• 4am@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    18 days ago

    Many believe Harris lost in 2024 because voters viewed her as too progressive, and that Ocasio-Cortez could face the same problem.

    Who’s this “many”? Kamala lost because of her Joe Biden neolib policies, her hard heel-turn to the right, and her “nothing will change, we are the most lethal military” stance on the Middle East.

    Instead of reassuring the masses who she thought were a shoe-in, she tried to appease the “I’ll never vote for a black woman” crowd, which alienated the former and would never have worked on the latter.

    It was either the greatest miscalculation ever, lead by Third Way focus groups, or someone tugged the leash. Either way, with the GOP rat fucking that was almost certainly happening to some degree.

    Pretty shitty of Newsweek to pretend that progressive policies are unpopular with a majority of Americans.

          • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            17 days ago

            However, the immediate effect of not voting for the lesser evil is either not voting, meaning the right wins, or voting for candidates with no chance of winning, taking votes away from the more left ones and allowing the right to win. “More right” is better than “all the way to the far right.”

            • Matty Roses@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              17 days ago

              If you’re not going to change direction, the speed at which you’re moving right isn’t really important. You’re getting there anyways.

    • ALoafOfBread@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      18 days ago

      Sure they will be. They’ll look at the poll results, throw them in the garbage, and run Newsom like they were already planning to

    • protist@retrofed.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 days ago

      The DNC is currently up shit creek. Many other major Democratic organizations are out fundraising them by a wide margin. Many “true blue” Democrats are pissed as hell at DNC leadership and how utterly spineless and opaque they’re being. I don’t think we’re going into this next election cycle with a DNC that’s powerful enough to thumb the scales in that way

      • dreamkeeper@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 days ago

        They’re gonna have a harder time painting all progressives as sexists and racists when we’re going apeshit over AOC. I like her even more than Sanders.

      • bss03@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        I’d also vote for Bernie (VP or Pres.), still. But, I think there are younger progressives that could fill the role quite well.

        I’d even take someone more centrist for the VP role, since that might make it easier for them to attract (Super)PAC monies.

        • Footer1998@crazypeople.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          In this moment, any candidate who receives super PAC funding from corporations or Israel is a bad candidate.

          Centrism is dead. The right is dying. This is a time for moving towards socialism.

          • bss03@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            16 days ago

            We are still a FPtP system, you don’t get to write off the majority, if you want to gain political power through elections. Right+Center > 50% of electorate.

            Taking resources away from “bad” organizations, and using them for the socialist project is a good thing. The trick is not given them (as much) value in return.

  • nandeEbisu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    17 days ago

    Many believe Harris lost in 2024 because voters viewed her as too progressive

    What are they talking about

    • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      They’re drinking the kool aid.

      Harris lost because she never should have been nominated. Before she was nominated she was polling at 2% among Democrats. Nobody wanted her. And her campaign offered zero new ideas or new energy or new solutions, basically promising to be Biden 2.0 (just without the trust carried over from Obama’s presidency). Obviously that didn’t work, and (just like Hillary), ‘I’m not Trump’ wasn’t enough to get her elected.

      Her being progressive had NOTHING to do with it.

      • iocase@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        There’s also the unfortunate consideration that she’s a woman. A black woman. That’s like playing on hardcore+ permadeath mode when it comes to elections…

        I wish it wasn’t that way but it’s the reality in the US if you want a meaningful shot of winning… There is an unfortunate amount of voters who just won’t vote for a woman or a POC…

        Edit: it seems I triggered a lot of people intent on shooting the messenger. I should make it clear I don’t believe this myself, but it seems a lot of people are unused to seeing opposing views on this backed by sources.

        Speaking of which, after reading some sources, it sounds like education is a pretty strong counter to these biases, although it needs to start a long time before an election. You don’t do 4 years of education in the 8 months leading up to the presidential election… It needs to start now.

        • WraithGear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          i reject this stance. the same thing is said about a black president. and women make up 50 % of the vote base.

          especially since this is a talking point of operatives who seek a gender based wedge.

          and also moot when there were a lot of issues whith both women candidates who were the democrats primary candidates in the last few presidential elections. these issues supersede all other reasons. the internal reports point to the backing of a genocide and aligning with establishment democrats, the ultra wealthy, and her “tough on crime” stance that is by design targeting minorities.

          AND AND she lost by a narrow margin, male nominees have lost by FAR MORE then she did

          do not accept such arguments

          • iocase@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            16 days ago

            Yeah rejecting it doesn’t make it false… Just because 50% of the voting base are women doesn’t mean they’re feminists. There’s a lot of internalized misogyny.

            Obama was a bridge too far for a ton of American voters and he was only a well educated light skinned black man… He still ticked all the other boxes for an American president. A female president is beyond the pale for a lot of Americans.

            The Democrats are welcome to deny reality, ignore candidate popularity during primaries, kill all other candidate potential, and then lose the presidency again and act confused about why that happened… I guess the big thing they have going for them is trump isn’t allowed to run a 3rd time so the trump cult candidate will be a weaker option compared to trump himself.

            • WraithGear@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              15 days ago

              what makes it false is the idea that she lost because she was a woman.

              the numbers do not agree

              it is a sexist point because it pushes the thought that democrats can not run female candidates if they want to win.

              this is provably false, even considering misogyny. and like i said, is sourced from political operatives looking for a wedge. misogyny is just not that influential.

              Harris was polling to win the election, up until the listed slights against the progressive base.

              you can see that even within the democratic party a push to reaffirm conservative power by reassigning failures of the party on such things like inclusiveness, sexism, racism, ect. they attempted to hide the result of their internal investigation that counters their talking points.

              it is also a thought terminating accusation with no one to blame and fights against progression in this regard. and should be shouted down when ever and where ever it crops up.

              • iocase@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                16 days ago

                I don’t believe this either. Her polling was dead wrong up until the last minute, same with trump but the warning signs were there early. I don’t think it was reflecting reality so it’s a bad measuring stick for the situation. Also, don’t shoot the messenger here I’m not supporting this but it’s an important aspect of why she lost even if you disagree with me…

                Edit: I’m going to copy one of my other comments with sources below to support my argument, and why this should be brought up and identified.

                Here’s an article on what I’m talking about

                When voters are presented with evidence showing that women political candidates garner just as much support as men in U.S. general elections, voters’ intentions to support women presidential candidates increased by about 3 percentage points, the researchers’ data showed

                If they aren’t shown and it’s normalized that a candidate can garner just as much political support then it’s a headwind…

                There’s also the belief I’m talking about where people say a woman can’t win, which becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. It also comes down to advertising and education (which are hamstrung by mudslinging during elections)

                There are a lot of studies like this. I could go on for quite a while.

                There’s also a double bind racial bias where black female candidates are viewed as highly competent but unsuitable for a general election.

                We theorize that one driving force is a paradox among Democratic primary voters: namely, that Black women are seen both as more liberal and less electable. Using two different survey experiments, we show that, while most Democratic primary candidates benefit from perceptions of being more liberal, this cannot be said for Black women due to beliefs that they are less likely to win in the general election.

                These issues need to be:

                A) recognized as real.

                B) dealt with through education and normalization.

                Ironically your style of comment is undermining A and B by saying none of this is real, and shutting down any conversation about potentially fixing it…

        • Krauerking@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          Sexists love to say it is everyone else’s reasoning for the way they speak.

          You are currently the one telling people that their gender or skin color stops them from doing what they want. You are being part of what crushes them.

          • iocase@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            16 days ago

            I’m not saying I like it or want it to be that way. There are a lot of people who prefer to ostrich about the problem than deal with it. Would me having said nothing or deleting my comments be better? Would me doing or saying nothing about the problem help to solve it?

            • Krauerking@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              16 days ago

              Not saying you like killing people while shooting then in the head doesnt make them any less dead or you any less guilty. It is just an easy excuse for you to continue your actions without dealing with your own morals.

              You want to act like you think critically? Do it. Right now you are adding to the message that people will read and hear that says they are less than and you will claim its repeating it for no ones benefit but the truth as if the truth agrees with you.

              You want to deal with the problem, work on dealing with it, instead of bowing down and getting out of the way of it.

              • iocase@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                16 days ago

                Here’s an article on what I’m talking about

                When voters are presented with evidence showing that women political candidates garner just as much support as men in U.S. general elections, voters’ intentions to support women presidential candidates increased by about 3 percentage points, the researchers’ data showed

                If they aren’t shown and it’s normalized that a candidate can garner just as much political support then it’s a headwind…

                There’s also the belief I’m talking about where people say a woman can’t win, which becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. It also comes down to advertising and education (which are hamstrung by mudslinging during elections)

                There are a lot of studies like this. I could go on for quite a while.

                There’s also a double bind racial bias where black female candidates are viewed as highly competent but unsuitable for a general election.

                We theorize that one driving force is a paradox among Democratic primary voters: namely, that Black women are seen both as more liberal and less electable. Using two different survey experiments, we show that, while most Democratic primary candidates benefit from perceptions of being more liberal, this cannot be said for Black women due to beliefs that they are less likely to win in the general election.

                These issues need to be:

                A) recognized as real.

                B) dealt with through education and normalization.

                Ironically your style of comment is undermining A and B by saying none of this is real, and shutting down any conversation about potentially fixing it…

    • mrdown@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      It is BS. She lost because she is dumb politically. Obama won because people viewed him as a progressive.

    • Watermark710@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 days ago

      No, it clearly states in the article that this data was from a poll conducted by AtlasIntel, a Brazilian marketing company. They also point out that not a single other poll has gotten these results. This post is very misleading. But people see a headline they like, and they upvote/comment without bothering to read the articles.

  • Doorbook@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    The democratic party funded by AIPAC will rather see Trump for a third time than having AOC as president.

        • chrischryse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 days ago

          They don’t want to admit this country is sadly bigoted and a lot of men don’t want a woman running the country

        • AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 days ago

          Cuz they already ran a woman for president, twice. So saying the dems don’t want a woman president is just categorically false.

            • Matty Roses@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              13 days ago

              Or, maybe, people who will vote for a Democrat don’t want a neoliberal centrist?

              Biden barely won even with COVID, and he ran to the left of both Clinton and Harris.

      • Matty Roses@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        They’re run 2 candidates that lost to the GOP that were women already. Where is the idea that the Dems won’t run a woman coming from?

          • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            17 days ago

            Even the chuddiest chuds I know don’t express anything remotely like that opinion. Racism, xenophobia, and Islamophobia are all either open topics or simmering just below the surface of political discussion, but not the sex of a politician. Nevertheless, the hand-winging centrists are sure there’s a wellspring of otherwise gettable voters that are driven by that single issue. And its salience magically rises and falls depending on whether there’s a popular female progressive.

              • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                17 days ago

                Oh, I’m sorry. I thought your original response was mocking that take. I try to assume good faith so someone writing that sincerely didn’t make sense.

        • thlibos@thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          17 days ago

          Well, perhaps it is concern that the Dems shouldn’t run a woman, not that they haven’t. The reality of the situation is that there is still plenty of closeted (some less so) misogyny among Democrats such that a woman is going to have a harder time winning than a man (all other things being equal) in the general. Add a racial minority, socdem, and 8 years of GOPedo vilification on top of that and you have an even harder path forward than Clinton or Harris, especially if the GOP nominee in 2028 is an outwardly reasonable, straight, white, male. I still think that the GOPedos stole the 2024 election, but I also think that their steal may not have been successful if a straight, white, male had replaced Biden instead of a brown woman. Not that I want any of this to be true, but I think it is where we are currently.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    If you actually believe she’ll win I have another bridge to sell you

    Knowing the DNC, you’ll end up again with Biden

      • nomy@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        They’re not even in the U.S. they’re just here to talk shit and disenfranchise people.

        • Canaconda@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          17 days ago

          Maybe y’all should listen. Just cuz you’re part of the half of Americans that can read above the 6th grade level doesn’t mean you’re not completely inundated with the group think that’s gotten y’all to where you are.

          Regardless, there are multiple valid counter arguments to an AOC 2028 run. I’d say ignore them at your own peril but the USA is causing global harm right now. So like it or not non-american opinions actually do matter. Lord knows the rest of the world wishes we weren’t stuck in the same boat with you.

    • smeenz@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      Don’t worry, some dirt will be invented, and unfounded rumours will be spread, well in time for her to lose.

  • flop_leash_973@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    Part of me hates to see her try. As long as she is straddling the line between serious presidential candidate and popular US House member my head cannon reasons there is still some sanity in some small part of our political institutions.

    Watching her actually seriously try to get the top job and watching the DNC ruin her for it would be so depressing.

  • Tolc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    cant believe so called leftists will vote another establishment democrat candidate

    • Bloefz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      The thing is any succesful presidential candidate in America can’t be too progressive. Especially now the overton window has shifted towards the extreme right. I would love to see it but it won’t happen.

      A left of the middle president is the best you can hope for, sadly.