108

DSA debates how to debate AOC presidential endorsement (www.cityandstateny.com)

submitted 2 days ago by florencia@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/politics@lemmy.world

40 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 41 comments

sorted by: hot top new old

[-] daannii@lemmy.world 27 points 2 days ago

Benefits to having a woman run is that she likely won't have rape allegations show up last minute.

Plus I generally think aoc is the best person for the job.

[-] Eldritch@piefed.world 29 points 2 days ago

The only thing to debate is whether or not virtue signaling is the most important thing. As far as candidates go there will never be a perfect one. Not at state or federal level. Ocasio Cortez certainly doesn't buck that trend. The one Trend she does break for the DSA. Is the general positive name recognition she has at her level. If they have a better candidate who can overcome that Gap. Then they should tell everyone.

It's better to have someone you can agree with sometimes. Than someone who is niche perfect but unelectable. DSA is finally getting some wider recognition and momentum. While I still hold that no state or federal offices should exist, as they can never represent their constituents well. Elected office in general is problematic too. I'd much rather see DSA candidates in those offices over the alternatives.

[-] a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago

You sound reasonable. That isn't how discourse about electing democrats work.

What you are supposed to do is complain that none of the candidates are perfect, sit this one out or vote for someone with no shot, then complain endlessly when a fascist gets elected.

[-] edible_funk@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 day ago

I see you too are familiar with lemmy discourse.

[-] a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Shut up, tankie.

[-] edible_funk@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I've been called a zionist, a republican, and a liberal but that's the first time I've been called a tankie. Once I get called a libertarian that'll be bingo! Which is funny since if you read my comments I'm clearly a very angry progressive/socialist, but lemmings gonna lemmy.

Edit: Dammit I missed the joke. I too am lemming. Sadness.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Fuck you you georgist

[-] edible_funk@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

Yahtzee!

[-] a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

You did. XD

But we got there eventually.

[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 days ago

They blocked a non-binding poll. There's only one reason why the leadership wouldn't want data on whether their members think they should support AOC running for president. Scumbags, just like the real democratic party

[+] panthera_@lemmy.today -32 points 2 days ago

AOC won win a presidential election. Her opponent would probably be Vance. These are factors working against her.

She is a Puerto Rican woman. Vance is a White man.
Although married she has no children. Vance is married with 3 children.
AOC never served in the military. Vance was in the Marines.
She is 5'4" compared to Vance 6'2". In a debate, she will look short.
She is too far to the left. Although Vance is to the right, his views would be more acceptable than hers.

[-] quick_snail@feddit.nl 5 points 1 day ago

Everything you listed is why people would vote for her. Get your head out of your ass.

[-] hoppeduponcoffee@lemmy.zip 21 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Progressive policies have wide backing in the USA. Declaring a candidate “too far left,” is a scare tactic from the establishment. AOC would bring out all the disillusioned voters who sat out in 2016 and 2024, due to the DNC picking establishment candidates, instead of candidates who reflect their values.

What’s working against AOC right now is trying negotiate with Hakeem “pro-Israel” Jeffries. She doesn’t need him, Jeffries is hated right now. She could’ve carried without catering to establishment centrists who accomplish nothing.

Vance is an idiotic couch fucker, who has zero appeal or charisma. A half-empty trash can could beat him.

[-] panthera_@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago

Progressives do well in blue areas but lose in purple or red areas.

Vance beat Tim Walz when they debated.

Democrats would be smart to select a candidate such as Jon Ossoff or Andy Beshear to be their presidential nominee.

[-] coolie4@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago

Vance is a real man who knows how to give a couch what it needs.

[-] panthera_@lemmy.today -2 points 1 day ago

He beat Tim Walz during their debate.

[-] quick_snail@feddit.nl 4 points 1 day ago

Did the debate ask about the genocide? The school to prison pipeline? The nuclear threat?

It isn't a debate if it's setup and run by fascists, and they don't ask the important questions

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

That’s a load of bunk.

is irrelevant. The kind of people that won’t vote for her because she’s non-white or non-male aren’t going to vote for a Dem Soc anyway. Because they’re voting for a nazi.
don’t forget the fourth on the way. Breeders are weird and Vance is a breeder. this is a bizarre argument that has nothing to do with presidential anything, and is easily turned around to “dude can’t figure out how condoms work”
Vance was a Remfie making propaganda bullshit. This is not the win you think it is.
and yet she’ll eat him alive and she scares him. This is an asinine argument. Be better.
bwhaha. You’re a fucking idiot who hasn’t been paying the fuck attention.

[-] panthera_@lemmy.today -3 points 1 day ago

They might not vote for a Dem Soc but might vote for a Democrat.
Some voters might think there is something wrong with a person who doesn't want children especially when the US along with many countries have a low birthrate.
He had to be tough to get into the Marines. Some voters like a person who has served the country.
Models are tall because it makes them more visible. Vance would be more visible than AOC. He will also look more impressive.
AOC would do no better than Kamala Harris; winning in blue states but losing in purple and red states. Democrats need a candidate like Jon Ossoff or Andy Beshear.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

is a different issue than not voting for someone because they’re not a white, old, cishet man
even more people think there’s something wrong with the other end. Especially when they demand $150k helicopter trips for golf lessons
lol. No. Stop wanking off to military channel docus
we’re not talking about models. You’re being shallow and vapid and more than just a bit ridiculous. AOC is far from unattractive- she’s tough, intelligent, and strong. Exactly the kind of woman that scares and intimidates Vance. Also, since you’re being like this, she wears her make up better.
Yes she would. The main reasons Kaila lost were getting fucked over by Biden trying to hang on, getting fucked on Israel and getting fucked on “I wouldn’t change anything” - none of which is a problem for AOC

I can only assume you’re not paying attention

[-] panthera_@lemmy.today 1 points 14 hours ago

There are people who are uneasy about having a woman President especially one who is nonwhite.
Some voters might feel that a woman without children is a bad example for the US at a time when the birthrate is low.
Some people respect those who have served in the military.
AOC is attractive, but Vance's height when standing next to AOC will make him more appealing.
AOC is too far to the left. If she runs for President, she will move towards the middle, but the GOP would attack her past views.

[-] LostCarcosan@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago

I think you're arguing with a hobbyist troll. I've seen this person around, spouting the absolute most braindead takes I've ever seen like how AOC will lose because she's too short or whatever, and I cannot believe someone able to operate a device to connect to Lemmy is that much of an idiot

[-] a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

She can stand on a box the same way so many conservative white men do.

[-] panthera_@lemmy.today -2 points 1 day ago

Candidates normally shake hands before the debate.

[-] a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

[+] hoppeduponcoffee@lemmy.zip -37 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I’m slowly doubting more and more about AOCs commitment to the cause of workers. We don’t need a candidate that negotiates with establishment libs. It’s a really bad look for the future of her political career. We need someone who will fight and not cave in order to woo boomer centrist voters who won’t even be around in 10 more years.

I’m happy to take a L in the short term to set up for success in the long term. If we wait it out, we can kick all the establishment dems out within a few years by refusing to go along with the status quo. Show these pro-Israel corporate patsies we can burn their empire to the ground by refusing to support them.

[-] edible_funk@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago

So you're a Trump voter.

[-] hoppeduponcoffee@lemmy.zip -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I voted for Harris to stop Trump, but I blame the DNC for losing. People no longer want “good enough.”

I guess your assumptions are wrong 🤷‍♂️

Go ahead and continue to support failure, though. Don’t hold your own accountable.

[-] edible_funk@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

Well I vote in primaries for progressives which is really the only way to both hold our representatives accountable and also wield power for ourselves. It's literally the only way to hold the DNC accountable, by replacing them and building a truly progressive party. And then you keep republicans out in the general at all costs, which means voting dem. Everything else gets republicans elected. That's the reality.

[-] hoppeduponcoffee@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

So we’re in agreement on primaries. Vote actual left candidates in the primaries. That still doesn’t mean I trust the DNC to honor that, after what they did to Bernie in 2016, or forcing Harris upon us in 2024.

In my political hellscape of North Carolina, they only give us the option of write in, dem or Republican. We’re also gerrymandered to the point where my vote only means something in my district, but sparsely populated rural areas have disproportionate sway. Next time, I’m doing research into what actual progressive candidates are out there for a write-in. I just wish they’d primary more quality candidates here.

Follow the money. Only vote for non-corporate and non-AIPAC progressives.

[-] edible_funk@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

Oh a write in, that's voting responsibly.

[-] hoppeduponcoffee@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

My options: Vote blue in a general election (which I’d likely have to do).

Primaries: In this state, I get the choice of establishment dem or Republican, neither represent progressive values in a hotly contested tested purple state). My choice of candidates is restricted. There is no other choice than write in, or going with the choices already chosen for me. There was no one else on my primary ballot as a registered dem voter.

So yep, I could’ve wrote in Ronald McDonald for this last primary, and it wouldn’t have made any difference. There are more than enough moderates in this purple state to put the establishment guy on the ballot. I’ll be holding my nose to vote for the establishment guy, because that’s at least better than the “other guy.”

And that’s the state of politics in a battleground state. Always have to vote for the lesser of two evils, not for someone actually any good.

So if my centrist guy gets voted and helps hold back the rest of the party, don’t blame me I guess?

[-] Dadifer@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago

Who need this stinkin' negotiation?

4 day old account

[-] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I've seen what taking the L in hopes the Democratic Party will learn a lesson and do better. They won't. They will move to the right. We can't afford 4 more years of MAGA just to move Dems further toward fascism and alignment with Israel.

I think we'd be far further ahead, if you want to teach lessons, if Dems saw AIPAC isn't critical to their success.

this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2026

108 points (97.4% liked)

politics

30455 readers

2563 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News