1084
SHOCK POLL: AOC a Close Second Place Behind Kamala Harris in 2028 Democratic Primary
(www.mediaite.com)
this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2025
1084 points (96.0% liked)
politics
23015 readers
3761 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Stop with this shit. It's 2025. This is stupid.
Women can't be president in America. We have a shitty culture that prevents that from happening. We keep trying, we keep failing. If you want to win, find another candidate with a dick. That's a requirement in America. Not saying I like it. Just saying that's reality.
Women can win if the democrats wanted to win.
Michelle Obama would destroy the cheeto.
Tried twice with two exceptionally shitty candidates. Blaming Hillary and Harris's losses on their sex is a massive cop-out. Trump should have been destroyed in every election he ran in, but the only time he lost was with the weight of a worldwide pandemic working against him, and then, he wasn't exactly blown out of the water.
A woman can definitely be president in America. But as long as people like you blame the losses on that, the actual reasons these candidates are losing will never be fixed.
It's time to take some accountability.
I agree, I can't say this is 100% a cope but it's a partial cope. Look at when "Ghostbusters" was rebooted. I'm sorry, that's a really terrible film. However, at the time, if you said that you were likely to get someone to pop up and say "That's just because you hate women!" No, that's because that movie was fucking horrible and happened to have women in it. How many people are still watching that film now? Is it remembered fondly?
Two failed bids is not even close to statistically significant when you consider the huge number of other factors at play in an election.
A Catholic can't be president in America. Until one was.
A Black man can't be president in America. Until one was.
No, just precedent. Nothing you say is like the laws of physics, more a rule of thumb.
Harris was less than 2% behind, and Clinton was ahead in the popular vote. I don't think gender was not a factor, but I also don't think it was a major one.
You wouldn't believe how many people say it was a "blowout".
To me, if it was a baseball game and one team did 2% better than the other, I don't think that'd be called a blowout, but the election was...
It's possible, but Trump would have to fuck up really bad over and over and over again right before election day and have dementia so bad he couldn't even say his name anymore and the race between a woman and Trump's 3rd term would still be close
I'd like to think it's close because the republicans purged the rolls of most democrats, but it's probably just the misogyny
Nah, women can. The Democrats just keep picking bad candidates. That's all.
AOC is great, but probably still a bad candidate.
I would go with Taylor Swift. It's about charisma and following, and at least some proven progressive credentials. She fits the counter-counter culture narrative perfectly.
This is the kind of thinking that got us here.
Are you saying kamalacaust and taylor swift are basically the same candidate? smh.
How so? Trump's supporters figured out how people think. No amount of righteous rationalism or appeals to people's better nature wins elections. Populism is what wins. I mean obviously right?
Are you saying want taylor swift as president?
Yeah. Not because she's qualified for the job, but because I think she could win it for the left. That is all.
We already picked a game show host... is this actually worse? 🤷♂️ at least she's a billionaire that pretends to care about people
I think there is some reason to believe she actually gives a shit.
Nobody becomes a billionaire without exploiting many, many, many people.
But yeah, she might also believe that she's a good person
I agree with you, but her "exploitation" is basically using the tools capitalism handed her. The worst that could be said for her is that she might be aware of her privilege and not doing anything to give that up. But here's the thing - what rational actor within capitalism who amasses any power would just give it all up? Benevolent intentions only get you so far, and principle rarely gets anyone anywhere in this world.
Edit: Unless it's all bullshit, she's probably done more good with her wealth than any other billionaire I know. Which might not be saying much, but says a lot for her candidacy as "not a complete piece of shit". Something few ultra wealthy can claim.
We know poor people can't get elected as well.
I am skeptical about your assertion about needing a dude. So how about a compromise? Both AOC and Bernie primary for president, putting the other on the ticket as their VP. If one of them is defeated, they hand over their voters to their counterpart. The best candidate wins, and we get a fully progressive ticket.
Not only that, the establishment Democrat will win the primary due to the progressive vote being split over infighting among 50 different primary candidates. That's how we ended up with Biden.
Actually this is a good chance to prove things. Most would rather vote for a woman than Trump right now. This could be a perfect moment for a woman to get in power and kick some ass.
"People need to vote Democrat to keep the country from further imploding, so we're gonna make the candidate a woman. That way they'll HAVE to vote for a woman and we can check that off our list!"
this is a losing strategy, you're even considering doing it with the same loser from 2024. We lost both 2016 and 2024 by doing this exact same thing. What are you going to tell me next, that the candidate should be Jill Stein?
At least AOC is an actual good candidate, but again: woman. You'll lose.
As much as I want AOC, she won't win not because she's a woman, but because she's relatively young. We are all tired of these old, greedy, out of touch fuckers doing shit they wont have to live through the consequences of, but they get away with that shit for a reason. They aren't old. They have experience. AOC would be presented as inexperienced.
Which is ironic given how inexperienced the current failure is having been in the white house fucking twice.
trumps not surviving another 3.5 years in office, let's be real
If that was the case Hilary would have not won the popular vote
Only the dems celebrate losing.
Bernie would have won the presidency.
Voting for Hillary was voting because I felt like I had to. Voting for Bernie felt like voting because I WANTED to. I'm sure many Americans felt the same way.
Exactly my feelings.
We should just have two women run for president and force the issue!
That's the only way we would get a woman president.
And tragically, that's how America elected a third party candidate.
Fuck. Probably true.
Hillary needs to run in 2028. It is Hillary her turn. Again. This has nothing to do with them being horrible candidates. Only misogyny is responsible.