Carville Tells Kamala Harris That Dems Want Nothing To Do With Her In 2028
Longtime Democratic strategist James Carville had blunt advice Thursday for former Vice President Kamala Harris and her political allies: the Democratic Party wants nothing to do with them in 2028.
Since the 2024 election, Democrats have had a strained relationship with both former President Joe Biden and Harris, who have remained in the public eye despite many in the party wishing they would quietly step aside.
Harris recently announced she would not run for California governor — a decision that has fueled speculation she is keeping her options open for another presidential run in 2028. But on his Politics War Room podcast, Carville dismissed any fears that Democrats would rally behind her again.
“Don’t be terrified,” Carville told one concerned listener. “She wisely chose not to run for governor of California.”
Carville said flatly that Harris will not be the Democratic Party nominee in 2028.
“Anybody that had anything to do with 2024, the party wants to move on from that,” he said. “This isn’t anybody’s fault.”
“This goes to Walz, too. I wouldn’t run again,” Carville said. “If I were your friend, if I were your chief advisor, I’m doing this not from a personal standpoint, but because this is not going to be the environment where Democrats look to anybody connected to the 2024 campaign.”
Carville’s co-host, Al Hunt, aimed his own parting shot at Biden: “Joe Biden, would you please go take the restful retirement you so richly deserve?”
Several top Democrats, such as Harris, former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, and California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, are all expected to run for president in 2028.
But one young, up-and-coming figure says he is not planning to jump into the race, CNN noted.
Maryland Democratic Gov. Wes Moore says he will not run for president in 2028, despite being frequently touted among Democrats as a prospective presidential contender.
That hasn’t prevented continuous speculation about his future political aspirations, especially since he continues to make engagements outside of Maryland, which boost his national image. On Friday, he will fly to South Carolina, an early presidential primary state, to speak at the Blue Palmetto Dinner.
When questioned about 2028, the governor was straightforward.
“I’m not running,” Moore told The Associated Press in an interview. He also said, when asked, that he isn’t trying to get his name in the conversation for a potential vice presidential candidacy, either.
Moore downplayed his high-profile trips to battleground states, including a recent trip to South Carolina.
“And people should get very used to me going all over the country bringing business back to Maryland, because that’s exactly what I plan on doing as long as I’m the governor of the state,” Moore said after a dedication in Annapolis for a memorial to former Rep. Parren Mitchell.
Moore, who is in the third year of his first term, expects to compete for reelection in predominantly Democratic Maryland next year. He said becoming the state’s governor during a difficult period requires his whole attention.
Another name continues to be floated as making early moves before 2028: Pete Buttigieg.
Buttigieg continues to force his way into the digital media sphere, defying traditional Democratic standards as talk of a presidential run grows.
Buttigieg spoke with the Washington Examiner about his views on new media, how to engage people who do not identify with established parties, the current political landscape, and what he is doing to assure the success of his party after leaving the Biden administration.
“I’m using my voice best I can in traditional media and new media, and I’m going to continue having conversations with neighbors, with voters, talking about how we could have a better way,” Buttigieg told the Washington Examiner. “I don’t know what that means for me, politically or professionally, a long way from making any decisions about that, but I know that’s what I need to be doing right now.”
A NATIONALLY TELEVISED RECKONING: SENATOR JOHN KENNEDY READS AOC’S ENTIRE THREAD WORD FOR WORD ON AIR
When Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez took to social media to label Senator John Kennedy “dangerous” and declare that dissenting voices “needed to be silenced,” she likely anticipated a standard partisan retort. Instead, the Louisiana Senator delivered a calculated, unedited counterstrike that captured national headlines.
Bypassing Spin: The Unvarnished Record
Rather than trading insults online or issuing a press release, Kennedy carried the confrontation straight to a nationally televised public forum. Armed with a printed stack of records, the Senator took the podium, paused, and began reading AOC’s entire thread aloud into the microphone.
Every single post. Word for word. No commentary, no edits, and no interruptions.
The impact was immediate. By simply reading the text exactly as written, Kennedy turned the words themselves into the centerpiece of the discussion, forcing viewers to confront the rhetoric on its face without the buffer of online talking heads or social media spin.
The Constitutional Contrast
Once the last tweet was read into the record, Kennedy methodically dismantled the core premise of the argument. Drawing directly on the First Amendment, the Senator offered a biting, forensic critique of modern cancel culture and political double standards:
Free Speech vs. Political Censorship: Kennedy underscored the bedrock constitutional principle that no elected official has the authority to dictate who is permitted to speak or whose views are deemed acceptable.
The Receipts on Display: By contrasting the calls for silencing opponents against past defenses of radical speech, Kennedy highlighted what critics called a glaring standard of selective outrage.
Composure Over Outrage: Refusing to raise his voice, Kennedy let his trademark folksy calm underline the gravity of the constitutional stakes, turning the moment from a political spat into an indictment of authoritarian impulses.
A Turning Point in the Political Debate
The stark visual of a veteran senator calmly holding up public statements and letting them speak for themselves resonated widely, sparking an immediate frenzy across political broadcasts and digital platforms. The exchange shifted the spotlight from party lines to fundamental questions about accountability, public discourse, and the right to dissent.
By trading digital outrage for a live, unedited reading of the public record, Kennedy didn’t just answer a challenge—he forced Washington into a broader reckoning over the language of modern politics.
Will moments like this reshape how political battles are fought going forward? Share your thoughts below!
SENATE SHOWDOWN: ADAM SCHIFF’S GAMBIT CRUMBLES AS SENATOR JOHN KENNEDY DELIVERS A DEVASTATING TAKEDOWN
What began as a standard Senate hearing on intelligence reform erupted into one of the most explosive political confrontations in recent Capitol Hill history. Congressman Adam Schiff’s attempt to outmaneuver Senator John Kennedy reversed course dramatically, culminating in an extraordinary defeat that left the hearing room—and viewers across the country—stunned.
An Ambush Derailed
Schiff opened the session with an aggressive gambit, looking to steer the proceedings and dictate the narrative. Framing the discussion around intelligence protocols, Schiff quickly pivoted to launch familiar rhetorical salvos, attempting to put committee members on the defensive with sweeping assertions.
Kennedy, however, refused to yield an inch of ground. Known for pairing a drawling, down-home demeanor with razor-sharp legal acumen, the Louisiana Senator sat back, waited for Schiff to overreach, and sprang a meticulously constructed trap.
The Masterclass in Cross-Examination
Rather than trading partisan talking points, Kennedy methodically built his counterattack on raw documentation. Point by point, the Senator systematically challenged Schiff's record:
Dissecting past statements and intelligence memos line by line against verified committee findings.
Pressing hard on questions of procedural transparency, selective disclosures, and ethical boundaries.
Turning Schiff’s own past arguments back on him with unflinching, forensic precision.
As Kennedy tightened the focus on specific ethical violations and questionable oversight decisions, Schiff’s confident posture began to erode under the relentless questioning.
The Live-Broadcast Climax
The confrontation reached a boiling point when Kennedy introduced a critical piece of official correspondence into the record. The document struck at the core of Schiff’s defense, leaving no procedural exit.
In a shocking scene broadcast live to the public, the tension at the witness table snapped. Confronted with the unassailable evidence, Schiff’s own legal counsel hesitated, gathered their materials, and stepped away from the table—leaving Schiff isolated before the microphone without an answer.
The hearing room went dead silent. Schiff, deprived of both rebuttal and support, could only sit in stunned silence as the final seconds ticked away.
The dramatic clash has triggered shockwaves throughout Washington, with analysts hailing the exchange as a benchmark demonstration of rigorous congressional oversight and accountability.
What are your thoughts on this dramatic Senate face-off? Share your perspective below!
