• JustAThought@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 hours ago

    I feel like this is actually what republicans want. Feels like they want another minority woman to run right into them again. She’s wonderful but it feels like political sabotage.

  • Pnut@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    12 hours ago

    She’s one of only half a handful of Dems that sound ready to lead people into battle. The difference between how she uses knowledge and intelligence to speak to people is in stark comparison to Trump sounding exactly like he has dementia. She listens and responds. Trump just keeps interrupting any question he doesn’t like. Fuck you Maga. Fuck you entirely. You god damn idiots.

  • Tigeroovy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    15 hours ago

    She’s one of like 3 US politicians that I don’t just kind of low-key actively hate.

  • Korne127@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I hope she will be successful in actually overtaking the party to some degree, as most high-ranking party members would certainly see that differently

  • chemicalprophet@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    13 hours ago

    If she jettisons neoliberalism and takes a stand against genocide and imperialism she could begin to make a difference.

  • MochiGoesMeow@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    24 hours ago

    Disagree. The Democrats dont know who they are anymore. Pelosi and the old Democrats have got to go.

    AOC should just make a new party.

    • theneverfox@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      ·
      20 hours ago

      No, we don’t have time for that. We just have to do a tea party on the Democratic party… Which is what she’s been doing

      They do have to go, but we’re keeping the house and the dog

        • _stranger_@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          17 hours ago

          There have always been factions in the main parties. Obama was part of a wave of more progressive Democrats that pulled away from the moderate liberalism of Clinton.

          There are also formal sub parties like the Blue Dog Democrats and the New Democrat Coalition, the us news media just doesn’t report on them the way European news does for parties.

          Even AOC and “the squad” are considered a faction with followers and enemies. The fact that the media is focusing on her and de facto making her the face should be a pretty big signal to the other party leaders that they need to get their shit together or be swept aside. Hopefully they fall in line to help her.

          • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 hours ago

            There have always been factions in the main parties.

            It’s almost like 2 political parties is insufficient representing the people.

            With state level electoral reform, we can ensure equal access to our electoral process for all political parties willing to run.

            Electoral Reform Videos

            First Past The Post voting (What most states use now)

            Videos on alternative electoral systems

            STAR voting

            Alternative vote

            Ranked Choice voting

            Range Voting

            Single Transferable Vote

            Mixed Member Proportional representation

          • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            15 hours ago

            Sadly my expectations for the Democrats is that they will ignore every red flag on their way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

              • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                10 hours ago

                The democrats will never drop their rabid anti gun stance. They will never stop pursuing full disarmament. Beto gave up the game in texas, he should have pretended to care about people’s right to bear arms. But the zealot couldnt contain his gleeful enthusiasm to see the working class disarmed. Times have not changed as we can see through David Hogg’s ascension in the party.

                Not even a insurrection and blatant disregard for other civil liberties the democracts currently hold dear will shake them from this losing policy.

                We live in the shitter multiverse. No one will protect us but ourselves. Not the justice system, not our constitution, not even the democratic party itself.

                If you can’t see this now, given current and past events, there is no need to type any further.

                SocialistRA.org

          • farngis_mcgiles@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            14 hours ago

            lol obama was about as progressive as george w bush in fact he killed a lot more poor middle easterners than bush. he campaigned on a pile of lies he never planned to implement

      • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        That’s why I never believed in the rhetoric of “it’s too late to consider 3rd party!” before the elections. Here it is just 6 months later and “we don’t have time for that”. Is it disingenuous then to just say there will never be time for that, like it is being implied here?

        edit: just saw your other comments, I hope your DNC-tea party plan works with some effect. It’s harder for those who have voted for decades for a party that just isn’t responsive to the citizens so we’ll see I suppose.

        • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          18 hours ago

          That’s why I never believed in the rhetoric of “it’s too late to consider 3rd party!” before the elections. Here it is just 6 months later and “we don’t have time for that”. Is it disingenuous then to just say there will never be time for that, like it is being implied here?

          It takes years to get a new party off the ground and in a meaningful position to take federal offices at any significant rate. During that time, you are mostly helping your farthest opposition of the main parties win by splitting the vote.

          This is literally why the Tea Party operated by internal change of the GOP and not by starting a third party. And love them or hate them, they were effective at shifting the GOP.

          • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            17 hours ago

            My concern with this take is “what are we considering this effect to be?” If we are taking the average republican who wholly considers themselves to be “Conservative”, their party was overtaken by extremists who are the antithesis to what the goal of that meaning is.

            I don’t want a “Blue Maga” which takes the party away from progressive policies in an attempt to drum up fanatical support “against the tyrannical reds” while in reality they continue destroying the democracy we have. An example is a new DNC who wishes to prosecute and deport those who are on the right (there are examples on this site of individuals who are “progressives” but think the “right” should all be rounded up).

            When people say they want a “tea party” I think it’s way to vague. Talking about the “effectiveness” of how the GOP has been changed is just completely scary, since in reality it just became a mask off-authoritarian free for all. I don’t need a Corporatized DNC to decide they no longer need the decorum of piece-meal policy that helps citizens since they know everyone has no other choice (like what happened with the GOP).

            Again, I really hope a “Left Tea Party” would cause the DNC to capitulate to progressive ideology, but that’s not what happened on the conservative side (as evident from the big beautiful bullshit-bill).

            edit: taking=talking, fixed a confusing sentence

        • null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          18 hours ago

          It would take many decades for a new party to get the recognition.

          Most voters probably think Obama is still president.

          • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            18 hours ago

            Would it though? I’m not convinced of that. We already know what the party should look and act like based on actual progressive parties and policies around the world (even some past actions in the states itself), we really just need a name to know it by for everyone to get behind.

            It’s the whole problem-solution thing, doesn’t matter what the name of the website or company is, we just need something to step in and fill that gap.

            • null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              13 hours ago

              You might not have noticed my point.

              I think the vaaast majority of voters just vote the way they always have. They’re just not engaged. There’s no consideration of who to vote for.

              I honestly think it would take either a revolution, or several decades before any other party has a chance.

          • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            17 hours ago

            Sadly many of them didn’t know Kamela was even running until they couldn’t find Biden’s name on the polls come Election Night.

    • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      20 hours ago

      You’re not really disagreeing. AOC is perceived as the face of the democratic party and it’s true. She’s at least offering consistent resistance while the feckless leadership of the party does nothing but line their pockets and ensure 100 percent unconditional support of Israel to the determient of all else.

      I don’t even disagree with your conclusions necessary, if it’s impossible to dislodge Pelosi and Schumer. But building a party from scratch is really fucking hard. Hijacking one might be easier.

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      17 hours ago

      “MAKE A NEW PARTY!11111!!1”

      That’s not how America works. Only Democrats and Republicans can actually get elected at the level AOC plays at, because the electoral college only recognizes Democrats and Republicans.

    • CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      22 hours ago

      They’re going to stay there making bank off of insider trading until they’re so ancient someone accidentally walks through and disperses the dust cloud known as Pelosi, and they finally decide they have enough money to reach supply-side Jesus.

      • fishy@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Just insider trading? Those super pacs are the fucking Democrats and Republicans at this point. Greed itself is our new overlord, business ethics are dead and rotting.

        • farngis_mcgiles@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          14 hours ago

          Those super pacs are the fucking Democrats and Republicans at this point

          they always have been. people have been pointing out how dems and republicans are two arms of the business party for a hundred years

      • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        12 hours ago

        You’re right. We need to get real. Those who support Democrats are just throwing their votes away. At this point, the Democratic Party has proven itself utterly incapable of winning a national election. Voting for Democrats is throwing your vote away. A vote for a Democrat is a vote for a Republican. We need to focus on real political parties like the Working Families Party that actually have a vision that they’re trying to fight for. Democrats don’t believe in anything. Democrats don’t even care about winning elections. A vote for a Democrat is a vote for MAGA. Centrists may not like voting for a progressive candidate, but they need to get over themselves. If centrists want to vote for Democrats, they’re choosing Fascism over Democracy.

        • Maeve@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 hours ago

          At this juncture, a complete reboot seems necessary. The Constitution is old and more cumbersome than reasonable. We can do better.

      • MochiGoesMeow@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Potentially with local elections first. Build it up from the ground up.

        Not like the Green Party and Jill Stein’s goofy ass.

  • WraithGear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    I have said this elsewhere, but i will not again vote for the Democratic Party until they actually put up progressive candidates. Not pinky swear to pass progressive policy. That means the candidates has to have a provable history of struggling against the Democratic Party to pass progressive policy. There are only two i know of and that’s Bernie Sanders (who is too old for the presidency), and AOC. Else it’s third party until the democrats learn better.

    • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I will vote for the democrats if I am able to transfer my vote after my real choices dont win. Best get on that electoral reform blue states.

      • Genius@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I will vote against genocide, even if it means voting for a lesser amount of genocide. I’ll never vote “no preference” on genocide.

      • WraithGear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        18 hours ago

        That was a calculation made by democrat leadership. They banked on further alienating progressives for their donors, and to push for the Republican values they truly want. Every compromise against progressive platforms has been a full rightward tilt. They miscalculated the severity of their abandonment of progressive voters. Arguments to “vote blue no matter who” and “don’t let perfect be the enemy of good” are obfuscating the reality that we are here because of this rightward ratchet. And all progressive promises turn out to be lies convenient during an election. Blaming disenfranchised voters is an attempt to defer blame where Is doesn’t belong to maintain power, and is a losing strategy against republicans.

        • megopie
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Exactly, it’s not the job of the voters to convince a party their interests are worth pursing, it is the job of the party to convince voters that they will pursue their interests.

          Donor money alone can not win an election and a failure to engage with voters will sure as hell lose it.

        • Log in | Sign up@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          17 hours ago

          That’s a lot of words to cover over your preposterous assertion that electing the neo fascists shows how America wants left wing government.

          • WraithGear@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            17 hours ago

            The Democratic Party lost to Donal trump, this is the second time. Seems to me the democrats need their progressive voters. Best they answer to them.

            • Log in | Sign up@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              14 hours ago

              Like a lot of folks on lemmy who claim to want things to be better, you’re full of criticism of the democratic Party and can divert absolutely any topic whatsoever to be the fault of the Democrats, and trying to get you to come up with any genuine criticism of the republicans will fail because you’re perfectly happy with the continued dominance of the far right as long as you get to talk about how the policies of the Republican Party are the responsibility of the democratic Party and the people who vote for them. It’s actually insane nonsense and I see through your doublethink even if you don’t.

              • WraithGear@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 minutes ago

                You make foolish assumptions about me that could be easily disproved by a glance at my history. Democrats do not get to sell out their base just because republicans are more evil. Turns out that the democrats are incapable of dealing with the situation. So before we can work on republicans we have to bring democrats to heel.

                Complaining about republicans being stupid or evil is a waste of time because at this point i don’t see any republicans voter being swayed by logic or empathy, or even their own interest. Its a waste of my breath complaining that water is wet.

                Its too bad the Democratic party is so full of shit that trying to clean house has put you on the defensive. And you reflexively blame abandoned voters for the parties failings. But the party is too incompetent and an active obstacle in dealing with trump

      • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        17 hours ago

        “It’s my turn.” was everything wrong with Hillary’s campaign in a nut shell.

        How the fuck are you able to make yourself look like an unhinged ego-maniac who just wants to be President for the sake of being President, when you’re running against Trump? That shouldn’t be possible.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          16 hours ago

          How the fuck are you able to make yourself look like an unhinged ego-maniac who just wants to be President for the sake of being President, when you’re running against Trump?

          This isn’t a problem of Trumpism, it’s a naturally occurring brainworm in Americans broadly speaking. Trump’s a nasty dim-witted freak, so watching him climb to the top of the pile we’ve been raised to believe was a meritocracy causes all sorts of cognitive dissonance. But everyone running for President (except maybe Mike Gravel) ends up looking like this. The thing that separates the Obamas and Trumps from the Hillarys and McCains is whether cheering for the unhinged ego-maniac feels fun or not.

    • Zombie-Mantis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 day ago

      She’s just the most recent candidate. The most recent candidates, and most recent Presidents and Vice Presidents are almost always in these sorts of lists, especially in the weeks and months following an election, before the next campaign starts.

      Joe Biden was a favorite in these sorts of polls in 2015/16, despite saying he wouldn’t run, because he was just VP.

  • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    1 day ago

    I still have to lol about how the stupid qons tried to use her dancing in university as some kind of BAD thing.

    Back when Denver Post still had a comment section and they’d allow gifs, and if the topic was AOC, I’d post her dancing. A few of the local wingnuts would try to get me banned/my posts removed over it, esp. if one of the qanon mods was on-duty…

    She’s the best. Why the buzzkills in the unhinged right tried to paint a beautiful intelligent rep like AOC dancing during college as a bad thing is anyone’s guess, but that sure as fuck blew up in their faces…

    • underline960@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      Why the buzzkills in the unhinged right tried to paint a beautiful intelligent rep like AOC dancing during college as a bad thing

      Because she’s leading moral and dignified Christian men into sin!

      It’s not my fault / I’m not to blame / It is the gypsy girl / The witch who sent this flame / It’s not my fault / If in God’s plan / He made the devil so much / Stronger than a man

    • Sillyglow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      1 day ago

      So let me get this straight: somehow just dancing is somehow worse than drinking beers in fraternities and raping?

      • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        17 hours ago

        She’s a woman with a will of her own, that’s enough for anyone on the Right to hate her.

        What I really can’t stand though is when they try to pretend she’s dumb. I mean when we on the Left call Trump a moron, we can actually point to things he did and said. When they try to paint AOC as an airhead, they mostly just repurpose old blonde jokes to be about AOC, there’s never anything she actually did or said that they bring up.

        Ever notice that?

        God I’m glad I don’t use facebook anymore

    • Ronno@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 day ago

      I don’t get it neither, let’s turn it the other way: why would anyone want to vote for someone/something that doesn’t show basic human emotions and doesn’t have fun?

        • King_Bob_IV@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 day ago

          I disagree. He doesn’t love money. He covets the respect and power that he believes money brings with it and if forever angry that even with the presidency he can’t get the true respect he believes he is entitled to.

          • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            Yea that too but I feel like if someone told him “you would be the most respected person in the world and very powerful if you agree to live an economically average life (think Merkel but more modest even)”, I don’t think he would agree. Maybe because he thinks if he has money he can anyway buy the others but still money is not just a tool for him he is hooked on the luxuries it brings too.

  • Feelfold@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    1 day ago

    Zero chance the DNC will run her. They’ll give us another white bread, right of center, compromise candidate. The Overton window has shifted so far right we need to build a new wall to house it.

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Oh I fully expect Democrats to endorse Trump for a third term if the alternative is a real progressive.

      • keys42@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        23 hours ago

        This is something I see come up a lot, but I think people are severely underestimating the amount of infrastructure that would be lost by “starting over.” Fundraising, state committees, local committees, volunteers, etc. “Starting over” effectively means surrendering nearly every election on any scale larger than a municipality to MAGA Republicans for years while those networks are rebuilt and the country cannot survive that. We need more political parties, but unless and until a viable 3rd party emerges, we’re stuck with what we’ve got and refusing to support the only non MAGA options at the ballot box will actively make the country worse.

        If you don’t like it, help build that 3rd party and recruit candidates and donors to your cause (or try to shift the DNC and the Overton window back to the left). Until that’s done there unfortunately isn’t a better alternative.

        • SabinStargem@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          22 hours ago

          I think most people wouldn’t want to. Unfortunately, I suspect that the Trump Regime only offers two choices: submit to an existence of GOP rule for the rest of our lives, or force the GOP out of existence.

          As a very lazy person, I would prefer to coast throughout my life and not worry about much. Unfortunately, that gets harder with each year that passes: the economy is getting worse, RFK wants to send me to an wellness farm, innocents are being trafficked to death camps in El Salvador, and rules that erode liberty for the everyday person are being imposed upon us.

          If people like myself don’t get into a “start over” mindset, we might end up paying the price for the rest of our lives.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 day ago

      The Overton Window isn’t real. Political parties can create their own political realities by leading the electorate, rather than cowardly tailing the electorate like they’re advertisers trying to sell a product.

      • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Political parties can create their own political realities by leading the electorate

        Manufacturing consent? What ever happened to representative democracy?

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          What ever happened to representative democracy?

          Political leaders don’t just represent the electorate, they lead it. Political reality has always been shaped by parties and leaders, even if sometimes those leaders aren’t electoral and so we pretend they aren’t political leaders.

          For example, MLK Jr was a political leader even if he wasn’t elected. He created political realities through organizing and activism and propaganda and sloganeering and speeches. He didn’t just wait around for the Overton Window to move, he moved it.

          Is that manufacturing consent?

          Either we use politics to shape political reality or we allow the right wing to do it for us. Fascists will manufacture consent for our extermination if we let them.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          19 hours ago

          It gets the causal relationship between political leaders and the masses backwards.

          The Overton Window presupposes that politicians are limited by the electorate in what they can discuss and pursue; there’s a range of acceptable politics which is created by public opinion.

          The reality is that public opinion is created by political leaders and politics is the tool they can use to change the range of acceptable opinion.

          By getting the causal relationship backwards there is a tendency to tail the masses rather than lead them. Instead of using politics to create new political realities, politicians behave as if they are trapped within the existing political reality by politics. They seem to think politics is something that happens to you, rather than a tool you use to do things.

          There’s a range of acceptable opinion, sure, but it doesn’t limit politics. Instead, politics creates the range of acceptable opinion.

          • Maeve@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            12 hours ago

            That’s an entirely novel way for me to think about that, and I like it, and now I need to let that percolate. Thank you.