She’s one of only half a handful of Dems that sound ready to lead people into battle. The difference between how she uses knowledge and intelligence to speak to people is in stark comparison to Trump sounding exactly like he has dementia. She listens and responds. Trump just keeps interrupting any question he doesn’t like. Fuck you Maga. Fuck you entirely. You god damn idiots.
I would prefer a new party, but I’m glad that she and Bernie are still out there.
Funny what happens when you actually do something.
She’s one of like 3 US politicians that I don’t just kind of low-key actively hate.
Well afaik she’s the only one doing a nationwide campaign at the moment
If she jettisons neoliberalism and takes a stand against genocide and imperialism she could begin to make a difference.
I feel like this is actually what republicans want. Feels like they want another minority woman to run right into them again. She’s wonderful but it feels like political sabotage.
Weird. The party that claims to be “for the people” keeps putting centrists in charge. We’re ready for someone who is actually for the people!
The partyThe people that vote in the primaries for the party that claims to be “for the people” keeps putting centrists in charge.Most people don’t vote in the Democratic primaries. Did you?
Quickest way to mobilize the Democratic party is to threaten to put a progressive in charge
They learned their lesson with Obama. The funny thing is he’s not even a fucking leftist, the party is just so full of dinosaurs they think a modern centrist is a leftist.
I’m a European born American. Obama would be right wing politician in my country of birth.
With Obama they just learned how to take a somewhat progressive candidates and bend them into a moderate. It’s the same thing that happened with Kamala, although of course it’s hard to say if either were ever really progressive or if they just used that for votes and didn’t mind discarding it once they got pressured by the party and consultants.
Kamala was never progressive.
Neither was Obama. Not long after he put a bow on the nomination, he voted for an expansive security bill. A lot of people were surprised, but not me.
plus his voting record pre-presidency was very conservative. they fabricated his progressive persona
Yeah I definitely agree, both Kamala and Obama are candidates that acted progressive in their primaries but as soon as they eventually got the nomination they went towards the corporate Democrat establishment. My main question is whether they were progressive at some point but let themselves be changed by the establishment, consultants, and donors or if they never really cared that much to begin with. The end state is the same but the difference is important as it gives us insight into how much power the consultants and others have over candidates vs if they didn’t really care then it wouldn’t have taken much to change them.
Kamala was picked as VP because Dems thought she would get votes from the republicans who aren’t so MAGA. She’s on the conservative side of things: tough on crime as AG, opposed cannabis legalization (changed position later), opposed abolition of death penalty (flipped later), etc.
Forgot hard on incarcerated trans women…
I’m not even sure it was as deep as that, IMO they shoo’d her in without any chalengers as she could legally use the Biden-Harris
bribesdonations they had already collected. Thats about the extent of their thinking.
In general, no. In terms of specific policies as an AG, there were some.
I’d say she’s a centrist, with some progressive policies and some regressive. Just my opinion obviously.
Obama wasn’t even somewhat progressive before the Democratic Party. He was against gay marriage for a while.
The dinosaurs know they’re marching right, that’s where all the money is (for them).
See David Hogg
See Bernie Sanders.
they’d rather lose to Trump for a third term than do that.
They’re definitely for the billionaire people.
DNC: I am here for the working people-- from billionaires, all the way to millionaires.
From the business owners to the CEOs, the Democrats are here to hear you. All the people, white or tan, brown people of light complexion as long as they have a 401k and 10 million in assets they will LISTEN
Aren’t there primaries for the Dems?
Voter turnout in primaries is pathetic. In 30 states, you have to be registered with the party - i.e.: give them your name and address for fund-raising purposes - to vote. This all works to bias primaries to ‘establishment’ candidates, or at least people well known among party apparatchiks. They are, theoretically, the best way to get progressives or populists into office, but practically, those progressives are fighting demographics and the general apathy of voters under 40.
The same phenomena that let MAGA take over the GOP keep the moderates in charge of the Dems. At least, until someone figures out how to motivate all the young internet revolutionaries to actually go and vote instead of memeing about how useless voting is.
You’re blaming the DNC for something that is controlled by each individual state.
Not really. I’m saying that the system discourages change. If there’s blame for the DNC, it’s that their message has constantly been something along the lines of “be reasonable & empathetic; improve the world through measured change” which tends to demoralize people who think the system is seriously fucked. That empowers the career politicians. GOP propaganda, at least for the last 50-or-so years, has been “More guns! More babies! No brown people!” which tends to attract passionate radicals.
The DNC in a nutshell. Absolute garbage.Okay, but the states decide if there are open primaries or not. The State is to blame for that, but it can be changed if made a state ballot measure.
That’s not really up for debate. It’s literally state law and dependent on the state. The DNC and GOP don’t decide that.
Is that not the second sentence in my original comment?
Sort of, sometimes. They can and will heavily disadvantage candidates they dont like. Like when they gave Hillary the questions for debates beforehand but not to Bernie, and let hillary control the funding of races, including her own. And like when they cut new hampshire out of the primary results this year because the New Hampshire dems wouldnt move the date for the primary to when the dnc wanted. So sure you could vote in that primary, but nothing was done with the results. Straight to the garbage can with those ballots.
Russia says they have a democracy too, with votes and everything. Not saying we’re the same, but proving we have “democracy” by the fact that voting happens is not that firm of a thing. Its easily corrupted.
Sadly I don’t think it’s possible to have a party “for the people” with only two parties. There’s too much pressure for both of them to champion the status quo.
“Championing the status quo” is not how I would describe what Republicans are doing right now.
Yes it is. If the part “for the people” turns out to be captured you drop it and get in an actual party for the people. Rinse and repeat as needed. There is a problem with political parties growing too old and becoming too institutionalized. But keeping them in power instead of giving them the boot is a choice made by the voters.
Controlled opposition
Buzzword catchphrase
It all makes sense when you realize who makes the cutoff for what they consider “people.”
Conservatives, they are putting conservatives in charge. Don’t be fooled by how republicans label themselves. They haven’t been conservative since before the turn of the century.
It’s DNC leadership that has taken up that mantle.
I’m confused. Are you arguing that AOC is or isn’t for the people?
She absolutely is. Her nomination is the DNC’s nightmare.
she’s got my vote
She’s not the face of the Democratic Party
She’s the face of a completely new and different party that has nothing to do with old Democrats.
To me, I’ve been viewing the US as being governed under a one party state for a while … the Republicans and the Democrats form two halves of the same organization.
The US doesn’t need a third party
They need to form a new second opposition party because the old one morphed into the monstrous thing we have today.
The US needs a third, a fourth, a fifth and several more parties as viable alternatives.
They to drop any weird FPTP systems, this will allow new parties to come into play.
This would also end the ridiculous gerrymandering shit
Omg, I love you. I’ve been screaming this since CGPGrey’s videos about voting and alternatives to what we have. Getting that is gonna require all existing party members to be cool with a complete loss of power and an increase in the amount of work the have to do to keep their power or get elected.
It’ll take the states. However, there are already states trying to ban alternative voting methods.
Haha, thank you for your kind words!
As a Swede, the US election system has always seemed so backwards, even the fact that you have to register to vote is completely foreign to me.
And there’s no chance it can get one while $ is in American politics.
Yeah, no.
If no party can get to 270 electoral votes, the president is picked by the House of Representatives.
That means congress would need be flippped into third party majority first.
Splitting the left off only benefits the far right. Anyone who thinks otherwise is stuck in an echo chamber.
This is why stoy said the First Past the Post system needs to be dropped.
Which would require a constitutional amendment, meaning it’s a pipe dream.
Could you explain how Alaska or Maine managed to have a Ranked-Choice Voting system?
One of the UK’s two parties has died and the other is in the process of killing itself. Two party duopolies can disintegrate, even under FPTP, we just have to hope that Left parties emerge, not just rebranded far-right ones.
The Democratic Party is just a vessel. It used to be the right wing (relative). Now it’s the left wing (relative). Bernie and AOC don’t really fit in with the Dems, but they can. Same with Manchin.
There was a time where I thought a Musk type could rally many behind a weird Libertarian version of the DNC or RNC and shift the landscape. But he just went hard fascist as soon as he publicly aligned with the right.
Any time someone can’t tell the difference between centrists and fascists, I just have to assume that their stance is more about arguing than it is about a sincerely held ideology.
Or put another way, it’s time for the non-fascist party to realign ideologically as part of the Seventh Party Era
Fuck that.
Centrists/Republcian Lites don’t deserve to the party.
They are free to fight republicans over control of that shitshow.
Pretty much, yeah.
Taking over the Democratic Party vs starting a new party is kinda like addressing climate change on Earth vs terraforming Mars.
The former sounds painful and bureaucratic while the latter sounds exciting and innovative.
But if you can’t fix the party or planet you’ve got, which has like 80% of the hard work done already, what hope do you have of doing a new thing from scratch?
One of the criticisms against the Democratic Party is that they aren’t particularly democratic. Party insiders and the wealthy hold far more power and practically pick the nominees.
Rather than compare them to the planet from which we were birthed, I would compare them to a shitty boyfriend we’re afraid to dump.
Next to Bernie she’s the best the Dems have to offer. And for any possible run for President, she beats Bernie on age.
If they run Harris again, or Newsom or some other conservative Democrat in 2028, the party is fucked.
Newsom is trying his level best to have a right-of-center glow up right now. I’m almost certain that the DNC plans to tilt the scales for him. They likely will resist running a woman again for a long time because they’ve stupidly come to the conclusion that it was the genitalia of the candidates and not the quality of the candidate, campaign, and platform that caused them to lose what should have been two of the most winnable elections ever.
Progressive woman of color
Or
Conservative white guy with (D) next to his name.
Pretty sure we can guess who will win the primary if they can help it. DNC leadership is not interested in what it’s membership wants.
Absolutely. I can’t see AOC being given a chance in 2028 unfortunately, unless things change a bit. Not excited for Newsom as a candidate :/
Her as president and Bernie as vp. If they kill her then they put someone even more opposed to their views in power.
As much as I absolutely adore Bernie, the guy needs a rest. He’d be starting as VP for a potential 8 year period of two terms at 86…That means he’d be 94 by the time he left office. The man is an absolute beast, but father time catches up with us all and I don’t want to see his final days in politics to be a sad decline after everything he’s given. He deserves to serve as a badass senator, like he always has, until a progressive gets elected as president and then retire.
AOC and Pete Buttigeig as VP, on the other hand…or Tim Waltz again…or Elizabeth Warren for a double team, all woman ticket? Hell yeah.
yeah, one of the reasons the dems are a dead/dying brand currently is because they keep putting in who they feel has earned it the most, not who the population actually likes. That also leads to entire party embarrassment when they fight for that person and they turn out to be an abysmal milquetoast failure like Biden.
AOC - Crockett?
The Gore Strategy
You guys need more than just two relevant parties. AOC being this popular should prompt her to start her own movement, supported by Bernie, raher than clinging to the “Democrats”.
Ideally, we get an democrat Bernie or AOC presidency, who then runs for a second term as an independent. Incumbents tend to have name recognition, which would make it easier to give the DNC the Old Yeller treatment. The Geronocrats have a callow ambition, even if progressives manage to Tea Party things. After all, the DNC’s bluebloods will want to retake the throne. It would be best if the throne that they treasure was lost outright.
They need election reform for that to happen.
And the only way election reform happens is if we get the corporate Dems who like things the way they are (AKA roughly all of them) out of power. It’s damn near hopeless.
I’ll trust her judgment on that one.
Seeing how it’s going in USA rn I don’t trust any judgment coming from the country whatsoever
thanks, that’s helpful
Agree but have the senior members support and coach AOC, have a united front. We’re supposed to support and learn from our elders but they have an obligation to move aside and allow the younger leaders to rise.
Agree but have the senior members support and coach AOC
lol the dweebs that can’t win a slam dunk election because they are too busy running corporate friendly husks
Support, yes. Not too sure about coaching, though, I think she’s doing great without needing to consult old white people
Of course they will. Harris or Buttigeig
I promise you the Democratic Party will do whatever it takes to keep her away from leadership roles because she actually wants to change things.
That’s the one thing the Democratic Party is consistent on: rejecting progressives, even if it means letting the conservatives win.
always so strange to see the words ‘guarantee’ or ‘promise’ when someone is giving a predictive opinion for an outcome they have no contol over.
We should be so lucky to have a party she represents in this country. The only reason she has that seat is by defying the DNC as a spoiler. They only elevate politicians to the Federal level on the basis of how good they’ve proven they are at collecting that sweet, sweet corpo bribe money.
The DNC and democratic leadership would rather dissappear her Than Trump by a mile.
The pendulum is the point. Both parties are well bribed to maintain the capitalist’s murderous control. Good cop and bad cop are both just fine with mass homelessness and entire murder for profit confidence scheme market sectors. One laughs at you when the capitalists cause you harm, the other just shrugs and says “golly gee market forces nothing we can do! But I affirm your right to die horribly as who you are here in this cardboard box under a freeway! Pronouns are free so whatever I still get bribed 😁” (edit to be clear, respecting others identity is the right thing to do and basic decency, but there’s a hierarchy of needs, self-actualization only matters if you have your basic needs met. You cannot live in an affirmation ribbon, you cannot eat a preferred pronoun, priorities.)
If the Democrats were led by someone talking about redistribution, that bribe gravy train would stop. If by some miracle AOC manages to steal the party out from under them as Trump did the RNC, the DNC would be fighting her every move and comment the way we wish they were countering Trump right now. In fact, here’s how Democrat leadership spent the months leading to Trump’s inauguration:
https://www.axios.com/2024/12/12/aoc-pelosi-oversight-committee-connolly-raskin
Defending the country from one of the only slightly left Reps in the entire federal government.
Democrats like Schumer and Pelosi are far closer to Trump than AOC.
https://apnews.com/article/business-nancy-pelosi-congress-8685e82eb6d6e5b42413417f3d5d6775
That’s funny, because the dnc does not share any of her ideology, and it’s not even close
Because the DNC leadership doesn’t represent anyone except for the donors who own them.
The voters keep voting for the same corporate fellatio enthusiasts, so I guess they are representing their voters. The core Dem voters are as bad as, and walk hand-in-hand with, the DNC.
Yeah she needs to spilt and be the face of an actual workers party, not the mask for the failed democrats.
AOC and Bernie should break off, start a new party and call it the Social Democrats … if for no other reason than that is what they espouse – a socially-conscious mandate that the government is to be there for the people, not the other way around.
Much as Bernie will definitely continue to be the face of the movement, I have doubts he has many years left for politics. We’re in need of new faces for that same initiative.
If they do that the corporate Dems would buy up all of DC’s champagne. There is nothing they want more than to evict the left wing elements of the party and force them into electoral irrelevance, why would AOC et al do that for them?
Make it clear to the Democratic Party establishment that progressive candidates will be on the ballot in every congressional district in Nov 2026, and they will be a spoiler candidate if they have to be. Either way, we are done with their shit. There will never be a better time.
they will be a spoiler candidate if they have to be
I’d rather phrase it as “and they better not run a neolib spoiler candidate”. It’s not the progressives with popular support who are spoilers, but the neoliberals who are only propped up by corpo lobbies.
Write your senators about this folks, if you really care about Bernie and AOC, write your Senator and let them know you support Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Urge them to stand with them, or to at least listen to what these two folks have to say.
It probably wont do anything, but if we keep writing them (I write weekly) dropping their names, maybe they will take the fuckin hint
The way to prevent a new party from being a spoiler, is having the neoliberal DNC not running a candidate.
Since they clearly aren’t interested in winning or stopping Trump, nothing would change.
Look into star voting when you have a chance. The democrats can be whatever they want if the voters get the freedom to transfer their vote how they wish.
Oh I love star voting, I try to use it when I can in groups/communites. I used it when a decently large discord server had its only active admin just leave randomly, and there was a handful of people interested in running. STAR enabled a good result for the top two to become co-admin. Worked well until a schism happened and 90% of the active users left, myself included.
