Behind closed doors at Democratic gatherings, a uncomfortable conversation has taken root: whether the party's path back to the White House runs through nominating a man, preferably one who is white and Christian.
The calculus is rooted in defeat. After losing twice with women at the top of the ticket, some party insiders have grown convinced that voter prejudice makes diverse candidates an electoral liability. The concern has leaked out of private strategy sessions into public statements from prominent Democrats, including former first lady Michelle Obama, who said recently that America is "not ready for a woman."
Several Democratic strategists have been blunt in their assessment, with some telling confidants that "it has to be a white guy." The worry resonates beyond the consultant class. South Carolina Rep. Jim Clyburn validated Michelle Obama's comments as "absolutely correct," while former President Biden attributed Vice President Harris' 2024 loss directly to sexism and racism.
Harris herself explored the question in her book "107 Days." She revealed that she had initially considered then-Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who is gay, as her running mate. But she ultimately chose Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz instead. "He would have been an ideal partner, if I were a straight, white man," Harris wrote, explaining that asking voters to accept both a woman candidate and a gay running mate represented too much risk given what was at stake.
Yet Harris told the New York Times in December that she does believe the country is prepared to elect a female president.
Who's Actually Considering a Run?
The 2028 field remains unsettled, but it reveals the party's demographic complexity. The men most frequently discussed as potential candidates are hardly a monolith of straight white Christians. Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker are Jewish. Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego is Latino. California Rep. Ro Khanna is Hindu and of Indian descent. New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker and Maryland Gov. Wes Moore are Black.
Among white Christian men, the roster includes Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, though Newsom describes himself as an "Irish-Catholic rebel."
On the women's side, relatively few appear to be actively exploring campaigns. Vice President Harris, Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin, and New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are believed by observers to be seriously considering runs. Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is another possibility, though insiders doubt she will ultimately enter the race.
Pushback against the defeatist narrative has been swift and sharp from several potential 2028 contenders. California Rep. Ro Khanna flatly rejected the premise that women and diverse candidates cannot win. "They have no idea what they are talking about," he said. "The data says otherwise."
Khanna pointed out that Harris received the same share of white votes as Barack Obama did in his campaigns. "What she lost in white men, she made up in white women," he said. "But we didn't win as many Latino Americans, Asian Americans, Black men or young voters." The implication was clear: the party's problem extended beyond candidate identity.
Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer expressed confidence in American voters' readiness. "I love Michelle Obama," she told NPR, "but I think America is ready for a woman president."
Josh Shapiro, responding on a podcast to someone who admired him but doubted a Jewish candidate could win, offered a different argument. He pointed to his own electoral success in a critical swing state and his ability to connect with voters across religious and demographic lines by being candid about his faith.
"I think America's ready to elect a woman, a Black person, a gay person, a Jewish person or whatever," Shapiro said. "What America wants is someone who's going to get stuff done for them."
Pete Buttigieg echoed a similar view to Politico, arguing that voter trust hinges on what candidates pledge to deliver for people's lives rather than demographic categories.
Some Democratic observers caution against using voter bias as an explanation for recent electoral losses. They suggest the party risks avoiding harder questions about its own divisions and strategic failures if it settles too quickly on the argument that Americans are simply not tolerant enough. The 2028 campaign will ultimately turn on far more than candidate identity, they argue, and premature conclusions about electability could obscure the real work ahead.
Comments