- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or # to comment.
AOC is my second favorite serving politician after Bernie, she would be a great President.
But I’m afraid that the Democratic leadership will squash her, as they did to Bernie. She’s pro worker, and the Ds abandoned labor long ago (and they were paid well to do so).
If she runs, I am voting for her, whether it’s with Democrats or DSA or Green.
DNC want to keep her away from Schumer’s senate seat.
Schumer is 76. He should retire. This is ridiculous, go out and enjoy your life. Advocate for AIPAC. Do something else.
What school of propaganda are you representing?
What part of your colon are you looking thru to see my comment as pro schumer?
Are you posting from tel aviv?
I assumed I was agreeing with you.
Every time I get a text pretending to be from Shumer begging for donations I cringe at how many people just yelled fuck you at their phone. Doddering bastard.
I’d sure rather vote for her than Harris or Newsom and realistically, idk who else is gonna run.
I don’t think she has a chance in the general if I’m honest. She won’t even make it to nomination. However it would help with the Overton window if she ran. We need someone in the race with no gray hairs who will speak truth plainly. It’s amazing how long it’s been since we even saw that happen.
Why not? Her policies reflect the will of the voters much more than the other mainstream candidates. Is this another one of those, “only a centrist can possibly win!” type arguments? Because every time we say that the centrist loses. If we skip the BS what you are saying is that only a pro israel candidate can possibly win, right?
The last Democratic president was a centrist who won the primary over a very well respected and credible, experienced, white male who was simply further to the left.
We can argue about it more, but I think you are just overestimating the “will of the voters.” I campaigned for Bernie in the primaries and then watched the boomers around me nominate Biden. I no longer have any illusions about the rest of the voters, but you apparently do.
Biden won because he had the scent of Obama on him. And no other reason. So I think you have come to completely wrong conclusions.
So people vote against all their own interests because of the scent of Obama? That’s nonsense, but even if it were true it would only support my point that voters don’t care about what you think they care about. The DNC sucks balls to be sure but the electorate truly can’t be underestimated.
Agree but she needs to do something national for sure. She’s able to pull an audience on your all over the country, she needs to be elevated beyond congress. I really hope we can start moving away from personality politics. Let the big personalities get people excited and let the good hearted boring folks do the work. Maybe I’m wrong it’s just that personality voids attract sociopaths. Not saying AOC is one but if we’ve learning anything we need big benches from the local on up not single person leadership. Also I am inherently becoming distrustful of anyone who gains internet fame or looks good on TV and I suspect many other ppl are too
Certainly true of Newsom and the other options advanced by the DNC.
I’ll support her and anyone she supports if she fails to secure the nomination for herself.
Newsome thanks you for capitulating early.
The more people who say shit like this now. The less difficult it will be to ratfuck her campaign, rig the primary, and coronate a donor-friendly Neoliberal ghoul. I’ll check back here in a little over two years and see how you feel about my prophecy coming true.
I promise to never think of you ever again.
Try again
See ya in 2028. I absolutely will say I told you so.
AOC would Crush it. But to get the DNC on board would be tricky or you get a left lane split ticket. We need to flip the electoral college and statehouses, then fill those Congressional seats everytime they come up. An AOC presidency could achieve great things but she needs a receptive congress, and willing states.
But to get the DNC on board would be tricky
Why?
The current chair said he wants a presidential candidate like Mamdani, both in regards to policy and charisma…
And he said that right after Mamdani won his primary, when people didn’t think he’d win the general…
So why do you think the same DNC wouldn’t support AOC?
What they say and what’s true aren’t really the same when it comes to politicians.
Ain’t happening. The US is too racist and sexist
I love AOC and wish you were wrong… Buy after two women losing in a row to the biggest piece of shit imaginable I just don’t have trust nor desire to roll the dice again.
I don’t think it was strictly sexism and racism that led to their failure. Clinton was an elitist insider who arrogantly thought the presidency was “her turn” as part of a political dynasty while working with the DNC and the other establishment candidates to sabotage Sanders’ campaign. I was pissed learning of her leaked emails collaborating with DNC administrators to thwart Sanders every step of the way.
Harris was a milquetoast politician who was basically appointed to be the Democrat candidate when Biden announced he wouldn’t run for a second term long after the primaries could have been held. Could she have done a better job had she distanced herself from Biden’s foreign policies? Possibly, but she held firm to the status quo which was not gonna fly with a lot of those who knew the horrors Israel was inflicting on Palestinian civilians.
A lot of us on the left have this notion that our candidate has to be near perfect to win their vote and that also tends to hurt their chances. Couple that with the DNC getting high on its own neoliberal farts and you tend to get a losing combination.
AOC doesn’t have the same kind of baggage that made both Clinton and Harris undesirable to many so there’s a better chance she could make it, especially with the way Trump has ratfucked the US and the world at large. Her championing Sanders’ policies will also be a big boost to those who want a more affordable and equitable life too.
I’d love for her or someone like her to win. 28 isn’t the right year though. It’s going to be a shitshow and likely years of partisan crap. We need a good progressive dem to win with massive wins in both senate and house to be able to push and solidify policies
28 pres is going to have to punish Trump and cronies which would distract from good policies so I’d rather those wait a few years and they make sure we never have this issue again. Both at once would be great ofc by that’s setting huge expectations.
Having her run in 32 or 36 with 8 years to fully push progressive policies and not have to deal with punishing Trump and others would be amazing
I think she can walk and chew gum at the same time. Why do you think she cannot both govern policies and execute the law? First day, make Tom Massie R-Kentucky special council over the Epstein Files and tell him to run that show into the ground. Tell him to speak for young girls everywhere and show some accountability for the monsters in power. Satan almighty Democrats advertise like shit. We can do these things!
It’s more so I’d rather not have her legacy and time spent cleaning up all the shit and instead have even more support from congress so she could pass huge amounts of reforms
Need to flip a lot of seats before a dem president can do much. Republicans don’t care about breaking the law and having a do nothing congress so can skate with low margins there
She could be a VP pick in the meantime. Or even cabinet.
In fact, I think she would do more good for turnout and for the party as a VP pick to than as a presidential candidate.
I hate to say it but half the country is either a racist, sexist piece of shit, or is in an abusive and controlling relationship with someone who is. As a result, I think having her as the presidential candidate would do more harm than good.
I just wish the vp was a better role. As a congress woman she can still do a lot and push laws.
Same. I love AOC and hold that Clinton and Harris lost primarily because they were unexciting centrists, but I’d prefer not to duplicate any of the variables with the stakes this high.
I understand this and go back-and-forth sometimes internally. But there’s a lot of women-only or women-leading statewide seats, governorships, Senate seats even in conservative states.
I think right-wingers who wouldn’t vote for her anyway are a lot of duplication with sexist voters, and sexism may just be the lowest-hanging excuse they’ll have for hating her. And it will definitely bleed into sexist propaganda in right echo chambers. But I’m not sure it would be enough to stop a good candidate, which I think she’d be.
I would never love to be proven wrong more than about this
I think AOC could be a strong candidate. I would support her. I also would support Jon Ossoff.
DSA is going to be too busy purity testing and infighting to support her publicly.
My local DSA is quite up-front about being a “big tent”, I’d be surprised if others weren’t also.
Mine sincerely wishes it were a smaller tent. Which is why I don’t have time for them.
Came here to say this.
I love it when I see some overly online person - the same types that would complain that Chomsky is some kind of right-wing stooge - complain about some way that they were betrayed by AOC.
I mean, FFS. I imagine quite a few of these posters are probably just Russian plants meant to split the Democratic party, but I do know some of these types IRL, so some people actually hold these ridiculous views.
The same complaint is made on Zizek as being a right wing plant.
Zizek
I honestly have no idea what to make of Zizek, TBF. Chomsky got me-too’ed over Epstein, it seems, but I’m not someone that believes in the idea of throwing out an entire body of work, so I value a lot of his critique of American empire and so on.
I’ve tried with Zizek and I just haven’t really found a way in. If there is something highly recommended, I’d check it out.
Nah. We only purity test right wing neoliberals. They are the ones that accept Israeli money and share donors and campaign funds with maga
You liberals are idiots.it is your side who go to fox news to attack dsa
I never had any criticisms of the organization until I joined lmao.
DSA is run by amateurs who don’t know how to handle the media. While I agree with some of their positions, it’s too embarrassing to be represented by them.
Imagine saying that after seeing Mamdani communication skills
You should look at who actually runs the DSA.
Politicians like Mamdani are actually an exception and they’re successful at getting elected because they’re not communicating like the DSA itself. They’re doing quite the opposite.
They are normal humans and fellow American citizens. If that’s what you mean by ameuture…
I would much rather vote for normal humans right now than rich pedophile baby eaters…
explain the baby eater part, i missed that
There’s allegations in the Epstein files that some of our elites have eaten babies.
That’s also an old QAnon conspiracy and why Comet Ping Pong got shot up a decade ago. Please exercise skepticism and don’t commit any terror attacks.
I’m gotta get downvoted and cause a stir with this. Here goes anyway for the all of 5 people it might reach.
I would love. FUCKING LOVE for a candidate like AOC to get elected president of the United States. Love it.
HOWEVER.
Until there is enough power transferred in the senate and the house to candidates that would remove the current structure of how we elect the executive office; they are not electable.
See, you read that sentence thinking what I said was an opinion and pessimism. It was not. It was based in the statistics of how Americans vote and how strong the votes in various states are in a first past the post electoral system that uses an electoral college.
As it stands, and Nate Silver backs this math as well, the electoral college requires a moderate democratic candidate to overcome a 3.7 point disadvantage. That might sound small. It isn’t small. It’s the margin of victory in many races so, you effectively need to more than double the current margin of victory for a candidate, and so it when further left candidates have a harder time than that.
Jeff Jackson could make a run for office in 2028-2032 and be a candidate that historically could get elected. Statistically.
AOC is just not electable in the current structure of the electoral college and state first past the post voting that still persists in most states.
You run the virtue candidate and lose the election.
The same was true of Harris in 2024. Not because we don’t deserve a black woman president or that she couldn’t do the job.
She wasn’t fucking electable in this racist, sexiest voting base.
I get we want better candidates, but you can go too far and effectively give the election to the fascist asshole, and frankly the country can’t have that happen again post Trump. It will be the end of democracy as we know it if It does.
I know that isn’t what folks want to hear but the math is the math.
deleted by creator
Yeah, I agree. I can understand why people think America “isn’t ready” for a woman president; two women losing to Trump isn’t great. But also, a part of me thinks maybe America is ready for a woman president, just not Clinton or Harris. Neither was ever a particularly popular candidate, and as you say, Harris never even won a primary
Harris lost on more than just the racism and sexism vote though?
She was bland. Did nothing to distance herself from Bidens unpopular policies AND was running against someone who made promises that they never intended to keep. She had zero interest from voters BEFORE the campaign started.
AOC already has a name for herself and what she stands for. She doesn’t need to compete against lies, because they’ve already shown their ass. It won’t be effective the second time around. She’s popular among a much larger amount of demographics. She won’t be up against Trump either, who has repeatedly demonstrated that he’s the pillar on the entire R platform. The only pillar.
I have optimism because of the fdr effect. After a really shitty far right, we have hopes of electing a leftist
People said Trump was statistically unelectable, too 🤷
Not anyone with a stats background.
In fact it was his election to lose.
I’m telling you that Democratic party operatives whose entire job is electoral statistics assured me that he was unelectable. I disagreed, and it turned out I was sadly right.
I respect your respect for statistics and statisticians, but I don’t believe their predictions are as accurate as they were a few decades ago given the current political reality. “Winning elections based off of statistics” has been the Democrats entire thing since like literally the Tammany Hall days and it isn’t as consistently reliable as it used to be for a lot of factors that could be sumed up as the increasing complexity of political society.
The difference is he proved that a huge population is very racist, sexist, and okay with rapist and pedophile being elected.
The election system is rigged against large blue states/ cities with how the senate and house are calculated
Not to be that guy but people kinda knew about Bill Clinton and still championed his politics. Like it wasn’t just a cheating scandal he was in a position of power and groomed an 18 year old, was close with Epstein, etc.
I think America has long proved that it was willing to vote for rapist pedophiles, or racist far right supremacists (Reagan).
While it is pretty blatant and specifically bad in Trump’s case, idk how you could support someone who is so obviously guilty of pedophilia, All victims of the Epstein racket deserve closure and justice, even if that means cracking down the hammer “on both sides”, with Chomsky, Clinton, Trump, etc.
If bill did anything with epstein he should go down too. The fact they pulled him and Hillary into testify and nothing happens makes me think he’s clean there.
I think there’s no way anyone that involved with Epstein like bill was is “clean”. You have to be willfully ignorant to believe that. He groomed a teenager as president.
Why would he testify against himself? Why would you testify against your spouse? You have a lot of faith in someone heavily involved in a pedophile ring. I wouldn’t ever suggest Trump is innocent because he wouldn’t testify, of course he wouldn’t!
Stats only work until they don’t. Statisticians are great with simple logic, not so great when some of the same people that voted Trump voted Mamdani and AOC. The political calculus is shifting in this country and now is the best chance we have of a sudden takeover. You are right that political shifts usually need to be senate and congress first (and states and counties and cities) but I think the normal political rules don’t hold as strong right now. If she can win a primary, she can win the presidency. Harris couldn’t overcome racism and sexism because she had little to offer.
I worked in Dem politics for the first Obama election. He was so popular that he regularly had racists committing to voting for him. When we got regional or national polling we would regularly hear from polling companies that people would answer polls with (paraphrasing) “I’m voting for the n-word, I might be racist, but I’m not stupid”. Also we had a white lady volunteer in one of the local county campaign offices that regularly used racial epithets like the n-word and she was sent home cause no one knew what to do about it.
Don’t expect predictable logic from voters.
there’s more nuance than that. If AOC support is coupled with heavy (and popular) DSA representation in both chambers she may actually stand a chance. So the focus right now should be elsewhere which is not to say AOC endorsement should seize, but that for that to become reality a lot of things have to fall into place. Also, just as Bernie’s “failed” candidacy did AOC challenge will force DNC to acknowledge it’s leftmost side and incorporate it’s agenda.
Harris had to run a half a campaign. I feel that was the bigger factor. you aren’t wrong about the rest of it though.
Agreed. The US electorate has far too many ignorant bigots and the current power structure likes it that way. HOWEVER, this is kind of a self-solving problem - if AOC were actually able to get through a primary with most of the Democratic and all of the Republican party apparatus gunning against her, she actually would have a chance. So best option is to run her in the primary, and any other progressives in the future, to gauge whether the US electorate is still full of rotten people.
I don’t want to hear it but I’m glad you said it.
You talk about statistics and you say you would love her as a president, but then you call her a “virtue candidate”, and your real opinion is showing. You may as well have called her DEI.
One of us doesn’t know what “virtue candidate” means, and I’m pretty sure it’s you. I understood it to mean “the candidate with high ethical standards” or “the candidate that focuses on integrity and decency for all constituents rather than attacking the opponent”. Idk what that has to do with DEI.
I read that with a positive connotation, at least towards her.
That is, the virtue candidate is the most virtuous one. The best person. The one the world needs. The one you choose when you don’t want to game theory your way into your vote.
But they are not the person the world WANTS, presumably.
The negativity is cast more on the person choosing AOC, the way I initially read it. By choosing the virtue candidate, they are virtue signaling their purity of leftness or whatever. They refuse to compromise and join a coalition behind somebody electable. (again, I’m just discussing the term reflecting more positively on her in my interpretation – I am NOT arguing that she is in fact a virtue cabdidate or unelectable. )
I hope it’s not “whoever elon buys”.
Spoiler: it will be “whoever Wall St buys”. Elon may or may not decide to buy a few shares in the Dem candidate this cycle.
It will be more like Palantir and Anduril also weighing in.
Palantir (which Thiel co-founded and still chairs) has a significant financial and personnel relationship with Jeffries and his DCCC:
Jeffries received about $25,000 from Palantir executives, plus $44,300 from Palantir manager Mehdi Alhassani to his victory fund, and roughly $22,000 more from Palantir executives for his 2026 campaign. Palantir’s lobbying firms funneled at least $3.8 million to the DCCC last year, and $2.9 million in January 2025 alone. Palantir hired Jeffries’ former chief of staff Cedric Grant as a lobbyist in May 2026, along with Steve Elmendorf, a top DCCC fundraiser who hosted events featuring Jeffries.
It’s all a game and we have to pretend that that we have representation
Lets wait and see how well the DSA and the Democrats in general manage to do in the midterms and with keeping their promises if they get majorities again before we start making any lofty 2028 Presidential plans.
The Republicans are already making 2028 plans, and so should the opposition. I know that Democrats are really good at doing nothing and being useless, but I personally would like to see an end to that trend, not encourage it to continue.
Article doesn’t load
let’s split the sane people’s votes so trump can win again. excellent plan!
This is in the primary, no vote splitting involved
oh,well that is different. Go AOC!
Do you make the same claim when the DNC runs center right candidates year after year despite a large portion of Democrats constantly begging for more progressive candidates?
i make the same claim any time there is an existential threat to civilization and someone runs for office and appeals to many people who’d otherwise vote for the existing candidate who is against the existential threat.
divide and conquer is a thing you know.
Yeah… Might not the onus of responsibility be upon those who continue to vote for people advocating for the existential threat over the person who is wanting to solve it?
Especially since the demand of the people willing to vote for the existential threat is to pick a candidate from the ilk of politicians who have been ignoring or collaborating with the existential threat support group this whole time?
IMO this will hand the election to the GOP again. The democrats need to stop pushing unpopular women into the oval office. They want to get their landmark “first woman president” victory and it’s blinding them from actually winning the election.
So the problem you have with AOC is that she’s a woman?
Sounds like you vote Republican anyway, so why should we give a fuck what you think?
I agree. I like AOC but she’s not gonna get the needed votes. I think realistically need a man.
You need a man to smack you upside your head for overt sexism.
Can you explain what you mean?
I’ll take it. If Kamala ends up as our candidate I will purposefully abstain. If blue can’t put up a solid inspiring candidate, they need to feel that with voter turnout.
you sound like a Russian bot. not voting is the worst thing you can do… unless you are voting for Trump’s party.
Well, I’m a person, not a bot. Sorry you don’t like my take. I don’t know how else to put my foot down, I voted lesser evil for Hillary and Kamala already. I am committed to breaking their strategy of offering status quo candidates that don’t move the needle and have almost no chance of winning.
