SHOCK POLL: AOC a Close Second Place Behind Kamala Harris in 2028 Democratic Primary
Ocasio-Cortez, finished a close second behind only former Vice President Kamala Harris in one recent poll measuring how Democrats feel about 2028.
You're viewing a single thread.
If Harris was a leader she would be out there touring like AOC. Shes not a leader. She had her shot to prove otherwise and didn't.
I mean, if I were her I’d feel drained and devastated. Everything that happened during the election and people still picked Trump over her…
I have a hard time feeling sorry for her after leaving the left hanging and going after conservative votes. She made an incredibly poor strategic choice and it cost all of us.
Obviously she's not the only one to blame here, conservatives deserving the majority of blame followed by people that stayed home, but she doesn't deserve pity.
… not to mention she didn’t ask for a recount. That one was a red flag for me.
A recount requires a vote to be close, it wasn’t. Trump won every swing state. And with the margins he won by, every recount in the world would not overcome the 86 EVs she trailed by.
The election results were very close - and it was a big election, some ballots were rejected, there were bomb threats and there were also statistical anomalies. She should have asked for a recount.
Pity maybe not, but understanding definitely. If that were me ya'll picked Trump over I'd tell all ya'll to fuck right off while I prep a boat to Europe. Then all the people saying I should stay out of it would be bitching that I'm not participating anymore.
Exactly. If I were her, I'd fuck off to Europe and send a big fat middle finger to everyone asking for help.
Is that in the best interests of the American people? No. Is it an entirely understandable reaction? Yes.
If I were her, I’d fuck off to Europe and send a big fat middle finger to everyone asking for help.
Sending a big fat middle finger to everyone asking for help was basically her campaign.
Europe would be the worst pick for Harris. Maybe the Philippines or other thinly disguised police state.
So just half of Europe?
Exactly why she's not a leader. A leader understand that you don't have time to lick you wounds when the enemy is at your door. She should be fighting harder now, not sulking.
Yeah. I have a lot of problems with Kamala The Cop. But she lost what might be the final election in American History. That takes a lot out of you
Not as much as it’s taking out of the rest of us, not even close.
If I were her, I would have had a plan B knowing what the right wingers were up to, and it should have looked a lot like what Bernie and AOC are doing. Instead she showed up then fucked off to somewhere else after hanging out with Dick Cheney for a few months.
Drained and devastated but willing to lose again? Spray this turd down the drain of your empathy and out of a leadership roll.
You feel sorry for that god awful campaign?
So she should be all recovered by '28 then? /s
If she's still drained and devastated months after losing, she's not emotionally mature enough to be president. What's going to happen the first time a soldier gets killed in combat? At least Hillary has some cajones, Harris never gave me that impression.
At least Hillary has some cajones, Harris never gave me that impression.
Hillary had years of experience on the federal level. Senator and then Head of State. She was used to making choices that had a big impact.
I will always remember Harris for her DNC nomination debate performance. She personally called out Biden's racist policies and how it impacted her. Showing that out of touch white men have lasting impacts on generations children. It was her highest moment. If you check articles they'll say that was one of the highlights of the event.
And then became Biden's VP. Just willing to ignore how he personally wrote a racist bill that harmed you because it's a position of power? Alright. That's sure a message about your morals.
And when asked about why by Steven Colbert: "It was a debate!"
They cheated, and we ALL know it. If she's upset about anything, it's that she was cheated out of her historic legacy, and the spineless Democratic party backed HitlerPig over her.
Like when she was up there giving her chatgpt, "make me sound inspirational" concession speech rather than just being mad as hell like the rest of us. She's plays leader but she will sit in the manager cubical while the rest of us eat the company provided cold turkey in the break room the day before Thanksgiving.
If she were out there touring people would tell her to shut up and sit down. She had her shot, twice, nobody wants what she's selling.
Is she even considering running at all?
Completely agree. It would have demonstrated that she would have been a good president and it would have sealed the deal for her (if there are legit elections). She didn’t step up. AOC did. Says a lot about each of them.
I can't imagine thinking about "serving people" when majority of them turned out to be hateful idiots that frankly deserve getting their faces eaten by a leopard. Let her catch a break maybe?
Nah, I'm not giving her a break. She handed the elction to Trump on a silver platter. It should have been a slam dunk election, but she chose genocide, money, and the Cheney's over winning.
Ah the good ol american responsibility deflection strategy
How is accurately describing what happened "deflection"?
The Dipshit didn't even get the majority of people who did vote, let alone the country as a whole
Usual: If you voted 3rd party or didn't vote, you signed off on our current reality.
But you're not wrong, and I have plenty to disagree with AOC about, but they're all conversations for a better time; done and done.
Nope. I voted 3rd party because I didn't want Trump, and I also didn't want Harris. Maybe if Harris had tried campaining on what Americans wanted, rather than trying to win over people who were obviously not going to vote for her, we wouldn't be here.
But she chose genocide, money, and the Cheneys over winning an election against one of the least popular presidents we've ever had.
Nah, 3rd party voters at least voted. This solely lies on the folks who didn't vote.
If you voted 3rd party in a FPTP election, you are functionally indistinguishable from a non-voter. You can talk about your principles all you want, but by the mechanics of the electoral system you are exactly equivalent to a non-voter.
Yeah fuck people who help dems win local elections and ballot measures! Those things aren’t real! Everyone knows the house and senate don’t matter! And neither do state legislatures! Fuck those stupid things that don’t affect anyone, it’s all about voting for the guy you think is going to win, not the one you want! Or, idk whatever you dems go on about.
Let’s keep attacking progressive voter base like the DNC wants! Let’s keep alienating them more! It will be a good idea THIS time! It worked so well that’s why 2016 was our best year! Way better than 2008 when we didn’t actively attack them! If we don’t ensure politics is voting against the one you hate most how will we keep all those non-voters at home, keep money in politics, and keep those oligarchs happy!
A histrionic straw man.
Exactly the opposite of reality. FPTP does not preclude third parties from winning, hence the existence of the republican party. It does mean you have to vote your principles and not strategically vote. If everyone voted for the party that most closely aligned with their principles, neither the Dems or repubs would ever wing the presidency and would never hold a majority in any Congress at any level.
Incorrect. I can justify any number of results with such a monumental "if". Any strategy based on such a large number of people suddenly changing their voting tendency in such a way is unworkable. As one party splinters, the other is heavily incentivized to stay together and easily win. It's a game of chicken; the first party to break ranks is doomed. People understand this on an intuitive, tribalistic level. Fracturing the less monolithic party will only strengthen the more monolithic one. That is reality.
Without organization sufficient to convince at least a third of the country that a specific party is viable, you cannot beat a strategic party with principles alone.
Hard disagree, as again, the republican party exists. It was a third party.
Practically no one votes strategically. The vast majority of voters vote the same as their parents and/or peers. The extreme minority of voters that care about issues vote for whatever party of the two that suits them best at the time.
But bigger than all these groups are the eligible voters that think nothing will change because people like you tell them they only have two options, so they don't vote.
Because neither option is good. There is Nazi, and there is the group that appoints nazis. Both exist solely for their own power and wealth. Neither help people until the riots get too violent. So why vote. Why care?
So either we introduce a third party or more, and maybe give some hope, or we let the uniparty continue to win and we all have to survive a balkanized US when it collapses.
Without organization sufficient to convince at least a third of the country that a specific party is viable, you cannot beat a strategic party with principles alone.
You quite literally don't need that, you just need both large options to fail obviously, as they are. People will seek out alternatives and there will be enough that aren't disillusioned with electoralism that go for that option.
You cant organize on a large scale in the US, you get assassinated if you survive the character assassination.
For example, I bet you still think stein is a Russian spy or spoiler candidate.
Third parties haven't even gotten a house rep yet. We have partyless reps but no third party reps. Start there is it has to be federal. State game is shit too. If you can't even do those, running for president is a joke and a waste of ballot space
People will seek out alternatives and there will be enough that aren't disillusioned with electoralism that go for that option.
A baseless claim unsupported by anything but your own wishful thinking. I'd love for that to happen, but I'm not fool enough to gamble on it.
No.