you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 20 points 21 hours ago (8 children)

Ain't happening. The US is too racist and sexist

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 13 hours ago (7 children)

    I love AOC and wish you were wrong... Buy after two women losing in a row to the biggest piece of shit imaginable I just don't have trust nor desire to roll the dice again.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 13 hours ago

    I don't think it was strictly sexism and racism that led to their failure. Clinton was an elitist insider who arrogantly thought the presidency was "her turn" as part of a political dynasty while working with the DNC and the other establishment candidates to sabotage Sanders' campaign. I was pissed learning of her leaked emails collaborating with DNC administrators to thwart Sanders every step of the way.

    Harris was a milquetoast politician who was basically appointed to be the Democrat candidate when Biden announced he wouldn't run for a second term long after the primaries could have been held. Could she have done a better job had she distanced herself from Biden's foreign policies? Possibly, but she held firm to the status quo which was not gonna fly with a lot of those who knew the horrors Israel was inflicting on Palestinian civilians.

    A lot of us on the left have this notion that our candidate has to be near perfect to win their vote and that also tends to hurt their chances. Couple that with the DNC getting high on its own neoliberal farts and you tend to get a losing combination.

    AOC doesn't have the same kind of baggage that made both Clinton and Harris undesirable to many so there's a better chance she could make it, especially with the way Trump has ratfucked the US and the world at large. Her championing Sanders' policies will also be a big boost to those who want a more affordable and equitable life too.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 12 hours ago* (2 children)

    I'd love for her or someone like her to win. 28 isn't the right year though. It's going to be a shitshow and likely years of partisan crap. We need a good progressive dem to win with massive wins in both senate and house to be able to push and solidify policies

    28 pres is going to have to punish Trump and cronies which would distract from good policies so I'd rather those wait a few years and they make sure we never have this issue again. Both at once would be great ofc by that's setting huge expectations.

    Having her run in 32 or 36 with 8 years to fully push progressive policies and not have to deal with punishing Trump and others would be amazing

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 hours ago* (1 child)

    She could be a VP pick in the meantime. Or even cabinet.

    In fact, I think she would do more good for turnout and for the party as a VP pick to than as a presidential candidate.

    I hate to say it but half the country is either a racist, sexist piece of shit, or is in an abusive and controlling relationship with someone who is. As a result, I think having her as the presidential candidate would do more harm than good.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 13 hours ago

    I understand this and go back-and-forth sometimes internally. But there's a lot of women-only or women-leading statewide seats, governorships, Senate seats even in conservative states.

    I think right-wingers who wouldn't vote for her anyway are a lot of duplication with sexist voters, and sexism may just be the lowest-hanging excuse they'll have for hating her. And it will definitely bleed into sexist propaganda in right echo chambers. But I'm not sure it would be enough to stop a good candidate, which I think she'd be.

  • source
  • parent