We have a lot of fun mocking the hopefuls for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination these days. Hey, train wrecks are fascinating in so many ways. There will be plenty of time to worry about one of them actually winning when 2028 gets here, but for now, let’s just have at the spectacle of stupidity they have over there.
While we content ourselves with effortless mockery, the Democrats’ flying monkeys in the mainstream media have to pretend that their best hopes for regaining the White House aren’t merely a bunch of Stalin knockoff goofballs.
Good luck with that.
The Washington Post frequently takes a look at the Democratic field and assesses the viability of each potential candidate at that time. Sports fans call it a power rankings. I’ll give you the first four paragraphs of the latest WaPo look at the Dems just to set the tone:
The Democratic field for president is still wide open and unsettled. The very early list includes former presidential candidates, governors, senators, House members and celebrities. While no one on this list has officially declared, some candidates have been more open than others about wanting to run.
Ahead of November’s midterm elections, the field is starting to take shape as a major debate roils the party: Is the surging progressive movement helping or hurting Democrats’ chances to take back the White House in two years?
Some Democrats argue it’s time to embrace bold, progressive policies to boost their party’s popularity among working-class voters. Others think centrists will stand out.
“I think Democratic voters are going to get incredibly pragmatic when it comes to 2028,” said John Anzalone, who served as the chief pollster for President Joe Biden’s winning 2020 campaign.
The MSMers are still fleshing out how they want to deal with the commie insurgents. Some are so freaked out that I’ve actually seen hints of journalism from them. I’ll probably write something about that next week. The author of this article has opted for — I love using this word regarding leftists — whitewashing the mess with the “surging progressive movement.” It’s the set-up for her mention of “centrists” in the next paragraph.
There are no centrists in the Democratic Party, not even relative to the Democratic Socialists of America. Also, as I’ve been writing all summer, the only real difference between the establishment Dems and the DSA upstarts is the average age of the people claiming to be one or the other. What WaPo is trying to do here is make it seem as if there has been some sort of Dem course correction by asserting that there are objective ideological differences in a party that hasn’t allowed them since Lyndon Johnson was a young racist.
Hellbound and Down 