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.
The issue is we’ve never actually tried to run a populist left candidate. So everyone saying, “it’ll never work!” have no real bases for that statement. (the closest we’ve ever been was Sanders, and the DNC ensured that he was not going to be on the ballot.)
A TRUE LEFT POPULIST WILL WIN! in my opinion
We actually did, his name was Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Sure if we hold him up to today’s standards not a progressive by any means, but he campaigned on working class issues and helped steer the country out of the depression. He created virtually all our modern safety nets or their predecessors.
He was so popular a president that Congress amended the constitution to ensure no other president could have more than 2 terms. He was so popular congress was afraid it threatened the power of their branch of government.
Running on and actually accomplishing worker centric policy works.
And to fend of the inevitable yes he was not that progressive by today’s measures and had a mountain of flaws. But his accomplishments were revolutionary for the country in his time.
I didnt say ‘it’ll never work!!’, I said NYC <> the US. You can’t compare the two and say “See, it works” when he isn’t even elected yet, and its in a city that is absolutely further left than democrats on the national scale.
I would love to see it work. One mayoral hopeful in a friendly city is not a reasonable comparison though.
Edit: feel free to show me a single example somewhere red. I’d love it.
When that happens, yeah, that’d be a good example.
To bolster your point, a true progressive ran in 2018 in west Virginia- Paula Swearengin. She challenged Joe Manchin in the primary and lost 70-30.
She then won the Democratic primary in 2020 for Senate and went on to lose in the general 70/27 (other votes to the libertarian.)
People really need to understand that while Zohran and AOC are great there isn’t some kind of silver bullet with progressivism across the country.
How do we know that? In super deep red areas it’s a uphill battle. But the most left wing president we’ve ran since FDR was Carter and I’d say he’s more neoliberal/pure centrist than progressive/left. Once again, when you only run center and more right candidates; the more center candidates losing isn’t really a sign America wants only right politics. It just means the more left wing voter stays home on elections.
I don’t know? Results?
I want more progressive policies. Run em. But just don’t be surprised if they get slaughtered.
I think more than progressive policies people want younger people.
But to Anyone down voting, great. I simply presented raw facts.
It’s not just policy, it’s energy.
Becoming a recognized name that sticks in people’s heads is the biggest battle — this is usually the incumbent advantage: this was Manchin’s advantage over Paula Jean Swearengin; but it was also Cuomo’s advantage over Zohran Mamdani… and Cuomo lost. So there’s another way to make yourself known: being disruptive.
I loathe MAGA. They are assholes, but that’s how they took over. That’s what gets them covered in the news, they do constant theater saying asshole things. Literally everyone knows who Marjorie Taylor Greene is, whether they’re into politics or not. Many MAGA politicians nowadays you know first from the podcast circuit. Yes they have an ecosystem but that doesn’t mean we can’t do guerrilla campaigning. After all, Mamdani still won, right?
Now I’m not saying we need progressives to be assholes. But they should be more performative — loudmouths even: get up in people’s faces, speak confidently and provocatively into the camera, tell people your values without them asking. Do things that aren’t necessarily stunts, but that get labeled as stunts.
Mamdani has done a bunch of this stuff, from telling Cuomo how to spell his name, to his full day walking through Manhattan and interacting with people, to how easily he answers even the hardest questions — I mean, you probably already know how good he is at this stuff and how easy he makes it look, so it might be tempting to think you can’t replicate his success because of how uniquely talented he is, but let me give you another example:
Kat Abughazaleh (YouTuber and investigative journalist for Mother Jones and Media Matters, currently running for Congress) has done arguably even more with her campaign: she’s using campaign money for mutual aid (anyone can walk into their office and get free stuff except for ICE), feeding the homeless, Pride and Drag Queen Story Hour; she gave bigots the finger on camera and doubled down; she did a campaign event in a comedy club and turned it into a TED-style stand-up presentation about “General” Michael Flynn wanting to sell your blood. Her campaign slogan as a Democrat is “What if we didn’t suck”! She started in single digits and now she’s single digits away from first place. Watch her explain it though, to get a sense of the energy. (All the other stuff is on her channel too, I highly recommend the Flynn one btw!)
You have to get creative and work the outrage media space, it’s the only way. Get eyes on you and stand up for your values, loudly!
I don’t think we should risk another 4 years with GOP/Trump candidate based on your opinion.
I don’t think running another center right candidate like we have since FDR will work. There’s way more evidence that Americans want far left policies. Problem is that Americans are soooooooo politically uneducated it’s scary
There’s way more evidence that Americans want far left policies
Not according to the election results.
Problem is that Americans are soooooooo politically uneducated it’s scary
Doesn’t this increase the chances of a leftist losing?
Not according to election results?!
When choices are far right and center right, center left and far left voters just stay home.
And no. Educated people vote left at a much higher rate!
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.
And specifically NYC, not even the state.
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.
Unlike Kamala and Clinton she actually believes in something, and not just the Dems’ very rich corporate donors.
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.
She won’t win.
So what? Run her anyway. There’s this thing called the window of discourse.
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.
And your solution is to vote for the people who are doing nothing to stop the fascists, instead.
Bold strategy.
False dichotomy.
The U.S. has proven a woman can’t win because the U.S. is a bigoted shithole with a flawed constitutional system.
The alternative is to vote for someone who can win and can beat the fascists.
Assuming there are free and fair elections in 2028. A big if.
Exactly. The Primary process is about getting your policies in the platform as much as it is getting you candidate(s) the nomination. She should run, a “standard neoliberal” should run, a corporatist should run etc… the process is allowed to be messy.
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.
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
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”.
Removed by mod
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”
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.
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.
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.
Walz/Cortez 2028 take my vote all day long.
deleted by creator
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?”
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.I’m willing to bet that Obama was a fluke
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.
Racist and sexist because you believe other people are doesn’t make you any less.
deleted by creator
No you are just the person who thinks black people winning office positions is a fluke cause they could never do that properly.
I’m not gonna argue with you further cause you are so up your own butt and think somehow you are the only person breathing fresh air.
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.
If you see bigotry but refuse to fight against it, you a coward and no different than the bigots.
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 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 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.
Ranked choice only goes so far when the electorate is batshit insane and willfully ignorant.
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
She also ran an incredibly poor campaign (Not completely her fault). Assuming she would have a run a Biden free open (which I’m not convinced of given how poorly she did in 2020), she would have done so by being good at campaigning and testing which messages swayed the electorate. Every winning canadite gets it.
Additionally the people you beat, give you a feel for the parts of the party that you need to bring into the coalition which you can satisfy as you build out your proposed VP and Cabinet. Think of how Obama brought in Clinton as Sec of State, Trump brought in Pence as VP to satisfy the religious right, how Biden brought in Harris etc… Harris didn’t have any of that feedback and picked a pretty questionable VP as a result.
At the end of the day she lost by 1.5% of the popular vote. And I got to imagine that the whole process lost her significantly more than that.
To be fair, she is a woman.
There are many men and women will never vote for a woman no matter what. Many Latino and black men will not vote for a woman, especiially she is brown . A lot of white men won’t vote for a brown woman
We are sexist. The US is not ready. We are not a land of the free.
1.5% was her popular vote margin. Hardly some blowout. Maybe instead of scapegoating brown people we look at the legitimate ways in which her campaign should have been better but couldn’t be because of corruption in the DNC. That corruption is correctable.
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.
I agree but the issue is her actually winning. I feel like america broadly is still too racist and too sexist to elect her. Obviously I would love to fix both simultaneously but I’m trying to be realistic with the info we have now. Maybe something changes between now and then and I would be happy to be wrong but rn that’s kinda where things stand.
I can only speak from the outside, as Americans need to decide for themselves if they’re worth saving.
Ofc. I’m not expecting people to know everything about what’s going on here. Everything these next 4 (?) years is gonna be a uphill battle here. Rn we’re literally seeing policy that could lead to the balkanization of the usa. The ability to file a fair injunction against Trump is officially gone here. Red states will get preference from the courts while blue states will fight constant battles to get anything through. I am interested in repairing our national image but there very well may not be a nation to repair the image of in coming years. People do care it’s just that they don’t care enough to do what actually needs to be done.
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.
It’s “Democratic” when used as an adjective.
Don’t use Rush Limbaugh-speak. (May he rot in hell.)
“I’m a Democratic” isn’t a good sentence.
“I voted for the Democratic candidate.” Accurate but feels off.
Do you know the difference between adjectives and nouns?
Yes, and I’m not the one dictating how people should use a language.
Then why did you add an “a” in front of an adjective? It’s either “I’m Democratic” (adjective) or “I’m a Democrat” (noun). This isn’t dictating language, they’re two different parts of speech. The name of the party is “the Democratic Party” and its members are “Democrats”. They’re proper nouns, not linguistic styling. There is no “Democrat Party”.
The people who try to rename the party aren’t doing a whoopsie, it’s a conscious effort by conservatives to say the thing in a dumb way for extremely dumb political purposes. It takes effort to do that.
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.
Until the money is worthless and they realize they’re the frog in the saucepan.
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.Both are happening.
It’s important to understand what went wrong so when you with on a fix, you won’t make the same mistake.
People can both bitch about politicians and also help fix the problem.
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.
Yup.
Our system is fundamentally broken, but the bottom line is Americans failed. It was entirely possible for us to stop all this and we chose not to. Shit electorates make for shit countries.
We’re going to be circling the drain for the foreseeable future.
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 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 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.
land of the free, laws specific designed to ban people’s choices.
was nothing real?
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.
yhea, the dems becoming right wing is what the donors want, but it won’t get votes
making the democrats a dead party, unless they tell the donors to fuck off.
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.
do some states have paetial wins? if its 50% each candidate gets half the delegates?
Two states allocate votes by congressional district, but that’s just first past the post at a smaller level and the spoiler issue remains. You need proportional representation or some actual form of transferable vote to avoid it.
TBH, I got the idea, I knew there’s loads I don’t know, and choose to post instead of asking chatGPT. prefer answer from real people.
I’ll vote for her and split the dem vote. if the dems are hell bent on killing their own party, then fuck em.
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’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.
deleted by creator
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.
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.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
My results were so good, I even listed some things they didn’t tell me about
So they only tested him to see if he doesn’t need full time care? So they checked if he can wipe his own ass and dress himself? THATS the baseline to be the POTUS?! Holy shit, that’s some baseline. At least give him a driving test. 🤮
Look up the Mini Mental, and that is basically what he aced.
Yep, “very difficult” things like copying a shape and labeling everyday items. This is similar to the “test” that Trump was given.
We would’ve seen this coming had his zygote been able to brag about being the last one standing - aka the only “viable” candidate.
People in america still believe there is going to be an actual election in 2028?
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.
I have my doubts
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.
During a debate, AOC would smash any Government of Putin candidate. The problem lies with the Democratic Party.
And the deep-seated sexism of too many independent/moderate voters, unfortunately.
deleted by creator
An even moderately progressive speaker would be monumental, but unfortunately we the people don’t pick the speaker.
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
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.
Nailed it.
Sure, you couldn’t possibly wrong and support shitty policies. It’s everyone else who is bad and wrong.
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
So one just lost, and the other lost because of the vote distributions were not in her favor: sexist/racist state electoral votes were needed that she didn’t get. I stand unrefuted.
How do you distinguish voters who vote against them because they are racists and sexists and those for other factors?
Because they are sexist and racist, and no other factor has ever mattered. They will claim all kinds of other reasons, but they’re lying. We’ve seen it time and time again: they’ll complain about something that a Dem does, but not when a Republican does the same thing or worse, so you know it’s all actually about culture war BS, which comes down to racism and sexism with the GOP.
You sound like those people who claim that anyone opposing Israel is automatically antisemitic. Yes, many anti-Israel individuals are antisemitic, but the majority are not. Similarly, while there are certainly people who didn’t vote for Harris or Hillary because they are sexist or racist, most people had multiple other reasons for not supporting them.
They all just took a year off with Obama apparently. The dedicated bigots already have their party. They’re not needed for Democrats to win.
