AOC said she might quit politics, as some centrist Democrats blame progressives for House losses, NYT says
news.yahoo.com/aoc-said-she-might-quit-040107...Posted Nov 9, 2020, 1:36 AM UTC
041
news.yahoo.com
You wish she'd quit politics. She's only getting started. AOC 2028!
24
She's eligible for 2024. She would be 35 by the time she's sworn in.
AOC 2024
10
I thought the eligible age was 36. AOC 2024!
0
[removed]
1
Fuck them. Corporatists pulling for rich people per usual-
Play the Trump card, turn moderates off of politics and make them desperate for the status quo, attack the people actually advocating for change for poor and working people.
13
They think they are entitled to our vote but hate it when we raise our voice.
6
Poor and working people and minorities.
Turns out that not only will plenty of them vote for republicans, buy tons of people just won't show up.
Stalwart Republicans on the other hand will vote for a child molester and then brag about it on Facebook.
2
Imagine if she did quit politics and say youth turnout dropped in 2022 behind a lackluster Centrist message and Dems got wiped out.
The Corporate wing of the party would blame her for that too, rather than owning up to "nothing will fundamentally change" and "better things aren't possible" are horrible messages guaranteed to produce electoral nihilism and political disengagement.
9
If the progressive Dems left there would be so many different ways that it would hurt. It would damage their long-term future, for sure. It would also damage their messaging. They would have a lot less ground to stand on if they were to adopt progressive messaging because people would believe them much less. The protest movements throughout the country would be more intense. And the Dems would basically be sacrificing anti-establishment and populist narratives to Republican fascists. They would quickly discover that the votes they take for granted are suddenly not showing up, and then the appeals to win over a small percentage of moderates is utterly dwarfed by the damage they've caused.
2
Yeah, except Biden got more votes in her district than she did, so...
2
Compare how Biden did in MN where his top surrogate was Ilhan Omar compared to how he did in Ohio where his top surrogate was John Kasich.
0
Two things:
-
Biden's top surrogate in Minnesota was not in any way, shape, or form, Ilhan Omar. Hell, I'm not even sure she was a surrogate for him at all. It was Amy Klobuchar that was his Minnesota surrogate. In what world do you think it was Ilhan Omar?
-
Even if Ilhan Omar were his top surrogate, the statement is nonsensical because you are comparing two states with totally different partisan leanings. To extrapolate, it's like saying Biden doing better in Massachusetts than he did in Wyoming is proof that we need to focus more on progressive values
Or how about we look at Nebraska's second district. Kara Eastman was one of the only swing state candidates endorsed by Justice Dems, and they basically put everything they had into her. She managed to lose NE-02 by a larger margin than she did in 2018 (despite being in favor of Medicare for All). Meanwhile, Biden won it fairly easily. What does that tell you about running progressives vs moderates in swing state districts?
2
As an aside, why do we expect politicians to remain politicians for their entire lives? Why can't actors quit making TV shows and movies and just take a regular job without being considered a failure? Why do we judge athletes who retire early?
6
Capitalism. All those other options are suboptimal.
3
the revolving door ensures that monetarily, there are plenty of options.
if you mean capitalism manipulating the system using entrenched congresspeople, yes, it's advantageous
0
Lol what? Nobody expects this and they can retire whenever they want.
Turns out having a well paying job, with a ton of power, that doesnt really require you to work that hard is pretty attractive. Who knew?
0
[removed]
1
Imagine if Americans actually had a full view of the political spectrum:
Far left: Communist Party USA
Center Left: Progressives
Center: Democrats
Center Right: Centrists
Far right: Republicans
6
Why vote new presidents??? GOD SAVE THE QUEEN REESTABLISH BRITISH AMERICA
4
[removed]
1
Motherfuckers, your number 2 pick for President was Bernie Sanders. How is that not indicative that the people want more progressive policies instead of dealing with the status quo forever?
4
Establishment Democrats are basically aged bricks. They don't see that data as evidence that the progressives have become more popular but do see the success of Biden as evidence that their views work.
They're incapable of actually comprehending anything with any kind of logical rationality, thus for them, any loss of support is because of anybody who rocks the status quo boat rather than people retracting their support for a ship their voices don't get to steer.
It's literally the Simpson's Principal Skinner "It's the children who are wrong" meme in action.
NJ is seeing this play out locally as the NJ Democratic Party is basically dealing with camps from the status quo establishmentarians to the political machine bosses to progressives demanding more reforms and integrity all clashing at every level.
2
Biden got more votes in her district than she did.
2
2 completely different positions bud
-1
And yet, that he got more votes than her and a higher percentage of the votes than her indicates that even in super liberal districts, centrism is still popular.
2
Again...2 different positions and 1 being vastly more important.
0
It would look absolutely terrible if the Democrats were so hostile to the progressive wing of the party that they up and left. It would do so much damage.
3†
She's an absolute legend and the Dems would be worse off without her.
2
[deleted]
0
Of course the Democratic party has moderates. The Republican party's "moderates" are where the extreme right was 20 years ago and the far right is insane. So the Democratic party is the only option left.
2
As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any advocating or wishing death/physical harm, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click here to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
[removed]
1
[removed]
1
[removed]
1
Hi 70hamsters. Thank you for participating in r/Politics. However, your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):
- No copy-pasted articles - Please do not submit articles or videos that are a direct, complete copy-paste of original reporting. Articles or videos that add another take on a subject, or include different verbiage or context are allowed.
If you have any questions about this removal, please feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/politics&subject=Question regarding the removal of this submission by u/70hamsters&message=I have a question regarding the removal of this [submission]%28/r/politics/comments/jqo96s/aoc_said_she_might_quit_politics_as_some_centrist/?context%3D10000%29)
1
I think many issues that require "centrists" to join their Republican colleagues are going to simply evaporate as relevant political issues now that the Supreme Court is stacked with right wingers. Make no mistake, Republicans are about to make sure that their positions on abortion and gun rights are firmly established once and for all in Supreme Court jurisprudence. That battle is all but lost so I guess the only thing left for "centrists" to join their Republican colleagues on really will be tax issues and war.
1
This story is nothing more than a fever dream of defeated Trump supporters.
Uh, it's based on a lengthy New York Times interview with Ocasio-Cortez herself:
From that one quote the headline could have been "AOC said she might run for higher office, that the movement is real and people want Dems to fight" and be just as true.
I think editors are spinning for clicks and ignoring context.
I think her quitting politics would be much more surprising to the average reader than her running for higher office, so if she says the odds are the same, then surely the story is that she might quit politics.
The fact that you're focusing on "surprise" and not the full context shows the spin.
The full context isn't really that "surprising" if you frame it the way she did: She had a rough first two years that caused her to doubt if this is her calling. She also hung in there because she saw that the cause was bigger than her and felt like she's doing good work.
I'm a teacher so this is a story that is shared by every single one of my colleagues.
[deleted]
[removed]