this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2024
1139 points (98.8% liked)

politics

19072 readers
3743 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TexasDrunk@lemmy.world 109 points 4 months ago (10 children)

Hey, DNC, aren't you desperate to put a woman up for election? You've got a fiery, quick-witted, awesome, young one here that is full of ideas and not afraid to try stuff. The conservatives haven't had time to run decades of smear tactics against her and she hasn't been threatening her husband's SA victims. I bet she already has a plan to deal with someone accusing her of being born in Mexico (I understand she's Puerto Rican, but that's not the bogeyman) and shut it down before years of idiocy bring it up again.

She's standing behind Biden this time around. I'm hoping for a run in 2028. It would be the first presidential candidate in a while that I didn't hold my nose to vote for.

[–] model_tar_gz@lemmy.world 41 points 4 months ago (3 children)

She’s a firebrand—that’s not an insult. But it is a fact that if the DNC puts her to run, she will mobilize a lot of voters who may otherwise sit this one out. Hard to say definitively how many on either side; but I think she’s likely more hated by the rightwing base than she is loved by the left wing/centrist base.

I don’t think it would be a good strategic move in this cycle. Although I’d love to see her in the Oval Office and would vote that way should the chance arise.

[–] Stupidmanager@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago

Uh, late 40s here. I didn’t want to vote for Clinton (I did), but I’ll be first in line for AOC. She’s the right kind of direction to inspire us Genx who vote liberal. Time for Joe to step down.

[–] Schmoo@slrpnk.net 16 points 4 months ago

Any good leftist candidate would mobilize opposition voters, that is unavoidable. It's no reason to not run a good candidate.

[–] TexasDrunk@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

Agreed on this cycle. Agree or not we've got Biden. That's not changing and that's who I'll be behind. But damn, next cycle if she's in the primary I'm going to get even more involved than I already am.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 21 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You've got a fiery, quick-witted, awesome, young one here that is full of ideas and not afraid to try stuff.

All evidence suggests that's the opposite of what the DNC wants

[–] Frozengyro@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago

A moderate Crusty old white guy or bust! And then when he's too old say he shouldn't be running....

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 4 months ago (5 children)

AOC suffers the same problem as Nancy Peloci: she's too demonized by the GOP. It's an odd problem to have but she would need to retire from the House for a few years and run later.

If you want AOC-like, Kathy Porter is actually a very viable candidate. The question is whether the DNC is willing to let her actually run or if they'll pull a "It's Hillary's turn" like they did to Bernie.

[–] Omega_Man@lemmy.world 50 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Who gives a shit what the GOP wants.

[–] billwashere@lemmy.world 27 points 4 months ago

The GOP demonizing her is a good thing. It means they are scared of her.

[–] RippleEffect@lemm.ee 16 points 4 months ago

Right? We get it, the GOP wants to watch the world burn.

[–] TexasDrunk@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Voters do after decades of shit tactics, but she hasn't been embroiled in anything and they haven't had time to really put it into people's subconscious.

Also, I agree with your sentiment. I can't give the slightest shit what a bunch of homophobic, regressive, hateful, Nazi cuntbags and their enablers think. If we work hard and get lucky we may be able to live in a world where what they think never matters again.

[–] Omega_Man@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

Democrats always want to please the GOP. Anytime they appoint someone (for example a special counsel) it always has to be a Republican to avoid the bad optics. Fuck that noise.

Meanwhile the GOP takes its gifted position and furthers it's goals.

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 17 points 4 months ago

she's too demonized by the GOP.

This will be true of any candidate another party runs. It is their primary MO, so ultimately, it needs to be factored out of discussions like these. If Joe Voter believes that shit anyway, it doesn't actually matter what candidate you run.

[–] danc4498@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago

I think AOC has a lot of the same features that made Bernie so popular on 2016 with the added benefit of youth.

The GOP will try to demonize, but she will rise above the noise the same way Bernie did. Given that she is so young, she can stay relevant and pick and choose the exact moment she wants to run for president. Or even VEEP as the gateway to presidency.

[–] too_high_for_this@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago
[–] Seasm0ke@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

I was pretty bummed when she lost the Senate race

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (5 children)

I'd vote for her, but I don't think she's ready. Better than Biden though.

Personally, I want Jon Stewart. He's not perfect, but there's not a single person on the planet better equipped to take down Trump.

I don't know if Jon or AOC would make a better president, but Jon would be better at campaigning against Trump.

But really just give us someone under 65. (Note: I'll still vote for the good person who's too old for the job if the alternative isn't better.)

[–] TexasDrunk@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago

I definitely get the love for Stewart. However, he holds no elected position and has repeatedly stated that he has no interest in running for president. So I'm not going to be the one to hold a gun to his head and force him to run.

AOC has the proper ambitions. If she's not ready then let her decide that because the only reason she wouldn't be is because a bunch of out of touch old dudes refuse to mentor her and I'm not sure that's such a bad thing.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 4 months ago (2 children)

pls no more reality tv presidents.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago (1 children)

There's a bit of a difference. Jon Stewart has made his reputation and career in political commentary. That's not exactly The Apprentice.

[–] billwashere@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

Yeah Jon is very intelligent, very quick witted, and a deep thinker. He reads a lot, listens, and learns from his mistakes. He knows to admit he doesn’t know something and listen to advice. And most importantly, he actually wants to do what’s right. I’m pretty sure he’d be a top 10 president.

To compare him to a reality tv personality like Trump is a little disingenuous.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

ps no more actors or presidents that want to get into acting

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 months ago

That's not fair, you don't always get to choose what you'll be successful at. But we could use a doctor president...

[–] billwashere@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

I would literally pay hundreds of dollars to see Jon Stewart debate Trump, like pay per view. Jon would eviscerate Trump. He might frustrate him so much he’d have a heart attack right there on stage …. or better yet cause Trump to shit and completely overflow his diaper. Trump should probably wear his brown pants just in case.

[–] Freefall@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago (2 children)
[–] Jarix@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Bet you if AOC said to Jon stewart ill run for president if you are my running mate he would do it.

That would be the best campaign in history

I would love AOC and bernie sanders to be on the supreme court, however impossible that is

[–] Freefall@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

He might just jump on that grenade because the US would need it and I'd give him better than even odds he would self-sacrifice to counter evil winning.

[–] Jarix@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

I also think he would do an actual good job as vice president. Like break the mould type good

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago

We could draft him

[–] commandar@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Personally, I want Jon Stewart. He’s not perfect, but there’s not a single person on the planet better equipped to take down Trump.

Stewart would be terrible for it.

Smart guy, great at calling BS, but he's continued to preach understanding and cooperation in the post Trump world in a way that, plainly, isn't possible when the American right operates in pure bad faith at basically every turn.

Take all the issues Obama had getting walked all over because he tried to work with the GOP and amplify it.

[–] billwashere@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

I would gladly vote for her. Hell I’d even volunteer for her campaign.

[–] smeenz@lemmy.nz 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)
[–] moody@lemmings.world 13 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] smeenz@lemmy.nz 4 points 4 months ago
[–] kittyjynx@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Sexual assault victim. Bill Clinton is a rapist and general sex pest.

[–] smeenz@lemmy.nz 4 points 4 months ago

Thanks. I was seeing 'South American' and it just didn't work.

[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago

Problem: The Democratic Party would rather loose than get a left-winger elected.

[–] chakan2@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

She would have a real chance at winning this cycle...thus there's no way they'd run her.

This will be the last cycle we have Democrats...a LOT of people are about to fall out of windows Russia style after Trump takes office.

The Supreme Court made him a king and people like AoC will be first on his hit list.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

~~First and foremost, she isnt eligible to be president until next year. She's only 34, and won't be 35 until after the inauguration.~~

Whoops, looks like I misread and was off by a year. I don't think it's going to matter this time around, but hopefully they keep her in mind for the future.

[–] Resonosity@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

Per US Constitution, Article 2, Section 1:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

AOC was born in New York City, NY, USA on 10/13/1989. On 10/13/2024, as in this October 13th, AOC will turn 35 years old. At that point she will be eligible to take the office of the presidency.

35 would be the youngest age of any president, though. The most recent younger presidents were Barack Obama and Bill Clinton at 47 and 46, respectively. The youngest ever president was Theodore Roosevelt at 42.

It would be a hard line to cross given that the majority of voters seem to be older, but it would be monumental in my nation's history.

[–] Frozengyro@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If you read the second paragraph they are talking about 2028

And adding to that, she is eligible to be president this year, or rather 20th January 2025, because she's turning 35 in october...

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone -5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

she only turns 35 in october so she's got a long future ahead of her but she wouldn't be eligible until 2028.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 26 points 4 months ago

She only needs to be 35 when taking office, from what I understand. So would be eligible now.