97
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2025
97 points (98.0% liked)
politics
26670 readers
410 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm not sure she has the thunder she had in 2018. BUT If she calls for a general strike in the next 6 weeks, and then starts to be the lead organizer of said strike, she's my gal. I really hope she learns from Bernie in specifically how he's organized his national campaigns.
2018 was different I don't blame her for being more outspoken then. I agree with the other commentor that she should run for senate. She' make an excellent senate majority leader. If there's still no female president by 2036 she'd probably be a layup at that point.
I don't share the view that sexism is what is blocking a female president in the US; I think being an inauthentic corporate sellout is what has, so far, blocked a female president in the US. So that doesn't factor in for me.
2028, should there be an election, is 100% in play for AOC.
And that actually is my biggest concern with AOC. Pelosi worked hard, from 2018-2020 to ice the FUCK out of AOC. And AOC stayed strong and outspoken. In fact, AOC in some ways was representing real leadership. When AOC ran again, won again, Pelosi instead of resisting, worked to bring her into the fold. And the strength of AOC's rhetoric has diminished substantially. And AOC has become less and less outspoken and willing to target Democrats with criticism and become more and more of a "team player". Now I'm not saying AOC is cooked, but she's definitely on the stove.
I sort of agree, but there is definitely enough sexism to knock off a couple percentage points. It's possible to win and AOC has the right populist appeal that might actually get her elected, but both her gender and her latine name will give her more work than a cishet white man.
These aren't barriers, but the are hurdles.
Our greatest recent win was with a black man with a Muslim name. Charisma and idealistic policy are way more important factors than all these excuses the centrists are throwing around now that the female nominee might not be a neoliberal. The same "but whatabout vagina" hand wringing surged when Warren was briefly leading the primary. And the same deferral to whatever prejudices are convenient to the end goal were brought out against Obama.
The same people promoting moderate Republican sensitivities as our guiding light are the ones who keep running shitty candidates and losing. They don't know how to win elections.
I agree. That's why AOC should focus on policies instead of identity politics. Because what I said is also true
Me neither. 2036 is 3 elections away. Not exactly a long shot that the next 2 will be won by men. All I'm saying is that she'd probably be more effective in the senate (especially as leader) for the next decade and she's young enough for a presidential run later.
She'd be empowered as SML and given her aptitude that's why I think she'd be a layup for first female president afterwards.
Seems like the core argument is that AOC should wait a few cycles.
I question the strength of that argument given the nature of her approach to politics and our current/ ongoing political moment. She doesn't get stronger as a candidate with time she gets weaker, more associated with the establishment.
The outsider lane is the strongest right now and it's hers to take in 2028. Neither Pritzker or Newsom can take that lane. Why wait?
The core of my argument is that the senate needs AOC more than the executive branch. America needs functional legislatures more than the ideal commander and chief. Americans have fixated on the presidency for generations at the expense of functional house/senate/courts.
Because the senate is the real bottleneck; as we saw during Obama/Biden. Meanwhile 2028's presidential race is a referendum on democracy regardless of who the DNC puts forward.
The core of your argument seems to place a higher priority on AOC winning the presidency than the actual outcomes. I'm arguing for what I see as best for USA, not AOC.
Given her aptitude I think she could win in the senate and would be an excellent majority leader. AOC would also not be required to resign as senate majority leader to run for president. IMO she's one of the few people that could effectively campaign while maintaining her senate duties.
The higher priority is in winning the presidency, and regardless of what the constitution once said it was interpreted to mean, having an executive with the same political and ethical priorities as myself is of the highest priority. This is coupled with them being of the kind of person, like FDR, who be willing to assert the kind of executive authority established under Trumpism.
It is now established in the US that both the Congress and the judiciary are secondary authorities to the executive branch.
A meek, milquetoast Democrat, or a greasy centrist, or yet another billionaire, taking office and just trying to glaze over and return to a neo liberal business as usual would be disastrous for this country. We need bold reforms and it's not going to come through the legislative when the scope of executive powers have been expanded as such There are plenty of adequate Democrats to fill this Senate seat, it's not one that the DNC is at risk of losing. Democrats, however, have not been effective at winning the presidency.
AOC being effective 20 years from now is of almost no value because timing is everything. Also, it's clear to me that Bernie has been grooming her for a Presidential run now for several years. He's handing off the reigns to the movement he built. AOC has been tossed around as a potential presidential candidate since her first upset. She the obvious progressive pick.
Right now in the mix for 2028 the three names available to you are Newsom, Pritzker, and AOC. There are boomers and Jefferies and Buttegiegs of the world that might throw their names in, but they are way lower down the tier list.
Your perspective seems to be based largely out of parochial thinking that you know best where AOCs skills and aptitudes should be deployed, and that the"true power" of the government lay in the Senate. I don't think your opinions are with soit because you are ignoring the entirety of the context of the current political landscape and the entire redefinition of the structure of power which has happened under Trump. Thankfully though, like I'll be doing, opinions like yours will be recognized as the anachronism that they are by the politically savvy, this be dutifully ignored.
lmao k
sorry for having a different opinion than you. jfc buddy wtf.
Deleted by moderator
Right now I'm still trying to find someone to primary this fucking cunt, Ed Case. I had a line on someone in the first, but they're now moving to Portugal. I've put out feelers to Tyler Dos-santos, but like, I'm pretty sure Tyler thinks he's going to be governor and isn't willing to fight Case. I've reached out to some a kanaka lawyer only to find out that her family is close family friends with Case.
Then there is this shit-bird: https://ballotpedia.org/Samantha_DeCorte
I'm trying to figure out if Desire Desoto is running. She came close but fell short and we ended up with a MAGA rep. Kanaka maoli are very pro-Trump.
You interpreting anything I said through that lens means your brain is fucking broken and need to step back from politics. Fuck off with any even fucking hinting of blue-maga bullshit that handed Trump the election.