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”.

  • SuiXi3D@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    1 day 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.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day 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

          • Nebraska_Huskers@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 hours ago

            LMAO if even you clown. I played it safe with the Democrats non nominee the last two times Trump won. They still had their asses handed to them.

            Done playing it safe. I do blame Trump’s victory on The pro Palestine protest voters though. Maybe you should be mad at them. They stayed home. I at least tried. You’re a fucking joke. This isn’t reddit noob This isn’t a safe space for dem neolibs

    • dhork@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      22 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
        25
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        19 hours 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.

        • SabinStargem@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Personally, I think Kamela’s biggest issue was the lack of primaries. Any candidate shoved into running when the elections are halfway done, are going to have a massive issue with recognition and being ‘proven’ for the role. A primary is both a filter and an advertising event.

      • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        19 hours 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.

        • dhork@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          15 hours ago

          The Presidency is a bridge too far, though.

          Ask yourself: why did Joe Biden, of all people, win, where Clinton and Harris didnt? It certainly wasn’t because he had fewer “crappy policies” than they did.

          America, as a whole, is simply too misogynistic to elect a woman as President right now but, they are at least self-aware to know they can’t say that out loud. So we get excuses, instead, like “I don’t like her laugh” or “I just don’t agree with her”.

          My favorite was a dude who said “I can’t vote for Harris, she reminds me too much of my ex-wife”. At least he’s honest.

          • Formfiller@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 hours ago

            I do think this is a huge factor. My lived experience backs this up and the fact that so many women and mostly girl children were abused by powerful men and there’s literally no consequences backs this up. This country has a very serious mysoginy problem and we still can’t even talk about it without having our experiences dismissed and discounted. It’s undeniable that our system enabled the abuse of those women and children from top to bottom and were still not even allowed to talk about that reality. There’s a reason why most women you know have had an experience of sexual violence and no men that most people know have ever had any consequences for this and every time women try to discuss this online the conversation devolves into whataboutism with guys crying and mobbing on women about some guy they know who falsely accused or some issue they had during a divorce that proves all women are liars. Anyway I know I’ll probably get downvoted because honesty on this stuff always does and I’ll vote for a woman for sure but failing to acknowledge the mysoginist problem this country has is a mistake. At the end of the day the real issue is will a candidate who is actually popular with the people be allowed to make it through the corrupt DNC’s primaries?

          • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            9 hours ago

            Yeah, going to call bullshit again here.

            Let’s take a look at the 2016 election

            Popular vote was 65 million Hillary to 62 million to Trump.

            Let me repeat here, Hilary, the vaginal candidate, WON the popular vote.

            She lost because she didn’t listen to Sanders and other Democrats that told her don’t do your quixotic Southern strategy and listen and talk to your disillusioned working class voters in the rust belt.

            And because she’s was a stubborn, neoliberal ass hat that thought she knew better, she lost the electorial college.

            As for Harris, fuck, there’s so many things she just did wrong along with Biden.

            So again, with all due Internet respect, get out of here with your anti woman BS and America as a whole won’t elect a woman. We just need a non-shitty neoliberal one.

            • dhork@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              9 hours ago

              Both she (and Harris) lost because their votes were not in the right zip codes. Biden got those votes. Biden was not a magically better candidate than either woman. There’s only one explanation that makes any sense at all.

              Some voters may not even be aware of it. They might not even realize they are giving male candidates the benefit of the doubt, while assuming the worst about female candidates.

              Did anyone ever say they couldn’t vote for Bill Clinton or GWB because they didn’t like the way they laughed?

              • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                8 hours ago

                Okay, so let’s get some data behind your Ludacris’ Area Codes Theory of Misogynistic Voting caused the loss of the 2016 and 2024 elections then.

                You’re anecdotal evidence of some guy who said they would never vote for Hilary or that one guy who went and said they didn’t like her laugh, the only thing that proves is that America has people that are misogynistic, which of course is true, but isn’t proof of your premise that women can’t win elections. I can point out people that said they wouldn’t vote for her because Harris was black but that doesn’t provide enough of a basis that she lost due to racism. Anecdotal stories does not equal causation.

                Here’s some more supporting evidence that Americans are becoming more open to women in office.

                https://www.genderontheballot.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/2025-GOTB-Deck-c4_release.pdf

                Some highlights because I’m sure you won’t read:

                • four in 10 Americans personally know someone who would not elect a woman to the White House
                • 83 percent of people polled think it’s important to elect more women into office.
                • 82 percent are open to a qualified woman candidate for president.

                So again data allows that women still have a hurdles but supports that a woman can win the presidency and I’ll continue to vote for a qualified progressive women in the primaries to counter your misogynistic vote.

          • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 hours ago

            Ask yourself: why did Joe Biden, of all people, win, where Clinton and Harris didnt?

            Because he was an already known name that evoked memories of better times. He was Obama’s VP and people liked him in that position, that’s why he won, it’s very simple. Clinton wasn’t VP, wasn’t well liked, and was known to be an unreliable prospect. Harris was not known to the majority of people. Both Clinton and Harris had contentious campaign statements that worried and alienated a significant percentage of their potential voters. Harris, in addition, also was never voted for in a primary, she was simply assigned as Biden’s heir and we were supposed to just run with that and be okay with it. She really never had a chance no matter who she was. Clinton was consistently cringey and reeks of moneyed interests, she was never an attractive option to democratic voters, and would never stand a snowball’s chance in hell of converting any Republican voters like she seemingly wanted to because her husband was one of the favorite Republican whipping boys of all time. They all hate the Clintons, for poorly defined reasons.