411
Pete Hegseth is talking about a possible run for president in 2028, sources say (www.nbcnews.com)
submitted 2 days ago by to c/politics@lemmy.world
143 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I think he might just have a fetish for losing.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 137 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Keep in mind that is exactly what I thought when Trump announced his candidacy in 2015.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 15 hours ago

    Nominees don't matter anymore. They won't let anyone who will make a meaningful difference in. If someone meaningful gets in, they'll be blocked from making any changes.

    we lack the pitchforks and the will to do jack all about anything.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    Hmmm.

    You make a good point.

    On the other hand, look at the history of presidents and their parties. It ALWAYS swaps parties unless there is a particularly popular vice president. Literally, back to Washington.

    The US isn’t like Japan where the LDP wins consecutive elections for decades on end.

    The republican candidate was GOING to win in 2016.

    We are now in a time of chaos. I feel Dems will probably sweep the midterms and maybe win in 2028, but it’s unclear. We’ve only had one nonconsecutive president before.

    I wouldn’t put money on James (Vance).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 36 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    Remember when the Supreme Court interfered in the presidential election because of hanging chads and effectively kept Gore from winning, thus leading somehow to the death of Harambe and bringing us to the bad place dimension where everything always gets worse and almost always in the worst way possible?

    Yeah.. like you said, history likes to repeat itself.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    Oh yes; I remember the Brooks Brothers riot.

    Begging the question — was Al Gore a particularly popular vice president?

    Having lived through it, I would say no.

    Which doesn’t mean Dubya was wildly popular. Only that Al wasn’t.

    Whether Dubya won legitimately, the national mood wasn’t four more years of Clinton.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 15 hours ago

    Between the two, you had one that constantly made shit up like "I made the internet" and one that couldn't pronounce nuclear.

    The fact that it got down to the chads are a better indicator to our split as a country.

    At the time climate was a hot topic and we pushed hard to get gore in as best we could.

    IIRC the chad was in Florida, which is pretty handicapped red.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    Not really though, post civil war there was a 40 year pause where no democrats were president iirc until Wilson won due to Teddy Roosevelt splitting the vote

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    That's because both sides are shit and just keep the rich and powerful, rich and powerful, in exchange for money.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    This is the shit that is put out there to keep people from being involved in politics because "why bother if both sides are the same?" and to deflect blame from the fact that the right is objectively worse in every fucking way. The Democratic party has a lot of problems and is in need of of a huge pull to the left, but it is better than the alternative. Dismissing it this way solves nothing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (1 child)

    Well we could always keep doing like the past dozen decades and endlessly have the population flopping back and forth between two parties and always pissed and screwed but never doing anything real about it other than "you have to vote guys. That will fix everything". The system is corrupted. Voting isn't going to fix it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago

    Right. Standing up there and yelling "there's that f__ talk again!" as some kind of response, ala Idiocracy would be a huge selling point for the Tribe That Rub Shit In Their Hair. The pig people loooove that kind of stuff - they are intimidated by competency, expertise and people that are smarter than them. An idiot like donnie or Petey are their idea of "common sense" politicians.

    That, combined with enough of the apathetic staying home as well as the armchair "leftists" that love to tell everyone how it is useless to vote, (at least to actually vote for a candidate that can actually win) and you'll get Petey in office...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent