The best politicians understand this.
Take Barack Obama. Sure, he was only elected to the Senate in 2004. And he said, repeatedly, he wouldn’t run for president in 2008. But, he saw his moment. He took it. And he won two terms as president.
Or, to cite the opposite example, Hillary Clinton passed on running for president in 2004 — believing she would be the de facto Democratic nominee in an open-seat fight in 2008. She would have likely won the Democratic nod in ‘04 and had a very good chance to beat a struggling President George W. Bush. She passed. And then lost in 2008 to Barack Obama. And never became president.
Which brings me to New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. And the speaking tour she did last week alongside Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. Here’s the crowd they drew in Denver:
That’s 34,000 people. Which is pretty amazing given a) it’s 2025 and there’s no election for 600+ days b) Democrats are not exactly kicking ass and taking names these days.
On the heels of that speaking tour, the New York Times is out with a new piece asking a key question: What does AOC want to do next?
Here’s the best bit:
Interviews with nearly 20 progressive Democrats about the left wing’s future revealed a faction that sees the ideas Mr. Sanders has championed — reducing the power of billionaires, increasing the minimum wage, focusing more on the plight of workers — as core to the next generation of mainstream Democratic politics.
Though there is little agreement about who will emerge to guide progressives into a post-Sanders era, virtually everyone interviewed said there was one clear leader for the job: Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.
Correct.
The story goes on to outline three possible future moves for AOC:
Stay in the House and become as committee chair if Democrats win back the majority
Run for Senate in 2028 — either against Chuck Schumer or for an open seat if he retires
Run for president in 2028
To me, this is a no-brainer: AOC should run for president.
There is clearly a lane for a liberal populist — someone in the mold of Sanders who, I would like to remind you, came pretty damn close to winning the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020.
And Sanders, at 83 years old, is not going to run for president again. This speaking tour, in fact, seems very much like a informal handing off of the baton to AOC.
Would AOC win the Democratic nomination? Who knows! And would she be the most electable Democrat in a general election? I doubt it but, also, who knows!
The future is uncertain. Timing is everything. And I think 2028 is shaping up to be a wide-open race for the Democratic presidential nomination where a figure like AOC would absolutely have a fighting chance to win.
Does she agree?
 |
| Source:Chris Cilliza proving once again why Americas are so ignorant when it comes to political philosophy. |
From Chris Cillizza
From The View: "Hostin joins executive producer Brian Teta to discuss meeting with thought leaders about what Democratic voters want, what she would change about Sen. Bernie Sanders and Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's message as they host rallies drawing massive crowds, and the highlights from visiting her daughter at college over the weekend."
The New Democrat has been very clear on where it stands on the James Carville vs Bernie & AOC debate about how the Democratic should act as the opposition party in this country:
"See, whatever you think of what Leigh McGown is proposing here, it's the wrong approach, even if you like what she's proposing. At least the politics of it, even if you agree with her ideas. What she's talking about is proposing an alternative to what House Republicans are trying to jam through the House right now, but seem to be short on votes.
I'm with James Carville on this:
When you see your arch-enemy is drowning in the ocean. don't throw them a lifeline. Let them drown.
When you see your arch enemy's house is on fire and no one is there to do anything about it, don't even offer to spit on the fire, let alone dump your own water on it, or call 911. Just let the house burn down...
From The New Democrat
"When you see your arch-enemy is drowning in the ocean. don't throw them a lifeline. Let them drown.
When you see your arch enemy's house is on fire and no one is there to do anything about it, don't even offer to spit on the fire, let alone dump your own water on it, or call 911. Just let the house burn down.
Let MAGA burn our national house down. Hopefully they don't destroy the country. But don't help them do that, or try to get in their way, outside of what's going on in the courts and at the state level. Show American voters this is exactly who you voted for and the consequences of that fateful decision. And tell them and show them there's a better way on the campaign trail and why you deserve to be in power again."
From The New Democrat
"Just when I think CNN is almost completely useless: they show a conversation that is really at the heart of the Democratic Party right now: which direction should they be moving in and how to combat Donald Trump and his MAGA movement. And the two sides represented here: The James Carville's and the AOC's.
The Carville's representing the political rope-a-dope strategy of strategic, political counter-punching.
And the AOC's who want to burn the house down and not so much concern with who gets burned in the process, just as long as the house gets burned down, so they can rebuild the Democratic Party in their left-wing, militant, socialist, badass, image, and perhaps take over the government as well...
From The New Democrat
I'm going to respond to what Sunny Hostin told Brian Teta about what the Democratic Party should be doing as well. But my first point is a quick response to Chris Cilliza and then I'll get into what they are both saying here. Warning! This might offend a few WOKE tight asses.
Hearing Chris Cilliza talk about American leftists (people he still calls Liberals) reminds of an America before it became cool to be gay and gay men and lesbians were still in the closet, even if they were queens and dykes in private.
Neither Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, the rest of The Squad in Congress, a lot of the left-wing in House Democratic Caucus, are closeted Socialists. They've been out for 10 years now if not longer. You can call them Socialists (perhaps they would prefer to be called Democratic Socialists) and you won't offend them or have to worry about being sued over that.
Both Bernie and AOC are members of the Democratic Socialists of America. Bernie Sanders represents the self-proclaimed Socialist Republic of Vermont. The door of their political closet has not just been open for the last... 35 years (in Bernie's case) and last 7 (In AOC's case) but they took the door down and that closet is no longer there. And yet the Chris Cillizz'a of the world and a lot of the rest of the mainstream media feel the need to call hardcore leftists, "Liberals", even though liberalism is way to the right of socialism ideologically.
So back to this Carville vs Bernie and AOC debate in the Democratic Party:
The Democratic Left (meaning Democratic Socialists) want the Democratic leadership to be their own version of Mitch McConnell. As Sunny Hostin said last week in talking to Senate Minority Leader (and I'm paraphrasing here) that:
"Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump burned the old playbook as far as how political leaders from other parties relate to each other. And it's now time for Democrats to be as partisan as McConnell and Trump because of that. It worked for them. So it would work for us". That's basically what she's saying here.
Every time the Left of the Democratic Party talks about how the leadership should lead, you know why they're not in leadership.
To use a sports analogy: just because a team wins the Super Bowl by using a certain style of offense and defense, doesn't mean that if you decide to run that exact same offense and defense the following season, that you'll win the Super Bowl as well. Especially if you didn't even make the playoffs the year before.
In football you have to run the offense and defense that best fits the personal that you have, in order to be successful. Very similar in politics: you have to use the political tactics and strategy that best fit you party and your members... your voters.
American voters elect Democrats to protect their entitlement programs, to keep the government running, to empower the middle class to move forward, etc. The Democratic Party is supposed to be the party of progress, not obstruction. At least if you are a mainstream Democrat and you are not just a registered Democrat to have a voice in a major political party, instead of trying to run third-party with the Socialist Greens, to get elected. Like, I don't know... Bernie Sanders, Alex Cortez, and the rest of The Squad.
American voters elect Republicans to:
Shake things up
To hold the establishment accountable, so the elitists (means successful and intelligent Americans of all backgrounds) don't have too much power in America, Even if that means shutting down the government to advance their own political agenda.
So when you are the party of progress and that's why you get elected and reelected over and over, shutting down the government simply because you don't like the only government funding bill on the table, doesn't work for you politically. Republicans can get away with that politically, because they are viewed as the obstructionists, the party of no (to paraphrase Senator Tom Coburn) and that's why voters elect and reelect Republicans over and over as well.
Shutting down the government is not progressive, it's regressive. And its even worst when it's done by the Democrats, who are supposed to be the party of progress.
"American voters: we didn't elect the Democrats to shut down the government. That's what Republican do".
But voters expect that from the Republicans. And this is something the Democratic Left may never understand. Which would also explain why they're never in the leadership.
You can follow me on Threads.
You can also see this post on WordPress.
No comments:
Post a Comment
All relevant comments about the posts you are commenting on are welcome but spam and personal comments are not.