politics

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.

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.

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.

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!"

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.

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.

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.

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...

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.

"This DNC won't help any specific candidate in a primary"

I'll believe that when I see it.

...but they won’t work against a specific candidate either.

Absolutely demonstrably untrue.

They will definitely work against specific candidates.

They will change rules and ask super-delegates to ignore voters and choose their preferred candidate, the news networks most closely aligned with the DNC's goals will literally put a camera in front of an empty mic stand for 40 mins rather than show the candidate they don't want. They will compare that candidate winning states during the primary literally to Hitler saying it's like "the fall of Paris" or compare the supporters of the guy whose own extended family was murdered in the Holocaust to "brownshirts.".

They will support anti-choice Ds over progressives in primaries while claiming neutrality.

The DNC isn't representative of its constituents. They are the rich's secondary defense against "the left" (meaning anything even slightly to the left of 1990s Clinton policies).

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.

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.

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'"

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. 🤮

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).

An even moderately progressive speaker would be monumental, but unfortunately we the people don't pick the speaker.