There are laws about how they can campaign. Once she makes an official statement about running for president, it really limits how she can raise money or talk about the campaign.
Even if she’s 100% decided to run, it would make no sense to confirm it until around January 2028.
They can be a lot less coy without triggering whatever happens when they formally announce a run. They can have exploratory committees and that sort of thing.
An AOC 2028 presidential run would be interesting but that is also when Chuck Schumer is up for re-election, giving her a chance to prmary him. I don’t have any idea of her chances either way. I think she understands that situation and will make informed choices when the time comes. I’m not exactly a fan of hers but I’ll give her some props for electoral savvy.
Shes my congresswoman, and i can say her and her office are genuinely great. Very responsive, religiously communicates with the district, etc. Basically do their job year round instead of just around election time.
That being said, id rather see her run for senate first. We need to see she can win across red and blue districts. I personally think she can, but we need to show that
Stop it. It’s bad enough we have to wade through nearly two years of campaign assaults prior to POTUS elections. The spectacle of the last inauguration was just 14 weeks ago, and we’re fucking exhausted. Just stop it.
We’re gonna have to get used to constantly fighting this battle. Fascists don’t get exhausted, they never rest. They have an unnatural, compulsive desire to crowbar themselves into everybody’s life. Hell, they’ll settle for anybody’s life.
They’ll literally settle for shouting on street corners like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJriMuVEPMY
we’re fucking exhausted
That’s the exact reason why it’s not stopping.
She had absolutely nothing to gain from announcing anything like that right now.
I’d be willing to bet anything that if she’s the nominee, we’re getting President Vance - or a third Trump term. It would be the political equivalent of not even wanting to win. To win elections, you need a nominee who can appeal to at least some of the people who voted for Trump. AOC is the exact opposite of that. This wouldn’t be shooting oneself in the foot - but to head.
There are a large number of people who voted for her and trump on the same ticket (they were both up for election this year). Her and people like her would do far better than any middle of the road dem could. Im convinced of that.
For some reason we keep hearing the same thing for the last ten years, yet dems cant denonstrate a consistent ability to beat Trump of all people with “moderates”. This “playing it safe” approach isnt working long term. Its embarrasing really.
To win elections, you need a nominee who can appeal to at least some of the people who voted for Trump.
‘A change from the status quo’: the voters who backed Trump and AOC
This take is so detached from reality.
AOC and Bernie are filling entire stadiums in red states.
Their grassroots support is so fucking strong, I’ll answer phones and knock on doors for these two mofos even though that’s the last thing I want to do on my free time.
Just because it’s a red state doesn’t mean everyone there supports Trump. AOC and Bernie definitely have passionate followings, and they can fill venues - but that kind of enthusiasm doesn’t always translate into broad, general-election support. If you polled random voters - especially outside of activist circles - both are often seen as being on the political fringe. I actually think Bernie might have had a real shot if he wasn’t 300 years old and the democrats didn’t conspire against him, but with AOC, I think her public image is already too polarizing to win over the kinds of voters Democrats would need to flip. If anything, I’d imagine the MAGA crowd would love for her to be the nominee because they know how easy it would be to rally their base against her.
Are you a host on msnbc or cnn?
Classic ad hominem. Easier to mock the messenger than deal with the message, I guess.
Not attacking you, but you are definitely just repeating talking points of cable news… sorry if that upsets you
Yes you are. Instead of engaging with the content of my argument, you’re attempting to discredit it by implying I’m parroting a biased media outlet - suggesting my view is invalid not because of its reasoning, but because of its supposed origin or alignment. It’s a bad faith logical fallacy meant to undermine credibility without addressing the substance.
To be fair. Corporate media also pushes narratives whether they are true or not, much like your made up point
