35
That's it? After not having primary and being force choked with worst possible candidates for years the indigned dems turn around and point to... Mayo Pete as their desired candidate?
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Seems like the more important take is that 68.5% do not want (or at least does not prefer) the most popular candidate, that's a level of fractured that should be prompting some introspection from the party.
Not really? We're still 3.5 years out from the next presidential election, most people aren't even thinking about who they're voting for yet. People won't be announcing their candidacy for another 2 years so this is all premature anyways.
Don't worry, I can assure you they'll rig another geriatric fool and gg ez their way through the primary to make sure AOC or any serious progressive doesn't win just like Bernie.
If Trump actually managed to remove the two term limit, you bet your ass they'd prop up Clinton with some puppet wire.
TLDR: It's Mayor Pete in the lead in this poll, followed by AOC in second.
And an AOC candidacy would really, really excite me if I didn't know that Democrats rig their primaries. It'll be someone that rich people love who gets the nod, likely Mayor Pete or Gavin Newsom, and then Democrats will wonder how they could have possibly lost to JD Vance.
And an AOC candidacy would really, really excite me if I didn't know that Democrats rig their primaries.
Yeah at this point I think you could take a person from my own life that I have literal love and respect for and I would still be more inclined to interpret surviving a primary as a character indictment than as reason for optimism.
Pete has been making the rounds on various right and left'ish podcasts and channels, that's probably why his name is coming up. Though he avoids discussion on specific policy or make any firm stances.
Basically he's doing the Democrat Dance. Saying lots of words with little or no substance or committment.
Host: "America is feeling a lot of economic pain."
Pete: "I aknowledge and empathize with that pain."
Host: ".....and? What would you do about it if you were president?"
Pete: "Yes! So, about that local sports team..."
Democrats will wonder how they could have possibly lost to JD Vance.
Lost to Trump. He's running for a third term and he's tearing down as much infrastructure as he can to do it. This isn't going to be a representative democracy if Trump and the goons behind him stay in power. Infighting and implosion is all we can hope for.
He's repeatedly said he won't... not that he can't change his mind but I'd be really surprised if he ran again. There's a much better chance of him dying in office than running again, let alone winning given he'd literally have to get a constitutional amendment passed. The supreme court is conservative but they have a strong record of swatting down his more ridiculous claims, including when he tried to challenge the 2020 election results.
If Donald Trump is President past January 2029, he won't need an election to do it.
Just like in Russia, appearances will matter. Show pony elections are often the norm in totalitarian states.
If appearances mattered they wouldn't be doing half the shit they are doing right now.
Appearances do matter. It's how fascism comes to power.
From your link:
Fascism cannot exist outside of a democratic political system any more than cancer can exist outside of a living organism, and for much the same reason. Fascism is a disease of liberal democracy, a disease that co-opts the principles and systems of liberal democracy to destroy it from within.
This is proven obviously false by history. Every successful fascist government abandoned the democratic political system when it was no longer useful. That's what I mean by appearances not mattering. Appearances do matter up to a certain point, but once fascists seize power the mask falls away and the fascists stop pretending because appearances stop mattering.
How so? Mussolini did that exact process in Italy, as did Hitler and Franco.
I'd love a source on that
Franco was never elected. He was appointed by the Junta during Spanish Civil War, and lost the elections a few years before.
As for Italy, the last elections were in 1934 once the fascists consolidated power and the Chamber of Deputies was replaced with the Chamber of Fasces and Corporations. The last elections Germany had were in 1933 which saw Hitler appointed as Chancellor.
Italy was a dictatorship 11 years, Germany for 12 years, and Spain for 40 years. They didn't even bother to maintain the appearance of democracy during this time, they dissolved parliaments and banned political parties and became very open dictatorships.
Once the fascists are in power they rip off the mask because appearances don't matter anymore.
Even if she got past the primaries the US public is so brainwashed that I doubt she'd make it. I'd love it if she did but.. I don't see it.
You forget the split ticket in the last election where people who voted down ticket for tRump and republicans only to overwhelmingly vote for AOC. She has the popularity to bridge the divides and unite labor against the wealthy. This tour with Bernie will further cement her popularity with the masses!
It seems Democrats are content to just ignore how Bernie and AOC are filling football stadiums in red states, because MSNBC just repeats that common drumbeat that only centrists are electable.
Looking back, the old guard in the DNC needs to go. They're still reeling from when they last ran a progressive and Nixon took like 48/50 states. I think that explains some of their hesitation. However, those were vastly different times and before Nixon -- and moreover Reagan -- started dismantling the guardrails that helped create the middle-class.
People keep saying that, but I live in Missouri, where we just voted for a $15 minimum wage, required paid sick leave, and voted down an abortion ban.
Ergo, a red state that just democratically voted in the biggest pieces of Bernie and AOC's politics.
It's already been decided that Newsom will get the nomination. He has the most important asset, that both Harris and AOC both lack: a penis. If there's one lesson that Democrats have learned over the past 12+ years, it's that penis-havers have an advantage.
Buttigieg is an interesting wild card: Is simply having a penis enough to win, or does it matter how you use it?
If there’s one lesson that Democrats have learned over the past 12+ years, it’s that penis-havers have an advantage.
That's the only lesson you learned? Really? Nothing else comes to mind?
Oh, I've learned a lot more about why we keep electing shitty people, but that's the only lesson the Democrats have learned.
It’s already been decided that Newsom will get the nomination.
Wouldn't surprise me. He's nice and cozy with fascists as evidenced by his willingness to platform them on his podcast.
And throwing away the meager posessions of the unhoused so that the wealthy aren't bothered by the guilt.
That seems to be what gets you elected in NYC these days, promising to be the biggest prick to homeless people.
I'd vote for Illhan Omar or Rashida Tlaib.
Not that I really think elections are going to happen.
That's fair, we didn't want her in 2024 or 2020 either...
McKinsey Pete to the rescue!
this post was submitted on 31 May 2025
35 points (97.3% liked)
United States | News & Politics
8053 readers
114 users here now
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS