Why AOC should run for president in 2028

I love AOC, but she will lose.

The American people have shown that they would rather have a convicted felon, rapist, fascist pedophile than a highly qualified woman.

It's stupid, but it's reality.

A woman candidate is a non starter.

Unlike Kamala and Clinton she actually believes in something, and not just the Dems' very rich corporate donors.
look at Zohran Mamdani in New York. He's a Muslim, foreign born, socialist. Plenty of things that by the same logic would make him loose. But he won the primary and odds are he'll Winn the mayor position.
- NYC does not extrapolate out to the US, or things would look very different these days.
- His path to victory is very hard. Expect hundreds of millions to be spent on ads against him. My boss’ PAC has estimated Cuomo would have $100 million available if he chooses to run as an independent.
- That's New York. You won't win swing states with those candidates. And I love Zohran. If he ran in California, I'd vote for him.
- It does not matter enough. Too many bigots in the conservative dem voter base.
  They will vote black, Muslim, Asian, so long as it's not a woman.
  Sad state of the American psyche.
- Unlike Kamala and Clinton she actually believes in something, and not just the Dems’ very rich corporate donors.
  And that is why she will fail.
  Welcome to reality. Welcome to America.
  We chose a felon rapist traitor over highly qualified women...twice. And those women were more qualified than AOC and more moderate. The further left AOC goes, the more voters she loses.
  She won't win.
In all likelihood, yes, she will lose.
But she should still run for the same reasons Bernie ran. Change the discourse and prevent unfettered ratcheting of the Overton window; force Democrats to respond to her challenge.
If she doesn't run, we all lose. Winning isn't quite everything.
- If the dems lose in 2028, assuming there is an election, the fascists will consolidate power and the U.S. will be a dictatorship for 40 years.
To be fair, Clinton and Harris and the platform were not particularly exciting, and they played by the old rules.
Misogyny may have been a contributing factor, but not being bold, exciting, or authentic sure as hell didn’t help.
- maybe let the people who actually vote for the party decide who they prefer as candidates, rather than having the gerontocracy alone dictate that choice
Harris and Clinton both had major structural issues that went beyond their gender. I'm not ignoring the reality that women face a greater uphill battle--they need to be downright perfect in order to even get fair consideration--but I don't think that the fact that they are women was the only factor. I'm not even positive that it would be a deciding factor against someone who isn't Trump. His particular brand of politics really only works for him, somehow.
Maybe people didn't vote for Clinton and Harris because both are complicit in war crimes?
- After doing weeks of phone banking and door knocking, my read is that it was the economy and being unwilling to break the mould. They were more of the same and they were uninspiring.
  It was so rare that I would run into people who wanted to talk about foreign policy.
- Nope. We only use identity politics to explain political failings here.
  /s
- You're a fool if you think that's the reason why.
  The average American voter doesn't give a shit about brown people dying in the Middle East.
  It's only about your football team winning, oh and women are too "emotional".
This is the type of thinking that will keep the status quo the status quo.
"Things can't change oh well!"
- Prepare yourself for the “Status Quo-mo”
The fact that Harris got as close as she did with so little time proves that she didn't lose because she's a woman. She lost because her policies sucked. Run someone who is honest and trying to help the people and I'd bet they do well, man, woman, or otherwise (OK, maybe a trans candidate actually couldn't win for now).
The people saying those two lost because they're women are ignorant. They lost because they were shitty candidates. More men have lost than women, and no one says it's because they were men. It's just an easy excuse to ignore that people don't like corporate ass kissers who fuck over the average person to help the rich.
- Another factor which IMHO led to her lose was that she didn't primary. So all the anger against Biden mostly transferred onto her. His blinding support to genocide, his greediness for the presidency, his support for big businesses, him breaking the railway workers strike just eroded any goodwill he did have.
  He did good things but optics of these didn't let good deeds to shine. They did cast a shadow over Kamala's campaign too.
Losing the nomination would not be the end for AOC. But as a champion for the "Democratic Socialist" wind of the Democrats there's really not a better candidate to speak at the primaries and ensure that even in a primary loss the eventual winner adds parts their goals to the administrations goals.
This is why the "Christian Conservatives" always run a few candidates in the Republican party, and why they've always got a spot in the Republican party platform.
- Based on what's happening in New York, I think they'd sabotage her.
They've shown they don't want to vote for hope-extinguishing establishment dweebs.
A woman candidate who's actually good would do great.
- I wish. I really, really do. It's nothing more than fantasy right now.
Walz/Cortez 2028 take my vote all day long.
- Not a single one of them has ever been able to answer the question of "Even if you believe that, how does allowing Trump return to power make it any better or advance your position?"
  Cause it's not about the one person you are arguing with but the hundreds of thousands who won't say anything and vote against all that anyways.
  That one person didn't allow trump to come to power they just raised a voice for why they believe all the silent voters are voting the way they do and standing up for it to be heard by someone that will hopefully listen.
  I'm willing to bet that Obama was a fluke
  If the Democrat party puts forward a woman or minority in 2028, especially after 4 years of Trump stoking racial tensions, they're going to lose.
  Racist and sexist because you believe other people are doesn't make you any less.
You are correct.
Anyone downvoting you is just ignoring reality.
There's a reason Trump has run 3 times and only lost once and it was to a man. A significant portion of this country in the right geographical areas will never vote for a woman to be president. And that includes a ton of women. And half of the country wants to burn AOC at the stake for being too liberal.
She can't win the Electoral College.
You want to get Bernied again? Vote for AOC.
If you see bigotry but refuse to fight against it, you a coward and no different than the bigots.
In our cast system she is way low in the hierarchy. Not even Hispanics would vote in the majority for her.
- Yup, it's ridiculous, but reality is reality.

you guys need ranked choice. I'd bet on most red voters not ranking multiple and just putting their evil fucker pick as #1. then you need more than one non evil candidate.

We tried. I watched rank choice requests fail time and time again, because people vote against it thanks to smear campaigns.
My buddy is in a city with rank choice, and after the most recent election, there was a push to get rid of it again. You can tell by who.
- yeah my bad you need guillotines first
Instead what we have are Republicans trying to outlaw ranked choice voting... They've already had right wing media brainwashing the people into believing it's a really bad thing...
- Republicans are trying to outlaw voting. Unless it is for their candidate.
Ranked choice is bare minimum for a democracy these days. Whatever ancient shit the US has doesn't count anymore. Also get rid of the elected tyrant bullshit and upgrade to parliamentary democracy. Then go for mixed-member proportional for extra credit. Also get rid of voting machines and do it all on paper.
Ranked choice only goes so far when the electorate is batshit insane and willfully ignorant.

She should absolutely run. I don't know if she should win the nomination, but running brings a voice to the wing of the party she represents.

Primaries are about coalition building. And to have your ideas represented by the eventual candidate you need a champion to promote them in the process.

I don't know if she should win the nomination,
Her winning the nomination would be Schumer and Pelosi's worst nightmare. They would 100 percent rather lose to Trump than let that happen.
- they'd actively campaign for mango mussolini's third term before they let AOC win the nomination. fucking ghouls.
- Maybe we'll luck out and those two will be dead by then.
But, from the last election, we know some minorities will never vote for a woman. This is a big gamble.
I voted for Harris. I thought she was going to win until I saw all those minorities vote against her just because of her gender.
This world is not ready.
- We absolutely don't know anything of the sort. Centrist assholes just cling to that excuse to avoid acknowledging that focusing on appealing to conservatives and pledging to maintain the status quo is a failure.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_elected_and_appointed_female_heads_of_state_and_government
- This ~~world~~country is not ready.
  FTFY

As a non-American, electing AOC as president would be the way to speed run the repair of America's reputation internationally.

I mean this in the nicest way possible. I don't really care about fixing our international reputation atm. I'm worried about stopping the country from falling apart first. We can fix all the international stuff after.
- I mean this in the nicest way possible. I don't really care about fixing our international reputation atm. I'm worried about stopping the country from falling apart first. We can fix all the international stuff after.
  This will be a rather gentle rebuke:
  AOC being elected president would not only be the most direct way of making the day to day lives of all Americans better, it would be the quickest route to restoring America's status on the world stage. It would all happen simultaneously.
- Most dictatorships are toppled by external powers.

The democrat leadership did everything in their power to stop bernie in 2020 they will do the same against AOC

Agreed, no reason to give them reprieve. Let them try again and this time the gerontocracy is weaker then it has ever been.
It's "Democratic" when used as an adjective.
Don't use Rush Limbaugh-speak. (May he rot in hell.)
- "I'm a Democratic" isn't a good sentence.
  "I voted for the Democratic candidate." Accurate but feels off.

God, americans are so naive. There won't be fair elections anymore. You had your chance and you blew it! It's over for your democracy.

It's the Democrats. They still haven't realized that the game is over. Nobody's playing by the rules. Why would they start during an election?
- So long as the donor checks keep clearing, establishment Dems are happy to play spoiler for big business and let Trump destroy the country.
- It’s the Democrats.
  It's the people blaming the politicians instead of doing something about it.
  But almost no one cares until they get ICe'd. That's human nature for you.
- It’s the Democrats.
  It is Americans as a whole. 1/3 of then didn't even bother voting.
  They get what they have coming to them.
- The democrats have handed Trump the country on a plate. As a non American I've been saying the American "Empire" will fall eventually, I never thought it would be to a fascist, and with a wimper.
It is looking more and more like the election was stolen.
Edit: You are blaming Americans for screwing up the previous election becuase this next one will not be fair.....when the last one you are blaming Americans for was already rigged.
- there's a reason for that.
- Does it matter at this point? Seeing how fundamentally rotten every other part of our government has become is what’s really broken my heart. The president didn’t make all of these lawmakers roll over, the supreme court blatantly disregard the constitution, or these hate-filled minions put panty hose over their faces and go around kidnapping their neighbors. The president isn’t making people stand by filming all of this madness instead of doing anything to stop it.

I agree that she should run, but as an independent candidate because the DNC will never give her a honest shot in the primaries.

Americans however are unlikely to elect her especially due to electoral college as there are plenty racist and misogynistic voters in the swing states.

But if she’s able to raise money in the process to give her a real shot, US will finally have a viable third party candidate. If it looks like she’ll only split the Dem vote without winning, the raised money can be used to support progressive candidates in local elections.

Either way, I think US needs a progressive liberals party and soon because there’s a lot of House and Senate seat elections coming up and as we have seen from the GOP playbook, local elections are as relevant and influential as the national ones.

as an informed she'll split the vote.
it's there a way to force a form of ranked choice voting?
she runs for independent, but the votes are for delegates that chose the president, so if she gets 10% of the votes, the delegated should vote for the other less fash candidat, while if she does get the majority she gets the presidency
on top of that, she can make the delegate vote conditional for some policies. so even if she gets 5% of the votes she can dictate the delegates to vote for whichever candidate signs a legally binding contract to do some prewritten executive actions on day one, like abolish Ice. release all imprisonment migrants, grant re-entry visas to deported...
so even if she only gets a few votes, she can have a lot of influence and power.
I just started thinking about this today,and I fear there are more complications. but I'm principle, could this work?
- Yes, it could, which is why (IIRC) 16 US states now have laws that partially or fully ban ranked choice voting.
- At a minimum splitting the vote would mean that they are coming from the "didn't vote" pool (which has been the majority in pretty much every election for decades now). This is a strong signal that the DNC needs to move left or become irrelevant because a new party would simply split. For example of this working see the republican party becoming the maga party for that reason. Doing this will also add more weight to our protests.
- Electors are not granted proportionally. If the Democratic nominee gets 30% of the vote in a state, AOC gets 30% of the vote, and the Republican gets 35% of the vote, all the electors are Republican.
I'll vote for her and split the dem vote. if the dems are hell bent on killing their own party, then fuck em.
unfortunately I don't think that's possible without ranked-choice voting. we desperately need ranked-choice voting in order to make more than two parties a viable option

All the fucking second-order sexists here saying we can't elect a woman because two of the worst female candidates ever lost.

These are the same people who said Obama couldn't win because he was black. Not that they were racist, no they love black people, but they just want to make absolutely extra sure we don't actually try to elect one. Because they imagine their neighbor/uncle/coworker would look at everything going on and think "none of that is important, no black presidents". They're not racist, they just advocate for racism. And with this most facile of analyses they'll believe themselves to be politically savvy realists rather than reactionary children.

This is the cowardice that dooms liberalism. At every opportunity they want to worry about what their opponents will like and time after time will try to blame strategy or immutable characteristics for the failures of their do-nothing policies. Politics is about change. When people's lives suck you don't try to tell them we'll keep doing the same things. And whether the person talking change is a charismatic black man or a clown show, or even... A FEEEMALE, they'll vote for them.

...when i was growing up, my well-meaning parents pulled me aside to express their concern over a jewish friend dating a black friend; aghast at their comment, i immediately confronted them over its apparent racism, and they replied that they had nothing against it personally, but were instead concerned about what other people might think...
...they're fcking balls-out fascists fourty years later, and i want no part of them in my life...
...to anyone tempted to compromise their own best interests on behalf of what other people might think: don't give them that kind of power over you, or they'll drag you down in it...
- My ex wife is indian, I'm white, my kids are mixed race. When i lived in louisiana, my son's pre-school teacher took me aside and told me "I'm not racist, I just feel bad for him. He's not going to fit in because of his background". She then segregated him from the rest of the class and sat him at a table where it was just him and one other non-white kid. the white kids were at other tables, physically pretty far from where he was sitting.
  Fuck people who say shit like that. They're absolutely just as racist as the overtly racist fascist pieces of garbage running the US.
- Ah, I see you've met my mom. She's overly concerned with the opinions of others, to my and my siblings' detriment. Meanwhile, I have a "I don't know them, why should I care what they think?" attitude, which made my youth with her so very fun /s.
  Her brain is clearly still locked into an old society's ways. The things she thinks would be humiliating are things that nobody would bat an eye at today, like wearing pajamas outside. She's got her "hidden" racism too, of course. She's made comments about my partners "having dark complexions." I eventually went off on her, calling out her racist thoughts, and she's shut up about it since. Or at least, she's shut up about it when I'm around.
You're not wrong. Obama won because he was a corporatist and easily manipulated and ran on empty slogans, so he had the backing of the mainstream. Harris did too, but AOC won't have that backing.
That also means she could run on actual popular policies. Something Trump did. His voters now kinda got the same scam with him than the progressives got with Obama lol.
But there is deeply entrenched propaganda in the media and the minds of people. Like you'd need a movement that comes together. But you can see the liberals in this thread would balk at any tankie demanding and end to US or EU imperialism lol, just like they will balk at putting another women on the ticket.
because two of the worst female candidates ever lost.
One was a Senator, Secretary of State, and former first-lady. The other was a VP. AOC is just a member of the House and half the country wants to burn her at the stake for being so liberal.
She won't win.
- Credentials are not what make a good candidate.

I'd rather AOC knock Schumer out of the Senate in 2028. (Or a special election if he for whatever reason is unable to complete his term.) Congress needs as much replacement as the White House.

But it is really frustrating framing how the article is already conceding Trump will be the dominant candidate for a third term in 2028. That's a long way off.

I think AOC would make for a much better Presidential Candidate in 2036 or 2042, after a term or two in Chuck's Senate seat. (Or maybe even as VP)

But, she is still a good candidate right now, and the next election will be crucial for the country. If 2028 AOC is the best option for Democrats, we should run with it. I would definitely sooner vote for her than the Next One Up for Democrats.

Harris/Newsom 2028 because “it’s their turn”
I agree. I want to see AOC have long-term influence over the Democratic party. We're going to need significant reconstruction over the next 4-8 years, and I personally think she would be a bit wasted in that role.
That said, we don't really have an alternative well positioned to run in '28 except Bernie, and I wouldn't blame him for not running (or people being upset about another 80+ year old president).
She would have been better than tan Hillary, she was exactly 35. An establishment centrist was proven a bad choice in 2016.

screeching that she’s “NOT qualified for office,” that she’s “stupid” and the “dumbest,” while defending his own intelligence by noting he “ACED” a cognitive test doctors use to determine if an elderly person’s dementia has gotten so bad they need to be put in full-time care

God, this guy loves bragging about "acing" his cognitive tests.

- My results were so good, I even listed some things they didn't tell me about
So they only tested him to see if he doesn't need full time care? So they checked if he can wipe his own ass and dress himself? THATS the baseline to be the POTUS?! Holy shit, that's some baseline. At least give him a driving test. 🤮
- Look up the Mini Mental, and that is basically what he aced.
We would've seen this coming had his zygote been able to brag about being the last one standing - aka the only "viable" candidate.

People in america still believe there is going to be an actual election in 2028?

We just going to post this in every thread from now on?
- Yes. Until americans realise it. They are still making stupid little jokes about the regine in talk shows, they are staying or talking about midterms or 2028. Absolutely naive.
  They need to fucking leave the country. If they cant afford to leave sell what you have, save until you can leave but leave.
  Or if you want to fight dont do cute peaceful no kings protests for a few days. Shut down the country, general strike. Use the amendment you always claim is there to prevent the situation you have now.
  Dont joke and laugh about jokes in SNL but wake up and either save your life and that of your family by leaving or fight.
I have my doubts
Yeah it's weird, and if there are elections popular opposition candidates will face a fate like mr Navalny, I'm afraid. Much as I would like AOC as a US president, I think at this point, she needs to run for her life rather than for president. And believe me, I truly hate that this is the case.
She is an amazing person and a fantastic leader. However she is the kind of person the fascists fear and she is also the right shade of skin to earn a one way ticket to El Salvador.
You see the people clamoring for the deportation of mr Mamdani, and he is at this point nothing more than one party's possible candidate for mayor of one town. Imagine what would happen if ms Ocasio-Cortez were an actual presidential candidate!?
Even now I worry about her safety often. Same for that wonderful ms Crockett, mr Frost and a few others.

Our nation is too sexist and too racist for AOC to win. I'll still vote for her if she runs.

"We've tried running two shitlib women with 'status-quo' platforms during a time when the public is crying out for economic change, and they both lost. That proves women can't win, because it couldn't possibly be about our abject refusal to rein in the billionaires!" --- shit liberals say
Pretty much.
If it was just a feeling with Hilary, then it's absolutely true with Kamala.
The excuses like "Kamala is pro-cop!" Or "Hilary is evil", while it can be true, is also what sexists latch on to avoid being called sexists.
And for icing on the cake, a bunch of hispanic dudes voted for Trump and then are getting deported. Sexism runs so deep that it clouded their own survival.
- The excuses like "Kamala is pro-cop!" Or "Hilary is evil", while it can be true, is also what sexists latch on to avoid being called sexists.
  You remind me of people calling anybody criticizing Israel anti smite. While it true that sexists would use it most people really believe that they can't support them for their policies and priorities
- Yep — because she is a woman, people with create reasons why they can’t vote for her. Hilary and Kamala were both fine politicians. Most that did not vote for either of them are just afraid to confess they’re real beliefs, so they just pick a narrative and run with it because it makes them appear more sophisticated than a “I hate women” statement.
Nothing to do with racism and sexism . Your electoral system simply suck. Hillary won the popular votes and harris lost by only 2.3m it;s nothing for a population of 340 millions
- So one just lost, and the other lost because of the vote distributions were not in her favor: sexist/racist state electoral votes were needed that she didn't get. I stand unrefuted.

An even moderately progressive speaker would be monumental, but unfortunately we the people don't pick the speaker.

During a debate, AOC would smash any Government of Putin candidate. The problem lies with the Democratic Party.

And the deep-seated sexism of too many independent/moderate voters, unfortunately.

If the BIG Bill of Garbage passes, there are no more free elections.

Just passed the Senate by one vote. Back to the House for the finale vote, which is controlled by Republicans.
It's over fam.
You can kiss this nation goodbye.
Now hunker down for the suffering and death that's sure to follow.
This is what happens when you give conservatives power. Such a profoundly stupid nation of individuals.

No way AOC is getting anywhere near the Presidency unless there is a full scale revolution. Sad, but true.

Because there won't be another election?
- Also because both of our major party machines would cooperate in attacking her.
  Neoliberals would rather lose power than signal to their bribers that their party isn't bought and paid for. President Ocasio-Cortez would be such a signal.
  The DNC promotes on the basis of potential federal level reps getting bribe money. AOC was a spoiler and is not welcome in the party because of her views. That's why the Neoliberals in congress don't care Trump is in office and even help him with appointments.
  Neoliberals like Pelosi would lock arms with the Fascists and treat a President AOC like the threat we wished they'd treat their fascist opposition like, but they have too much in common on the same Economic policy they're both well bribed to enact and protect from us.
  Which is why, all the more, AOC is a good choice. The hatred of our true oppressors on Wall Street is welcome. At worst, it will further demonstrate that the American people aren't permitted by big corpo to have a real choice in governance, only hypercapitalist robber baron enablers paid to divide us on social wedges as they legislate new ways for the owners to monetize sucking us dry.

I think the only legitimate chance Democrats have is Luigi Mangione. You have to fight fire with fire. He's young, smart, charismatic, from a well to do background, and not even a felon like our current president. Also brave unlike our Republican chickenshit losers. Sanders as running mate.

The only good shot Democrats have
- 😏
Luigi Mangione is fine. But he has no experience. What will he bring during discussions ? AOC is ok for president post. But she is not that popular. I mean even Bernie Sanders has not become president despite being in active politics for so many decades. But let's see what will happen in USA after Trump steps down when his tenure gets over.
- But he has no experience.
  I'd argue he single-handedly saved thousands of lives via a single action, and if we let him do more, he could save many more.
- He's got a particular sort of experience that only recently became valuable in a president. The Supreme Court says that during official duties the president is legally immune for all crimes. Give that man immunity and let's see where things end up.
- Do you mean after his third or fourth term?
He's young
Right, so we need to wait 8 more years for the "only legitimate chance Democrats have" to reach the minimum age to assume office?
- Luigi, allegedly, doesn't let the rules get in the way of doing what's right.
- It's very possible Trump could be the eternal president, even after he dies. Would it make a difference if he's alive or just a concept?
would that mean the US would have a good chance at having free/universal healthcare?
- I'll bet $1000 that we'll slip into fascism unless we vote Mangione as a write in. Nobody else has the guts to stand up to these thugs. The guy is paraded around like he's guilty, and stands tall.

No.

I like AOC and I think she has demonstrated that, of the entire "Squad", she actually knows how to be a politician and when to fight and when to bite her tongue.

She has zero chance of winning. First, this country has demonstrated that it will NEVER elect a woman. But second, she is still too young and the DNC will never give her that "Obama Moment" where she can win over the entire country in one speech. And third... republicans hate her so much that she would get shot at every single week AND would actually care about the people who took bullets for her.

Nah. I want AOC to stay in Congress. Not sure if she is more valuable as a Senator at this point, but she is increasingly showing she is well suited to being the politician who rallies and guides the other politicians. A Pelosi but not 90 years old and constantly pushing centrist viewpoints.

Look .... not that I have anything against women running for president .... but .... if we haven't learned twice from the shitty decision making of the voter population, 2028 is not the year to test if the US can get its first woman as president AGAIN. I'm going to chalk this up as democrats just can't stand to win and the media needs to stop encouraging that line of thinking. We'll be lucky if there even is a 2028 election. Also, did everyone forget AOC is not in the good graces of kingmaker Pelosi?

This is the realistic take. Racism is bad enough in this country that we just barely squeaked Obama into office as a half-black man. Misogyny is way more widespread. Spend about 5 minutes in an online game chat room and you'll see what I mean. Not to mention the manosphere/blackpilling are actually growing movements rather than shrinking.
I think AOC is great and that she would make a fine administrator, but let's keep her in congress for now where she can still do a lot of good for the progressive cause. There's no need to put someone who the right has spent years building up as the antichrist boogeyman as the frontrunner when we already have a poor track record of prominent female politicians losing the presidential race to the most embarrassingly unqualified candidate in American history.
- This is what I was saying to the poster above, that thinks there'd be no problem with a woman running. They clearly haven't been outside or even in 1 gaming lobby or they'd know how bad it is.
Pelosi looks like she's one stiff gust of wind from keeling over. Fingers crossed.
Clinton and Harris both lost because they sucked, not because they were women.
- Voters used their feelings rather than looking at who was fit for the job. You can say Harris sucked all day long, at the end of the day, of the two candidates, she was more fit. And yes, maga ran that as part of their smear campaign with dumb shit like because she was a woman "her heightened woman emotions would cloud her judgement." There were literal ads. This was used to help persuade a good chunk of 75 million fucking idiots to elect someone who is clearly a fucking moron and has dementia. Nobody should base their vote on whats between the candidates' legs, but clearly a good portion of voters did.
I agree let's give the average american what he wants and bring Brandon back. It's not joever yet!
- I had to stop for a moment to think about who the hell Brandon was. Then I realized it was that grade school Nascar insult only maga retards use. This is the point of my comment. The voter population that elected the current king dumbass is because of this dumbass attitude right here.

Run? In 2028?

What election?

Unless you're planning on taking up arms, we have to assume there will be one until there isn't.

She wouldn't win. The U.S. has shown the world twice that it would rather elect a convicted felon dictator over a women. The U.S. is fucked.

I love AOC but I don't think she'll win. She needs to focus on Schumer instead. Rn the DNC is in a death spiral and is in desperate need of new party leadership. She's the one for that. Newsom will likely be the 2028 candidate. Which yeah it's gonna suck to have to bite our tongue and back him but if it gets us out of a maga dictatorship then I'll gladly do it.

My right-wing friend finds AOC hot so he might actually vote for her if she runs.

Right wingers love the idea of hate-sex
- Right-wingers tried to make fun of her, and lost.

HELL YEAH THIS COUNTRY NEEDS AOC

I have nothing but absolute respect for AOC and I would love to see her as President and I would certainly vote for her. However, I can think of only one person that would attract more vitriol from the right, and the media at large, than HIllary Clinton and that is AOC. Aside from convincing the misogynistic masses to vote for a woman, she'd have to convince them to vote for one who will be endlessly labeled in the media as a Socialist and Communist. And the masses will eat that up with no more understanding of the terms than the talking heads that will spew them across the airwaves and internet. She would have an uphill battle of biblical proportions just to win the Democratic primary.

On the other hand, I would trust AOC to run a better campaign than Hillary did. If any woman could get elected president in this country, it would be AOC. She would not blow off the working class and lurch to the center to try and court disaffected republicans. I also think AOC would do a good job sticking to issues and throwing republican failures back in their faces.

Having said all that, I don't know if '28 will be her time to shine. Hell, it's hard to make any call with confidence since Trump has about three and a half years to continue his rampage across this nation and there's just no way to forecast what the situation will be like come primary season. At this point, I would be happier to see another candidate lead the ticket. One with similar positions to AOC but more palatable to those masses I mentioned above. The only one I really like right now is Illinois' J.B. Pritzker.

I know he's a billionaire but his actions in Illinois since he became governor show he is a good one. He has been pro-worker, pro-LGBTQ+, pro-choice, and has used his fortune to support progressive candidates. He is also pro-campaign finance reform because he doesn't think people like him should be buying elections. He has also donated millions of dollars to organizations across the nation to help the left thwart republican plans to enact draconian anti-choice laws. If you're not familiar with Pritzker, I suggest you look him up and see what he has accomplished since getting elected in Illinois.

If I could have any ticket in 2028, it would probably be a Pritzker/AOC ticket and I think they would wipe the floor with the right by focusing on issues that matter to people rather than kowtowing to mega-donors.

Pritzker is good, as evidenced by the "Pritzker sucks" signs found across rural Illinois. My concern would be who would replace him as governor.
- It would be a hit for Illinois, that's true, but a win for the nation would be worth it to me.

I don't understand what people aren't getting here.

The last two female candidates to run for president, who were extraordinarily more qualified than their opponent, were denied in favor of a felon rapist clown.

If that isn't proof that this nation is not ready for a female president, I don't know what is.

I voted for both those female candidates. I am not against a female president. But can we exist in reality for a moment and acknowledge that if we run AOC, we're going to lose, again? Because America isn't ready for that shit. You will not capture independents with a female candidate. You will not capture disenfranchised Trump supporters with a female candidate. You will not win. A mayoral race is not the same as a presidential race and Mamdani is a man and that's the country we live in.

Edit: Scroll through this comments section. This is a liberal sub. And even here it's 50/50 about AOC running for president. She won't win guys.

Nah, the Republiklan got Trump elected twice by rejecting reality and substituting it with their own. Reality isn't winning elections anymore (hell, maybe it never was). People who inspire passion are. I would back AOC before another milquetoast Dem any day.
Plus, it wasn't just "women candidates" who lost. Hillary had decades in politics for the Right Wing Propaganda machine to attack. And Kamala had literally no time to build up support. AOC on the otherhand is honestly quite popular amongst her constituency and progressives nationwide. She is someone people vote for.
I placed my votes for Kamala, Biden, and Hillary, but they were all votes cast because of Trump. It would be so fucking nice to cast a vote for the candidate I want to win again.

I would love AOC as president. Unfortunately, she's a woman and she's a minority, and this country is just too racist and sexist - and stupid! - to elect her.

All those things but mostly stupid

She is picking a fight with the billionaire oligarchs and unfortunately it seems like a losing battle. Democrats and republicans alike will campaign against her.

It’s a sad but proven truth that the USA is not ready for a woman president.

I voted for both Hillary and Kamala. But I’m open minded. Too many Americans simply are not.

There is a clear prevailing consensus in the USA (not a correct or good consensus, but nevertheless it’s here) that woman should not be leaders. Even a large percentage of women believe in this.

We NEED to change the consensus. How do we change the consensus? It’s clear that pushing the envelope by making a woman the presidential candidate has not worked. The patriarchal front is dug in too deeply for such a frontal assault.

I believe the first woman president of the USA will be a woman VP who takes over after the president is removed, for whatever reason. A “side door” approach.

I could be wrong. I hope I’m wrong. But I think AOC running for the presidency will put another Republican in the White House.

Of course the US is ready. Hillary won the popular vote. Don't use idosynchroncies of our electoral collage be what determines what US is ready for.
- Kamala actually won the popular vote too. By a fairly small margin, but she still got more actual votes than Trump. But then there's the electoral college... Our constitutional dinosaur that has now failed the American people 3 times in the last 7 elections.
  Ok, apparently I'm working with out of date information. As late as January I was hearing reports that the popular vote was slightly in favor of Harris. But that appears to not be the case.
  Then again, "Elon Musk, he knows those computers so well..." Who fucking knows. Not like Republicans are above breaking the law.
- Don’t use idosynchroncies of our electoral collage be what determines what US is ready for.
  Those idiosyncrasies are what made a felon rapist clown fascist win over highly qualified women...twice.
  She won't win. Enough people in the right geographical areas are simply not ready for a female president and will happily vote for a fascist instead to prevent it from happening.
  It's not a fluke that of the 3 times Trump has run, he has only lost to a man.
  Welcome to America.
One of my conservative friends (also a woman) said the same thing: women shouldn't be in power. Stunlocked me for a second.
- That's why conservative women exist. There's a known phenomenon where the victims of abuse are often the most vociferous defenders of their abusers.
  Culturally you see this in things like the defenders of hazing but there's plenty of science on the topic to back up the observation.
  The thing about that, however, is those votes aren't something you were going to win, ever, and it's not something you should chase.
- It's religion, not politics, that does this to women
That's how Canada got its first female PM, and it has not resulted in any more. I don't really think it's going to have the feminist effect you are hoping for.
My honest opinion is that both Clinton and Harris lost to Trump because people wanted Trump. Biden won despite being a paper bag because people realized they hated trump. Then they forgot about it.
She has a lot going against her, even if people don't think there's a patriarchy issue.
She's very active politically and very vocal. Immediate resistance from conservatives.
She is no friend to AIPAC. She'll lose a good bit of the Jewish vote
Policy-wise, she's decently progressive. She'll be easily demonized by the right-owned media.
Voter Suppression. Even if we get a fair election, as soon as the right loses, they'll martial law up and claim fraud, and you better believe they'll find what they're looking for if they have to make it themselves.

Run every time and educate every time till the win and then win again.

I will be a touch disappointed if there is still a us in 2028.

I don't think that the us is worth saving at this point.

As much as we'd all faun over the fall of the US empire, I don't think fascism in the US would work out well for anyone.
- Well its here, and I can hope/dream its the dumb type of fascism that collapses under its own weight.

She should definitely run, but Democrat will certainly find a way to fuck it up, just like they did with Bernie.

Gerontocracy cannot be allowed to continue to dominate Democratic party primaries

She has no path forward clearing primary to fight for presidency.

Imagine a primary with AOC, Pete Buttegieg, and maybe a third younger candidate....
All could be really exciting to see advance, but they'll split the vote and open the way for some stupid fucking corpse to win.
I hate this system.
- Do they not have preferential voting in the primaries?
  Is this a specific NYC democratic party thing?
  I am not from the US.
- You are also forgetting the SuperPACs
You are, unfortunately, right.

Ask yourself a question: why can't a woman become a preacher, priest or pastor? All major US religions indoctrinate their followers from birth with the teachings that god does NOT permit women to exercise authority over men.

So if Christian and Catholic men and women believe in a core set of values and reasons for why women are not allowed to take leadership roles over men in the church, what makes anyone think they don't or won't apply that same logic to leadership at the political level, or ANY level?

Christians won't let a woman lead their church, but they somehow will be OK with electing a woman into a much higher role, one that can make decisions that affect all churches/the entire world? I don't see it.

Uh, there are lots of Christian denominations who allow women to lead churches. And majority Catholic nations who have happily elected women (like the Latino countries who you people like to also say are too dedicated to machismo to vote for women).
Don't justify your bigotry by an appeal to tradition of the people who already won't vote for Democrats. This isn't a well thought through argument, it's just a reactionary justification.
- Was a female Pope ever considered after JD Vance cursed the previous one?

More like how there should be a coup now. lol.

AOC has already demonstrated her extreme willingness to fall in line for the DNC. She will not bring change.

Neoliberals are still openly hostile towards her.
Queen Neoliberal Pelosi spent more time in the lameduck period undermining AOC's committee appointment than Trump's Presidency.
That's good enough for me as a leftist knowing the context that she really is about as left wing as our pathetic, deluded, propagandized, under or miseducated populace could ever elect as we are.
I don't have any hope anymore, this nation died under Reagan and it's just a slow falling corpse as far as I'm concerned, but for anyone looking to cling to at least borderline rational hope, someone in her position is your best bet, because she's a known name, that matters in our shitty celebrity obsessed culture, she proves every day that a leftist can be professional and govern, that matters because leftists are painted as anarchist boogiemen without a plan in most American news media, and she's photogenic and naturally charasmatic, which shouldn't matter but sadly does.
There isn't an individual to the left of her that I can think of that could conceivably get elected President in this cesspool of willful ignorance and systemically stoked division of the poors, can you? Even her becoming President would be a moonshot. That isn't a knock on her, she's one of about 4 members of congress (or executives in the fortune 1000) I'd give a glass of water to if they were dying of thirst, that's a knock on our gold plated shithole and people, not her. She's a diamond in the rough.
- She’s a diamond in the rough.
  True. But she won't win a presidential election.
- I disagree. Mamdhani has shown it possible to not compromise on basic human rights.
  AOC has crossed the line and there is no going back. The mask cannot be put back on.
  There is no harm in allying with her but she should not be the leader of the progressive movement.

AOC with Harris for VP and Sanders for Dept. of Health.

Why Harris?
- Secure "democrat" funding for the campaign, Sanders is too old and "too commie".

Save us aoc your our only hope

Zohran Mamdani is just the democratic primary if I understand correctly. He's not the mayor of New York yet.

It's been assumed that whoever the democratic nominee is will win since Adams is extremely unpopular and so is the republican party in NY generally
Of course Cuomo running independent complicates it, and the democratic party not enthusiastically endorsing Mamdani certainly doesnt help. Then again, the party had a 30% approval rating last i checked, so maybe that actually helps....
But he's the most popular debut candidate since AOC, so he still has a very good chance.

Right now, the ticket I think has the best chance of winning is Buttigieg/AOC. I think the DNC knows they need to go younger and have someone who can stand up to a bully in an eloquent and calm manner that will win over reasonable people. And I think AOC probably knows that the only way the DNC is letting a democratic socialist on the ticket is if they fall in line a bit and not come off as a firebrand who has to fix everything with drastic change and would be willing to go incrementally in the left direction. The DNC would be wise to energize the Bernie youth vote they abandoned last election cycle, but they definitely won't give her the keys or their blessing alone which blows. This ticket gives you appeal to the youth, to the rational elder folks like even my 70 year old lifetime republican father who hates trump, the gay community, city folk, country folk, and of course veterans too. Pretty solid combo if you ask me.

Buttigieg is one of the better politicians I've ever seen. He's more well spoken than AOC. He's more prepared for questions. Calmer.
But this is America.
There's a very large swath of this nation in the right geographical areas that will never vote for a homosexual or a woman. Neither of them will win the Electoral College.

I think running another woman to get absolutely trounced by the populace is a poor choice. I don't believe the people are ready for it yet, that's how we ended up with this. Kamala was a good candidate, but with the wrong chromosomes for a very specific swing vote.

Michelle Obama. Less baggage (for better or worse). More beloved.

Michelle Obama only Democrat to beat Trump in new poll

Whhhhaaaaa..... So instead of an elected offical who has been making headlines weekly for the last 6 years, but the unelected wife of the president from 12 years ago?
No. Heck no. No more political dynasties.
Worse politics, plus her favorability would drop as soon as she became an active candidate.
Lol no.
Another neoliberal.

"After Zohran Mamdani's win, Trump reveals how scared he is to face Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez"

Yeah, because she would be running against Trump... That's a really silly take.

She should definitely run but also let the people choose from a valid primary.

AOC is a fantastic candidate in an ideal world. But she won’t win. She’s too divisive for Conservatives and moderates and I don’t expect progressives to actually vote; complaining is easier than showing up.

"Why AOC should've run for president in 2024"

Stop with the women.

Should it matter it’s a women? No. But the reality is it does to too many people and it’s another uphill battle.

Dems will never win an election again if they prioritize trying to win the votes of ""centrists"" who are too sexist to vote for a woman.

Depends if the corporate shilling is in order?