US Democratic Senator Mark Kelly has said he will “seriously consider” running for president in 2028 as he battles the Trump administration over a video in which he urged military personnel to refuse illegal orders.

The Arizona senator, who was accused of “seditious behaviour” by Donald Trump over the November clip, said he and his wife, Gabrielle Giffords, received “many” death threats after the president’s comments.

“We get them on a weekly basis now,” he told BBC Newsnight. “We had to get security to protect us 24 hours a day.”

Asked if he was considering a White House run, the retired Navy captain said he was considering it “because we’re in some seriously challenging times”.

    • ameancow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      11 minutes ago

      A lot of lefties going to complain about his support for israel, even if modest. But honestly I cannot see another viable candidate in the wings. We have a couple years still but things are getting scary in terms of actual prospects and we’re going to have to throw our hats in with someone (other than Newsom) so Kelly is probably going to be a great bet, he appeals to the largest swath of moderate America who are tuned out and just want to hear that someone strong and professional will keep them in their comforts, and he has enough established clout with the legislative branch that he already has political capital, they won’t be afraid of working with him.

      And he’s seen Earth from space, and had to be a caregiver for a wife who was the victim of a political assassination attempt, I imagine that builds all the best kind of character and empathy.

  • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    19 minutes ago

    Honestly if love for him to run in the primary against a progressive.

    He’s left of center centrist to be sure but miles ahead of that slimy ass Newsome.

  • Ice@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    I’d vote for him. Back when Biden was dropping out, I posted the question of peoples preferred democratic candidate, and Kelly was suggested by several people.

    I think he could have won the '24 election had he been the candidate, and I think he could win the next election also.

    The fact that (as he said in the video) he “Doesn’t consider himself a politician” is a huge plus.

    It’s a bit sad that he’s starting to get old though. 60 seemed perfectly okay, 65 is a bit on the high end.

    • locahosr443@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 minutes ago

      If Trump can make it to his age on a diet of McDonalds and child semen I’d bet Kelly will be good for a while yet.

      Not ideal, but “not fucking awful” would be a big step up for the dnc.

  • aesthelete@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    And I will seriously consider voting for just about anyone else left of him in the primary. No offense to him, he seems like a very solid dude, but the time for half-measures, centrists, and people that believe institutions will save us is well beyond over.

    • Nebraska_Huskers@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      29 minutes ago

      Ya I’m done placating Dems, anyone left of Gavin or Kelly will have my vote. I’ve played it safe the last 2 elections with trump. We need a Hail Mary. Not more complacent. Marks only in this for a personal grudge, which is fine but when it come to big picture he will be just another dem.

    • SuiXi3D@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      6 hours ago

      You nailed it on the head. If AOC runs, I’m absolutely voting for her. If not, Kelly seems a lot better than Newsom.

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        I love AOC, I think she’s the future of the country, but please please PLEASE do not nominate another candidate with a vagina in 2028. We’re just not ready for that.

        I am selfish as a New York State resident and want to keep her, and give her Chuck’s seat in 2028. Maybe after a term or three in the Senate we’ll be ready to elect someone without a penis as President.

        • Krono@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          17 minutes ago

          PLEASE do not nominate another candidate with a vagina

          It’s so frustrating when well-meaning people have this blatantly sexist take.

          The problem with Hillary and Kamala was not their vaginas, it was their policies.

          If you actually believe that the US is too sexist to elect a woman, then you need to explain the election of Claudia Sheinbaum in Mexico. By every statistic (rape, domestic violence, etc), Mexico is a more sexist nation than the US, yet they overwhelmingly elected a woman.

        • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 minutes ago

          What utter BS. We have progressive women winning races in the house and Senate so the problem isn’t having a damn vagina. The issue is the last two women presidential candidates were neoliberal jackasses that had crappy policies and dismissive attitudes toward their electorate.

          Sure be selfish and say you want to keep her representation local but piss of saying a woman can’t win and then say don’t even try.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Yeah Kelley seems to be a centrist with a soul. I don’t want another fucking centrist but I really must insist on a candidate with a soul

  • EpicMuch@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    95
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I’d vote vote for anyone (Mark Kelly) over anyone who protects pedophiles. Plain. Simple. Straightforward.

    • SailorFuzz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      65
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Honestly, I’m just happy if theres an alternative to Newsome. Kelly isnt a progressive, but hes not a full blown corpo shill that the DNC would happily shove down our throats if unopposed.

  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Either the next president will be a Democratic Socialist, or it will be a fascist. Democrats need to get back 20% of their base, plus the margin they need to pick up in the places they need to make up the differences they’ll need to win the big house.

    Ask yourself this without looking at this announcement: Can a corporate Democrat do that?

    I’m telling you now, either the next president will be a Democratic Socialist, or the Republicans win. No amount of glazing liberals is going to make them capable of winning an election.

  • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    10 hours ago

    He would be 65 in 2029 when he actually took office. Can we get someone who is about 20 years younger?

  • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    12 hours ago

    He might have to clarify a lot of his stances to get widespread support. For examples,

    he opposed the Republicans tax bill giving cuts to the rich, but he has no comments on Kamala’s proposed unrealized gains tax for the rich

    he has a 100% scorecard from reproductive freedom advocates, but exactly how far he supports bodily autonomy and by extension trans rights is unknown

    Sadly one thing he has been clear and consistent on is when the war in gaza began several years ago, he supported aiding Israel and moving a carrier group to threaten Iran and Houthis into deescelating. He still as recent as January promises to continue “aiding” Israel despite acknowledging the carnage.

    Honestly, I don’t like the idea. But he’s a little better than Newsom and he’s 10,000x better than Trump.

        • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          Primaries are picking. If you think your opinion matters more than tens of millions of people it’s a you problem.

          Bender is poking fun at how we threw the 2024 election when millions of people who voted for Biden in 2020 did not show up for Harris, which is relevant because of how I nitpicked Kelly’s stances.

          • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            10 hours ago

            Kamala lost because she abandoned her voters. She told her own base to pound sand while fruitlessly trying to appease Republicans. The voters didn’t “not show up.” She simply made herself not their candidate anymore. It’s a fools’ errand to blame voters, as they’re not an individual you can actually hold accountable. Blaming voters for not voting for your terrible candidate is like blaming consumers for not buying shitty overpriced items at a store. You can whine, “well you have to buy something somewhere anyway!” But that’s just unproductive whining.

            • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              10 hours ago

              I think the only unpopular stance she had was on Israel and even thats only a few percentage points, about the same as those concerned with the economy among those who voted for Biden but not Harris. SOURCE

              Do you have any examples of policies that you think made Harris a worse choice than Trump?

              • HakFoo@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                10 hours ago

                I think she did a poor job of saying what she brought to the table. I understand not wanting to throwJoe under the bus, but opening some daylight on policy would have given her a chance to deflect the affordability problems the last months of Biden had, for example.

                • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 hours ago

                  She had a campaign website which is no longer up and it detailed every stance very clearly. One of my favorite parts was a proposed Unrealized Gains Tax on amounts over $1M which would cripple income for billionaires, removing the cap on social security so that the rich payed their share, and no tax inceases on anyone who made less than $400k.

                  There was a large orchestrated effort to keep the conversation off of those important topics, though. Including social media psyops, such as giving lower priority and exposure to DNC on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and TikTok.

                  The news surrounding her and her campaign advertising were generally pretty ass, though, yeah.

              • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                10 hours ago

                First, you can cut that shit right out with your leading question of “was she worse than Trump.” That isn’t how a large portion of the electorate acts, thinks, and believes. Some vote on utilitarian ethics. Some vote on respect for persons. You can’t just whine, stamp your feet, and pretend that utilitarianism is the only way to vote. You’re trying to hand waive away an branch of moral philosophy that has centuries of scholarly work behind it. If you view voting as simply an either/or choice, sure, Kamala was the only choice. If you view voting as an endorsement of candidate, then it’s perfectly valid to not vote for a candidate simply because you consider their actions to be morally abominable. The other guy being worse doesn’t change that.

                She abandoned Palestinian Americans. The strongest defense of trans people she could offer “she would follow the law.” She cozied up with the Cheneys and offered no real policies that would move the needle on wealth inequality. And she couldn’t even offer a robust plan on how to protect abortion rights. And she gaslit everyone on the economy, telling people to believe the inflation figures and not their own lying eyes.

                And before you claim that utilitarianism is the only valid voting philosophy, realize that is not how our own government behaves. We’ve literally vaporized millions of innocent civilians over the decades. The justification has always been, “well, they supported the evil regime and their evil actions.” Yet every dictator has come to power on the backs of people who thought they were the lesser evil. Hell, almost every Republican thinks Trump is a monster, but they vote for him because they consider him the lesser evil. I’m sure we incinerated thousands of Iraqis who voted for Saddam because he was the lesser evil on the ballot.

                Vote how you want. If you view voting as a utilitarian exercise, so be it. But part of living in a democracy is recognizing that other people can have different belief systems and ways of life. Your way is not the only way. You believe that the ends always justify the means. Others recognize that as a road to Hell.

                • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 hours ago

                  The Biden administration she was Vice President of had Trans cabinet member and judges appointed, the most LGBT+ administration in US history.

                  Biden protected the ranks and jobs of LGBT government employees and servicemembers attacked by the previous Trump admin including reinstatements. They also signed the respect for marriage act which gave protections for Gay Marriage.

                  No matter how you expect the electorate thinks, there were two options and the people of the US collectively made the wrong choice, blame falling on the few million who could have changed the outcome.

      • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Being willing to throw an election is one of the only tools voters actually have to fight fascism. It’s the only way to prevent a bait-and-switch candidate. If you’re not willing to potentially lose an election when your candidate betrays you, future candidates will betray you every time. You’ve told them that you’re perfectly fine with being betrayed. You’ve proven yourself a spineless cuck that will let people walk all over you.

        Actions have consequences. Voting has consequences. And Trump isn’t the worst possible leader out there. He’s a monster, but there are many gradations of monster. There are far worse monsters out there waiting to be elected. If you’re not ever willing to walk away from a traitor candidate in the general election, you guarantee that the Democrats will just keep sliding to the right forever. Nominating a corporate Dem in 2028 will almost certainly see another Republican win. But even on the thin chance they do win, electing a corporate Dem in 2028 guarantees someone even worse than Trump winning in 2032.

        We’ve degenerated so far precisely because Democrats don’t take responsibility for their votes and will just blindly vote for whatever corporate tool is placed in front of them. It’s the political version of the “next quarter” thinking that plagues corporate America. All that matters is the election today. Don’t think about the long term consequences. Focus only on today, even if it hurts you in the long term. Trump is the result of decades of Dems kicking the can down the road, holding their nose, and voting for the lesser evil.

        Notice, we’re only starting to see some progressives gain traction in the party after Democrats have suffered badly at the polls. There has been real change at the DNC. That and candidates like Mamdani would have been completely impossible if Trump hadn’t been elected. It’s only when the old guard loses horribly and has to run away in shame that the opportunity arises for new voices to take the reins of the party.

        • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          There are people in concentration camps, and some who have been murdered. China might take over Taiwan. Ukraine has lost many more people than it would’ve, given more support. The Gazan people might wind up displaced in favor of Trump resorts.

          None of them volunteered to be martyrs for social democracy. Tell them how much worse we could have it. People who are so quick to sacrifice others instead of doing the work to build a better world get no claim to moral righteousness. If people want social democrats, that’s what the primary process is for. You don’t need to punish them for choosing wrongly. As a parent of five I can tell you punishment doesn’t motivate anyone to do the right thing — it motivates them to remove your ability to punish them.

          The more I reread your words, the more I reject your vainglorious recklessness. You must do what you can with the means you are given for the situation you are in.

    • thespcicifcocean@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      So basically, just another dem. I’ll vote for whoever wins the primary, but he probably wouldn’t be my first choice.

  • daannii@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Maybe he could be AOCs VP, maybe.

    Id have to look into his voting history first and his donors.