Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

senseandsensibility

(24,587 posts)
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 02:06 PM 22 hrs ago

Head to head poll between JD Vance and Newsom for 2028 is encouraging!

Yahoo News/ YouGov poll of US adults from Feb. 9-12: JD 43% Newsom 49%

Lol, JD. The American voters have seen you in action for a year and they don't like it. And for those of you who say JD's number is too high I agree. But in today's climate of extreme partisanship, six points is significant.

Look, Newsom may not be the candidate. But to me this shows that the non maga candidate has the advantage.

47 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Head to head poll between JD Vance and Newsom for 2028 is encouraging! (Original Post) senseandsensibility 22 hrs ago OP
Wow. SunSeeker 21 hrs ago #1
Have to admit that I was surprised senseandsensibility 21 hrs ago #2
Wow is right. Newsom/Moore would be the unbeatable dream ticket. PeaceWave 15 hrs ago #31
I haven't seen enough of Moore to make a judgement on him, but I do believe Jack Valentino 15 hrs ago #36
That poll shows there's still something very wrong with this country. mdbl 21 hrs ago #3
Even as a stalking horse, Newsom can drive Vance's poll numbers down farther Brother Buzz 21 hrs ago #4
Newsom is a bit of lightning rod, so not surprising Wanderlust988 21 hrs ago #5
What negative sh*t? Dave says 18 hrs ago #20
"A LOT of baggage?" Are you seriously bringing up that ridiculous shit from 21 years ago? PeaceWave 16 hrs ago #26
Any politician with a record will have a lot of things vulnerable to attack-- I do worry that Jack Valentino 14 hrs ago #38
. Scrivener7 15 hrs ago #32
Neither will be the 2028 nominee of their party. Nt Fiendish Thingy 21 hrs ago #6
So you won't be voting for Newsom in the Canadian primary? BannonsLiver 18 hrs ago #12
Nice... PeaceWave 16 hrs ago #27
HAHAHAHAHAHA! And VANCE will CERTAINLY LOSE the Canadian GOP primary--- Jack Valentino 14 hrs ago #39
JD Vance so oozes insincerity & unctuous "love" for all things Trump-MAGA (for the moment)... hlthe2b 21 hrs ago #7
Exactly! senseandsensibility 21 hrs ago #8
People do NOT like JD Vance pinkstarburst 20 hrs ago #9
Post removed Post removed 20 hrs ago #10
Newsom is not perfect but I'd vote for him over trump or jd senseandsensibility 19 hrs ago #11
Same Blue Full Moon 18 hrs ago #13
and twice on Tuesdays! Jack Valentino 14 hrs ago #40
so backing pritzker or the vanity candidate in CA is a no vote? nt msongs 18 hrs ago #15
Pritzker is for taxing billionaires. Blue Full Moon 18 hrs ago #17
Pritzker could be a good candidate, too Dave says 18 hrs ago #21
Who else do we have, really? Esp. since we evidently can't have a woman president.... CTyankee 18 hrs ago #14
Exactly pinkstarburst 18 hrs ago #16
Murphy is not flashy, didn't go to Yale, smart and knows what he's doing. I like him a LOT! CTyankee 18 hrs ago #19
He is very impressive and was out there almost immediately senseandsensibility 16 hrs ago #23
We still don't know if Trump is going to try to pull off running again. Or has he given that up? CTyankee 16 hrs ago #24
Who knows? senseandsensibility 15 hrs ago #30
especially with most other Democratic leaders Jack Valentino 14 hrs ago #42
Mark Kelly, Pritzger, Waltz, AOC Blue Full Moon 18 hrs ago #18
It's Prtizker and Walz. BannonsLiver 17 hrs ago #22
This message was self-deleted by its author WarGamer 16 hrs ago #25
Actually Harris is definitely in the hunt WarGamer 16 hrs ago #28
Love her, but I think that would be a mistake on our part. Scrivener7 15 hrs ago #34
It would definitely be a mistake, if she continues to speak with the "caution" Jack Valentino 13 hrs ago #43
I just don't think she's right for this moment, even if she does what you say. Scrivener7 4 hrs ago #44
I think that's a big risk pinkstarburst 3 hrs ago #47
Murphy would be my first choice. He's one of the organizers of the People's State of the Union. Scrivener7 15 hrs ago #33
It's my hope angrychair 16 hrs ago #29
"That poll shows there's still something very wrong with this country." J_William_Ryan 15 hrs ago #35
Except he won't do the thing that is needed. Always Blue 14 hrs ago #37
People completely (and perhaps purposely) misquote Newsom on this issue... PeaceWave 14 hrs ago #41
Well said. But my opinion is that, if taxing them means they'll move out of my state, we should tax them hard. Scrivener7 4 hrs ago #45
Didn't realize they had been nominated already. When did the 2028 primaries take place? Martin Eden 3 hrs ago #46

Jack Valentino

(4,743 posts)
36. I haven't seen enough of Moore to make a judgement on him, but I do believe
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 09:03 PM
15 hrs ago

that if the presidential nominee is white, it would be wise to have an African-American
on the ticket with them, hopefully a charismatic one!

(I was advocating for an AA running mate in 2016, it didn't happen and we lost.
In 2020, we had an AA running mate, and we WON.... 'nuff said!)

Brother Buzz

(39,790 posts)
4. Even as a stalking horse, Newsom can drive Vance's poll numbers down farther
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 02:34 PM
21 hrs ago

And Newsom won’t have to try all that hard for the simple fact that Vance is widely disliked.

Wanderlust988

(766 posts)
5. Newsom is a bit of lightning rod, so not surprising
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 02:45 PM
21 hrs ago

He's a good man, but a man with a LOT of baggage. We love him for standing up to Trump, but he can be soooo easily attacked and dragged into the mud with all the negative shit around him.

Dave says

(5,372 posts)
20. What negative sh*t?
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 05:58 PM
18 hrs ago

Any Democratic candidate will be dragged through the mud, whether warranted or not. We need a candidate who can wash off and loudly sling it back. I think Newsom fits the bill. (There are others.)

PeaceWave

(2,964 posts)
26. "A LOT of baggage?" Are you seriously bringing up that ridiculous shit from 21 years ago?
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 07:55 PM
16 hrs ago

The man was in a bad place while getting a divorce from perhaps one of the most horrible women to ever walk the Earth. Since then, he has gotten remarried, had four children, been a tremendously successful Governor, soundly defeated a Republican engineered recall effort and waged an equally successful daily ass smacking campaign against Trump. Give it a break. As candidates go, Newsom's about as bullet proof as they come.

Jack Valentino

(4,743 posts)
38. Any politician with a record will have a lot of things vulnerable to attack-- I do worry that
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 09:17 PM
14 hrs ago

with Newsom having served as Governor of California, there will be a lot of stuff---
kinda like Dukakis in 1988!....... HOWEVER---

Newsom and his team HAVE shown a great ability to FIGHT BACK,
and within the same news cycle--- and THAT was Dukakis' greatest failure!

(His campaign's utter failure to refute many of the charges made against him
in a timely way, left even ME wondering 'what the truth was'---
and by the time he did so, it was too late--- although I still believe
that he might have won if the campaign had another two weeks--- but it didn't.)


As for what *some people* might think were any of Newsom's "personal failures",
I don't really know anything about any of that---- but I think the American people
are well beyond anything like that, and the only refutation needed is
"but Trump did this and this and this, Republicans voted for him anyway---
but they want you to think about Newsom's divorce or whatever?? PFFFFFFT "


Jack Valentino

(4,743 posts)
39. HAHAHAHAHAHA! And VANCE will CERTAINLY LOSE the Canadian GOP primary---
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 09:23 PM
14 hrs ago

to a Canadian McDonald's cheeseburger, who names their running mate in advance---
an order of french fries served with vinegar!

hlthe2b

(113,435 posts)
7. JD Vance so oozes insincerity & unctuous "love" for all things Trump-MAGA (for the moment)...
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 02:58 PM
21 hrs ago

though I suspect most see that he would knife anyone and everyone in the back and say anything and everything to advance to the Presidency. That Trump picked him because he thought he was a "handsome" man--absolutely baffles me. Honestly, though, I do think quite a bit of MAGA sees through him. I certainly believe a hell of a lot of Independents do.

Newsom is sharp as a whip and comes across quite well, IMO. We shall see how this progresses on the DEM side as I know Newsom has his detractors, but I like him. That doesn't mean I'm ready to say "he's the one," but he COULD be.

pinkstarburst

(1,933 posts)
9. People do NOT like JD Vance
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 03:11 PM
20 hrs ago

Newsom may or may not be the one in 2028, but he has charisma and good looks and knows how to handle social media.

Response to senseandsensibility (Original post)

Blue Full Moon

(3,339 posts)
17. Pritzker is for taxing billionaires.
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 05:54 PM
18 hrs ago

Newsom is against it. No more. That's how we got here.

Dave says

(5,372 posts)
21. Pritzker could be a good candidate, too
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 06:01 PM
18 hrs ago

Actually I think we have a pretty good field to pick from. Not sure why I've been reading suggestions that Newsom has alot of negative baggage. What, Musk and Theil don't like him? I've not seen anyone spell out his negatives. However I'd rather we focus on his positives. Why lay down ammunition for the bottom-dwelling rightwing (which is just about all the Repubs, with a few exceptions)?

(See, I can suggest negatives too, but mine are directed at the rightwing.)

CTyankee

(67,999 posts)
14. Who else do we have, really? Esp. since we evidently can't have a woman president....
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 05:28 PM
18 hrs ago

We got Chris Murphy here in CT but I don't see him out there doing too much to raise his profile. I'm waiting to see someone else, really good and sharp, but I haven't yet and it's getting late.

pinkstarburst

(1,933 posts)
16. Exactly
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 05:37 PM
18 hrs ago

Either we decide we are unafraid of nominating anyone, including women, POC, non-Christians, and LGBTQ, which would give us lots of prominent democratic choices, or we have quite limited options of straight white Christian men. Newsom is one of the more vocal options out there. Some of the other names I see floated like Murphy, Beshear... might be nice guys and I'm not opposed to learning more about them, but they just don't have a national profile. I've literally never heard either of them talk, and couldn't tell you anything about them.

CTyankee

(67,999 posts)
19. Murphy is not flashy, didn't go to Yale, smart and knows what he's doing. I like him a LOT!
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 05:56 PM
18 hrs ago

Since we can't have a woman, we have limited choices, so Murphy would be my strong choice.

senseandsensibility

(24,587 posts)
23. He is very impressive and was out there almost immediately
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 07:24 PM
16 hrs ago

after trump was reelected warning other Dems about what is coming. That won a lot of points with me.

CTyankee

(67,999 posts)
24. We still don't know if Trump is going to try to pull off running again. Or has he given that up?
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 07:26 PM
16 hrs ago

senseandsensibility

(24,587 posts)
30. Who knows?
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 08:10 PM
15 hrs ago

He'll probably have thirty different stories about that before 2028, each one crazier than the last.

Jack Valentino

(4,743 posts)
42. especially with most other Democratic leaders
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 09:47 PM
14 hrs ago

'acting like a dog that's been beat too much, 'til they spend half their life just covering up'
~ Bruce Springsteen


On the other hand, our 107-day presidential nominee Kamala Harris
was warning us about Trump BEFORE the election,
but it was mostly "lost in the noise"----

and like Michael Dukakis, she did little to "fight back"
against the GOP's late "anti-trans" ad campaign which did her in, in my judgement---
even though she seemed to have a lot of money to have done so---

Still, recent "do-over" polls show her now beating Trump by high single digits,
which also puts her "in the mix" for 2028---


Personally, for her to be "in the mix" for me in 2028,
I would need to see messaging from her that would energize
the progressives, African-Americans and Democratic economic populists in our party---

now freed from 'the burden' of being 'a loyal vice president',
she has the opportunity to DO SO!---

She has been a 'lady' up until now--- but now we need a pit-fighter!
"MORE AOC and less Hillary (with my apologies to Hillary)!"


Response to CTyankee (Reply #14)

Jack Valentino

(4,743 posts)
43. It would definitely be a mistake, if she continues to speak with the "caution"
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 10:18 PM
13 hrs ago

that she did during the latter portion of her short 2024 campaign---
she started well with her propositions about housing subsidies for first-time buyers,
but went weak after that-------

if she was willing to 'take the gloves off'---
the 'white gloves', if I may be so bold as to say so, as a white man---
and the 'corporate gloves' if I may be so bold to say so as a Democratic economic populist---

then, in the coming 2028 campaign, she might become so big with voter turnout
that she could overcome racism and sexism to become the first female President!!!!

(possible campaign slogans: "I told you so" and
"time to give women a chance, since men have FUCKED EVERYTHING UP so badly already"!
or possibly some shorter and cleaner alternative!)

((Throw 'caution' COMPLETELY 'to the wind', and choose AOC as her running mate!!--
or Pete--- just so there's "a man on the ticket"! ))


Newsom has proven that the Democratic base, and even crucial independent voters,
are starving for resistance against the GQP-magat-Trump fascism!!!!

Kamala has the name recognition to get her immediate attention if she speaks---
but I want to see some righteous ANGER from her--- and FORGET the 'Obama model' of
'not appearing to be an angry black male'---

I think there are now a lot of 'angry black women'---
and furthermore, there are a lot of 'angry white males'----!!!!

The moment calls for boldness, and leadership, and political courage
(with the winds at your back!)

If she comes through at this moment, I would quite possibly support her
for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination!---

but I am waiting to see it!









pinkstarburst

(1,933 posts)
47. I think that's a big risk
Mon Feb 23, 2026, 08:51 AM
3 hrs ago

Even if we decide we are unafraid of nominating women, LGBTQ, POC, and non-Christians (which I think we SHOULD be, as I hate the idea of limiting our voting options as much as we are), I think we need to be careful about being so enthusiastic about a nominee in the primary who resonates with democrats while ignoring how they may do in the general.

Harris already ran in 2024 and lost. Voters got their chance to weigh in and they said no. We would be very foolish to run Harris again, just like we would be very foolish to run Hillary Clinton again, or any other candidate who has run and lost in a presidential election. It would be a huge gamble to try to force voters to accept Harris (or Clinton) when they clearly didn't want to vote for them the first time around. We need to turn the page and go with a different candidate.

Scrivener7

(59,081 posts)
33. Murphy would be my first choice. He's one of the organizers of the People's State of the Union.
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 08:21 PM
15 hrs ago

Much better use of our time than watching a deranged criminal hallucinate for an hour.

But, if Newsom is the primary winner, I'd be happy to vote for him.

angrychair

(12,019 posts)
29. It's my hope
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 08:07 PM
16 hrs ago

That it's just about anyone but him. Well to be honest there are several I would like to avoid. I'm leaning far more heavily left that I ever had because we need a different approach going forward.
Don't get me wrong, if he runs and if he win I will vote for him BUT until that happens I endorse or promote others I think are better.

I don't think the guy who took it apon himself to personally help destroy a homeless encampment and is actively fighting any taxes on billionaires is not the look we think it is going into the next presidential election.

Reference:
Homelessness
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/s-mayhem-craziness-californians-react-gavin-newsoms-order-remove-homel-rcna165401

Billionaires
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/california/2026/02/04/2026-california-billionaire-tax-act-latest-updates-newsom-opposition/88164971007/

J_William_Ryan

(3,437 posts)
35. "That poll shows there's still something very wrong with this country."
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 08:48 PM
15 hrs ago

True.

Which is why neither 2026 nor 2028 are ‘in the bag’ for Democrats.

Always Blue

(71 posts)
37. Except he won't do the thing that is needed.
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 09:10 PM
14 hrs ago

This mess is because the rich will not pony up and pay their taxes.
The democrats don't need someone to champion billionaires.
He will be poised to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory unless he changes his stance.
I am glad his aides are going back at Trump though.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/13/us/newsom-billionaire-tax-california.html

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/13/gavin-newsom-california-billionaire-tax

PeaceWave

(2,964 posts)
41. People completely (and perhaps purposely) misquote Newsom on this issue...
Sun Feb 22, 2026, 09:44 PM
14 hrs ago

Newsom has not said that he is completely opposed to taxing billionaires. What he has said is that if you're going to tax them, you need to do it at the federal level - Otherwise the evil bastards just move to another state.. Which is common fucking sense. But, it's all too convenient to misquote him on this important distinction.

Scrivener7

(59,081 posts)
45. Well said. But my opinion is that, if taxing them means they'll move out of my state, we should tax them hard.
Mon Feb 23, 2026, 07:31 AM
4 hrs ago

But yes. Unless it's at the Federal level, it doesn't solve the problem of idiots hoarding money so they can use it against us.

Martin Eden

(15,504 posts)
46. Didn't realize they had been nominated already. When did the 2028 primaries take place?
Mon Feb 23, 2026, 08:29 AM
3 hrs ago

It's a total waste of time speculating about match-ups in a presidential election more than 2 months away. Far too much can happen between now and then.

Far too many urgent matters are before us right now. Let's not lose focus, people!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Head to head poll between...