Harris? Seriously?

I recently read the polls for the 2028 election for president and was surprised at the results.

I appears , by this poll, that Harris leads the field of potential candidates.

Kamala Harris remains the best-positioned figure among Democrats in a potential 2028 presidential run.

The former vice president receives 28% support, exactly double that of California Governor Gavin Newsom, who registers 14%, according to The Center Square Voters’ Voice Poll.

The survey represents just an early snapshot of a hypothetical Democratic primary, with more than two years to go before the next presidential cycle.

However, the results show significant movement behind Harris, especially among Newsom, Pete Buttigieg, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Harris has been hovering around 30% support for months and has remained at the forefront of The Center Square’s measurements since October 2025.

In that survey, she reached 33%; she dropped to 31% in March, registered 27% in June, and now stands at 28% in August.

One of the most relevant data points for the Latino community is how preferences are distributed within that electorate.

Harris receives 30% support among Hispanic and Latino voters, but Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez appears in second place with 17%.

The result positions AOC as a figure to watch within this group, despite being behind the main candidates in the overall result.

Ocasio-Cortez also receives 13% among voters aged 18 to 29, again as the second option behind Harris.

The former vice president’s strength among young people is much greater: 47% of registered voters aged 18 to 29 prefer her over other potential candidates.

Kamala Harris’s leadership does not extend with the same intensity to all demographic groups included in the survey.

Among voters 65 years or older, Buttigieg leads the preferences with 20%, followed by Newsom with 19%. Harris drops to 13%.

She also loses ground among those with graduate degrees: Buttigieg receives 18%, compared to Harris’s 15%.

Another difference appears when observing political identification. Harris achieves 30% among Democrats, but her support drops to 20% among left-leaning independents.

AOC, on the other hand, even surpasses Newsom among the independents included in the measurement, with 10% compared to 9%.

(mundonow.com)

My thoughts on this…..first it is one poll but it does show similar results as others I have seen….second….why? She is a proven loser why would the Dems take the chance again considering the country as a whole?

I do not think at this point in our history that the country will overwhelmingly vote for a women….so why take the chance…..and the country is divided and she will bring little to the table as far as any unification goes.

This is an early snapshot and is there as a PR stunt for the corporate Dems…..will it hold up?

I think not.

Do you think she has a chance?

Educate, Agitate

I Read, I Write, You Know

cogito ergo agito

Sorry But Democrats Are Losers

In more ways than one.

Yes they lose consistently in the elections but that is not the full extent of their betrayal of the voter….once elected they fall into the same cycle of corruption and deceit.

Dems play to the working class at every election they get equally corrupt labor unions to sponsor them and they go around feeling faux sympathy for the working population….and it is a fake concern.

Working-class voters have been telling pollsters for 60 years that the political system doesn’t hear them. Democrats, over the same period, have grown more comfortable with the institutions working-class voters have increasingly less faith in.

This distrust stems from specific experiences: deindustrialization that happened on government’s watch, trade deals that economists endorsed and workers paid for, a 2008 financial crisis response that saved the banks and foreclosed on their homes, an opioid epidemic that regulators missed entirely.

To be fair, this is precisely what the new crop of reform candidates say they want to fix. The argument that the right candidate can move the needle is not crazy. Candidate quality matters. Personal trust can substitute for institutional trust, at least at the margins.

But economic-grievance politics is a very small slice of what working-class voters are telling us. The data documents a comprehensive, decades-long divergence in how working-class voters and mainstream Democrats understand fairness, government, personal responsibility and social change.

Reducing that to class war jams working-class voters into a prefabricated progressive agenda rather than taking seriously what they are actually saying.

https://www.alternet.org/democrats-working-class-2677675466

Do you agree with the ‘findings’?

I kinda disagree with the conclusion….I believe it is a class war and the Robber Barons are winning.

That brings us to the real problem….Democratic candidates….are they truly representative of what the people want? Not even close!

Just look at the most recent elections….the vote proved that few wanted Biden or Harris but yet they were part of the ‘good old boys’ club so the nod went to them….Biden won only because he was not Trump, that is not a resounding endorsement now is it?

Democratic voters want a fighter as a candidate yet they do not support a fighter instead the succumb to the blase mumbo-jumbo of centrist cowards.

These are what Dem voters say they want….

The three top attributes that Democrats want in a nominee are:

A fighter for working people (88%).
Who works across the aisle to get things done (76%)
And is authentic in his/her beliefs (72%)

Let’s look closer….

Fighter for working people, whatever the ideology: 88% of Democratic primary voters say they would “vote for someone I don’t agree with on every issue as long as they are strong and will fight for the working people of this country.” Likewise, the most appealing candidate profile was “fighter” (86% appealing):“This candidate has the guts to stand up to Trump and the MAGA wing of the Republican Party.”
Authentic: 72% of Democratic primary voters would “vote for someone I don’t agree with on every issue as long as they are authentic and true to what they believe in.” And 59% prefer a candidate who is “authentic, relatable, and down-to-earth, even if they don’t line up with you ideologically on every issue,” over one who “stands with you on most of the major issues.” Moderates (63%) and somewhats (62%) chose authenticity; only socialists chose ideological alignment (57%).
Bipartisan dealmaker: 76% of Democratic primary voters prefer a candidate “who works across the aisle to get things done, even if it means compromising sometimes,” over a candidate “who sticks to their progressive beliefs, even if it means getting less done.”

What crap!

That is what the voter wants if so then name one nominee that has done any of those three desires.

I will admit the centrist try to work across the aisle but that is only for show for they know they will not succeed….but it makes a good show….and authentic? Name me one Dem that has been ‘authentic” once they are elected….I will wait.

Let’s be honest….things will not be different this time around….the nominee will be a centrists and the desires of the working class will be just a memory once they hit the high life.

The DNC makes me sick.

Let’s be honest….Dems are as useful as breasts on a flashlight.

Instead of snuggling up to big business they crap on the working people of this country.

And sadly it will happen again and continue happening until the voter wakes the fuck up.

Educate, Agitate

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

cogito ergo agito

Lots Of B*llshit For 2028

The DNC has decided where the first in the nation vote will be and their decision was South Carolina.

Progressives are not thrilled with this choice….

Democrats just set the opening scene for 2028—and the party’s left flank is not applauding. A key Democratic National Committee rules panel voted Friday to make South Carolina the first presidential primary state, sidelining Nevada and igniting fears among progressives that the move is designed to blunt another Bernie Sanders–style bid. South Carolina is where Sanders was trounced in both 2016 and 2020, and one panel member told Axios the choice risks “shutting down” a progressive contender rather than reflecting “the winds of change” while “the public is swinging left.”

The fight is layered with questions of ideology and race. Critics on the left, including Jacobin writer Branko Marcetic and streamer Hasan Piker, see the decision as an establishment play to block a “left-wing insurgent,” while some DNC members reportedly worried Nevada’s first-in-the-nation status could turbocharge a socialist candidate. Sanders easily won the Nevada caucuses in 2020 with help from organized labor allies, Puck notes. Earlier that month, Sanders won the New Hampshire primaries, with Joe Biden finishing fifth. But Biden went on to score a resounding victory in South Carolina, finishing ahead of Sanders in every county.

South Carolina Democratic Party chair Christale Spain, a former Sanders staffer, argues that a progressive such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez could “absolutely” win there—if they master retail politics in the South. The full DNC still has to ratify the calendar, but the deeper test for progressives remains whether they can finally break through with the older Black voters who dominate Southern primaries.

Will this make a difference?

The DNC is a dysfunctional mess and hoping blacks show up to vote will somehow save them.

Even that fossil James Carville sees how screwed up the DNC has become….he has even suggested the Hogg take over the leadership of the DNC.

Hogg was run out of the DNC earlier this year for his extreme views and yet a centrist slug like Carville says he would be a good choice for leader.

I do not necessarily disagree but beyond that I want to know what Carville’s game is….it is not at all like him to side with the more progressive Dems.

He is up to something….or he is got some sort of mental issue that comes with extreme age.

Educate, Agitate

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”