General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNancy Pelosi Reveals Top Dem She Thinks Will Run in 2028
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is already placing her bets on who will run for president in 2028.
Pelosi said she thinks that Rahm Emanuelthe former chief of staff to former President Barack Obama, former Chicago mayor, and longtime Democratic congressmanwill step up to the plate.
I think hes going to run, Pelosi told The Free Press in an interview published Friday.
Emanuel has already dropped hints. In the same Free Press article, he revealed: Im not done with public service. Im hoping its not done with me.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/nancy-pelosi-reveals-top-dem-222754601.html
Meh

Ocelot II
(124,844 posts)murielm99
(31,952 posts)He is ruthless. We need ruthless.
Ocelot II
(124,844 posts)brush
(59,977 posts)Pritzker, Beshear, Moore, Newsom, Whitmer, Walz maybe?
Autumn
(47,891 posts)murielm99
(31,952 posts)The guy you have in your sig pic?
Autumn
(47,891 posts)If Rham is a top dem we are fucked.
murielm99
(31,952 posts)you admire most. Which bills he has passed are your favorites.
Autumn
(47,891 posts)you are interested in Bernie. My admiration and respect for him is no secret on DU. As you know. Big Bernie fan since 2016 and it's not going to change now.
phylny
(8,740 posts)Dave in VA
(2,216 posts)
The Roux Comes First
(1,706 posts)LoisB
(10,535 posts)NNadir
(35,879 posts)...to me, the essence of a modern Democrat is Pete Buttigieg.
I loved this post: Ooh.. That's Rich
We'll see what happens, even if there is an election since we have a Supreme Court that hates the US Constitution they swore to protect and have nonetheless no intention of protecting, a cabal of ignorant thugs more or less, but if there is an election, I'd love Pete to run.
yorkster
(3,090 posts)pinkstarburst
(1,727 posts)One issue with 2024 is that we didn't get our voters to turn out on election day. I think many young voters are feeling disenchanted, like they definitely don't want to vote republican, but like they don't have a lot of hope when they look at our candidates either. I think someone like Pete provides a lot of hope. While some are saying the only path forward is the straight white Christian male route, I actually think that would really harm us. I think the straight white Christian male route is 1) not going to pick us up any votes from the conservative middle (those voters are never going to vote for us anyway) and 2) will harm us with the youth vote and harm us with turnout with OUR voters. We need someone who will speak to the heart of our party and get them to turn out. I feel like Pete has that heart and gives people that sense of hope, just like Obama did leading into 2008.
SheltieLover
(68,323 posts)All the Dems I knew there when he was in office hated him.
Rebl2
(16,376 posts)here to say that. I dont live in Chicago or Illinois, but I have read he was not well liked.
We need someone much younger.
SheltieLover
(68,323 posts)
Rebl2
(16,376 posts)he is 65 or 66.
Autumn
(47,891 posts)
Frasier Balzov
(4,386 posts)But only if he wants it.
I would donate.
asm128
(242 posts)The last thing we need is a centrist / center right running for president.
Frasier Balzov
(4,386 posts)Fetterman beat Lamb in the senatorial primary, that's true.
I wonder if they speak?
newdeal2
(2,591 posts)That doesnt mean it will be successful. In fact, I know it wont be - he is not likable except maybe to the Tapper/Maher types.
La Coliniere
(1,389 posts)Nothing progressive about him at all. No more corporate Democrats.
tritsofme
(19,191 posts)I dont see him with a particularly viable path to the nomination, but he will be a strong voice in the debates, and a huge asset to our next Democratic president.
Who knows?
cadoman
(1,272 posts)But then I didn't live in Chicago when he was mayor...but it must have been rather awful for folks to have the reaction they are??
mucholderthandirt
(1,513 posts)I wouldn't vote for him, I'd just stay home. No wonder the Dems can't win, if they keep heading toward right of center.
thought crime
(207 posts)Last edited Sun May 25, 2025, 09:47 AM - Edit history (1)
I am pretty close to being a Bernie Bro and definitely an AOC Democrat but I appreciate Rahms intelligence, charisma, political acumen, good hair and party insider status. If Democrats need a smart pragmatic centrist who knows how to fight, he could be a good choice. On the down-side he is slightly shorter than Pete Buttigieg, might be less popular with Black voters as a result of his years as mayor of Chicago, and his candidacy might result in increased resistance from the Pro-Palestinian faction, although they may feel better after hearing him speak about it.
DonCoquixote
(13,869 posts)That he helps kneecap Obamacare? That he always kept pushing Obama to the right, and acted like he was the puppet master before Obama ever spoke on matters?
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-sudden-but-well-deserved-fall-of-rahm-emanuel
The American peope might have tolerated that in the aughts, especially as they knew the alternative was the GOP, and yes people did have investment in the idea of the first black president.
NOW? Sorry, a lot of people took their hoods off, including some of those Pendejo Latinos that fell for the whole "you can be white too" drug that Uncle Sam has been selling. Now many whites do not even pretend they love saying the n word, or acting on it. When some
"karen" get caught on tape, people, some even along the DU audience, will defend her as if she is some damsel in distress.
But this is not about the average white person, this is about the fact that BLACK WOMEN, once the War Machines of the Democrats, are sitting a lot out, because they saw that many look at Harris as if she were some vegetable on the plate, instead of the quadruple bacon cheeseburgers they wanted to for dinner. The youth, frankly, have been hite with propaganda, but also a sense that there is a pace for them, and they will be WANTED and LISTENED TO, meanwhile, people wanted to hang David Bogg because he rightfully pointed out that many of the old hands were not willing or able to fight Trump.. Before you scream ageism, ask them why they ant BERNIE. Ask why they ;ike AoC.
Pete B. might be the ost sellable one, but you know the left better support the first LGBT, no matter how much Bill Maher screams "identity politics", a dog whistle many on DU respond to as much as the GOP des. And please, do tell the Afro american war machines why they should support a guy who, as mayor, fire his chif of police because he CAUGHT his cops saying the N word.
look at the face of the African American lady who asked Pete that question. She wanted a clear answer, and did NOT get one. She may be smart enough to know she needs to Vote trump, but if you want the sheer guts and War machines that will get you over the top, no, it takes more than sweet answers for those whose lives have become bitter. You better start working on that apiology Pete.
What does this have to do with Rahm, because he will be like those awful Bars in the "bar rescue show" that insist that some spoiled meat is perfectly good to serve. He will insist it is good, even though people who know the slime that is hidden under the gravy will make them sick. Biden became successful because he learned not to try the same "bipartisan" stuff Rahm kept demanding Obama did. Obama betters day were after he booted Rahm.
So, why are the Pelosis so ager to bring him back. No this is not age, because Bernie could smash through that House of cards, as can many others who have silver hair but young hearts. Can it be the simple fact that they do not see that trying to water down labor and civil rights to make the GOP pretend to drink it does not work, and will NOT bring out the voters. If you want to polish Gavin and Pete because they look like the clean boys you want your daughters to marry, you had better make a strategy to bring out the rest. NO BS that Rahm was known for all too well.
brush
(59,977 posts)they can beat republicans...and replace them when we are are so close to retaking the House majority, which happens most times with the party out of power in the mid-terms.
Hogg apparently doesn't like the idea that DNC officers are supposed to be neutral to help all Dem candidates, not push out sittig Dems when we are so close to retaking the House majority. That's just dumb.
If he wants to do that, resign and use his PAC money to back whoever he wishes.
womanofthehills
(9,786 posts)Rahn Emanuel would be a definite no from the whole younger anti-war generation. I find it weird that Nancy would recommend him as his chances are slim. .
yardwork
(66,727 posts)badhair77
(4,872 posts)Im hoping the answer is NO.
MuseRider
(34,663 posts)Nancy, you were good but we are looking ahead not behind. I don't think there is a heavy pull to go back to the mess that helped get us here?
Does she think it is the younger Dems who are the problem? hhmmmmm
Blue Full Moon
(2,161 posts)Phoenix61
(18,365 posts)dem4decades
(12,795 posts)leftyladyfrommo
(19,790 posts)now and people love him. He's just such a neat guy. And he's just getting started.
pinkstarburst
(1,727 posts)and I think the country is looking for someone who can give us hope right now.
lapfog_1
(30,882 posts)he doesn't treat anyone in the audience as ignorant... he doesn't put on some sort of folksy bullshit.
Will America vote for him? That part is still up for debate. I hope we can.
Newsome flamed out... Pritzker is another possible... Whitmer flamed out. I like Tim Walz but I don't see him as President. Shapiro is another possible.
No one from the Senate stands out ( we have some very good Senators... but the Senate no longer produces good candidates for the Presidency for whatever reason - Barack Obama was the exception... before that you have to go back to JFK as the last Senator to be elected President directly from the Senate ).
So... yes, my candidates are all white men, one LBTQ+, one billionaire, one Jewish. That is a problem since Democrats are now the party of women and POC. But I am tired of losing to the most hateful and least competent person to ever be elected. The difference between the 2000s and all that came before is the rise of the right wing propaganda and smear machine funded by the richest people to ever disgrace the planet... that is what we have to beat. Yes, Biden won... but he was too old when he won in 2020 and he was too decent to fight back against the propaganda machine bent on destroying him.
elocs
(24,370 posts)Wishing him to be elected doesn't make it happen unless it's only Democrats who turn out to vote.
pinkstarburst
(1,727 posts)of voters when there is zero enthusiasm for that outcome, you will see very low voter turnout at the polls on the democratic side, just like what happened in 2024. We have a huge problem right now where young voters don't want to vote republican, but also feel like democrats aren't sticking up for them and making their lives better in a measurable way either. Trying to tell them you have to suck it up and vote for this straight white christian male you don't like and don't connect with because we're letting the republican base choose the democratic candidate from here on out is a surefire way to get them to stay home on election day.
Again.
mopinko
(72,548 posts)i will admit i admire him, kinda. but no way i want him in the wh.
i met him once, and pulled this joke on him-
his last run, he was at a small event w barnie frank, who was on a book tour. i went w a friend.
i walked up, shook his hand and said a pleasure to meet u sir, im your only fan.
the look on his face was priceless.
Chasstev365
(5,475 posts)Last edited Sat May 24, 2025, 09:39 PM - Edit history (1)
Chicago Police Department gunned down an unarmed African American man with mental issue and as mayor Rahm covered up the police body camera footage.
Disqualification!
Blue Owl
(56,278 posts)All the old ways and rules are no longer viable Dump and MAGA have ripped the fabric of our democracy into shreds ..
anciano
(1,806 posts)has changed dramatically and the traditional candidate choices for the Democratic Party going forward will need to evolve accordingly.
FarPoint
(13,970 posts)Never ever trust this lizard.
Greg_In_SF
(218 posts)nope nope nope.
pinkstarburst
(1,727 posts)And I'm kind of tired of the old guard like Nancy and others thinking they get to put their finger on the scale. How about they let the voters make their own choice, then support whoever emerges as the candidate in the general?
Yet another reason some of these people who have been in their positions for too long need to be removed to make way for new, younger voices.
W_HAMILTON
(9,012 posts)The voters WILL decide and I can almost guarantee they will not nominate Emanuel, regardless of who does or does not endorse him.
PS - the reason "these people" """have been in their positions for too long""" is because of the voters as well. You can't have it both ways. Don't complain that the voters should get to choose their elected leaders and then also complain when the voters choose elected leaders that you think """have been in their positions for too long."""
pinkstarburst
(1,727 posts)Nor should someone like Obama, Hilary Clinton, Biden, or anyone else who is high profile enough in the party to have significant influence.
They may have someone they are rooting for, but they should keep those opinions to themselves until we have a nominee. Otherwise it just looks terrible. What's the outcome? If Obama comes out and says he's rooting for Newsom and then Newsom gets creamed in the primaries by Josh Shapiro, now it's embarrassing going into the general that our nominee looks like his second choice.
Pelosi isn't a nobody in the party. She doesn't have the luxury of acting like she's a nobody in the party. She needs to keep her damn mouth shut and keep her finger off the scale until we have a nominee.
And absolutely, she may have been elected by the voters to serve in her house seat, but there are people (her, Schumer) who have served in their leadership positions for TOO LONG. They are out of touch, and need to step aside to make way for new, younger leadership.
Hmm... seems like that's what David Hogg was saying.
betsuni
(27,930 posts)How is saying somebody is probably going to run not letting the voters make their own choice? Is there a vote on people who decide to enter the race and become candidates? How does that work? Is Nancy Pelosi a god with a magic scale? This conspiracy theory is confusing.
pinkstarburst
(1,727 posts)need to keep their opinions out of the primaries until we have an actual candidate. Otherwise they have the potential to 1) piss off voters who feel like they are trying to unfairly influence the outcome (and those voters may decide not to vote in the general out of protest if they feel it wasn't a fair race and someone like the DNC, or Pelosi swayed the outcome--see 2016 if you think that can't happen). 2) It looks really bad if Obama comes out saying he's all for Andy Beshear, and then Beshear gets creamed in the primaries by Pritzger. So now Pritzger is our nominee going into the general and looks like Obama's second choice.
Pelosi isn't a nobody in the party. She doesn't have the luxury of acting like she's a nobody in the party. She needs to stay out of the primary process entirely, keep her damn mouth shut and let the voters decide.
betsuni
(27,930 posts)unfairly influencing anything. Nobody is going to hear Pelosi say so-and-so is running and years later mindlessly vote for so-and-so if they make it to the primaries. "I ... must ... obey ... Nancy .. " they mumble, staggering glassy-eyed to the polls.
The DNC did not rig the 2016 primaries, why do you think it was? I can't believe we still have to explain this. Voters Voters Voters Voters Voters the Democratic Party base voted.
The gods of the Establishment and Nancy Pelosi don't have time to meddle in everything humans are doing and no oligarch is that into it that he's sending some guys with baseball bats his cousin knows to pay a visit to every voter and make them pinky swear to vote for so-and-so. Really, sometimes voting is just voting.
If anyone believes conspiracy theories that if Nancy Pelosi and the status quo Establishment god-elites say a name, World's Collide, they should leave the party or not vote, let Republicans take over. They can blame Nancy Pelosi and those mean old Democrats and complain and whine forever and be, finally, happy.
bucolic_frolic
(50,443 posts)He stands zero chance of winning the nomination. Zero. I think the Speaker is choosing not to take sides among serious candidates with this pronouncement.
stillcool
(33,922 posts)such a wicked sharp woman. It's got to be the bubble wrap.
enough
(13,533 posts)tritsofme
(19,191 posts)Nanjeanne
(6,127 posts)needs to rethink.
Horrible horrible man, politician, and choice.
Nancy should fade into the background and keep her mouth shut!
Shrek
(4,257 posts)Not an endorsement, nor a prediction.
This is a perfectly anodyne observation.
ms liberty
(10,229 posts)aeromanKC
(3,644 posts)No and No to the google infinity degree!!!
Rebl2
(16,376 posts)generalbetrayus
(909 posts)I thought it was Nancy's husband who got hit in the head with a hammer, not her.
MorbidButterflyTat
(2,998 posts)It's not "sarcasm."
demmiblue
(38,346 posts)WarGamer
(17,133 posts)And must be fluent in Populism.
And not the kind of politician to be featured on "L*bs of TikTok"
SheilaAnn
(10,409 posts)WarGamer
(17,133 posts)I hate to say it...
But transform yourself into a white 45 year old steel worker in PA...
What DEM are you gonna support?
Needs to be a populist... an old-skool Democrat.
JI7
(91,950 posts)WarGamer
(17,133 posts)But there are some folks who won't vote for a Jew.
Our next candidate needs to be completely safe... like Bill Clinton in 92.
WHO is the Bill Clinton of 2025?
I'm not sure.
pinkstarburst
(1,727 posts)from here on out.
Our big problem in 2024 was that OUR party did not show up and vote. Forcing us to have only straight white christian male candidates is not going to get the democratic party fired up and inspired. It is not going to get young people inspired.
Some people here seem to think that the straight white christian male strategy is the winning one because then we will somehow win all these conservative votes on the right. Newsflash: those voters are never going to vote for us anyway. We would do better to actually pick a candidate our voters are inspired by, and will turn out in HUGE numbers for.
We are not going to get the conservative right vote. That's a fantasy.
We need to think about the democratic vote. Right now young people don't care because they view our party as not doing anything for them either. So what candidate INSPIRES?
LearnedHand
(4,694 posts)AKA corporate neoliberal Dems. We need courage, fearlessness, and FDR-like vision.
WarGamer
(17,133 posts)But the face of the Party... the guy to win in November 28 needs to be "safe".
Needs to nail the populism speech...
choie
(5,480 posts)Hes a corporatist DLCer.
WarGamer
(17,133 posts)democrank
(11,487 posts)Rahm is a rock solid NO from me.
True Dough
(23,090 posts)This is further evidence of it. Rahm Emanuel would only seek the nomination due to his long-standing party connections. He doesn't generate enthusiasm among the masses.
MorbidButterflyTat
(2,998 posts)"Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is already placing her bets on who will run for president in 2028."
'I think hes going to run,' Pelosi told The Free Press..."
That's placing her bets?
It's clear the internet will say whatever the fuck it wants to about anybody, and possibly convince everybody.
milestogo
(20,610 posts)Save us from the egomaniacs.
mvd
(65,647 posts)We have MUCH better.
gulliver
(13,428 posts)I think he can bring it and help get us Dems back our proper cred level. We need to get back to common sense, brass tacks, all the time. No more of these emoto-sophist, screw-up, smartass, political klutz-attractant "causes" that "wedge issue us" from the working and middle class normies. Those people are the vast majority of our deserving constituents, and they are from every walk of life. Emanuel is tough and charismatic. And he's relatively young. I like the idea.
LearnedHand
(4,694 posts)Because it sounds a lot like a slam on "woke" or "DEI," neither of which is what the pukes say it is.
Autumn
(47,891 posts)"Emoto-sophist" " likely refers to someone who uses Masaru Emoto's ideas about water and consciousness in a way that is misleading, deceptive, or poorly reasoned. Masaru Emoto was a Japanese businessman, author, and scientist who claimed that water could be affected by human consciousness, thoughts, and words. He claimed that positive words and thoughts created visually pleasing ice crystals, while negative thoughts created ugly ones.
Some people have criticized Emoto's work for being pseudoscience and lacking scientific rigor. A "Emoto-sophist" would be someone who, like a sophist in ancient Greece, uses persuasive but ultimately flawed arguments to support their claims, often drawing on Emoto's ideas. In essence, they are using Emoto's work in a way that is not supported by scientific evidence and is perhaps intended to mislead or manipulate.
This is The Sophist: which ( IMO would be a better description for Rham if one wanted to use part of "Emoto-sophist"
.
In ancient Greece, sophists were known for their skillful use of rhetoric and argumentation, but they often lacked genuine knowledge and were more concerned with winning arguments than with truth.
gulliver
(13,428 posts)It's just an ad hoc contrived coinage by me as far as I know. I intend "emoto-sophist" to be a slam against people who use emotional cleverness and blackmail to advance arguments. You can't argue with them, because to do so is to spring a trap. They back their premises with emotion, not logic, so their premises are (to their pseudo-religion) sacrosanct. They're basically fools and scolds and grifters who are the bad kind of sophist intellectually and who are emotionally manipulative, threatening, aggressive, and even tyrannical.
It's easy to drift into this kind of behavior if you let your emotions run amok, by the way. We all do it sometimes. Children do it. The immature do it. People who are lazy and superficial do it. People who are lost do it. It's just a terrible, far from uncommon screw-up if you're trying to be a good person and a terrible offense against society if you're deliberately trying to be a bad person.
Celerity
(49,941 posts)He would be yet another septuagenarian POTUS for all but the first 10 months of a possible 8 years in office.
It is high time for Boomers to pass the torch of POTUS power. IF Emanuel were to serve 2 terms that would make 44 STRAIGHT YEARS of Boomer POTUS rule (with the even older Biden tucked inside that run). No one gen should have that duration of peak power in an elective democracy.
Emanuel also would destroy base turnout, especially black voters (Laquan McDonald, etc), progressives, and us younger voters.
He also was extraordinarily unpopular (approval ratings down into the 20s at times) in his last term as Chicago mayor.
He furthermore is a super hawk on Israel, and his father was a member of the murderous terrorist Irgun organisation, so good luck with that.
Disastrous pick.
ananda
(31,821 posts)He's awful.
What happened to Nancy?
She has really been screwing things up for Dems
these days.
FakeNoose
(37,427 posts)However Rahm Emanuel is not my first choice. I'm not even sure if he's my 5th or 6th choice.
He didn't make friends while he worked in the White House (for Obama) I know that for sure.
But Obama trusts him so I guess he can't be that bad.
Oopsie Daisy
(5,815 posts)DUU
(14 posts)I worked for him decades ago. Very practical and respected by all in Congress, with political wisdom way beyond his peers.
If he were here today, he would likely suggest we first understand why independent, undecided and other voters who voted Democratic in 2020 (helping cinch the win), voted the other way in 2024 (giving us ma-gag.)
Then he would gently proffer Dems find both the party platform/planks and a candidate that is acceptable to both them and Democrats to avoid a repeat and win across the board. Probably a new face.
2 cents worth from an old geezer who doesnt want to see a repeat.
bottomofthehill
(9,170 posts)Jesus, I go back to the Jamie Whitten, Silvio Conte, Eddie Boland days. You have me by a decade. A true old school Democrat. That said. I think it may come to a shock to people on this board but we do not lose elections because we move to the center, we lose elections because we say some weird shit trying to nuance answers and keep our left with us and get slaughtered for our efforts in the general elections.
DUU
(14 posts)Thanks Bottom.
Dont have to move to the center but Dems should:
Dont say stupid shit
Dont do stupid shit
Dont push or repackage potential candidates who do or have
Listen to swing voters and find enough common ground they respond positively.
Orange hair shouldnt be that hard to beat.
Celerity
(49,941 posts)Mahon voted against the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1960, 1964, and 1968, which were directed at enforcing constitutional rights for African Americans and other minorities.
He also opposed ratification of the 24th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which gave the federal government oversight and enforcement over state practices that discriminated against minority voters.
snip
DUU
(14 posts)Wikipedia? I didnt know that was a gold standard for accuracy and completeness!
If you really want the truth (that will change your premise), youll find the relevant documents in the archives of The Great Society President Lyndon Johnson, at his library (yes you can get there online, and use the search engine).
When you do, youll read actual documents that discuss the specific issues that made ***all the non civil rights provisions of the bill*** a Sophies Choice / "plata o plomo" gut wrenching decision for most in Congress. Compare all the provisions of those bills to the one passed under President Johnson and youll understand the real issues.
Please, go read 1st hand history!!!
Good luck.
Celerity
(49,941 posts)defend that racist Mahon with someone else, as I am immune to attempts at exculpation for votes that literally opposed my foundational civil rights.
As a person of colour, I find your attempts to excuse/mitigate his racist stances/actions entirely problematic as well as deeply offensive on a personal level.
'Gut wrenching decision'? Please. Maybe for some white supremecist trying to cling to power.

welcome to DU, enjoy your stay
DBoon
(23,717 posts)SharonClark
(10,478 posts)Xavier Breath
(5,629 posts)I'd like to do it today.
FHRRK
(1,094 posts)Can someone coherently explain why David Hogg was wrong?
FFS, Rahm Fucking Emanuel!
awesomerwb1
(4,732 posts)Good one Nancy. It's a joke right?
If it isn't, then half of the House needs to retire.
What in the absolute F.
rso
(2,560 posts)My picks are either Pritzker or Beshear.
tavernier
(13,702 posts)And I love Pete but there is wAaaaay too much homophobia in the Redlands.
Autumn
(47,891 posts)
lindalou65
(332 posts)Not a person I would support
Kid Berwyn
(20,410 posts)FWIW, the horse I like from that side is Pritzker.
sdfernando
(5,725 posts)Hell No!
CivicGrief
(184 posts)What a god-awful idea. Nancy is out of touch. I sense a schism in the Democratic Party at the exact wrong time. The donor-class, cocktail-party Democrats are ruining the party. Progressive policies are what will win, not going along to get along. Republican lite sucks.
MorbidButterflyTat
(2,998 posts)to see this thread turn into a Nancy Pelosi bash-fest.
Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)
Hornedfrog2000 This message was self-deleted by its author.
jgmiller
(555 posts)She's like many older people she's still living in a time 20-30 years ago when things were the way she was most comfortable.
Quixote1818
(30,965 posts)pecosbob
(7,938 posts)marble falls
(65,523 posts)Morbius
(496 posts)Not that she endorses him or even wants him to run. The article itself doesn't claim he's a top candidate; the headline does that but the meat of the article doesn't say that at all. So let's not assume facts not in evidence.
I've lived in the Chicago area almost all my life, and I remember his mayoralty well. He was not popular by the end of his administration, and he's not popular now. He can't win a stateside seat in Illinois, in my opinion. I think people should also remember Illinois has an open Senate seat next year. I think that's probably what Emanuel is hinting at.
betsuni
(27,930 posts)LearnedHand
(4,694 posts)Excuse me if I really don't want an 80+ year old member of Congress deciding who our next candidate will be.
pandr32
(13,020 posts)Whichever Democrats throw their hat in the ring will have to go up against each other and a nominee will emerge. No sour grapes, no fodder for the R's to use relentlessly in ads, we (at least I) will support them and will do whatever possible to help them win.
It isn't a popularity contest. It is far more serious.
The others can fill important posts. WE need all of them and all of us with them. Screw ageism, sexism, racism, and classism.
To see comments saying no way and ew are not helpful.
Our attitudes need to change so we can be the sane ones in this country.
Jit423
(1,359 posts)I sure hope this isn't true.
Renew Deal
(83,933 posts)Based on his media tours. Not sure if he can win
Mountainguy
(1,907 posts)He'll be nearly 70 when the next elections happens. He doesn't have a great resume of elected position, Mayor and House Rep. No statewide wins.
A pretty good political mind, but not sure he's a great politician. I think he's be helpful on a staff, but don't see him being the 2028 nominee.
fujiyamasan
(165 posts)Hed have to build bridges between different groups and I dont see him forging that coalition. The abrasive schtick works in the GOP, but not so sure how it would go among democrats. It may be off putting.
I think being mayor of the third largest city is a lot different from being mayor of a small town, like one very popular potential candidate. Managing a city of that size and complexity is no easy task, but I think there were some controversies during his term that may doom his candidacy.
Mountainguy
(1,907 posts)which is my only point.
I think was, and could again be, a great chief of staff.
k_buddy762
(240 posts)hatrack
(62,532 posts)Sorry, hard pass.
choie
(5,480 posts)The exact wrong person. Not surprised that Pelosi said this. I know a lot of people here idolize her, but shes wedded to keeping the Democratic Party a DLC like party - moderate and run by money interests.
LudwigPastorius
(12,493 posts)
DonCoquixote
(13,869 posts)The guy is the embodiement of everything that turns offf anyone to the left of Clinton, to say ntohign of the aoc sanders crowd.. and the "let Bibi ill whoever they want" crowd
Upthevibe
(9,519 posts)CentralMass
(16,108 posts)Melon
(337 posts)LilElf70
(881 posts)It seems apparent to me that Pelosi needs to retire. And I mean retire. Permanently. Go have fun Nancy. Enjoy your retirement. It's time to move on, "without" politics.
Bev54
(12,452 posts)betsuni
(27,930 posts)All Nancy did was say she thinks he's going to run. I've heard others say it and I thought it after seeing a couple of interviews. So what. She didn't endorse him.
Poor reading skills or auto-bashing Democrats, either is embarrassing.
proud patriot
(101,966 posts)I sure hope he does not get the Nomination . He was a huge Obstacle
for Michelle Obama . I'd like to hear what she thnks on the matter .
Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)
Skittles This message was self-deleted by its author.
DFW
(58,058 posts)Howard has been a personal friend for over 20 years.
As my old friend Stan used to say: nuff said.
Tree Lady
(12,397 posts)but he dropped out before it got to my state.
He did so great as head of democrats with his 50 state strategy.
I have never liked Rahm, I also heard it was because of him Obama didn't push for universal healthcare.
RandiFan1290
(6,515 posts)betsuni
(27,930 posts)bearsfootball516
(6,574 posts)Not when he's stacked up against Shapiro, Beshear, Pritzker, Warnock, Whitmer, Buttigieg and a half dozen more. Most likely outcome is he participates in the first couple debates, and drops out by the end of 2027.
Charlie Chapulin
(368 posts)Swell. Even.
NOT!!
jrthin
(5,130 posts)jalan48
(14,881 posts)elocs
(24,370 posts)and get in touch with reality (which is asking a lot) because there are many who believe that just because they really, really love a candidate then that person will automatically win which would only be true if only Democrats are the only ones voting. So we need a candidate who will not alienate a large chunk of the electorate right out of the gate.
So let's pick somebody who actually has a good chance to win because if a Republican wins then they will really finish us off.
But ultimately, "I'm not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.--Will Rogers.
Tree Lady
(12,397 posts)parts to our party, the far left and progressives, the middle, the conservative dems. If you get a candidate that goes to far either direction it pisses off a bunch of people. Then putting someone from the middle in frustrates a lot on the left that nothing will ever get done so some stay home.
It's easy for the media to target ideas in our party that only a small percentage actually believe in. They scare off independents and republicans that don't like Trump with those ideas.
Meanwhile republicans are real good at voting R no matter what ideas or who is the leader they just want to win.
WiVoter
(1,268 posts)Let the people have as much say as the leadership.
Mosby
(18,531 posts)Whoever that is. Preferably someone who can appeal to independents.
Prairie_Seagull
(4,205 posts)turn on for the youth whom one would think we need/want voting in large numbers.
IMO
Rob H.
(5,655 posts)democrank
(11,487 posts)My guess is that Rahm Emanuel will face a lot of opposition .and for good reason.
SleeplessinSoCal
(10,073 posts)I don't think it's helpful. Remember Tulsi Gabbard as a Dem ran in 2020.
I hope there's a way to keep it 12 at most. Ideally from all regions and job experiences.
Is there anyone out of left field we can't imagine who could run? A scholar, economist, or General Milley?
He's well educated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Milley?wprov=sfla1