AOC Reportedly Prepping for 2028 Presidential or Senate Run

Shell face the similar issue as Kamala. Male "latino" population will just NOT vote for her out sheer stubbornness and ignorance. No matter what.

I'll be volunteering for her campaign :)

She'd better. She joined the Dems in supporting Israel though, and if she's beholden to that party things will not change in the radical way they need to. If she doesn't run independently we cannot root out the rot.

She joined the Dems in supporting Israel though, and if she’s beholden to that party things will not change in the radical way they need to.
Utterly deranged.
- No you.
This comment section reads as fanfics. Do people in the US not realise there won’t be any more elections? A coup is unfolding by white supremacists and you’re all like “here, look, the brown female chick will right the ship”.
Go to the history section of a library before they burn them down.
- So we can burn along with the books? That's an odd idea.
Not this bullshit again. Here's what I think should happen: Lemmy needs to have a cultural immune system against this kind of overtly deliberate backwards-land bullshit infesting its way into the worldview of the place, because otherwise the Lemmy people are open to being manipulated by right wing propaganda into believing all kinds of total nonsense. If you upvoted this, or you believe it, I don't really blame you necessarily, but you need to be smarter about believing everything that you see repeated a bunch of times, as if it is factual. If you see this and you know it's not true, I feel like there needs to be some kind of FAQ or something where people can point to the extensive debunking for it, without it needing to be a long factual argument (which honestly is more than the disinfo deserves) or else a short hostile exchange (which isn't productive either @pugjesus@piefed.social).
So this entire narrative that AOC is pro-Israel now, is spun up from a single vote she made on an amendment MTG made that would have removed a small amount of funding for Israel including a grant which is used among other things for some of their “defensive” weapons for civilian areas, while leaving intact the waterfall of money for their offensive weaponry. AOC along with almost everyone else voted no on that amendment, and then said some dumb shit about why she did. The amendment was never going to pass. The impact on Israel or anyone else was pretty minimal. It did nothing for offensive weapons, it was just a stupid amendment during a busy day of actual work, so AOC voted against it.
Of course, later on, she voted "no" for the massive funding bill which spent $830 billion on various types of killing, including $6 billion for Israel for offensive weapons, which has been pretty consistently her stance on Israel throughout including vocal oppsition both verbal and material. At one point she was doing enough that Biden got mad at her personally and they had a meeting about it or something, because she was materially gumming up the works. Her support for Palestine is super rare in the US congress. Nonetheless these guys are still talking about how bad she betrayed Palestine. It becomes a whole narrative, where she’s now pro-genocide irrevocably forever, and if you challenge them on it, they can run and hide behind the fact that she did, in fact, vote against that amendment, and so it’s proved now. She’s bad. Don’t vote for her.
For some reason, this only happens to the left-est of left politicians. You will never heard someone randomly start cursing about how big an asshole Joe Manchin was when he did absolutely incalculable damage to the planet by blocking the first iteration of the IRA. No, you will only hear these kind of neatly-packaged reasons not to support a left politician deployed and repeated (there are only like 10-20 of them, you start to see them repeat after a while if you pay attention) against the leftest of the bunch.
Wonder why.
- Your point is decent; my point was meant to be an indictment of the Democratic party than an AOC purity test; the Democratic party is dragging her down.
AOC is already completely compromised. Her genocide support has ousted her for the fraud she is.
- See my comment about the MTG amendment. Just to check myself: Is that literally all you're talking about, that you are now summarizing as "her genocide support"?

She blows Newscom out of the water!

I have zero doubt the corporate oligarchs, that have ruled the USA since inception, will ensure another neoliberal is chosen to run interference on the left until the fascist dictatorship has installed enough loyalists to begin mass murdering all political and ideological opposition.
- This also why the oligarchs fervently support first-past-the-post and then fiercely oppose the ranked choice single transferable vote.

Assuming we're still allowed to vote by then, she's got mine.

Gonna have to be a hell of a lot more aggressive than that if there's going to be a election in 2028.

I could really appreciate Schumer retiring and someone half his age replacing him.

That's an unusual way to spell "reverse-chokes on his own petard", but I'll allow it.

Please let it be so.

I'd rather she be VP for Walz first. I'm not ready to roll the dice again on Americans voting for a woman, and AOC in particular has been heavily demonized. Walz has the benefit of being a folksy old white dude, which seems much more electable across the board.
- I'm okay with Walz if it comes down to it, but honestly, I don't know that the demonization moderates may see towards AOC really outweighs energizing the base at this polarized point in our political history.
- I'd argue Walz is too folksy. I can see MAGA walking all over him. I can't see them doing the same to AOC or an American born version of Mamdani (if they exist), for example.
  Doesn't mean more regressive white people would vote for AOC or that hypothetical but Obama won twice with only 43% and 39% of the white vote so its doable.

Other Democrats continues to give the Republicans a little bit more every day, hoping that the GOP will return the favor. It's been 25 years of this and now we have a holiday to celebrate a racist podcaster.

AOC and Bernie Sanders have been consistent with their direction. So Im going to hope AOC doesn't compromise on her long held stances.

I'm not interested in a "let's unite all Americans", especially when we have government agencies who are actively promoting that trans people are terrorists, immigrants are criminals, white supremacy is just a harmless ideology and rich pedophiles are misunderstood citizens.

Drain the swamp and align America more like the rest of the world.

Well if Democrats want to decrease their chance of defeating the MAGA horde, sure, let AOC run. Democrats need someone who can draw the Independents. That is, if the U.S. even has elections by 2028. I am hoping to be an ex-pat by 2028 as o have no hope for our future.

I don't believe there are any independents any more.
- None that show up to vote at least.
Democrats need someone who can draw the Independents.
What independents?
Harris tried the "country-over-party" approach, and it turned into a "country-over party"
What independents there are remaining don't vote on policy OR appeals to their sanity and decency, so why the fuck not tack aggressively left this time instead of meekly right?
- I don't think it's really all that relevant what "approach" Harris tried, to be honest. The whole country gets its news from social media, and no one in either industry or government is even trying to prevent social media from being manipulated on a mass scale to paint weird false narratives. That more than anything is why Trump won. The next election happening in the first place (in a form where it's actually possible for either candidate to win), or who wins it if there is one, is going to hinge on two opposing factors:
  How bad things have gotten in the meantime and how strong an organized opposition movement of the actual people has gotten in response, outside of anything "political" or party base
  Who spends the most money and talented effort on manipulating media and social media
  I'm not sure the identity of the Democratic candidate actually matters. It would be nice if it was one that was actually good and not just more center-right crap as is usually the Democratic option. But also, if someone is looking around at the state of the country right now but also needs it to be the right candidate before they'll vote not to have more Trump, that person is pretty much as dumb as a hamster (or has been fooled by a compelling sounding but astoundingly stupid disinfo argument, see second bullet point above).
The unfortunate ratchet effect. Tea party/maga tapped an alternative group. Dems need to reframe their platform maybe AOC will be a front runner there but it may look very different. Independents may get you an election or two but they'll swing the other way unless you have something solid for them.
Who are these independents? I always see them brought up, only for them to abstain from voting or vote for Trump.
A strategy to draw in independents is a shift to the right. This would abandon the left base and present the party as lacking any vision other than weak compromise with fascism. This has been the Democrat strategy since the Tea Party movement of the late 2000s. It hasn't worked and it won't work. The Democrats need to present a narrative that resonates. "We're not as bad as those other guys" isn't going to get votes.
- Leftist voters: I will NEVER vote for Democrats, they're dead to me
  Democrats: Hey centrists vote for us, we're buds now (loses)
  Leftist voters: shocked

17 million dems, who didn't vote in 2024, prove that she can't win. The dem voters will stick to their old, tired, and losing ways. Nothing will change. This timeline will continue to suck. The GQP and the MAGAts will cheat, steal, and eventually kill us all. And the Dems will do nothing. Nothing.

Our choices weren't that great tbh. The dem candidate was dishonest and had inconsistencies in what was said.
Aoc seems to have some big balls and is new and fresh. At the same time, has shown in the media long enough to be an actual champion of human rights and upholding the law.
- If you're talking about Kamala, Not sure I agree with the inconsistencies.
  I mean, the fact that she was Pro-Cop, was a black woman, and mostly focused on trying to keep the status quo rubbed nearly everyone - from the "Defund the Police" to the "Fuck corporate funding" to the "I hate women" group the wrong way.

As great as her as a president could be I really hope she chooses the Senate I think she could do a lot more good there. Having a semi-progressive candidate in the senate for such an important state could be a game changer.

I don't think the United States of America will vote a woman into office. They'd rather vote another fascist in.

She's a standing representative already. It's not a giant leap to go from the House to the Senate.

If there will be one. And that's a big IF.

I hope she cooks big chuck.

Pete Buttigieg is a better choice, but unfortunately too many Americans care about what he does in his bedroom and who he does it with.

Pete is just another neolib
Pete is a 'triangulator' of the same variety of Clinton and Harris.
Pete Buttigeg makes being gay look boring and dumb.
- Better than you, at least.
Pete, Gavin, or AOC would each be at least about 1000x better for us all than Trump. Any one of them would have my vote, donations, and maybe even volunteered time.
- A stone placed on a podium would be x1000 better than Trump. It's not a high bar.
- A very excited rat would be better than Trump, don't vote in a fascist-lite just because he hasn't threatened you directly.
- Absolutely! I just don't know if any of the less rabid would vote for someone at the far left. Getting most of the pie is better than getting none of the pie.