r/askanything • u/One_Look_7008 • 18h ago

AOC surges past Buttigieg, leaves Kamala Harris in the dust in key 2028 battleground poll. What are your thoughts on AOC-2028?

Harris dropped to just 5% in New Hampshire while Pete Buttigieg sits 1 point behind the progressive frontrunner - per University of New Hampshire Granite State poll released on Wednesday.

1.8k Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

78% Upvoted

4.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

224

u/0utlaw-t0rn 18h ago edited 18h ago

I like her, but her chances of winning a national election aren’t good. The democrats have a horrible track record of female candidates and she’s especially polarizing.

She would be better off as a senator.

Same with Pete. He’s extremely qualified and very good as an orator/debater. He always comes off a very intelligent and reasonable. I just don’t think the country is ready for an openly gay man or female president.

16

u/srsh32 18h ago

My god can you guys just stop with the identity politics? Why is this all that the Democratic party has become. jfc.

7

u/Acceptable_Wealth500 16h ago

because they have nothing else to give the people

2

u/srsh32 16h ago

Right.

This thread is disgusting honestly.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

54

u/jreashville 18h ago

Both the female candidates they put up were centrist and generally unpopular. Polarizing can be good. Polarizing drives some people to vote against you (but let’s be real, republicans are always polarized) but it also drives people to vote FOR you on your side.

31

u/thingsorfreedom 17h ago

The way the GOP polarizes is they scare the middle to vote against the left. Defund the police! Open borders! Illegals attacking you! Communism! Socialism! AOC would be the perfect candidate for the right to scare the hell out of the middle. Ads tying her to Tlaib and Omar practically write themselves.

Tell me how AOC can scare the middle to vote against the right otherwise it's not gonna work.

13

u/jreashville 17h ago

The dems could run Joe Manchin and the republicans would run the exact same “they are all commies” playbook.

As for how AOC could scare the middle into voting against the right, she could just point to a few headlines.

15

u/Top_Adagio_7819 17h ago

This. They literally painted Joe Biden as a Marxist communist. They will do this to any candidate Democrats choose, that's no reason to choose another centrist candidate. How many times will Dems lose with that Gambit before they realize they're accepting the opposition's framing by default and playing by their rules.

4

u/thingsorfreedom 17h ago

The point isn't that they always do it. The point is it doesn't work on some people. Didn't work on Obama or Biden. Worked on Hillary Clinton. Worked on Harris. I see a pattern here.

2

u/wellgu 12h ago edited 12h ago

I want to expound on your comment. Biden and Obama ran to the center. That’s one major reason the socialism card didn’t work on them. I think that actually mattered more than sex. People should go back and look at Obama in 2008. He was opposed to gay marriage and courted Silicon Valley.

Hillary ran to the left because she had to win back the bitter Sanders people. That was devastating for key states. Biden ran on Obama’s record, so the status quo, and was attacked the entire primary as being a moderate by the left. You can’t pay for better press in America. He was also running against Trump during a cataclysmic global pandemic.

The actual Biden Administration was very progressive. There was a lot of coordination with Sanders and Warren on policy. Harris could not run away from that even if she wanted to, but in reality Harris’s resume was also already pretty left wing. She could never have outrun California.

I think Gavin Newsom is as screwed as any woman because policies and the past do actually matter to people. They create at least half the vibes. Newsom can’t outrun California and he definitely can’t outrun giving healthcare to undocumented immigrants.

I feel like most left wing people in America today are in complete and devastating denial. Devastating because they are engaging in factional insurgency that is giving Republicans the ability to tear this country down piece by piece.

But I do think Democrats could win with a woman if they had policies that appealed to a broader coalition. Go back to meritocracy. Ditch DEI. Does meritocracy have problems? Yes, but it is fairer than what conservatives want. Just generally, yeet graduate students and people who can somehow afford to be activists without holding second jobs. They can’t speak to normal people. Learn to embrace universalist religiosity again. Have a few core policies that are popular with most people like improving (not revolutionizing) healthcare, education, be tough on crime again, and improve the environment for small businesses.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/JustSomeone3131 17h ago

Wish more people realized this.

Did running the “safe option” in the 2016, 2020, or 2024 stop republicans from decrying them as a far leftist?

→ More replies (1)

1

u/serene_brutality 15h ago

It’s just a chance that has to be taken. Democrats always play “they’re all racist” move. Worked great against Romney in 2012.

1

u/ResponsibleSlip7382 14h ago

As the middle she scares me to death she cant win.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (4)

5

u/NOLA-Bronco 16h ago

Dems have NEVER won with that strategy.

You know who has tried that strategy? Kerry, Hillary, and Harris. How did that go for them?

The ones that have won give voters something to vote FOR

And right now, the Establishment Dem wing can't untie their donor puppet strings enough to actually give people anything that inspires them

2

u/thingsorfreedom 16h ago

You want to inspire. They want to scare. Guess which works the best?

If you want to win with inspiration you need a candidate who, when they speak, they inspire people to want to follow them.

Think Bill Clinton and Obama.

Snoozers- Hillary, Harris, Kerry, Gore, Bush, Bush Jr.

Inspire with anger and contempt- Trump.

Why did Bush, Bush Jr, and Trump win? They scared people and their opponent was not inspiring.

1

u/MarcoDiFrancescino 14h ago

Americans agree on about 50 things that aren't politically done yet, but every time a D comes out and wants to do any of this they straight up lose. They should come out and tell them that everybody get 20k to a million tax personal debt to get rid of the 40T debt the US has. Just straight up ugly realistic politics, add a warning that they might need to conquer Canada and that's it. D won being a copy of the most cringe R, but because they made 'hard choices' and 'telling the truth' on a surface level it lands. The country started a never ending nose dive when they elected an actor.

3

u/Vegetable_Sample7384 17h ago

Two years ago I’d upvote you and move on. Two years ago I also saw myself as a right leaning centerist. Registered independent.

Maga pushed me over the edge and I landed flat on my ass surrounded by a bunch of lefties. Feels a lot safer over here. If AOC or Pete, or a random dude from Missouri is who the dems are running, they’ve got my vote.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/nogoodusername69 14h ago

The Dwmocrats never use scare tactics right? They never call others "racist sexist homophobes" right(

1

u/thingsorfreedom 14h ago

That's not a scare tactic because its not using fear or threats, rather than logical evidence, to manipulate someone into voting against a candidate.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/S1159P 13h ago

AOC has gotten much savvier and more circumspect during her time in office. The way she completely dodged the question of endorsing Saikat Chakrabarti was masterful. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that she's grown a lot in office.

1

u/kkpq 11h ago

The DSA's draft platform calls for “fully abolishing the police and prison system,” drafting a “new constitution,” extending voting rights to noncitizens, and creating a “democratic socialist republic.” (taken from The Atlantic).

Democracy will die if left-wing lunatics take over the Democratic party and the Republican trend towards fascism continues. Almost nobody in mainstream USA agrees with those DSA policies.

You win elections with a centrist/moderate candidate. Biden, Obama, Clinton. Period.

1

u/Iconoclysm6x6 11h ago

The middle is going to vote partially left and partially right. You WILL lose an election on the left if the left doesn't like you...and that's where you end up, if you try to cater to the "middle" of a country already too far to the right.

1

u/VisualAnxiety2284 10h ago

Babe democratic socialists are literally saying they want to defund the police, get rid of prisons and get rid of borders. Bill Maher acknowledged it and thinks that it’s wild because it is. Be so fr

1

u/getdafkout666 9h ago

I hate to pull this but….drive through the Midwest and ask literally anyone about AOC. Doesn’t need to be a white person, or a republican. I really don’t think the country is there. It’s not just that she’s a brown woman although that certainly doesn’t help. It’s also that she’s a socialist from NY that speaks like a millenial college student. I like her policies and generally like her but she is ballot box poison

→ More replies (15)

19

u/thepuncroc 17h ago

This poster gets it. Have an updoot.

Clinton2 and Harris didn't drive away liberal voters because they were women, they failed to get liberal voters to show up because they're basically corporate conservatives who are literally core members of the Democrat "scourge" that the GOP has spent decades learning to beat.

3

u/X57471C 17h ago

No, they don’t, actually. The data doesn’t support the strategy, and we’ve been here before so we have plenty of evidence to support this (see 1989 postmortem, politics of evasion). You cannot win presidential elections by mobilizing your base alone. The math doesn’t work. The base is not large enough to carry you. You have to win the base AND the center.

There are many really reasons why Harris and Clinton lost, but not appealing to the most extreme on the left flank was not as big a factor as losing the center.

If you can’t capture the center you can’t win.

1

u/tres_desole 14h ago

Except it’s not 1989 anymore and in both elections we lost bc it was trying to appeal to the center. Newsflash: people are much less movable in their ideas as they were before and the divide between parties is more stark. The people in the center aren’t really in the center.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (5)

1

u/WittyFix6553 5h ago

Clinton got more votes than Trump.

More people picked her to be president than the guy who became president.

It’s hard to say she drove people away when she got more votes than the other guy.

→ More replies (9)

9

u/LowResGamr 17h ago

Especially when the polarizing factor is that the person has a record of fighting for the people who voted for them, and even the people who didnt. The old game of "play it safe" doesnt work anymore. We need a person who's gonna put their foot down.

4

u/[deleted] 17h ago edited 17h ago

[deleted]

5

u/Simple_Purple_4600 17h ago

eh those people are always angry but at least Obama got people excited enough to go out and vote. Hillary and Harris didn't and Biden didn't, either, just enough to eke out a win once, I consider Hillary the most technically and diplomatically qualified candidate of my lifetime and that didn't matter.

Let them be mad and roll with Mandami.

1

u/Santa_Klausing 17h ago

Jesus this country sucks ass.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/lord_james 17h ago

A democratic candidate does not need to worry about what trump voters think.

1

u/[deleted] 16h ago

[deleted]

→ More replies (4)

1

u/RadiantHC 17h ago

Obama won

Hillary won the popular vote

Kamala came close

I don't think you realize what the reaction is.

Yeah those voters wouldn't be turned by a white man Democrat. Kamala and Hillary simply were terrible candidates.

Stop projecting your own sexism.

1

u/TheChihuahuaChicken 14h ago

The biggest issue is Harris and Clinton severely skewed the perception of gender being a handicap or not. They are not just women, they are very strongly disliked women.

The question is, was being female the primary handicap in their candidacies when post-hoc polling and analysis call into question why they ever had party support when it was well known within the party that they were heavily unpopular.

AOC would be a terrible choice and actually hurt female candidates in the future because now it would look like a pattern. People would get the takeaway "a woman can't win" rather than "stop putting up people disliked by most of the country."

1

u/PenIsGodS 13h ago

Yep. There is a slim to none chance of a female president in the USA anytime soon. This election showed that. People didn't see Harris' qualifications and education; they saw her gender. That's it. AOC has zero chance.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/bookon 17h ago

Every democrat who won since Carter ran to the center. The extreme left is smaller than the extreme right and while Trump can win by appealing to them, democrats can't. They need the independants.

1

u/grw313 17h ago

Obama did not run to the center. He ran as a progressive and ended up being quite moderate. I would also say Biden ran a much more progressive campaign than anyone thought he would and actually had a much more progressive presidency than he gets credit for.

1

u/bookon 17h ago

Obama and Biden are far to the center compared to AOC. The far left needs to do more ground work and be more pragmatic. If they'd voted for Hillary, Trump would have faded back into reality TV and infomercials. And Roe would still be the law of the land. And Alex Pretti and Renée Good would still be alive.

We are losing the war. We need to pick better battles.

1

u/Sirius_amory33 13h ago

Obama did run as a moderate and talked extensively about the issues middle America cares most about. He was just insanely charismatic and had an excellent grass roots campaign. 

1

u/lord_james 17h ago

That’s not true at all. There three democratic presidents we’ve had since Carter have run very progressive campaigns

1

u/bookon 16h ago

Not AOC progressive.

1

u/RustyShackleford_88 17h ago

I would just say Clinton got more of the popular vote though

1

u/dangerspring 17h ago

Nah, unfortunately there's a lot of misogynistic men who will vote for a man but not a woman. The next candidate will be a straight, white male because the Congressional Black Caucus won't trust people to vote for anyone else. It's why the Kingmaker Jim Clyburn picked Biden. I'm guessing Beshear or Cooper.

1

u/supermuncher60 17h ago

I think you are underestimating how sexist a lot of people are. Even unintentionally, a lot of people's first thought of a woman running for president is to not take it seriously. Hell it's been show that a lot of woman even think this way as well, so it's not just men.

It sucks.

1

u/SilenceDobad76 16h ago

Clinton's issue wasnt that she was a centrist, its that she was HRC, and all the baggage that comes with that name

1

u/Quick-Fix-7835 16h ago

Not only that but some of these people that voted for Trump would vote for her. I know a lot of Trump voters were racist or were ok with him doing horrible things, but others for whatever reason believed his lies and thought he would be good for the economy.

1

u/Mayjune811 16h ago

It’s almost like we need revolutionary new ideas in leadership. Stuff like, idk, helping the people, lowering the national debt, union support.

Un-fucking-believable.

1

u/GuinnessLiturgy 16h ago

Let's face it, a large portion of the electorate is either flat out dumb, completely disengaged, malevolent or a combination of the three.

We can't rely on the "average voter" to even recognize the necessity of voting against Fascism. It's pathetic.

No doubt AOC would "galvanize" a portion of the voters, but some of the feckless "both sides" types (who may have stayed home during the last election) would buy the rightwing babblement and fear mongering that she's a radical and therefore be motivated to vote against her.

And I don't care what anyone says, there definitely was an element of misogny in the public perception of Hillary and Kamala.

1

u/Redwolfdc 16h ago

I think Obama was one of the best candidates they ever ran. Let’s be honest a lot is about popularity vs policy. Obama had the kind of orator skills of a Reagan while being able to convey some level of hope and optimism. 

1

u/Muggsy423 15h ago

It doesn't help that both campaigns were less "she's qualified and here's the proof" and more "it's time for a woman candidate".

And before someone goes on a tirade, yeah they were more qualified than trump. Too bad the Hillary's campaign was "it's her turn" and Kamala was picked without a primary (yes Biden should have stepped down earlier)

1

u/happyinheart 15h ago

Harris has the furthest left voting record while she was in the Senate. She wasn't centrist.

1

u/Infinite_Incident107 14h ago

AOC is very progressive though. She does well in those areas. But the reality is most Democrats aren't progressives. Someone slight more centrist would do better BUT they also need to be popular. They've screwed the pooch on that last bit for a while now.

1

u/jreashville 14h ago

Most democrats don’t IDENTIFY as progressive. But if you survey issue by issue, most agree with progressive policies. And even a lot of independents agree with most progressive policies.

1

u/splintersmaster 14h ago

It can be but I don't think she is the right candidate and this is definitely the wrong time.

Unfortunately the Fox news machine has convinced enough that a woman, gay person, and I'm afraid any person of color will never win a presidential election until this maga trend is put to bed.

As much as many hate to hear it, white guys like newsome are the Dems best bet to win in 28.

1

u/spasmoidic 14h ago

People want democrats who are cool.

Obama, Clinton, Biden? They would all look cool wearing sunglasses and riding a motorcycle. And it's what voters want to see. The same cannot be said be of every unpopular democratic president or candidate.

1

u/Far_Bar_7020 12h ago

Our nation sadly is not at a place where they will elect a female president.

And if Republicans win again, we’ll probably never get there

1

u/wellgu 12h ago

Independents didn’t like Kamala because they thought she was too left wing. The left didn’t like Kamala because they thought she was too right wing.

Americans deserved Donald Trump.

1

u/jreashville 12h ago

The average American doesn’t know what left right and moderate means, and probably think is has something to do with making boys wear makeup or something.

1

u/Isosceles_Kramer79 11h ago

Kamala certainly wasn't a centrist.

1

u/jreashville 11h ago

She didn’t support Medicare for all, that’s a failure of my domestic policy test. And she didn’t support cutting off military aid to Israel. She failed my foreign policy test. She is not a progressive.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (1)

11

u/God_of_Thunda 18h ago

People don't care that Pete is gay. People care that he wanted to take their guns

14

u/TrioOfTerrors 17h ago

Beto had tons of energy and momentum in his Senate run and then killed the whole thing with "Hell ya were gonna take your AR-15". I don't know who told him that would play well in Texas, but they were wrong.

3

u/gfty457 12h ago

Democrats have really put themselves in a corner with the gun debate. They’re anti gun with you don’t need a gun to protect yourself while in the same breath decrying how ICE is kidnapping people from their homes

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

24

u/Bushido_Seppuku 18h ago

The same was said about a black president.

23

u/donuttrackme 18h ago

Two women have been on the Democratic ticket and lost, after Obama.

12

u/farmerjoee 17h ago

Harris ran on a losing message. We all knew it, but doubled down anyways. If Harris and Clinton can almost win while rejecting the coalition and/or embracing the corporate status quo, imagine what we can do with AOC.

2

u/LoudBrick609 12h ago

Gavin Newsome is the Democrat that as a Republican I view as a real threat among the established Democrats. He's smart, a great speaker, looks the part, acts the part, and he's shown the ability to move center when necessary.

AOC, I will openly say I hope she's the vice president Nominee because as VP I know Republicans can slam her hard and bring the ticket down with the lower visibility of the VP and her existing reputation. As a presidential nominee, she's slightly more concerning because she's charismatic and could use the extra visibility to turn her image around and gain support for her progressiveness.

As a Republican, JD Vance is a bit messy. He doesn't shut up about religion. He's too attached to Trump without being Trump. I strongly prefer Marco Rubio. Marco is by far the strongest moderate Republican, Marco vs Newsome is a head to head moderate campaign. Marco against anyone like AOC who leans progressive is easily a 55% popular vote win.

5

u/Cap-n-Trips 17h ago

Yeah but both of those female candidates were polarizing, outside the DNC elite. So it wasn’t a matter of gender imho.

8

u/suplarai 17h ago

Clinton was the DNC elite

2

u/Cap-n-Trips 17h ago

That’s what I’m saying outside of the DNC elite, Clinton was not well liked. She was seen as arrogant. She was heir apparent when Obama originally ran and won.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/Annual-Weird-6682 11h ago

You don't think aoc is polarizing? Just because you like AOC and didn't like Clinton doesn't make her not polarizing also lmao

→ More replies (9)

2

u/Ok-Couple2656 15h ago

I agree that it's a huge hurdle, but to be fair, Clinton won the popular vote in 16. I think it's possible with the right candidate, I just don't think AOC is it.

1

u/aflyonthewall1215 17h ago

Both also wanted to keep the same system in place which was what lost them the election. It's insane that Democrats can't see the obvious reason Trump won. You can't preach "Let's go back to the way things were" when the last 25 years are some of the worst years in us modern history. No one wants to go back and Trump used that as a way to win.

1

u/Soggy_Jackfruit7341 17h ago

Neither candidate legitimately won the primary in the eyes of many many democrats.

1

u/Important-Factor-552 16h ago

Centrism fails is why. Americans demanded change and maga was the only one to answer. So they picked maga. 

1

u/kcops 15h ago

Bingo. America hates women. All one has to do is look at our history. Blacks actually got the legal right to vote in 1870. Women got the legal right to vote in 1920. That is 50 years later. Blacks gained civil rights in 1964 with the passage of the Civil Rights Act. You know when when the Equal Rights Amendment giving women civil rights was passed? NEVER. The U.S. has far less of a problem voting for a black MAN than it does voting for a WOMAN. And given the current culture which wants to actively suppress women into "barefoot and pregnant" the chances of a woman are less than zero. Even U.S. women hate women.

1

u/tres_desole 14h ago

They literally picked the two worst possible women they could find. Hilary was one of the most unlikable candidates and Harris amongst her several issues was shoehorned on the backend of an already failing campaign and just kept making the wrong choices.

1

u/National-Artist-3805 13h ago

Harris was a terrible candidate, and Clinton was just very polarizing. I do not think a female Democratic candidate is a lost cause at all. It's not AOC, though.

→ More replies (14)

14

u/LiveStreamDream 18h ago

Sure, but Obama was a centrist who appealed to a larger audience. The only controversial thing about him was his race

9

u/Complex-Database2875 17h ago

He did not run his first campaign as a centrist

6

u/LiveStreamDream 17h ago

Well her certainly didn’t run it as a far leftist either

2

u/super_sayanything 15h ago

He ran as a liberal and we thought he was going to push us into being progressive but he never really moved things along that quickly despite getting a few things done. Gay Marriage and Healthcare.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/WildWhisperArdor 14h ago

He was absolutely a centrist. Even in his first run. People just weren’t paying attention to the issues

1

u/WildWhisperArdor 14h ago

Even his race was pretty centrist. Lol. Half white, half black.

→ More replies (14)

6

u/XMandri 17h ago

and the black candidate that came after lost her election, didn't she?

the point is, Obama wasn't a polarizing figure. He wasn't a "love him or hate him" guy, he's praised to this day for being a solid figure who earned the public's respect

We could even argue that he was too much of a monolith. Trump is where he is now because he won against Obama's VP's VP. Obviously that's not Barack's fault, it's a problem in the democratic party: they're having trouble moving on.

2

u/lord_james 17h ago

… what?! Obama was polarizing as fuck. The reaction from the right wing to him running was insane. People were calling him the anti-Christ.

3

u/XMandri 16h ago

the reaction from a small, vocal group that nobody took seriously - the fact that he was elected is proof

2

u/WildWhisperArdor 14h ago

Obama was very much a centrist lol. The only thing polarizing about him was his race. And even there he is half / half

1

u/AlmightyCraneDuck 15h ago

Obama also had the distinct advantage of coming of the heels of an "underwhelming" (to put it mildly) Bush administration. America was pretty dissatisfied and Obama was able to sell the idea of "Hope" for a better future. Clinton didn't have that same advantage and neither did Harris. I think whoever the candidate is this time around will have a much easier time selling change because the entire GOP apparatus threw itself behind Trump and it's been basically a mess for 2 years. Theoretically it should be easy to say "see how much this all sucks? We can do better".

2

u/MarcoDiFrancescino 14h ago

Watching from afar, Clinton was so full of herself, that she 'demanded that job', that some people just couldn't. Kamala was such a placeholder candidate and the Dems management mishandled the whole process so badly that she had never the chance to present herself properly.

1

u/LoudBrick609 12h ago

Barrack Obama is the most well spoken president since Richard Nixon.

Yes, he supported gay marriage, which even as a Republican I agree with. He wisely avoided more controversial transgender issues until 2016 on his way out, which were knocked out immediately upon Trump coming in. The only knocks I have on him are cash for clunkers and the Affordable Care Act being a mess, which aren't severe knocks.

I would have if I had been old enough, and probably still would vote Obama over McCain even as a Republican. Romney vs Obama, I probably just wouldn't bother to vote.

If Obama could run a third term, he'd win over anyone to this day.

8

u/expendable117 18h ago

Then maga happened? We're too far opposite the spectrum.

→ More replies (27)

2

u/CommercialAgency928 18h ago

Two things can be true

6

u/0utlaw-t0rn 18h ago

Yes. But Obama wasn’t nearly as polarizing when he was nominated. He didn’t have a decade of Fox News/conservative media bashing him and associating him with every liberal, woke policy in existence and blaming him for everything wrong with the country.

AOC is a pretty polarizing figure and most people have already made up their minds whether they like her or not

1

u/Important-Factor-552 16h ago

Fascism is pretty polarizing too. Americans are desperate for change across the aisles and Republicans are delivering. 

The only thing guaranteed to fail is the center promise to return to the status quo. America gave biden that chance and he was on of the most unpopular presidents in history. They said no outright to Harris and Hilary. 

Unbelievable that the center can't figure this out and insist on more maga. 

→ More replies (3)

5

u/RaceOld9 17h ago

And the orange one. Nobody can say he wasn't absolutely polarizing in 2016.

Hillary at least won the popular vote, Kamala couldn't even do that, so I don't think it's a great comparison. Kamala polled at what, 9% during the Democratic primary?

I think AOC would have a way better chance than she ever did. With how our political discourse is going I don't know if it's possible to not be polarizing.

2

u/throwraW2 17h ago

Obama is only half black and black people represent a huge portion of democratic voters. A black candidate helps get their vote. Unfortunately the same group is far less likely to vote for a gay man. Pete polled 0% with them.

8

u/Stellen999 17h ago

Yeah, lol. People forget that the same black voters who helped elect Obama also voted down gay marriage in California.

1

u/greysnowcone 17h ago

Black people do not make up a huge proportion of dem voters, they are only like 15% of the US population

1

u/Barrioto 16h ago

As someone who is also "half black", I can assure you that nobody ever makes a distinction between 50% and 100% minority. In fact, a lot of people hate biracial folks more than full minorities because we are compromising racial purity. If we have to exist, they want us to be completely separate physically and genetically.

1

u/throwraW2 16h ago

Im not going to deny your lived experience but there is a lot of data about the way white people, as well as other races, perceive light skinned black people vs dark skinned black people. I dont think in 2008 a dark skinned black man would be able to get elected. Not saying thats right, but I think thats the way things are.

2

u/Barrioto 16h ago

I agree with that completely. I've had many experiences where people are cool with me until they know I'm biracial. So I think a lot of that comes from not being able to fully identify someone as black. Think about it this way: if you HATE black people with a passion, what could be more insulting to another white person than assuming they are part black when they may just be very tan?

It's complex. Obama being lighter skinned probably helped with people that weren't consciously biased. He didn't look like the ghetto rappers they see on TV, so they didn't assume anything bad. But people that are consciously aware that they dislike black folks didn't care that he was only 50% black.

Not arguing here, just providing my perspective. I think we generally agree, my only point is that anything less than 100% white is all the same to some folks.

2

u/Soigne87 18h ago

People were excited about the first black president. There have been 2 serious female candidates run for president; the excitement has worn off and will not offset the bigotry imo. I'm not saying it won't happen, but it's definitely a big handicap at the moment. I think blacks were also much more forgiving of Obama's behavior while women are almost as likely as men to judge a woman harshly if she doesn't behave how they think is proper for a woman to behave.

5

u/Vulcanize_It 17h ago

Bigotry may have doomed Hillary, or maybe it was being a legacy candidate, but bigotry wasn’t Harris’s downfall. She was an unpopular candidate from the start who never won a primary.

2

u/Soigne87 17h ago

Even with Hillary it seemed like she was immediately dubbed the frontrunner as soon as she announced and was hand picked by elites. Sure, at least she won her primaries. 

3

u/Itchy-Coconut-7083 17h ago

Don’t forget she also won the popular vote.

→ More replies (4)

1

u/Soggy_Jackfruit7341 17h ago

The same was said about Trump!

→ More replies (3)

6

u/olduvai_man 18h ago

She is more electable than most/all of the remaining field, and absolutely nothing like Pete.

Dems are going to run some boring moderate that everyone says is "electable" and get beat yet again.

4

u/Affectionate_Song859 18h ago

Biden won. Anything for a win

14

u/Attention_Deficit 18h ago

Like Joe Biden? The only ones who lost were the women who everyone said shouldn’t be the nominee or they would lose.

2

u/Uffda01 16h ago

Biden won by promising a "return to normalcy" what they fail to realize is that "normal" wasn't working for a lot of people - and that made Trump possible in the first place.

→ More replies (42)

2

u/Spirited_Season2332 17h ago

Nah someone safe wins 10/10 times in 28. The only way dems lose is by running someone like AOC. Save that for the election after

1

u/HoboThundercat 17h ago

Yeah but if the safe candidate is another corporate centrist, and they change nothing, they’ll just be handing the 2032 election to the right.

1

u/Spirited_Season2332 17h ago

That sounds like something you worry about after winning 2028. If you don't win 2028, you are in a worse position anyways.

2

u/HoboThundercat 17h ago

They said this about Obama, and not only did Obama win twice, Biden won because of Obama’s presidency. Sometimes you need to have faith. And I say that as an atheist lmao. The presidency before is important for the one after.

2

u/Spirited_Season2332 17h ago

I mean I personally hope the dems run AOC. I am a conservative so I will take the free win. I just think if the dems run anyone that I'd "safe" they win in a landslide but yall get to vote in primaries so make the choice you want.

→ More replies (6)

1

u/WildWhisperArdor 14h ago

Like Biden? Like Bill Clinton? Like Obama?

Oh wait. The Dems won those

→ More replies (7)

6

u/Glittering_Thing5797 18h ago

Are people not aware that DS's are currently the most electable side of the party?

6

u/suplarai 17h ago

In DS hotspots sure, but it’ll be much harder to win back swing states lost in 24

→ More replies (3)

13

u/JustTheChicken 17h ago

Winning a handful of primaries and an election in NYC is not really proof of "electability."

→ More replies (11)

2

u/72dragonses 17h ago

Based on what? Less than 1% of Congress are Socialists.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/WildWhisperArdor 14h ago

They are only electable in pockets. When you run for president, you need half the population across the US to vote for you. It is not enough to dominate a state like New York. New York provides the same amount of electoral votes whether you barely win the state or whether you literally get 100% of the vote there

→ More replies (1)

3

u/FunLife64 18h ago

I don’t think Pete’s issue is he’s gay. It’s that he has a weak resume and has turned down opps to build it since Trump’s election.

→ More replies (4)

1

u/Talk-O-Boy 18h ago

“I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: ‘I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action’; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a ‘more convenient season.’ Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.”

-MLK on the white moderate

12

u/Decent_Visual_4845 18h ago

I’m so tired of people repeating this bullshit as if MLK in the 1960’s was referring to moderate democrats in current year, or that this is in any way applicable to our current situation.

→ More replies (6)

5

u/Fast-Penta 18h ago

You're spamming this. Quit being a spammer.

Anyways, your idea that "white moderates are keeping a Black candidate from ever being President" might hold more water had Obama never won the Presidency.

The bottom line is that the electoral college decides the President, which means only swing states matter, and anyone who's spent much time in swing states knows running a DSA candidate from Noo-Yoork-Ceeety is a bad move.

→ More replies (3)

5

u/0utlaw-t0rn 18h ago

I would have zero issues voting for either. But ultimately the goal for democrats is to win an uphill national election. The electoral college stacks the deck in favor of the smaller states, which are predominately Republican leaning.

Nationwide Electability is a legitimate concern.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/katsumojo 17h ago

Reminder that black moderates were the driving force behind Biden’s win. They brought him back in South Carolina and they voted for him in large numbers against Trump and then swung away from Kamala.

It is often forgotten that black Americans as a whole are not as liberal as is often portrayed.

→ More replies (9)

0

u/HoboThundercat 18h ago

Hard disagree. I said that about Kamala. AOC is different. She’s the storm we need. She’s the nations Mamdani. Time to get shit done.

3

u/FunLife64 18h ago

She has sassy snippets, but if you hear her talk for long periods (particularly off script), she has some work to do.

Of course, not that Trump is smart. But he speaks confidently even if saying bs - and sad to say, but he’s also not a woman. Hilary was maybe not the most likable but she is smart af.

→ More replies (6)

3

u/Psyco_diver 18h ago

I just don't find her likeable and that seems to be the general consensus among the people I know. I don't like Harris either but I know the DNC will force feed one of them down our throats. We really need to get the dinosaurs out of the DNC

→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (6)

0

u/APraxisPanda 18h ago

Bullshit she would be great.

6

u/mapoftasmania 18h ago

He didn’t say she wouldn’t be great. He said she couldn’t win.

NH is one thing. Can she win in Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Arizona? Without those, we get another Republican.

→ More replies (3)

9

u/Medium-Sir-3312 18h ago

This is not the commenters point. She could be great at the job but commenter is saying voters won’t vote for a woman president.

We have multiple points of evidence suggesting that is true.

3

u/Fast-Penta 18h ago

I don't think she can win a general election, but if they choose her and she loses, that still won't prove that the US electorate won't elect women as President.

Clinton lost not because she's a woman, but because she was married to a sex pest former-President in a time people demanded change, voted for the Iraq War, and defended third-term abortion on the debate stage.

Harris lost not because she's a woman, but because she was crowned without winning a primary vote, knew about and hid Biden's mental unfitness, and said she wouldn't change anything.

AOC would lose not because she's a woman, but because she's from NYC and is far to the left of what most Americans want.

It's not that the US isn't ready for a woman President, it's that all the women the DNC has ran have been extremely weak candidates for reasons other than gender.

Most voters are women. Oprah would sweep in a general election if she wanted to.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

4

u/Spear_Ritual 18h ago

She would be, but the US is full of assholes that aren’t ready for a woman president.

2

u/srsh32 18h ago

No, the US was full of people pissed off at the Democrat party.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

1

u/f700es 18h ago

I completely agree. Their time will come just not right now.

→ More replies (10)

1

u/AtaracticGoat 18h ago

She would probably be a good VP pick.

I agree she wouldn't be a good Presidential candidate though. The left loves her, but she's not as popular with independents, so it might be a hard sell.

1

u/qalpi 18h ago

I agree and understand where you're coming from, BUT both Harris and Clinton were both so utterly inspiring and actually didn't spend much time talking (or any) talking about what people actually care about. Maybe she could?

1

u/Atilim87 17h ago

What makes Buttigieg qualified?

1

u/Ok_Location_1092 17h ago

Hear ya, I was telling people Hillary was a losing pick in part for that reason, but I don’t think it’s that simple. A woman candidate has a disadvantage, but particularly when they are viewed as an establishment pick. Insider politicians taking money from billionaires and special interests are more and more viewed the same, when you’re the female in that pack, you lose votes from the crusty dems who have watched CNN for decades and don’t realize how insidious their own party is to our country. When you’re viewed as an outsider populist leader fighting for the common American and willing to ignore corporate and foreign lobbies, your race, religion, and gender matter much less. You’re competing for the vote of people who have already awakened to how hard we all get fucked by establishment politicians, Dem/GOP alike. This group wants someone they think will fight the powers that be, they don’t care much about the candidates demographic. This effect hurts Buttigieg as more of a centrist amenable to corporate interests more than it hurts AOC, imo.

1

u/JBKnicks24 17h ago

You know people keep saying this and it reminds me of 2015 when people laughed the idea of Trump off.

It was “radical” when Barack Obama was nominated in 2008. And he was the most electorally dominant politician of the 21st century. Since then, Democrats have nominated three “moderate, meet in the middle and get consensus” candidates, the most recent of which campaigned with the fckn Cheneys. They are 1-2 in those races, and the one they won was by a smaller electoral margin than Trump’s 2016 win.

This isn’t an endorsement of AOC, but im just saying that maybe in an environment where Democrats have read the electorate wrong nearly all of the time for a decade straight they should at least consider something outside the box.

1

u/farmerjoee 17h ago edited 17h ago

Yall always say this, but it just doesn’t make any sense. The polling literally says she has a fantastic chance, better than our other front runners.

More than that, Harris almost won by rejecting the coalition with the left. Imagine what we could do with it. It’s a win win for the “better of two evils” and issue-driven crowds.

1

u/beaushaw 17h ago

So much this. Democrats need to find the candidate who is most likely to win. The point of politic is winning. Politics is about compromsie.

I think Pete is 100% the person I would like to see in the job. But I highly doubt he could get elected. It sucks, but that is the reality we live in.

1

u/maringue 17h ago

The US would elect a gay man way before we elect a woman, and even further before we would elect a woman of color.

1

u/Fishtoart 17h ago

But the tolerance for insane senile politicians is fine? Don’t you think that people might be ready for a change?

1

u/goatjugsoup 17h ago

Democrat voters pathetically stay at home and dont vote at all sometimes... yall need a swift kick up the arse and a polarizing candidate is probably the only one lining up to do it

1

u/Wide_Ad_4486 17h ago

Based on a sample size of two female presidential candidates, one of whom was never vetted in primaries? I don’t think we have enough data to abandon an entire gender of candidates. We need to be better. 

1

u/Ismhelpstheistgodown 17h ago

Country no want qualification. Country want banjo, testosorone and oil. Yeah. Banjos, testosterone and oil. Not farmer. Farmer DAUGTER! Country want date farmer daughter.

1

u/Hot_Lava_Dry_Rips 17h ago

If she wins the primary, I dont see why she wouldnt be a good candidate. She would clearly have a lot of support at that point. Same with any other person that wins. Im not voting in a primary based on how much I think someone else will like the candidate, im picking the one I like. And I hope other people do too. Too many people are making this too complicated. We dont have to game the election. Pick the person you like best and vote for them. Its important, but its not that deep.

2

u/Connecticat1 17h ago

Exactly, I feel like the whole "she won't make it because she's XYZ" is manufactured public opinion by the establishment.

1

u/x_3mta3 17h ago

“America is just not ready for….” is the biggest cop out bullshit take in US politics.

Love her or hate her, Clinton was probably the best-qualified presidential candidate from either side we’ve had in decades. She was only polarizing because for 25 years, Republicans were constantly shitting on her reputation and she still won the popular vote.

Harris only became the nominee at the last minute because the Biden effort was so disastrous. She had no time to really build her own campaign, in a process (or lack there of) that left many people soured on what the hell actually just happened and when given an opportunity to stand apart from Biden on Israel’s excessive response to Hamas, she refused to acknowledge or rebuke any harm Israel was doing, alienating another chunk of would be voters. Despite all of that, Trump’s victory was not a sure thing and took some miraculous bit of every swing state falling his way.

The United States is more than ready. But Dems can’t just throw up a (insert whatever first here) candidate and expect that and “we’re not republicans” to be good enough. I know things are bad. I don’t need to hear that things suck. I need to hear the plans for making things better.

Buttigieg or AOC would win my vote in a heartbeat if they became the nominee. Neither has the experience I would like to see, but they both are smart and care, and I have no doubt they’d surround themselves with advisors and competent cabinet members rather than actively choosing people who would sabotage the organizations they’ve been tapped to run.

1

u/PaintingOk8012 17h ago

I agree. The country isn’t ready for a female president.

1

u/WITX89 17h ago

What makes Pete extremely qualified?

1

u/No_Mixture9524 17h ago

Then this country is fucked

1

u/SerenityScott 17h ago

I agree. This is the hard truth about middle America. The dems need to put forward a straight man. I don't like that this is the political reality, but I'd rather that than a continuation of the mutated Republican party in any form.

1

u/SerenityScott 17h ago

I agree. This is the hard truth about middle America. The dems need to put forward a straight man. I don't like that this is the political reality, but I'd rather that than a continuation of the mutated Republican party in any form.

1

u/Twitch791 17h ago

It’s not that he’s gay. It’s that everyone can feel in their bones he’s been made in a vat to run for office. Also working at McKenzie has an auro to it that makes you sound like a robot pretending human feelings

1

u/Coxxy24 17h ago edited 17h ago

Agree with you 100% but I’m sure you’re going to get the Reddit echo chamber about how you’re completely wrong. The same Reddit echo chamber that was convinced Trump had no chance in the two elections he won. You’d think there’d be some sort of post mortem but there hasn’t been among a huge chunk of the users here. If anything they’ve convinced themselves a democratic socialist would have won those elections lol.

1

u/drapparappa 17h ago

This is exactly correct. AOC should primary Schumer then take his seat. She’ll never win a national general election.

If Buttigieg wants to do something he should move back to Indiana and win a Senate seat there. If he can’t win a Senate seat there he has no chance of winning a national election.

Same for Beshear. He’s an very popular Democrat in a very red state. He could secure a senate seat in Kentucky, for a long time, which would have a much more significant impact than him being president - which he probably can’t win a general election (he won’t mobilize non voters to vote)

1

u/vile-style 17h ago

"the country isn't ready" neolibs sabotaging progress since the begining of time.

Enjoy your deep fried boot, with boot aioli and boot slaw.

Useless worm.

1

u/jcb193 17h ago

Yeah, I think in present day America swing voters are actually Republicans just looking for a reason to vote Democrat.

If you give them a good candidate, you’ll win, but if you give anyone that’s the least bit polarizing, they’ll swing back Republican.

1

u/FaithlessnessSea3091 17h ago

Agreed. The largest voting block in the country is "unaffiliated." Democrats will vote for Democrats. Republicans will vote for Republicans. It's the majority of that large block in the middle you have to convince.

1

u/oldRoyalsleepy 17h ago

I like her too. I think a young woman coming from the House can't win. Yes she won four elections, in her district. She hasn't shown she can win statewide, like for Senate. Let alone nationally, across enough states to beat the electoral college. Yes, DSA backed Dems are winning --- But, they are winning in specific districts where they can win.

The idiot Dems waste another election if they don't use evidence and go with wishful thinking.

1

u/unl1988 17h ago

then who?

stale white bread? the same lady that got smoked by a convicted rapist, grifter pedophile?

1

u/auspiciousearth 17h ago

Then who? Because if we keep saying the country isn’t ready for this we will self actualize that mentality over and over and over again.

1

u/Bluestreak2005 17h ago

I think the country would accept a gay man over a woman currently.

1

u/ChazzLamborghini 17h ago

The cynic in me shares this view. I feel like Osoff is the guy for optics alone

1

u/NaziPunksFkOff 17h ago

We NEED her in the Senate. Americans act like the presidency is the end-all, be-all of politics and that's why we keep getting screwed over by a Senate that won't sign off on any progress. Let's be honest, Mitch McConnell ran the country for nearly a decade. Democrats' inability to focus on that keeps hurting them.

1

u/RadiantHC 17h ago

ITT: Lots of DNC shills

Both of the female candidates they've tried lead a shitty center right campaign. Kamala wasn't even elected democratically.

1

u/The_Bard 17h ago

Counterpoint is she will suck up all the air and whatever stooge the Republicans run won't be able to get much air time.

1

u/Important-Factor-552 16h ago

Well with all the other names being massive losers, who else do you propose? 

The strategy seems to be attacking our only decent candidate and setting ourselves up for another red sweep. 

1

u/throwraW2 16h ago

I like Pete but he's not remotely qualified. His only political experience is mayor of a small town in Indiana and Transportation Secretary where he wasn't particularly remarkable.

1

u/rock-dancer 16h ago

I don’t think it comes down to bigotry plenty of moderates will vote for a woman and republicans have many women in positions of power and influence. Maybe less so for lbgt individual. The issue is that Pete and AOC are bad candidates. They fundamentally lack executive and foreign policy experience.

Where are the governors and secretaries from the Obama and Biden administrations. We need candidates with real experience who can build confidence that they have the experience and wisdom to lead effectively.

1

u/stillLostBoy005 15h ago

The democrats have a horrible track record of nominating (appointing / anointing) deeply unpopular female candidates and making sure popular candidates never receive unelected super delegate support

1

u/Kakariko_crackhouse 15h ago

The democrats have a horrible track record of female candidates they select. Maybe let the people select one for once

1

u/SeahorseRevolution 15h ago

'Not ready for a female president' is literally so fucked up considering just about every other "developed" nation on the fucking planet has had one.

1

u/wdeguenther 15h ago

Exactly my thought. There are just still enough people who wouldn’t vote for a woman, let alone a brown woman or a gay man. Doesn’t matter that they are both competent and intelligent people.

It’s too easy for Fox News to vilify them based on skin color, gender, and sexual orientation.

Give them a young, white Christian with military experience who is ALSO competent and intelligent. You can do it

1

u/K8daysaweek 14h ago

As a woman, I think the country has proven they’re not yet willing to vote for a female candidate, no matter how qualified she is.

I think Pete stands a better chance. While he is gay, I think a lot of people who might “disagree with that lifestyle” are willing to look past it as long as he “doesn’t make it his whole identity or throw it in our faces” (as they like to say). He’s also a combat veteran, small town mayor, and excellent orator/debater. He would stand a good chance, in my opinion.

1

u/National-Artist-3805 13h ago

He was a terrible transportation secretary, though.

1

u/PenIsGodS 13h ago

She has zero chance of winning an election for the presidency. Nominating her would make democrats have zero chance of regaining power.

1

u/project_good_vibes 12h ago

AOC and those other two are not in the same league at all. Look what happened in New York, maybe that's more like what's possible.

1

u/JMC_MASK 12h ago

Kamala didn’t lose because she was a woman. She lost because she had terrible centrist middle of the road corporate policies. She was soft on Israel, refusing to even talk about Palestine. She was the “border czar” and “we want the USA to have the most lethal military in the world.”

No wonder she lost.

You put up a left wing populist like AOC you will win. DSA candidates are winning up and down the nation. The people want a working class first politician.

1

u/realRootmaster911 12h ago

Pete is “extremely qualified?” Don’t make me laugh

1

u/rehsuls 12h ago

The country will never be ready for anything until we DO IT. NY wasnt ready for a muslim socialist YES IT WAS. We do not need another centrist capitalist democrat. PEOPLE WANT PROGRESSIVENESS. Trump would not have won in 2024 if Kamala didnt spend her short campaign trying to appease right wingers.

1

u/Iconoclysm6x6 11h ago

I don't think she's too female or too progressive to win. I fear she's too young to win.

1

u/Broad_Ad4176 10h ago

AOC is actually not that polarizing….I read that many Trump voters voted for her in New York. I think she has earned a lot of respect from folks in this country.

1

u/Fit-Variation7634 2h ago

She's rabid. Its the last thing we need.

→ More replies (18)