55

"What’s funny about that is they assume my ambition is positional. They assume my ambition is a title or a seat. My ambition is way bigger than that. My ambition is to change this country. Presidents come and go, elected officials come and go, single payer healthcare is forever."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

I 100% get not committing to run right now, it would be stupid to do so.

"In this op-ed that Bezos paid for in The Washington Post, there was a veiled threat — it was the elite saying if you want this job, you just stepped out of line," said Ocasio-Cortez. "What’s funny about that is they assume my ambition is positional. They assume my ambition is a title or a seat. My ambition is way bigger than that. My ambition is to change this country. Presidents come and go, elected officials come and go, single payer healthcare is forever."

But I sure as fuck hope she realizes becoming president is our best shot at that.

Shed drive down ballot races like Obama did, but isn't as cocky and obsessed with personal power to ignore the DNC after winning like Obama did. Shed name a progressive chair.

Bringing in a wave of progressives and putting the party firmly on the progressive side of the divide is absolutely the biggest thing she (or anyone) can do to get us single payer healthcare.

So like I said, hopefully she's planning to run, just smart enough to not say it yet.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

So like I said, hopefully she's planning to run, just smart enough to not say it yet.

Being a Representative, she's got an entire other election to win between now and the next Presidential election anyway.

Announcing that she plans to go for President (and would therefore be leaving the House) might attract primary challengers.

[-] yakko@feddit.uk 0 points 2 weeks ago

I'm not telling her what to do, she's clearly better at this stuff than I'll ever be

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

I mean she's not great. She's probably the weakest among the squad cohort at actually playing the game of politics. She gives a good speech but she regularly gets her ankles broken because she seems to have, like the article demonstrates, a very calculating nature, or at least developed one after sher first two years in Congress.

And that's bad. Like, very bad if you seek higher office, because people are done with the whole not saying what you mean thing.

[-] politicalincorruption@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

Many of us are done with saying nothing with meaning thing.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

I'm more concerned about how she regularly missteps and misplays moments. She genuinely doesn't have great political instincts and is usually last to the table among her peers when it comes to doing or saying the right thing. It's kind of baffling.

Both Ayana Presley and Ilhan Omar are leagues ahead of being in the right side of issues and leading when things matter the most. AOC trails them on issues.

Like, it's gotten bad to the point where I don't know if AOC could make it through a primary. Her ability to get a question and form an answer that is a good, correct take, the first time, without having to test it. It's not great.

[-] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

She is so threatening to the Epstein class - so much so that it causes comments like this from “ordinary people”

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I mean somewhat. Not nearly as threatening as Ro Khanna though. Someone also who has shown faaaar better political instincts. Ro might be a bit more boring and not as pretty, but they are FAR better at the game compared to AOC, who is a bit of a B student in her class.

It's the unforced errors she keeps piling up that give me the most pause.

[-] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

Oh, you’re not a serious person. Got it, sorry for wasting my time

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

I guess you just don't really follow progressive politics.

[-] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago
[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago
[-] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

Fascism is what it sounds like. Have the day you voted for

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

What the FUCK are you hallucinating?

AOC has genuinely bad political instincts as a critique of some one who got outflanked in the left by the likes of MTG and because I think the person has work to do, that makes me a fascist?

Just go through and reread this thread and rethink where you are at.

[-] Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 weeks ago

The only people siding with MTG over AOC here are not progressives

this post was submitted on 09 May 2026
55 points (91.0% liked)

politics

29872 readers
472 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS