics, I think, over the last three election cycles, 2018, 2020 and 2022.

To give you a sense of what happened, 63% of this voting bloc voted for Democrats, 35% for Republicans. That essentially was enough to mute the over 65 vote because the intensity of the support for Democrats had an extraordinary impact on the outcome. And Jeremy, when we think about Gen Z and Millennials together, by 18 points, they supported Democrats. Everybody over the age of 40 supported Republicans. The degree to which the red wave was blocked — it is blocked 100% because of the enthusiasm of Gen Z as well as Millennials.

The Tweet says, meh, 2018 was bigger but

It did and it didn't. I think the intensity of the support — when we talked about a Gen Z wave a few weeks ago, I knew that we'd see levels of participation that were going to look a lot like 2018, which is the highest level ever on record.

In places like Pennsylvania and in Arizona, this Gen Z, under 30 vote exceeded 70%.

[Defiant]

OK, 70% turnout by under 30s in a midterm in specific tight races during amazing would be incredible (that's the kind of turnout you see by the elderly in Presidential elections). So maybe the turnout was highly targeted to competitive locations, in which case, bravo, they deserve credit for that.

(Though ideally, if you had that kind of turnout everywhere, you could start seeing races that didn't look competitive start turning competitive.)

[Carpet_pissr]

Gen-X end up becoming Xtremely like the people we railed against when we were young.

It’s the residual influence of Reagan and Alex P. Keaton (Family Ties). X watched Happy Days and Beaver, and tasted the nostalgia kool-aid.

Hmmm, as an 80's latchkey kid (what a horrible title), I consumed mass quantities of both Family Ties and Happy Days, but never Beaver (my sister, who is 10 years older than me (59) watched Beaver for sure though (AND Happy Days). Parse that as you will.

[noxiousdog]

The most popular Democratic presidents of the modern age were JFK, Clinton, and Obama. They were 3 of the youngest 5 of all time.

The Democrats strength is in young people. Motivate the base.

[LordMortis]

The most popular Democratic presidents of the modern age were JFK, Clinton, and Obama. They were 3 of the youngest 5 of all time.

The Democrats strength is in young people. Motivate the base.

But who? Obama was a great challenger with charisma and appeal both to moderates and the progressive left. As much as I've had my beefs with Obama's leadership/rule, I never felt he was a bad vote and I'd love another of him. Where do we find that person? Who are they? If age equivalents are thing, we'd want someone born in the early to mid 70s with broad appeal to those born well after them.

From senate seats that looks like...


New Mexico Martin Heinrich Democratic 49 10/17/71
New Mexico Ben Ray Luján Democratic 48 6/7/72
Hawaii Brian Schatz Democratic 48 10/20/72
Connecticut Chris Murphy Democratic 47 8/3/73
Arizona Kyrsten Sinema Democratic 44 7/12/76
Georgia Jon Ossoff Democratic 33 2/16/87


Governors...

Michigan Gretchen Whitmer August 23, 1971 January 1, 2019 47 years, 131 days 3 years, 323 days 51 years, 89 days Democratic
Colorado Jared Polis May 12, 1975 January 8, 2019 43 years, 241 days 3 years, 316 days 47 years, 192 days Democratic Kentucky Andy Beshear November 29, 1977 December 10, 2019 42 years, 11 days 2 years, 345 days 44 years, 356 days Democratic

[noxiousdog]

The most popular Democratic presidents of the modern age were JFK, Clinton, and Obama. They were 3 of the youngest 5 of all time.

The Democrats strength is in young people. Motivate the base.

But who? Obama was a great challenger with charisma and appeal both to moderates and the progressive left. As much as I've had my beefs with Obama's leadership/rule, I never felt he was a bad vote and I'd love another of him. Where do we find that person? Who are they? If age equivalents are thing, we'd want someone born in the early to mid 70s with broad appeal to those born well after them.

I don't know about Kennedy, but Obama and Clinton came out of relative obscurity.

[LordMortis]

I don't know about Kennedy, but Obama and Clinton came out of relative obscurity.

I can't speak to everyone in the US not knowing about him but Obama was already coming out of the woodwork in 2006. He was nationally recognized and focused on politically. I can remember reading about his potential run against HRC and the difficulties she was going to have being anointed right after the 2006 election.

I don't remember WJC well enough to speculate there.

[Defiant]

I'm not sure Kennedy is the best example (he barely won election, and he was assassinated which cut his term short and probably affects how we see him).

But I think, more than being young, I think one of their biggest strength were that they were good orators/communicators (which FDR was also good at).

[Defiant]

I would describe Obama as coming from relative obscurity compared with the vast majority of major party candidates.

I wouldn't say JFK was obscure, given that he came from a prominent political family.

[Zarathud]

Obama was a rising star after having positioned himself well, and maximized the opportunities from his oratorical talent after becoming Senator.

[malchior]

The problem with trying to figure out patterns like this is the sample size is too small. Was their popularity tied to age? Maybe but pinning it mostly on age is probably not wise. One could easily argue that cutting through obscurity to become President is a Democratic party trait as well. 3 out of 4 most recent Democratic Presidents were relatively obscure nationally up until a few years or even the year prior to their election. And nominees? The losers tended to be more establishment Democrats who had wider profiles. Is that predictive? Maybe? The lack of sample size and widely varying context are some of the devilish problems that plague trying to predict much in the Presidential power sphere.

[El Guapo]

Also JFK was a terrible president, whose main achievement was diffusing a nuclear standoff that he helped cause, who began the U.S. involvement in Vietnam, and who couldn't get a civil rights bill passed until his assassination helped create enough public sympathy for LBJ (who was a much more effective president) to get it done.

Of course, maybe JFK would've improved if he'd had more time, but from what he had, he was pretty bad.

[Holman]

I don't know about Kennedy, but Obama and Clinton came out of relative obscurity.

Kennedy was a WW2 naval war hero and then a Senator. (It helped that his father was hugely influential in political circles.)

Clinton went from AK Attorney General to Lt. Governor and then spent 10 years as Governor, always among the youngest ever.

[El Guapo]

Politico has reported that Newsome's people have told the White House that he won't challenge Biden in 2024.