She’s embarked on a nationwide tour with Vermont’s Independent Senator Bernie Sanders, held town halls outside of her district in upstate New York, and raised $15 million
Democratic Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a progressive who has cemented her popularity with young voters, is reportedly considering running for president or the Senate in 2028.
Ocasio-Cortez, 35, made a splash when she was elected to represent New York’s 14th congressional district, located in the Bronx and Queens, in 2019. Now, the Democrat is reportedly considering taking the next step in her political career as the party searches for its next generation of leaders, Axios reported Friday.
Members of Ocasio-Cortez’s team have recently been positioning the progressive lawmaker, known as AOC, to either run for president or run for a Senate seat.
“Plotting” is an infuriating word choice.
I’d vote for her. I’m not interested in entertaining any arguments about electability. The least electable person in the universe has won the presidency twice. If enough people vote for her she is electable.
AOC concocts DEVIOUS scheme to repossess burger from McDonalds using PRIVATE bank account funding
AOC buy lunch at McDonalds.
AOC funds animal murder with her own monies.
" is reportedly considering running for president or the Senate in 2028."
Stupid clickbait title.
Title is a lie. It says right in the body “president or Senate”. Downvote and report.
Also: “plotting”? What the fuck is this? Has running for president suddenly become illegal??
it’s subconscious conservatism sneaking into the headline.
Good! I hope she comes with some fire, sound policy ideas, and a tight campaign
She is one of only two people I would be excited to vote for.
The other person is Jon Stewart.
I want Dolly Parton.
I’d vote for her in a heartbeat.
Probably one of the few candidates that have a chance with the democrats that would get me out to the polls.
If they nominate someone like kamala harris or joe biden again, it’s all over.
This is of course assuming it’s not all over already because they ran spineless crooks who don’t represent the working class.
If they nominate someone like kamala harris or joe biden again, it’s all over.
If they nominate someone like that, you should still go vote for that person and continue to fight for change, because the alternate is still far worse. The reality with US politics is that unless one of (or both) the two major parties implodes, the president will be affiliated with one of them. If one of the parties does break apart, it will guarantee a win for the other party.
If there is one thing the right does very well, it’s to whip it’s voters in line when election time comes. They may bitch and moan, but they’ll vote for the ® regardless.
You should be directing all of this energy towards those nominating candidates that don’t represent the interests of the working class.
sure thing, but you still need to vote for the less harmful candidate if your favourite doesn’t get the nomination. You got Trump because people figured they’d protest and not vote or vote for Jill Stein or whatever. Republicans may have not been fully on board with a second Trump term, but they still voted for him. They will vote for whoever has the ® by their name next time as well.
Does voting dem just kick the can down the road? Absolutely, but better than not having a can to kick…
sure thing
proceeds to do the exact opposite
Yeah, looking forward to staying home on election day. So fucking tired of the moderate white.
Yeah, looking forward to staying home on election day.
Have fun with another republican term then, because that is the only plausible result of not voting against them. That is, if there is another election since your morally superior not-voting got you Trump again and Project 2025 is by many accounts, well ahead of schedule. Good Job!
You should be directing all of this energy towards those nominating candidates that don’t represent the interests of the working class.
God dammit. You people just don’t learn.
We’re both going to be stuck with a republican because you keep repeating the same mistakes.
Both of your comments were a complete waste of energy and did nothing to change my stance. You need to direct that energy towards the people voting for the hillary clintons and joe bidens over the bernie sanders and AOCs.
Now, are you going to waste more energy or finally learn and do something different? I know what I’ll put my money on!
Have the day you protest-voted for. Keep protest voting and losing. Keep letting your rights get eroded because your perfect candidate isn’t on the ballot. But hey, if you protest vote enough, you might not have to vote anymore, the candidate that you allowed to take the white house said so.
Make sure to vote, just not for the capitalist party.
At the moment, that will likely be Newsom unless something major happens.
Looks like I’ll be sitting out another election.
Everyone getting mad at this needs to ignore me and direct any grievances they have towards anyone supporting newsom or another establishment candidate.
^^ supports MAGA ^^
She won’t win a run for POTUS. Try Senate first.
I don’t know if she has the volume of support needed to take on the next R candidate for POTUS, but Newsom also has a lot of skeletons that will probably tank him if he gets on the ticket. She would do great as a replacement for Schumer and from what I’m reading has a good chance to do so.
But, like, hear me out: Tim Walz is in a pretty decent position for a run at POTUS: There’s enough time for him to bow out of the next gubernatorial campaign and prop up a progressive candidate. There’s enough time for him to gain support in the party. His terms as governor were largely regarded as successful, showing that he is capable of being a head of state. Compared to Newsom, he also has a much better track record when it comes to standing up for minorities.
It is also worth noting that Walz is an old (-ish? Compared to recent candidates, he’s apparently on the younger side…) white guy who coached high school football. This means that he’s already well suited to get the swing voters - the ones that vote regularly, but will vote for either party. If he were to run, he would need a running mate that could sway the left-wing non-voters into voting, which means a fairly high-profile progressive.
Bernie is too old now and would be more useful promoting younger politicians.
AOC in the case of a Walz presidency would be more effective as a senate leader.
Any other center/center-right running mate would tank his candidacy.
Because the USA is racist AF, anyone who looks or sounds too middle eastern will tank him.
However, it’s been established that a black person can be POTUS and a black woman can be VPOTUS, so might I suggest Tim Walz/Summer Lee for 2028?
3rd time’s the charm for seeing if the country will accept a woman. What’s the worst that could happen?
The liberal only sees a candidate through the lens of identity politics and can’t imagine any other qualities.
Exactly - its definitely the liberals who refuse to vote for women. You seem super duper smart, pal. Any other insights to bless us with?
Sigh.
Look. I like her. I like her fighting spirit. I like that she gives a shit. I like it all.
But when is this country going to learn? Look around you. Our culture is trash. This country is overflowing with racists and sexists and incels. Look at where we are right now.
We’ve tried to elect a woman twice in a row. They were both WAY more qualified than their opponent. And they lost. I voted for both of them.
If we run AOC, they’ll run a white male bigot. And they’ll win. Again. Using the same tactics.
Know your audience.
I’m not sure the racists and sexists and incels are gonna vote for the Democrat candidate even if it was a literal clone of Donald Trump, solely because it’s the Democratic candidate
Damn, guess we better appeal to the sexists and racists, there is just no other option. You are very smart.
“Plotting”? Wtf is this wording?
Propaganda, as is usual
It worked so hard. I’m voting for her because this means she’s serious.
AOC is instrumenting a plot of running for office, while MAGA is merely preparing for another coup.
She’s plotting against the democratic establishment that wants to nominate another creepy fash loser.
That’s kind of how the article frames this. She’s popular with young voters, but would be jumping ahead of “established” “Democrats”. Very stupid framing since the establishment has failed us so consistently.
Plotting, eh? How diabolical of her.
She’s earned my vote now.
She’ll have my vote. …assuming there is actually a 2028 election. And that we’re not extinct by then.
She’d have my vote, but I doubt she could win.
Yeah I would definitely support her but I don’t know why you have downvotes. The fascist have been running character hit pieces on her and misinformation campaigns for like a decade now non stop. Also America has shown it’s true colors by electing Trump twice. I just don’t know how people think we go from an open racist to a women of color without major election reform. Which is happening. Just in the wrong direction. What reality are y’all living in where she has a chance? I hope I’m wrong but just from looking at the current state of things… I know people are somewhat fed up with things, but the idea that they’ll pull their heads out of their racist asses by that time seems ludicrous.
She might run if she believes it would steer the conversation in a productive way, even if she didn’t believe she could win a primary.
I think she’d have a great shot at the primary.
More likely she’s running for senate.
I know I’m a day late here replying but this narrative is just antiquated like our entire system. If we want to keep at this, we don’t need her after a stint in the Senate, we need her now. What exactly will she gain by going that route? Because it’s the best way to gain respect? Maybe she’ll get some experience?
Look, statistically you are right. But let’s run the facts, normal is just a setting on the dryer and we’re not playing by the standard rulebook anymore.
Ah yes, I remember when Trump became a Senator.
Fun stats: 17 U.S. presidents were previously U.S. senators, and also 17 were previously state governors (additionally, Harrison and Taft were territorial governors, and Jackson was military governor of the territory of Florida).
Six U.S. presidents had held previously both governor and U.S. senator roles, including Jackson and Harrison’s non-state governorships.
5 U.S. presidents were not elected to public office prior to holding the presidency - Taylor, Grant, Hoover, Eisenhower, and Trump.
Why do you think this?
I’m not the guy you’re responding to, but historically it’s been a lot easier to be taken seriously after a stint in the Senate. Hard to say if that’s still the case, we live in weird times, but the Democrat establishment is a lot more bound by tradition than Republicans, and it frequently leads them astray.
It’s very possible with a coalition formed through other recent success stories like Mamdani, she’s concluded that a coup of sorts is possible (and I mean that with the utmost excitement). They might have numbers showing now is the time to capitalize on a ground swell and really shift the party. I’m assuming they’ve got some sort of data backing this, even if it’s just “we don’t know if we can win but we know the establishment Democrats will lose”
Usually it is said that someone is ‘contemplating’ or ‘planning’ a run for office, but since it’s about a woman the headline says ‘plotting’ because that sounds underhanded and nefarious and the media wants to get the framing in place early.
That said, I think it would be better for her to run to replace Schumer in the Senate. A better chance to win and could do more good there.
I suspect poor headline editing. The article is about multiple options (Senate, President, other party-promoting path) where the navigational use of the term (“plotting a course”) is reasonable. But then the headline couldn’t fit even two options, so it got reduced to just President and no one on the team connected that plotting has a negative implication with a single subject.
If this is “plotting”, then I am all for this “villain” to win. The wording of the headline implies that AOC is a bad thing, when we got…waves at orange fuckwit
Anyhow, if given the choice between AOC and Newsom, AOC all the way.
I’ve always interpreted it more as ‘plotting a course’.
Yeah I was honestly surprised to see how many people in this thread interpret “plotting” as inherently negative.
It’s both, but in journalism, you pick your words carefully. There’s no chance the writer of the headline wasn’t fully aware of both connotations. There are a dozen other words that could have meant the same thing without making it sound nefarious.
I think it’s like when people use “scheme”. In the US it has heavy tones of nefarious intent, but it’s still used a lot because some people just don’t think of it that way. (Be it from UK influence or whatever.)
I am guessing it is due to politics inherently being a skulduggery kind of thing, especially with mainstream media being in the pocket of the wealthy. If our news outlets had a reputation of being fair and truthful, their wording wouldn’t be treated with suspicion.
As an American, I have to turn many statements like a rotisserie and think whether they make sense. They cannot be trusted if left raw.
I think “plotting” doesn’t see a ton of use in that more neutral sense outside of a few idiomatic cases like “plotting a course”. I definitely did not naturally associate a presidential run with that navigational sense of “plotting”, but instead the “plotting an evil scheme” connotation jumped out. I’d think of planning a presidential run to be more similar in activity to plotting a scheme, another literal plan of actions to achieve a goal, than to plotting a course as a figurative map of those actions. That’s why I interpreted pretty sharply that way, at least.
Since the article is about her considering multiple options - Senate or President - that she’ll have to narrow down to a single path, the navigation implication seems relevant.
Yeah, I was giving side-eyed to that choice of word, too. Why not just use the word “planning”? The word “plotting” sounds like a snarl word.
Anyhow, if given the choice between AOC and Newsom, AOC all the way.
Uggg I guess I’m same… But effing dems will go with the more fascist option everytime so we’ll get Newsom for sure…
I don’t think you know what fascist means
Look if she comes out of the box swinging, and I mean haymakers both left and right, she could do it. The DNC has to have an honest to god real primary and not the horse shit they pulled with Bernie or the last-minute Harris takeover.
If AOC wins a primary and is nominated, hits the ground at a full sprint, doesn’t pull punches on either side of the political spectrum, prays to Jah, and crosses her fingers she could do a Billy Clint or Obama. She is going to have to learn to play the Saxophone, confess to smoking weed and inhaling, slow jam the news, and probably host a full episode of SNL not just appear as herself in a sketch. If she did all that and she convinces Jesus to come down from on high and endorse her she has a 50/50 chance.
Oh, and she’ll need a gun for her purse like that bargain bin Barbie from Colorado or the dude from Georgia’s 14th congressional district.
