Why AOC should run for president in 2028
Why AOC should run for president in 2028
www.salon.com
Why Trump is terrified of AOC
349 comments
-
-
you guys need ranked choice. I'd bet on most red voters not ranking multiple and just putting their evil fucker pick as #1. then you need more than one non evil candidate.
-
We tried. I watched rank choice requests fail time and time again, because people vote against it thanks to smear campaigns.
My buddy is in a city with rank choice, and after the most recent election, there was a push to get rid of it again. You can tell by who.
-
yeah my bad you need guillotines first
-
-
Instead what we have are Republicans trying to outlaw ranked choice voting... They've already had right wing media brainwashing the people into believing it's a really bad thing...
-
Republicans are trying to outlaw voting. Unless it is for their candidate.
-
-
Ranked choice only goes so far when the electorate is batshit insane and willfully ignorant.
-
Ranked choice is bare minimum for a democracy these days. Whatever ancient shit the US has doesn't count anymore. Also get rid of the elected tyrant bullshit and upgrade to parliamentary democracy. Then go for mixed-member proportional for extra credit. Also get rid of voting machines and do it all on paper.
-
-
She should absolutely run. I don't know if she should win the nomination, but running brings a voice to the wing of the party she represents.
Primaries are about coalition building. And to have your ideas represented by the eventual candidate you need a champion to promote them in the process.
-
I don't know if she should win the nomination,
Her winning the nomination would be Schumer and Pelosi's worst nightmare. They would 100 percent rather lose to Trump than let that happen.
-
they'd actively campaign for mango mussolini's third term before they let AOC win the nomination. fucking ghouls.
-
Maybe we'll luck out and those two will be dead by then.
-
-
But, from the last election, we know some minorities will never vote for a woman. This is a big gamble.
I voted for Harris. I thought she was going to win until I saw all those minorities vote against her just because of her gender.
This world is not ready.
-
We absolutely don't know anything of the sort. Centrist assholes just cling to that excuse to avoid acknowledging that focusing on appealing to conservatives and pledging to maintain the status quo is a failure.
-
This
worldcountry is not ready.FTFY
-
-
-
As a non-American, electing AOC as president would be the way to speed run the repair of America's reputation internationally.
-
I mean this in the nicest way possible. I don't really care about fixing our international reputation atm. I'm worried about stopping the country from falling apart first. We can fix all the international stuff after.
-
I mean this in the nicest way possible. I don't really care about fixing our international reputation atm. I'm worried about stopping the country from falling apart first. We can fix all the international stuff after.
This will be a rather gentle rebuke:
AOC being elected president would not only be the most direct way of making the day to day lives of all Americans better, it would be the quickest route to restoring America's status on the world stage. It would all happen simultaneously.
-
Most dictatorships are toppled by external powers.
-
-
-
The democrat leadership did everything in their power to stop bernie in 2020 they will do the same against AOC
-
Agreed, no reason to give them reprieve. Let them try again and this time the gerontocracy is weaker then it has ever been.
-
-
This DNC won't help any specific candidate in a primary, but they won't work against a specific candidate either.
That's all progressives and specifically AOC need, a fair primary.
We're on a huge inflection point, if we let some shirt bird neoliberals like Cuomo or Newsom win the primary, then they get to name the next DNC chair if they win the election
And we'll be right back where we were in 2020.
We can not afford to roll the dice on neoliberalism again, and AOC has the best shot right now. But a lot can change before the primary starts.
-
-
Buddy...
This is like if in June 2021 you stared blaming Biden for the shit trump did when he was president...
The DNC is essentially ~400 people that get together to vote for a chair every four years. And if a Dem was elected president they just all vote for who the president suggests. (Note: Obama never nominated one)
So the people who rigged 2016 could have been replaced, and Donna Brazile's brief time gave us valuable insights into how fucked things were.
But the voting members went neoliberals again, there wasn't a good option running.
2020 Biden won, and picked the same type of chair who handed him the primary.
2024 we didn't get a primary, and New Hampshire's delegates were stolen, something I can never forgive as a Democrat.
But in February the voting members (who have slowly been getting replaced, literally not all the same people) choose a state chair who took a purple state, ran fair primaries for a decade, and turned it into a progressive stronghold.
"The DNC" is not a monolith, it's not some great institute of life long beurocrats.
Change is possible.
I've spent literally 30 years bitching about the DNC (and yes, I still held my nose and voted D in generals once I was 18). I understand how it works.
The chair runs the show and is final call on literally everything.
So expect the DNC to be run exactly like the last decade of the Minnesota party was.
Blaming current DNC for the faults of the last is as dumb as blaming 2021 Biden for what 2016-2020 trump did....
Just because they're both at the head of the same office.
Quick edit:
Also, Martin just ran out two of those problematic superdelegates who had been fucking shit up. Not only that, they had been high ranking members of the committee that has been running the sh primaries.
Shit is getting better.
Just don't expect Martin to throw the trash on the front yard and dont expect billionaire owned media to put anything this new DNC does in a good light. If a progressive wins in 2028 we'd see an fdr style movement again.
The billionaires don't want that. And they don't mind lying.
And sorry this is a wall of text, but it's important people understand how optimistic we should be right now.
-
I come from a town where most of the Democrats that end up running are classical liberal Catholics, and break with the party on abortion only.
Because of that, the only candidates that end up making it past the primaries are some of the lamest, idiotic, or occasionally actual criminal jackass candidates you can imagine.
The DNC has basically handed unicameral seats, the national congressional seat (the only one in the state that's actually contested) and the mayoral seat to conservatives for 30 years.
When popular candidates do make it past the primary and refuse to be pro choice, they magically see their national funding dry up.
To be clear, Omaha is at the very edge of the Bible belt, this is a Catholic town. Most Democrats here are Catholic. These are people who are fervently anti conservative, anti trump. These are the majority of the blue dot voters.
I'm not saying this is rational, or good. I'm not saying that the DNC should come around on banning abortion. I am saying that by enforcing national policy on down ballot races, they're shooting themselves in the foot in regions that would otherwise reliably support them.
-
-
This DNC won’t help any specific candidate in a primary, but they won’t work against a specific candidate either.
The same group of people absolutely shitting themselves over Zohran Mamdani as Mayor of NYC won't work against any specific candidate in 2028? Did we completely forget about 2020, when Obama got half the field to drop out after Super Tuesday to pave the way for a guy in fifth place? Or 2024, when Dems forewent having a Presidential Primary entirely so they could fumble between a geriatric genocidal bum and his Cheney-loving VP?
We’re on a huge inflection point
In 1972, Richard Nixon made the case for his reelection by invoking the second derivative of inflation. He stated that the rate of increase of inflation was decreasing.
This is the inflection point the American liberal party has reached, in the year 2025. Things are so incredibly bad that a Cuomo can't walk off with a high office in the finance capital of the world. The increase of fascism is decreasing.
We can not afford to roll the dice on neoliberalism again
This won't be a diceroll. The preponderance of Democrats are firmly in the tank for some ideological mix of neoliberalism and neoconservatism. One of the great "successes" of the Democratic Party over the last 20 years has been to draw a big chunk of the economic conservatives out of the Republican Party and into their own.
From Kristen Gillibrand to Kristen Sinema, from Hakeem Jefferies to Henry Cuellar, from Michael Bloomberg to Rick Wilson, this is a party overflowing with Bush Era "compassionate conservatives". AOC has no path to a national platform in 2028. Y'all are going to be stuck holding your noses and voting for Gretchen Whitmer/Pete Buttigieg while shouting "Vote Blue No Matter Who" in another three years.
But maybe we can get Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman their house seats back. Maybe we can get a few more Mamdanis into the big city mayorships. Then talk about what a minority of leftists in the Senate could look like in another ten to forty years.
-
-
Nope
I just understand that while that was going on the current chair was running Minnesota.
And we can look at that track record, that ran all the way up to assuming DNC chair...
And his actions since...
And logically conclude blaming the current DNC for that old shit makes as much sense as boycotting the Cincinnati Reds cuz Pete Rose didn't call your mom back after a date.
The person you're upset with has no affiliation to the current organization you're boycotting.
-
You've only been here for three days so you don't know, but the user you're replying to was notorious as an emphatic, outspoken critic of the DNC before the change in leadership. It was at the point where half the stuff he said was easily mistaken for tankie anti-Democrat trolling.
If he, of all people, says it's better now, I, for one, believe him.
-
-
-
Sexism run deeeeeeeep in this country.
It's not that big of an issue.
When you run Kamala and Hillary, sexism is an easy excuse. Neoliberals will never blame a loss on their policy, even though everyone is outright saying it's due to policy.
Someone who identified as a trans-racial Martian could win a general if they also had a progressive platform, charisma, and authentic delivery.
Like, if sexism was such an issue, she wouldn't poll so well
-
-
I’m really sorry to say that AOC stands a snowball’s chance in hell. Look around and ask yourself whether this country would ever, ever, EVER elect a woman. It’s really that simple. It’d be great if we lived in a more progressive country, but we’re going to have to be crafty clever to get what we want. Nominating a woman for the highest office of our land is a choice we can keep making, but we’ll keep losing and the GOP will continue to erode the country.
-
God, americans are so naive. There won't be fair elections anymore. You had your chance and you blew it! It's over for your democracy.
-
It's the Democrats. They still haven't realized that the game is over. Nobody's playing by the rules. Why would they start during an election?
-
So long as the donor checks keep clearing, establishment Dems are happy to play spoiler for big business and let Trump destroy the country.
-
The democrats have handed Trump the country on a plate. As a non American I've been saying the American "Empire" will fall eventually, I never thought it would be to a fascist, and with a wimper.
-
It’s the Democrats.
It is Americans as a whole. 1/3 of then didn't even bother voting.
They get what they have coming to them.
-
It’s the Democrats.
It's the people blaming the politicians instead of doing something about it.
But almost no one cares until they get ICe'd. That's human nature for you.
-
-
It is looking more and more like the election was stolen.
Edit: You are blaming Americans for screwing up the previous election becuase this next one will not be fair.....when the last one you are blaming Americans for was already rigged.
-
there's a reason for that.
-
Does it matter at this point? Seeing how fundamentally rotten every other part of our government has become is what’s really broken my heart. The president didn’t make all of these lawmakers roll over, the supreme court blatantly disregard the constitution, or these hate-filled minions put panty hose over their faces and go around kidnapping their neighbors. The president isn’t making people stand by filming all of this madness instead of doing anything to stop it.
-
-
-
I'd rather AOC knock Schumer out of the Senate in 2028. (Or a special election if he for whatever reason is unable to complete his term.) Congress needs as much replacement as the White House.
But it is really frustrating framing how the article is already conceding Trump will be the dominant candidate for a third term in 2028. That's a long way off.
-
All the fucking second-order sexists here saying we can't elect a woman because two of the worst female candidates ever lost.
These are the same people who said Obama couldn't win because he was black. Not that they were racist, no they love black people, but they just want to make absolutely extra sure we don't actually try to elect one. Because they imagine their neighbor/uncle/coworker would look at everything going on and think "none of that is important, no black presidents". They're not racist, they just advocate for racism. And with this most facile of analyses they'll believe themselves to be politically savvy realists rather than reactionary children.
This is the cowardice that dooms liberalism. At every opportunity they want to worry about what their opponents will like and time after time will try to blame strategy or immutable characteristics for the failures of their do-nothing policies. Politics is about change. When people's lives suck you don't try to tell them we'll keep doing the same things. And whether the person talking change is a charismatic black man or a clown show, or even... A FEEEMALE, they'll vote for them.
-
...when i was growing up, my well-meaning parents pulled me aside to express their concern over a jewish friend dating a black friend; aghast at their comment, i immediately confronted them over its apparent racism, and they replied that they had nothing against it personally, but were instead concerned about what other people might think...
...they're fcking balls-out fascists fourty years later, and i want no part of them in my life...
...to anyone tempted to compromise their own best interests on behalf of what other people might think: don't give them that kind of power over you, or they'll drag you down in it...
-
My ex wife is indian, I'm white, my kids are mixed race. When i lived in louisiana, my son's pre-school teacher took me aside and told me "I'm not racist, I just feel bad for him. He's not going to fit in because of his background". She then segregated him from the rest of the class and sat him at a table where it was just him and one other non-white kid. the white kids were at other tables, physically pretty far from where he was sitting.
Fuck people who say shit like that. They're absolutely just as racist as the overtly racist fascist pieces of garbage running the US.
-
Ah, I see you've met my mom. She's overly concerned with the opinions of others, to my and my siblings' detriment. Meanwhile, I have a "I don't know them, why should I care what they think?" attitude, which made my youth with her so very fun /s.
Her brain is clearly still locked into an old society's ways. The things she thinks would be humiliating are things that nobody would bat an eye at today, like wearing pajamas outside. She's got her "hidden" racism too, of course. She's made comments about my partners "having dark complexions." I eventually went off on her, calling out her racist thoughts, and she's shut up about it since. Or at least, she's shut up about it when I'm around.
-
-
You're not wrong. Obama won because he was a corporatist and easily manipulated and ran on empty slogans, so he had the backing of the mainstream. Harris did too, but AOC won't have that backing.
That also means she could run on actual popular policies. Something Trump did. His voters now kinda got the same scam with him than the progressives got with Obama lol.
But there is deeply entrenched propaganda in the media and the minds of people. Like you'd need a movement that comes together. But you can see the liberals in this thread would balk at any tankie demanding and end to US or EU imperialism lol, just like they will balk at putting another women on the ticket.
-
because two of the worst female candidates ever lost.
One was a Senator, Secretary of State, and former first-lady. The other was a VP. AOC is just a member of the House and half the country wants to burn her at the stake for being so liberal.
She won't win.
-
Credentials are not what make a good candidate.
-
-
-
screeching that she’s “NOT qualified for office,” that she’s “stupid” and the “dumbest,” while defending his own intelligence by noting he “ACED” a cognitive test doctors use to determine if an elderly person’s dementia has gotten so bad they need to be put in full-time care
God, this guy loves bragging about "acing" his cognitive tests.
-
Dr: "Ok, you passed: you have normal, average, cognitive function"
Trump: "Just ACED my cognitive TEST. The DOCTOR SAYS I had the MOST BEAUTIFUL, most TREMENDOUS results in history, ever. He says 'I see people take this test all the time, and your results are the greatest'"
-
My results were so good, I even listed some things they didn't tell me about
-
-
We would've seen this coming had his zygote been able to brag about being the last one standing - aka the only "viable" candidate.
-
-
I think AOC would make for a much better Presidential Candidate in 2036 or 2042, after a term or two in Chuck's Senate seat. (Or maybe even as VP)
But, she is still a good candidate right now, and the next election will be crucial for the country. If 2028 AOC is the best option for Democrats, we should run with it. I would definitely sooner vote for her than the Next One Up for Democrats.
-
Harris/Newsom 2028 because “it’s their turn”
-
I agree. I want to see AOC have long-term influence over the Democratic party. We're going to need significant reconstruction over the next 4-8 years, and I personally think she would be a bit wasted in that role.
That said, we don't really have an alternative well positioned to run in '28 except Bernie, and I wouldn't blame him for not running (or people being upset about another 80+ year old president).
-
She would have been better than tan Hillary, she was exactly 35. An establishment centrist was proven a bad choice in 2016.
-
-
NGL I'll take any blue tie but we've already shown twice that Americans might actually prefer fascism over a woman in charge.
-
While those are two possible points of data, there are a number of other factors that contributed to each Democratic candidates' loss vs. Trump.
- Both suffered from being establishment candidates in an antiestablishment era.
- Both were only really willing to push to milquetoast progressive policies.
- Both followed disappointing democratic presidents that promised a lot and delivered little, often due to their own party sabotaging attempts at major progressive reform.
I truly think that Democrat voters want real, progressive change (even if they find words like "socialism" scary) but most Democrat politicians aren't willing to anger their wealthy Third Way/Neoliberal/Abundance/whatever-the-fuck-they-want-to-call-themselves donors.
-
Here is a basic logical analysis of our “democratic” republic.
Everything, and i mean EVERYTHING regarding our sociopolitical system is up for sale and easily manipulated by money. It was this way before citizens United but then citizens united just exacerbated this and pushed this so far that a study done by Princeton concluded that the amount of influence one has on any potential political policy is directly proportional to how wealthy you are with regular working class people having a statistically irrelevant near zero level of influence on any potential policy/Legislation regardless as to how popular or unpopular it may be.
So in a system where it is obvious a small group of people with immense wealth and privilege who act as though they have divine provenance to dictate how our society is run what gives anyone the extremely naive idea that for a class of people who effectively believe themselves to be above the law they would for some reason consider the American democratic process to be one step too far for them to exert influence upon by any means necessary?
In Germany there was a supreme court case concerning election integrity within the last 15-20 years or so(i don’t exactly remember when) but the supreme court ultimately decided that electronic voting is unconstitutional because it is impossible to differentiate between fraudulent results and legitimate ones for laypeople who are not cybersecurity/ IT experts. And this is what the US needs immediately as well as a repeal of citizens United, and laws that prevent a biased Supreme Court acting in bad faith.
True leftism has been eradicated from the sociopolitical discourse. The Democratic party has shifted to the right every election since LBJ refused the party nomination and then RFK was subsequently shot in the head. To think that this has not been achieved through subversive collusion of individuals/ organizations/ entities with like minded interests and agendas requires the same level of naïveté it takes to believe our presidential elections have not been tampered with to benefit wall street Military and prison industry profiteers.
-
If you want more data there is also Congress which is only 28% female, and historically there were far less. I think the sentiment I saw in a lot of republicans wasn't that they supported Trump all that much, but that they opposed Hillary and Harris.
What exactly makes you say Joe Biden was a better candidate than either as far as those bullet points?
-
This is complete and total gatekeeping (actual sexism) bullshit that is frequently parroted but not actually analyzed with a modicum of depth, for one actually did, they would realize it has no bearing in reality. If anyone wants me to explain why, I will happily do so.
-
Have you gone outside? Americans (even women) don't want a woman president. We are stuck in 1890.
-
I voted for the female candidates, they both lost. The gender divide in congress is 7:18, only 28% of elected federal representatives are women. Gen Z voters were divided along gender lines between Trump and Harris. I don't know how to fix this problem, but ignoring it is not the solution.
-
-
Didn't the Dems run on 'anyone but Sanders' and they propped up Clinton instead?
-
Independent Party Bernie Sanders was invited to participate on the DNC presidential tickets on multiple occasions and in 2016 he earned over 13 Million Votes compared to Hillary Clinton's 16 Million.
If 4 Million more people voted for Bernie Sanders then he would have been the name on the Democrats ticket at the top of ballots across the nation.
The DNC had absolutely no incentive nor obligation to run Bernie in their primaries, they like his policies and gave voters the option to have him represent them as our president.
-
-
Exactly.
Americans chose a felon rapist clown fascist over HIGHLY qualified women. Twice.
America is not even close to being ready for a female president.
If we want to lose again, run a woman. That's the shit reality in this shitty country.
Not to mention AOC is still "green". Clinton was a Senator, a Secretary of State, and ex-first lady. Kamala was a VP. AOC is just a member of the House.
People need to stop fantasizing and get real. It's also WAY too early to seriously be talking about this.
-
I remember bullshit like this being spewed about Obama, too. "Obama is too green!" "a black man could NEVER be president. We have never had one before, after all!" (Or are you too young to remember that? I forget there are adults on here now who weren't even 2-years-old when he was elected.)
... Cue him defeating 2 white successful men by large margins. Doh. Think this through and stop parroting wedge-driving sexist gatekeeping conservative propaganda.
-
Idk if it's too early to talk about it, but part of the process is definitely weighing the pros and cons.
-
-
-
During a debate, AOC would smash any Government of Putin candidate. The problem lies with the Democratic Party.
-
Kamala showed trump for the idiot he is. Didn't make much of a difference. I think AOC would do much better, but I don't hold out much expectations for debates to influence things. Hell, the current criminal in the white house didn't participate in the Republican primary debates and still, somehow, got a bunch of inbred hillbillies to vote for him.
-
And the deep-seated sexism of too many independent/moderate voters, unfortunately.
-
-
I agree that she should run, but as an independent candidate because the DNC will never give her a honest shot in the primaries.
Americans however are unlikely to elect her especially due to electoral college as there are plenty racist and misogynistic voters in the swing states.
But if she’s able to raise money in the process to give her a real shot, US will finally have a viable third party candidate. If it looks like she’ll only split the Dem vote without winning, the raised money can be used to support progressive candidates in local elections.
Either way, I think US needs a progressive liberals party and soon because there’s a lot of House and Senate seat elections coming up and as we have seen from the GOP playbook, local elections are as relevant and influential as the national ones.
-
as an informed she'll split the vote.
it's there a way to force a form of ranked choice voting?
she runs for independent, but the votes are for delegates that chose the president, so if she gets 10% of the votes, the delegated should vote for the other less fash candidat, while if she does get the majority she gets the presidency
on top of that, she can make the delegate vote conditional for some policies. so even if she gets 5% of the votes she can dictate the delegates to vote for whichever candidate signs a legally binding contract to do some prewritten executive actions on day one, like abolish Ice. release all imprisonment migrants, grant re-entry visas to deported...
so even if she only gets a few votes, she can have a lot of influence and power.
I just started thinking about this today,and I fear there are more complications. but I'm principle, could this work?
-
Yes, it could, which is why (IIRC) 16 US states now have laws that partially or fully ban ranked choice voting.
-
At a minimum splitting the vote would mean that they are coming from the "didn't vote" pool (which has been the majority in pretty much every election for decades now). This is a strong signal that the DNC needs to move left or become irrelevant because a new party would simply split. For example of this working see the republican party becoming the maga party for that reason. Doing this will also add more weight to our protests.
-
Electors are not granted proportionally. If the Democratic nominee gets 30% of the vote in a state, AOC gets 30% of the vote, and the Republican gets 35% of the vote, all the electors are Republican.
-
-
unfortunately I don't think that's possible without ranked-choice voting. we desperately need ranked-choice voting in order to make more than two parties a viable option
-
I'll vote for her and split the dem vote. if the dems are hell bent on killing their own party, then fuck em.
-
-
If the BIG Bill of Garbage passes, there are no more free elections.
-
Just passed the Senate by one vote. Back to the House for the finale vote, which is controlled by Republicans.
It's over fam.
You can kiss this nation goodbye.
Now hunker down for the suffering and death that's sure to follow.
This is what happens when you give conservatives power. Such a profoundly stupid nation of individuals.
-
-
I feel like we try to shoehorn our political heroes into running for president. Why not senator? Why not speaker of the house, even? Speaker of the house is arguable more powerful than President in the democratic party - she has the power to shape the priorities and strategies of the entire party. Nancy Pelosi is probably more influential over the state of the Democratic party than Joe Biden or Barrack Obama were
-
An even moderately progressive speaker would be monumental, but unfortunately we the people don't pick the speaker.
-
-
People in america still believe there is going to be an actual election in 2028?
-
I have my doubts
-
We just going to post this in every thread from now on?
-
Yes. Until americans realise it. They are still making stupid little jokes about the regine in talk shows, they are staying or talking about midterms or 2028. Absolutely naive.
They need to fucking leave the country. If they cant afford to leave sell what you have, save until you can leave but leave.
Or if you want to fight dont do cute peaceful no kings protests for a few days. Shut down the country, general strike. Use the amendment you always claim is there to prevent the situation you have now.
Dont joke and laugh about jokes in SNL but wake up and either save your life and that of your family by leaving or fight.
-
-
Yeah it's weird, and if there are elections popular opposition candidates will face a fate like mr Navalny, I'm afraid. Much as I would like AOC as a US president, I think at this point, she needs to run for her life rather than for president. And believe me, I truly hate that this is the case.
She is an amazing person and a fantastic leader. However she is the kind of person the fascists fear and she is also the right shade of skin to earn a one way ticket to El Salvador.
You see the people clamoring for the deportation of mr Mamdani, and he is at this point nothing more than one party's possible candidate for mayor of one town. Imagine what would happen if ms Ocasio-Cortez were an actual presidential candidate!?
Even now I worry about her safety often. Same for that wonderful ms Crockett, mr Frost and a few others.
-
-
No way AOC is getting anywhere near the Presidency unless there is a full scale revolution. Sad, but true.
-
Because there won't be another election?
-
Also because both of our major party machines would cooperate in attacking her.
Neoliberals would rather lose power than signal to their bribers that their party isn't bought and paid for. President Ocasio-Cortez would be such a signal.
The DNC promotes on the basis of potential federal level reps getting bribe money. AOC was a spoiler and is not welcome in the party because of her views. That's why the Neoliberals in congress don't care Trump is in office and even help him with appointments.
Neoliberals like Pelosi would lock arms with the Fascists and treat a President AOC like the threat we wished they'd treat their fascist opposition like, but they have too much in common on the same Economic policy they're both well bribed to enact and protect from us.
Which is why, all the more, AOC is a good choice. The hatred of our true oppressors on Wall Street is welcome. At worst, it will further demonstrate that the American people aren't permitted by big corpo to have a real choice in governance, only hypercapitalist robber baron enablers paid to divide us on social wedges as they legislate new ways for the owners to monetize sucking us dry.
-
-
-
Simple. I'm voting AOC if her name is on the ballot. Take my vote AOC!
-
Hope you enjoy losing by not learning anything from the recent past.
-
No, I don't. All I'm saying is she's awesome. I propose that the people want someone who is different and probably the only people who are currently very public that people might want to vote for would be Bernie and AOC.
But probably new names would be best. New names that are not polarizing and that attract Republican vote. There have to be normal people who are currently Republican but would vote democrat if the right candidate came along. Why not test the waters now. See if AOC is electable if she's not, then definitely do not look inside. Look for new people.
-
-
-
Our nation is too sexist and too racist for AOC to win. I'll still vote for her if she runs.
-
"We've tried running two shitlib women with 'status-quo' platforms during a time when the public is crying out for economic change, and they both lost. That proves women can't win, because it couldn't possibly be about our abject refusal to rein in the billionaires!" --- shit liberals say
-
Nothing to do with racism and sexism . Your electoral system simply suck. Hillary won the popular votes and harris lost by only 2.3m it;s nothing for a population of 340 millions
-
Pretty much.
If it was just a feeling with Hilary, then it's absolutely true with Kamala.
The excuses like "Kamala is pro-cop!" Or "Hilary is evil", while it can be true, is also what sexists latch on to avoid being called sexists.
And for icing on the cake, a bunch of hispanic dudes voted for Trump and then are getting deported. Sexism runs so deep that it clouded their own survival.
-
The excuses like "Kamala is pro-cop!" Or "Hilary is evil", while it can be true, is also what sexists latch on to avoid being called sexists.
You remind me of people calling anybody criticizing Israel anti smite. While it true that sexists would use it most people really believe that they can't support them for their policies and priorities
-
Yep — because she is a woman, people with create reasons why they can’t vote for her. Hilary and Kamala were both fine politicians. Most that did not vote for either of them are just afraid to confess they’re real beliefs, so they just pick a narrative and run with it because it makes them appear more sophisticated than a “I hate women” statement.
-
-
-
HELL YEAH THIS COUNTRY NEEDS AOC
-
My right-wing friend finds AOC hot so he might actually vote for her if she runs.
-
Right wingers love the idea of hate-sex
-
Right-wingers tried to make fun of her, and lost.
-
-
-
I think the only legitimate chance Democrats have is Luigi Mangione. You have to fight fire with fire. He's young, smart, charismatic, from a well to do background, and not even a felon like our current president. Also brave unlike our Republican chickenshit losers. Sanders as running mate.
-
The only good shot Democrats have
-
😏
-
-
Luigi Mangione is fine. But he has no experience. What will he bring during discussions ? AOC is ok for president post. But she is not that popular. I mean even Bernie Sanders has not become president despite being in active politics for so many decades. But let's see what will happen in USA after Trump steps down when his tenure gets over.
-
But he has no experience.
I'd argue he single-handedly saved thousands of lives via a single action, and if we let him do more, he could save many more.
-
Do you mean after his third or fourth term?
-
He's got a particular sort of experience that only recently became valuable in a president. The Supreme Court says that during official duties the president is legally immune for all crimes. Give that man immunity and let's see where things end up.
-
-
He's young
Right, so we need to wait 8 more years for the "only legitimate chance Democrats have" to reach the minimum age to assume office?
-
Luigi, allegedly, doesn't let the rules get in the way of doing what's right.
-
It's very possible Trump could be the eternal president, even after he dies. Would it make a difference if he's alive or just a concept?
-
-
would that mean the US would have a good chance at having free/universal healthcare?
-
I'll bet $1000 that we'll slip into fascism unless we vote Mangione as a write in. Nobody else has the guts to stand up to these thugs. The guy is paraded around like he's guilty, and stands tall.
-
-
-
Run every time and educate every time till the win and then win again.
-
Run? In 2028?
What election?
-
Unless you're planning on taking up arms, we have to assume there will be one until there isn't.
-
-
I love AOC but I don't think she'll win. She needs to focus on Schumer instead. Rn the DNC is in a death spiral and is in desperate need of new party leadership. She's the one for that. Newsom will likely be the 2028 candidate. Which yeah it's gonna suck to have to bite our tongue and back him but if it gets us out of a maga dictatorship then I'll gladly do it.
-
She should run for the senate seat when chuck leaves office after he finally comes to his senses.
-
is he up for reelection in 2028?? damn, i'd take an AOC Senator over another term of Schumer with a failed AOC presidency run and Trump still in the white house
-
-
I have nothing but absolute respect for AOC and I would love to see her as President and I would certainly vote for her. However, I can think of only one person that would attract more vitriol from the right, and the media at large, than HIllary Clinton and that is AOC. Aside from convincing the misogynistic masses to vote for a woman, she'd have to convince them to vote for one who will be endlessly labeled in the media as a Socialist and Communist. And the masses will eat that up with no more understanding of the terms than the talking heads that will spew them across the airwaves and internet. She would have an uphill battle of biblical proportions just to win the Democratic primary.
On the other hand, I would trust AOC to run a better campaign than Hillary did. If any woman could get elected president in this country, it would be AOC. She would not blow off the working class and lurch to the center to try and court disaffected republicans. I also think AOC would do a good job sticking to issues and throwing republican failures back in their faces.
Having said all that, I don't know if '28 will be her time to shine. Hell, it's hard to make any call with confidence since Trump has about three and a half years to continue his rampage across this nation and there's just no way to forecast what the situation will be like come primary season. At this point, I would be happier to see another candidate lead the ticket. One with similar positions to AOC but more palatable to those masses I mentioned above. The only one I really like right now is Illinois' J.B. Pritzker.
I know he's a billionaire but his actions in Illinois since he became governor show he is a good one. He has been pro-worker, pro-LGBTQ+, pro-choice, and has used his fortune to support progressive candidates. He is also pro-campaign finance reform because he doesn't think people like him should be buying elections. He has also donated millions of dollars to organizations across the nation to help the left thwart republican plans to enact draconian anti-choice laws. If you're not familiar with Pritzker, I suggest you look him up and see what he has accomplished since getting elected in Illinois.
If I could have any ticket in 2028, it would probably be a Pritzker/AOC ticket and I think they would wipe the floor with the right by focusing on issues that matter to people rather than kowtowing to mega-donors.
-
Clinton / Harris did not lose because they were women. They lost because they either were a neoliberal shitbag (Clinton) or could not convince people that they were not a neoliberal shitbag (Harris).
We elected a black man after years of people saying America was too racist to ever do that. There are a lot more women in America than there are black people, and it turns out that running as a progressive is pretty popular.
We don't need to play this stupid guessing game about what genitals or skin colors will win elections. We already know the policy positions that win elections we just categorically refuse to run on them.
-
That's a narrative pushed here a lot, but I haven't seen good evidence it is true.
Wasn't Obama a neoliberal shitbag by your standards?
-
Clinton / Harris did not lose because they were women.
Yes they did.
We elected a black man
He's a man.
There is a large swath of our populace living in the right geographical areas that will NEVER vote for a woman to be president. And that includes a lot of women. AOC will not win the Electoral College. Half the country wants to burn her at the stake for being too liberal. She can't reach those voters. She won't win.
-
-
Pritzker is good, as evidenced by the "Pritzker sucks" signs found across rural Illinois. My concern would be who would replace him as governor.
-
It would be a hit for Illinois, that's true, but a win for the nation would be worth it to me.
-
-
-
She should definitely run, but Democrat will certainly find a way to fuck it up, just like they did with Bernie.
-
Gerontocracy cannot be allowed to continue to dominate Democratic party primaries
-
-
More like how there should be a coup now. lol.
-
Save us aoc your our only hope
-
No.
I like AOC and I think she has demonstrated that, of the entire "Squad", she actually knows how to be a politician and when to fight and when to bite her tongue.
She has zero chance of winning. First, this country has demonstrated that it will NEVER elect a woman. But second, she is still too young and the DNC will never give her that "Obama Moment" where she can win over the entire country in one speech. And third... republicans hate her so much that she would get shot at every single week AND would actually care about the people who took bullets for her.
Nah. I want AOC to stay in Congress. Not sure if she is more valuable as a Senator at this point, but she is increasingly showing she is well suited to being the politician who rallies and guides the other politicians. A Pelosi but not 90 years old and constantly pushing centrist viewpoints.
-
"After Zohran Mamdani's win, Trump reveals how scared he is to face Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez"
Yeah, because she would be running against Trump... That's a really silly take.
-
She is picking a fight with the billionaire oligarchs and unfortunately it seems like a losing battle. Democrats and republicans alike will campaign against her.
-
Zohran Mamdani is just the democratic primary if I understand correctly. He's not the mayor of New York yet.
-
It's been assumed that whoever the democratic nominee is will win since Adams is extremely unpopular and so is the republican party in NY generally
Of course Cuomo running independent complicates it, and the democratic party not enthusiastically endorsing Mamdani certainly doesnt help. Then again, the party had a 30% approval rating last i checked, so maybe that actually helps....
But he's the most popular debut candidate since AOC, so he still has a very good chance.
-
-
Right now, the ticket I think has the best chance of winning is Buttigieg/AOC. I think the DNC knows they need to go younger and have someone who can stand up to a bully in an eloquent and calm manner that will win over reasonable people. And I think AOC probably knows that the only way the DNC is letting a democratic socialist on the ticket is if they fall in line a bit and not come off as a firebrand who has to fix everything with drastic change and would be willing to go incrementally in the left direction. The DNC would be wise to energize the Bernie youth vote they abandoned last election cycle, but they definitely won't give her the keys or their blessing alone which blows. This ticket gives you appeal to the youth, to the rational elder folks like even my 70 year old lifetime republican father who hates trump, the gay community, city folk, country folk, and of course veterans too. Pretty solid combo if you ask me.
-
Buttigieg is one of the better politicians I've ever seen. He's more well spoken than AOC. He's more prepared for questions. Calmer.
But this is America.
There's a very large swath of this nation in the right geographical areas that will never vote for a homosexual or a woman. Neither of them will win the Electoral College.
-
-
Look .... not that I have anything against women running for president .... but .... if we haven't learned twice from the shitty decision making of the voter population, 2028 is not the year to test if the US can get its first woman as president AGAIN. I'm going to chalk this up as democrats just can't stand to win and the media needs to stop encouraging that line of thinking. We'll be lucky if there even is a 2028 election. Also, did everyone forget AOC is not in the good graces of kingmaker Pelosi?
-
Pelosi looks like she's one stiff gust of wind from keeling over. Fingers crossed.
-
This is the realistic take. Racism is bad enough in this country that we just barely squeaked Obama into office as a half-black man. Misogyny is way more widespread. Spend about 5 minutes in an online game chat room and you'll see what I mean. Not to mention the manosphere/blackpilling are actually growing movements rather than shrinking.
I think AOC is great and that she would make a fine administrator, but let's keep her in congress for now where she can still do a lot of good for the progressive cause. There's no need to put someone who the right has spent years building up as the antichrist boogeyman as the frontrunner when we already have a poor track record of prominent female politicians losing the presidential race to the most embarrassingly unqualified candidate in American history.
-
we just barely squeaked Obama into office
???
Obama won in 2008 with 52.9% of the popular vote, a larger % of the popular vote than any President since.
-
This is what I was saying to the poster above, that thinks there'd be no problem with a woman running. They clearly haven't been outside or even in 1 gaming lobby or they'd know how bad it is.
-
-
Clinton and Harris both lost because they sucked, not because they were women.
-
Voters used their feelings rather than looking at who was fit for the job. You can say Harris sucked all day long, at the end of the day, of the two candidates, she was more fit. And yes, maga ran that as part of their smear campaign with dumb shit like because she was a woman "her heightened woman emotions would cloud her judgement." There were literal ads. This was used to help persuade a good chunk of 75 million fucking idiots to elect someone who is clearly a fucking moron and has dementia. Nobody should base their vote on whats between the candidates' legs, but clearly a good portion of voters did.
-
-
I agree let's give the average american what he wants and bring Brandon back. It's not joever yet!
-
-
She has no path forward clearing primary to fight for presidency.
-
Imagine a primary with AOC, Pete Buttegieg, and maybe a third younger candidate....
All could be really exciting to see advance, but they'll split the vote and open the way for some stupid fucking corpse to win.
I hate this system.
-
You are, unfortunately, right.
-
-
She should definitely run but also let the people choose from a valid primary.
-
"Why AOC should've run for president in 2024"
-
-
-
AOC is a fantastic candidate in an ideal world. But she won’t win. She’s too divisive for Conservatives and moderates and I don’t expect progressives to actually vote; complaining is easier than showing up.
-
I will be a touch disappointed if there is still a us in 2028.
I don't think that the us is worth saving at this point.
-
-
Depends if the corporate shilling is in order?
-
She wouldn't win. The U.S. has shown the world twice that it would rather elect a convicted felon dictator over a women. The U.S. is fucked.
-
I don't understand what people aren't getting here.
The last two female candidates to run for president, who were extraordinarily more qualified than their opponent, were denied in favor of a felon rapist clown.
If that isn't proof that this nation is not ready for a female president, I don't know what is.
I voted for both those female candidates. I am not against a female president. But can we exist in reality for a moment and acknowledge that if we run AOC, we're going to lose, again? Because America isn't ready for that shit. You will not capture independents with a female candidate. You will not capture disenfranchised Trump supporters with a female candidate. You will not win. A mayoral race is not the same as a presidential race and Mamdani is a man and that's the country we live in.
Edit: Scroll through this comments section. This is a liberal sub. And even here it's 50/50 about AOC running for president. She won't win guys.
-
Nah, the Republiklan got Trump elected twice by rejecting reality and substituting it with their own. Reality isn't winning elections anymore (hell, maybe it never was). People who inspire passion are. I would back AOC before another milquetoast Dem any day.
Plus, it wasn't just "women candidates" who lost. Hillary had decades in politics for the Right Wing Propaganda machine to attack. And Kamala had literally no time to build up support. AOC on the otherhand is honestly quite popular amongst her constituency and progressives nationwide. She is someone people vote for.
I placed my votes for Kamala, Biden, and Hillary, but they were all votes cast because of Trump. It would be so fucking nice to cast a vote for the candidate I want to win again.
-
-
I think running another woman to get absolutely trounced by the populace is a poor choice. I don't believe the people are ready for it yet, that's how we ended up with this. Kamala was a good candidate, but with the wrong chromosomes for a very specific swing vote.
-
I would love AOC as president. Unfortunately, she's a woman and she's a minority, and this country is just too racist and sexist - and stupid! - to elect her.
-
All those things but mostly stupid
-
-
Ask yourself a question: why can't a woman become a preacher, priest or pastor? All major US religions indoctrinate their followers from birth with the teachings that god does NOT permit women to exercise authority over men.
So if Christian and Catholic men and women believe in a core set of values and reasons for why women are not allowed to take leadership roles over men in the church, what makes anyone think they don't or won't apply that same logic to leadership at the political level, or ANY level?
Christians won't let a woman lead their church, but they somehow will be OK with electing a woman into a much higher role, one that can make decisions that affect all churches/the entire world? I don't see it.
-
Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in 2016. What are you on about?
-
Uh, there are lots of Christian denominations who allow women to lead churches. And majority Catholic nations who have happily elected women (like the Latino countries who you people like to also say are too dedicated to machismo to vote for women).
Don't justify your bigotry by an appeal to tradition of the people who already won't vote for Democrats. This isn't a well thought through argument, it's just a reactionary justification.
-
Was a female Pope ever considered after JD Vance cursed the previous one?
-
-
-
It’s a sad but proven truth that the USA is not ready for a woman president.
I voted for both Hillary and Kamala. But I’m open minded. Too many Americans simply are not.
There is a clear prevailing consensus in the USA (not a correct or good consensus, but nevertheless it’s here) that woman should not be leaders. Even a large percentage of women believe in this.
We NEED to change the consensus. How do we change the consensus? It’s clear that pushing the envelope by making a woman the presidential candidate has not worked. The patriarchal front is dug in too deeply for such a frontal assault.
I believe the first woman president of the USA will be a woman VP who takes over after the president is removed, for whatever reason. A “side door” approach.
I could be wrong. I hope I’m wrong. But I think AOC running for the presidency will put another Republican in the White House.
-
Of course the US is ready. Hillary won the popular vote. Don't use idosynchroncies of our electoral collage be what determines what US is ready for.
-
Kamala actually won the popular vote too. By a fairly small margin, but she still got more actual votes than Trump. But then there's the electoral college... Our constitutional dinosaur that has now failed the American people 3 times in the last 7 elections.Ok, apparently I'm working with out of date information. As late as January I was hearing reports that the popular vote was slightly in favor of Harris. But that appears to not be the case.
Then again, "Elon Musk, he knows those computers so well..." Who fucking knows. Not like Republicans are above breaking the law.
-
Don’t use idosynchroncies of our electoral collage be what determines what US is ready for.
Those idiosyncrasies are what made a felon rapist clown fascist win over highly qualified women...twice.
She won't win. Enough people in the right geographical areas are simply not ready for a female president and will happily vote for a fascist instead to prevent it from happening.
It's not a fluke that of the 3 times Trump has run, he has only lost to a man.
Welcome to America.
-
-
One of my conservative friends (also a woman) said the same thing: women shouldn't be in power. Stunlocked me for a second.
-
That's why conservative women exist. There's a known phenomenon where the victims of abuse are often the most vociferous defenders of their abusers.
Culturally you see this in things like the defenders of hazing but there's plenty of science on the topic to back up the observation.
The thing about that, however, is those votes aren't something you were going to win, ever, and it's not something you should chase.
-
It's religion, not politics, that does this to women
-
-
That's how Canada got its first female PM, and it has not resulted in any more. I don't really think it's going to have the feminist effect you are hoping for.
My honest opinion is that both Clinton and Harris lost to Trump because people wanted Trump. Biden won despite being a paper bag because people realized they hated trump. Then they forgot about it.
-
She has a lot going against her, even if people don't think there's a patriarchy issue.
- She's very active politically and very vocal. Immediate resistance from conservatives.
- She is no friend to AIPAC. She'll lose a good bit of the Jewish vote
- Policy-wise, she's decently progressive. She'll be easily demonized by the right-owned media.
- Voter Suppression. Even if we get a fair election, as soon as the right loses, they'll martial law up and claim fraud, and you better believe they'll find what they're looking for if they have to make it themselves.
-
-
-
Stop with the women.
Should it matter it’s a women? No. But the reality is it does to too many people and it’s another uphill battle.
-
Dems will never win an election again if they prioritize trying to win the votes of ""centrists"" who are too sexist to vote for a woman.
-
-
AOC has already demonstrated her extreme willingness to fall in line for the DNC. She will not bring change.
-
Neoliberals are still openly hostile towards her.
Queen Neoliberal Pelosi spent more time in the lameduck period undermining AOC's committee appointment than Trump's Presidency.
That's good enough for me as a leftist knowing the context that she really is about as left wing as our pathetic, deluded, propagandized, under or miseducated populace could ever elect as we are.
I don't have any hope anymore, this nation died under Reagan and it's just a slow falling corpse as far as I'm concerned, but for anyone looking to cling to at least borderline rational hope, someone in her position is your best bet, because she's a known name, that matters in our shitty celebrity obsessed culture, she proves every day that a leftist can be professional and govern, that matters because leftists are painted as anarchist boogiemen without a plan in most American news media, and she's photogenic and naturally charasmatic, which shouldn't matter but sadly does.
There isn't an individual to the left of her that I can think of that could conceivably get elected President in this cesspool of willful ignorance and systemically stoked division of the poors, can you? Even her becoming President would be a moonshot. That isn't a knock on her, she's one of about 4 members of congress (or executives in the fortune 1000) I'd give a glass of water to if they were dying of thirst, that's a knock on our gold plated shithole and people, not her. She's a diamond in the rough.
-
She’s a diamond in the rough.
True. But she won't win a presidential election.
-
I disagree. Mamdhani has shown it possible to not compromise on basic human rights.
AOC has crossed the line and there is no going back. The mask cannot be put back on.
There is no harm in allying with her but she should not be the leader of the progressive movement.
-
-
-
Michelle Obama. Less baggage (for better or worse). More beloved.
-
Whhhhaaaaa..... So instead of an elected offical who has been making headlines weekly for the last 6 years, but the unelected wife of the president from 12 years ago?
No. Heck no. No more political dynasties.
-
Worse politics, plus her favorability would drop as soon as she became an active candidate.
-
Lol no.
-
Another neoliberal.
-
349 comments
I love AOC, but she will lose.
The American people have shown that they would rather have a convicted felon, rapist, fascist pedophile than a highly qualified woman.
It's stupid, but it's reality.
A woman candidate is a non starter.
Unlike Kamala and Clinton she actually believes in something, and not just the Dems' very rich corporate donors.
look at Zohran Mamdani in New York. He's a Muslim, foreign born, socialist. Plenty of things that by the same logic would make him loose. But he won the primary and odds are he'll Winn the mayor position.
NYC does not extrapolate out to the US, or things would look very different these days.
His path to victory is very hard. Expect hundreds of millions to be spent on ads against him. My boss’ PAC has estimated Cuomo would have $100 million available if he chooses to run as an independent.
That's New York. You won't win swing states with those candidates. And I love Zohran. If he ran in California, I'd vote for him.
He won with 48% of the 15% most involved DNC voters who took time to participate in primaries, in New York City, and he still has to win the generals next.
It does not matter enough. Too many bigots in the conservative dem voter base.
They will vote black, Muslim, Asian, so long as it's not a woman.
Sad state of the American psyche.
And that is why she will fail.
Welcome to reality. Welcome to America.
We chose a felon rapist traitor over highly qualified women...twice. And those women were more qualified than AOC and more moderate. The further left AOC goes, the more voters she loses.
She won't win.
In all likelihood, yes, she will lose.
But she should still run for the same reasons Bernie ran. Change the discourse and prevent unfettered ratcheting of the Overton window; force Democrats to respond to her challenge.
If she doesn't run, we all lose. Winning isn't quite everything.
If the dems lose in 2028, assuming there is an election, the fascists will consolidate power and the U.S. will be a dictatorship for 40 years.
To be fair, Clinton and Harris and the platform were not particularly exciting, and they played by the old rules.
Misogyny may have been a contributing factor, but not being bold, exciting, or authentic sure as hell didn’t help.
maybe let the people who actually vote for the party decide who they prefer as candidates, rather than having the gerontocracy alone dictate that choice
Harris and Clinton both had major structural issues that went beyond their gender. I'm not ignoring the reality that women face a greater uphill battle--they need to be downright perfect in order to even get fair consideration--but I don't think that the fact that they are women was the only factor. I'm not even positive that it would be a deciding factor against someone who isn't Trump. His particular brand of politics really only works for him, somehow.
This is the type of thinking that will keep the status quo the status quo.
"Things can't change oh well!"
Prepare yourself for the “Status Quo-mo”
Losing the nomination would not be the end for AOC. But as a champion for the "Democratic Socialist" wind of the Democrats there's really not a better candidate to speak at the primaries and ensure that even in a primary loss the eventual winner adds parts their goals to the administrations goals.
This is why the "Christian Conservatives" always run a few candidates in the Republican party, and why they've always got a spot in the Republican party platform.
Based on what's happening in New York, I think they'd sabotage her.
The fact that Harris got as close as she did with so little time proves that she didn't lose because she's a woman. She lost because her policies sucked. Run someone who is honest and trying to help the people and I'd bet they do well, man, woman, or otherwise (OK, maybe a trans candidate actually couldn't win for now).
The people saying those two lost because they're women are ignorant. They lost because they were shitty candidates. More men have lost than women, and no one says it's because they were men. It's just an easy excuse to ignore that people don't like corporate ass kissers who fuck over the average person to help the rich.
Another factor which IMHO led to her lose was that she didn't primary. So all the anger against Biden mostly transferred onto her. His blinding support to genocide, his greediness for the presidency, his support for big businesses, him breaking the railway workers strike just eroded any goodwill he did have.
He did good things but optics of these didn't let good deeds to shine. They did cast a shadow over Kamala's campaign too.
You could say also they’d rather select that than a qualified “person”. Should no opposition ever run again? Or is it clear that she was not chosen because of her gender? Maybe so, but that feels to me like it completely overlooks that there could be anything about her personality or positions responsible.
I’m not comfortable saying AOC or any other woman is a non-starter because other women have failed. A lot of people have failed before and at some point perhaps one will be selected. I think she would be a good choice, and more appealing to many than Kamala, I suspect.
Walz/Cortez 2028 take my vote all day long.
They've shown they don't want to vote for hope-extinguishing establishment dweebs.
A woman candidate who's actually good would do great.
I wish. I really, really do. It's nothing more than fantasy right now.
Maybe people didn't vote for Clinton and Harris because both are complicit in war crimes?
After doing weeks of phone banking and door knocking, my read is that it was the economy and being unwilling to break the mould. They were more of the same and they were uninspiring.
It was so rare that I would run into people who wanted to talk about foreign policy.
Nope. We only use identity politics to explain political failings here.
/s
Are we forgetting that even as a corporate puppet establishment Dems AND a woman, Clinton got like ~4 million more votes than the Dipshit did. People DID vote for her. It's just our broken as fuck since 1929 electoral college that prevented that from counting.
/#UncapTheHouse
You're a fool if you think that's the reason why.
The average American voter doesn't give a shit about brown people dying in the Middle East.
It's only about your football team winning, oh and women are too "emotional".
If you see bigotry but refuse to fight against it, you a coward and no different than the bigots.
This. This right here. This is what people are going to have to start accepting.
We heard throughout the entire campaign "Biden too old!". And to be fair, he was. That debate performance proved it. But here's the thing. Once his replacement was announced, people suddenly stopped having a problem with age, because they ran right back to Bernie Sanders. Suddenly, age wasn't nearly as much of an issue any more. The voters ultimately stood up in one voice and said "We'd still vote for a really old man or at least let another old man with dementia return to power before we vote for a black woman". It's like the voters demanded someone younger, saw the DNC endorse Harris, and said "No, not like that!"
The Gaza excuse doesn't make sense either, because Trump was actively campaigning on glassing the place and turning it into beachfront property. Never mind the fact that Harris was in a lose-lose position with regards to the war (Had she turned and supported Gaza, she'd have lost significantly more Jewish voters and the race would have been an even bigger Trump victory), but even if you believe she's "supporting a genocide", the fact of the matter is that Trump's position was not only to support it, but to speed it up. You can't claim that you didn't vote for Harris over Gaza while allowing someone who you damn well know is going to be even worse for Gaza to rise back to power. Again, this doesn't make the last bit of logical sense. Another excuse for people who just couldn't bring themselves to vote for a black woman and needed an excuse to either convince themselves or their social circle to justify it.
What else was there? "Well, she wasn't clear on some of her economic policies". Literal quote from news reporters on the Harris/Trump debate where Trump's answer to an economic policy question was "They're eating the dogs! They're eating the cats! They're eating......the pets!".
Or "They're all just handpicked by the corporate elite". Or "we're trying to send a message to the Democrat party to put forward better candidates". Or my personal favorite "She campaigned with Liz Cheney that one time......".
Or whatever other excuse people keep coming up with. Not a single one of them has ever been able to answer the question of "Even if you believe that, how does allowing Trump return to power make it any better or advance your position?"
The fact of the matter is that Democrats have their own share of low-key racists and bigots. They're just not as open about it as Republicans, and still prefer to hide behind whatever convenient excuse they can come up with. But they've twice over proven that, for all their bluster about age and progressive values, they'll gladly allow an old white man with dementia to return to power before they ever consider voting for a woman. I'll echo the exact same thing you said. I don't like it, and you don't have to agree with it. But reality is what reality is. If the Democrat party puts forward a woman or minority in 2028, especially after 4 years of Trump stoking racial tensions, they're going to lose. Full stop. This country is not willing to accept a woman President. Heck, I'm willing to bet that Obama was a fluke and the voters won't vote in a minority as President again, at least not in my lifetime.
Cause it's not about the one person you are arguing with but the hundreds of thousands who won't say anything and vote against all that anyways.
That one person didn't allow trump to come to power they just raised a voice for why they believe all the silent voters are voting the way they do and standing up for it to be heard by someone that will hopefully listen.
Racist and sexist because you believe other people are doesn't make you any less.
In our cast system she is way low in the hierarchy. Not even Hispanics would vote in the majority for her.
Yup, it's ridiculous, but reality is reality.
You are correct.
Anyone downvoting you is just ignoring reality.
There's a reason Trump has run 3 times and only lost once and it was to a man. A significant portion of this country in the right geographical areas will never vote for a woman to be president. And that includes a ton of women. And half of the country wants to burn AOC at the stake for being too liberal.
She can't win the Electoral College.
You want to get Bernied again? Vote for AOC.