Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 07/27/2026 2:30:07 PM PDT by Angelino97
There are only two lanes to the Democratic presidential nomination two years from now, and one of them is already blocked—by Kamala Harris.
Get ready for the Kamala comeback, followed, in all likelihood, by a replay of her crushing defeat by the Republican nominee. Believe it or not, the ex-VP occupies what counts as the “center lane” within the party, and for most of the last three decades that’s the one that’s led to the nomination.
Republicans used to be the party of orderly succession, even if the candidate whose turn had come looked like a certain loser: think Bob Dole in ’96. But recently, it’s been Democrats who’ve tended to pick a party elder as their nominee: Al Gore, as a sitting VP, might not have been remarkable in 2000, but in ’04 it was John Kerry, in ’16 Hillary Clinton and in 2020 Joe Biden—with only Barack Obama butting ahead of the line in 2008.
Democrats like a known quantity, a reliable liberal who isn’t too overtly radical; the radicalism can wait until after Election Day. So they’re leaning to running Harris again, even if donors aren’t happy about it: They blew nearly $2 billion on her campaign and aligned PAC’s in 2024, only for Harris to lose every battleground state to Trump.
It won’t be donors who decide the party’s 2028 nominee, though, and ordinary Democrats actually find Harris reassuring. She’s a familiar face, after all, commanding practically universal name recognition.
Harris checks the identity-politics boxes that may be as important as winning to Democratic primary voters: Their ticket must have a woman, and it can’t be all white. And after being vetted as a VP and undergoing the trial-by-fire of the ’24 campaign, Harris isn’t likely to surprise voters with any extremist tattoos or sexual-assault allegations—things that can’t be taken for granted among Democrats nowadays.
Then there’s the revenge motive: What better way to repudiate the Trump era and reverse the ’24 humiliation than by making the woman he defeated president? Democratic primary voters are still smarting from Hillary Clinton’s drubbing in 2016: by 2028, the election of America’s first female president will have been postponed 12 long years, and feminists in the party aren’t willing to wait any longer.
These are the reasons Harris tops almost all polls of 2028 Democratic hopefuls, with an 11.6-point lead in the RealClearPolitics polling aggregate as of mid-July. “She comes in with 99 percent name ID and everyone else is going to have to raise money and buy it,” a former Harris aide tells New York‘s David Freedlander.
The donors might prefer just about anyone else, yet they’d have to pour an enormous amount of cash into another candidate just to make him or her recognizable. This has led one longtime Democratic strategist with donors’ ears to welcome the inevitable: “I hope she runs,” Alex Hoffman told New York, “Because then she will lose and we will never have to hear from her again. She will never win an election at a national scale. Never.”
But if Harris is hopeless, why does she seem inevitable?
She has seniority no one else can match, but what about the other lane that leads to the nomination?
That’s the left lane—the far left lane. The one Bernie Sanders occupied in 2020 and 2016, and that a candidate like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez might fill in 2028. Young Dems keep moving leftward, with the Democratic Socialists of America making deeper inroads into the party.
Harris is not nearly left-wing enough for them—but then, anyone who is would be upsetting to the old guard. It’s not that the old-timers aren’t also well to the left on economics, but they don’t want to be labeled “socialists”—while the insurgent left is proud of the brand. The party’s mainstream wants to have it both ways on the Israel-Palestine conflict—while the young left, increasingly, is explicit about its anti-Zionism.
There are still enough baby boomers and suburbanites in the Democratic Party to make the left lane an unlikely road to the nomination. For now.
Harris can expect a challenge from the left, but the party is still probably one more presidential cycle away from nominating someone who openly represents where Democrats are headed. In fact, a Harris defeat in 2028 would be the perfect prelude to the socialist and anti-Zionist left’s takeover, discrediting the old guard for forfeiting the election to Donald Trump’s successor.
Insider Democrats know Kamala Harris is a terrible candidate, but the party they built can’t tell her no—even if this is the last nomination they get to make before DSA takes over.
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
This far out from the election it doesn’t really mean much, its just name recognition right now.
I don’t even think the DNC would be dumb enough to run her again.
She has two humps of retardation, Jim...
Once you go black there's no going back. Run Kamala run!!
I’ve got my eye on box wine futures.
if the Dems REALLY wanted to win the Presidency in 2028, they’d nominate John Fetterman. But they won’t. They rather lose by not abandoning their “principles”.
That is the exact same death spiral the GOP was in for decades until Donald Trump came along ...
John Fetterman COULD be the Dem’s Trump, but that’s not gonna happen, which is why i’m comfortable outlining this common sense approach, KNOWING common sense is 100% absent from the Dems across the board ...
Here’s hoping.
The primary complaint about Harris last time was from Democrats who wanted a candidate already vetted by the primaries across the nation.
Harris will announce her candidacy and compete in the primaries and caucuses beginning in about 18 months. We should expect people like Pete B. and the Pennsylvania governor.
There will also be unexpected candidates pop up, so there’s really no way to tell yet who Democrats will nominate.
Republican polls are all over the place too, but Vance has early name recognition. Rubio is doing a good job as Sec of State, and he’s had his eye on the prize every since he joined the Senate.
The problem with having a horrible candidate is they could win. Take Bill Clinton or Barak Obama. I thought both of them were awful candidates. But they won because the Republicans can throw victory away by running, in the case of Dole, a corpse and in the case of McCain...another corpse. Even if the Democrats had another John F. Kenedy, he couldn’t get nominated today, or if he did his sex life would sink him. The last really good Democrat was probably Truman. A modern Truman would be identified as a far right Republican.
Compared with what’s on offer from the Democrats today Bill Clinton and Barak Obama appear superior. (I need a shower.)
But because of the danger a Democrat could, through missteps and stupidity on the part of the GOP, get elected, I pray for a good, honest man. I don’t think there is one. Very scary.
Here’s a prediction for whatever it’s worth. If AOC gets the nomination - or even ends up a close condender - I’ll bet she goes Full Obama. Maybe not Roman columns but the same folksy style, adopting whatever accent is needed, a little self-deprecating humor - I mean, she got the House seat by audition, she’s got some acting chops just like Barry. But more importantly - she will talk like a centrist just like Obama did, but if elected she would go hard left.
OMG.
Please Stop.
I can’t take it.
In a fashion similar to the Three Stooges.
I still think Mitt took a dive on purpose when he ran against Obama (and I didn’t even like Mitt).
“I still think Mitt took a dive on purpose when he ran against Obama “
I just realized I had totally forgotten Romney. Dole, McCain and Romney were as close to absolute political zeros as you can get and still be in office. And yet, somehow, they became candidates. I don’t remember the exact details of how, but I’d imagine it was something like the implausible maneuvering that gave us Harris. My feeling about Dole was “it was his turn” and he would have been too old for a later try. For him it was now or never. He had paid his dues and even though he was the worst possible candidate to run against someone who was obviously alive and had a personality, he got the slot. It’s almost as if the GOP doesn’t even care if they have an adequate candidate.
He and McCain. Once they got a little ahead in the polls they tanked themselves.
If Kamala gets the nomination will she (and her handlers) have the nerve to let her sit with Joe Rogan for 3 hours? I know the answer, but after all the crap she caught about not doing it LAST time, it’s almost a requirement. But she would be exposed within 20 minutes and her handlers will pull her off, and that’s a HORRIBLE look.
It was a bit suspicious.
Clinton and Obama were bad presidents -- but great candidates. They were charismatic. They appeared moderate and reasonable.
Clinton attacked Sista Soljah, signaling that he was a pro-police, anti-crime, Southern conservative.
Obama presented as an articulate, post-racial figure who would finally heal America's racial divide.
Bad presidents. Great candidates.
By comparison, Cackling Kamela presents as a village idiot.
Dole and McCain were war heroes, and still carried their wounds. Dole couldn't fully use his right hand. McCain was unable to raise his arms beyond a certain height.
Wounded veteran status carries much weight among many conservatives.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.