Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has accused establishment Democrats of treating her “like shit” as progressive activists urged her to run for president in 2028.
In a 100-minute long video posted on Instagram, the 37-year-old congresswoman from New York said that the party had a “remarkable opportunity” to pass left-wing policies after the midterm elections. She also accused the party’s leadership of starving funds from left-wing candidates during the campaign.
“There’s this huge conversation about candidates that were under invested in,” Ocasio-Cortez said. She cited Angie Nixon, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America who came within 240,000 votes of flipping Florida from red to blue, but ultimately lost to the Republican candidate Ashley Moody.
“If Angie Nixon had just had a little bit of that support, that outcome could have changed. But that money has to come from somewhere and it comes from these people,” Ocasio-Cortez said in reference to the party’s Senate leadership.
Reflecting on the period after she was first elected to Congress in 2018 at the age of 29, Ocasio-Cortez accused senior Democrats of being “horrifically cruel” to her. “I mean I was treated like shit,” she said. “Everybody took a swing at me.”
The Bronx congresswoman is seen as the likeliest progressive candidate to run for the Democratic nomination for president in 2028.
Dude if she becomes president the end times are near.
Aren’t you weirdos into that?
For those of us paywalled out and looking for the video, I think I found it.
I am not on Instagram, but I found it via another article. Yesterday, November 9, AOC posted a live on her IG reels that explained the process of selecting a new Speaker of the House, and it is 100 minutes long, so I’m pretty sure this is it.
I use igram.mx to view and download Instagram reels, for those of us who do not use Meta products at all. Put her username “aoc” in the searchbox, it will take you to her profile, and right now it’s the one in the top center with her pointing to a white board with a dry erase marker. You might have to pass a quick bot check; I always do on that site.
I will vote for her in the primary and happily the general election if she wins the primary. I certainly hope she does.
I’d consider voting for her in the general even if she lost the primary.
If only we had ranked choice voting nationwide
It’s as obvious to them as it is to us. It would be naive to think they don’t know. At this point everyone against RCV is telling us who they really support by their actions.
AOC supports ranked choice voting and that’s why she’ll likely get my vote.
‘…Anyway, that’s why I’m excited to give Hakeem Jefferies my full and unconditioned support.’
(Did the article mention this? It’s paywalled for me.)
I can defend that. Jeffries is a nonentity; house democrats have been able to walk past him for 2 years. Schumer is far more of a problem, and has the contacts and connections to ratfuck anyone over anything. When Schumer wants to raise money and whip for Israel, he opens his Rolodex. When Jeffries wants to raise money and whip for Israel, he asks Schumer to open his Rolodex. Both need to go, but ousting Schumer as majority leader is step 1 towards that. You can disagree with the political calculus on that, but there is political calculus on that.
Thats unfortunately not even a little surprising
Controlled opposition.
Her honesty and directness are so refreshing. I wish I could be more like her, just a totally good pure person. It also seems like she genuinely tries hard, like her success is not without extreme effort.
No such a thing as a “totally good pure person”. You can praise people without lying to yourself, it’s possible I promise . She deserves more intellectually honest praise than “she’s perfect and without flaw”
‘Pure’ is nonexistent drivel. No human is ‘pure’ anything. Its dehumanizing. She’s human. She’s imperfect. She gets the job done and has a good heart. She’s not pure in anything.
I don’t know…it’s hard to think Stephen Miller isn’t pure hobbit Nosferatu.
Her honesty, directness, and willingness to continue using our taxpayer dollars to continue funding ‘defensive’ weapons for an apartheid occupation determined by the UN to be guilty of genocide.
(Edit: My mistake, she actually voted "Present’, and her excuse was basically “the bill didn’t do enough so I decided we should do nothing at all”. Very Democrat of her indeed.)
It’s a choice, she chooses that path, every time. Repeatedly, regardless of what she faces, she tries to make the best choices in that situation. And the more you do that the better you get at it. It sounds simple, in writing it out, but it’s usually the hardest choice. It’s choosing to stick to your guns, regardless of social ostracism.
Repeatedly, regardless of what she faces, she tries to make the best choices in that situation
Including voting against the bill to discontinue funding for the Zionazi state’s Iron Dome?
(Edit: My mistake, she actually voted "Present’, and her excuse was basically “the bill didn’t do enough so I decided we should do nothing at all”. Very Democrat of her indeed.)
It was chess. She sent a long letter to her constituents explaining why she went from no to present.
There was a lot on the table they were fighting for in a republican led congress.
Dems pressured her hard to vote yes, and she needed them to synchronize to try to rescue “The Build Back Better package”
The bill was rushed in to create a political wedge
finally her vote was not actually affecing the outcome, so it was pure political capitalI don’t give a fuck about your “chess” during genocide. You vote to stop the mass ethnic cleansing of human beings or you don’t. And if you don’t, fuck you, in the least uncertain of terms.
Well lookie here, another fine blocked user, good riddance
liberals when they encounter principles: BLOCKED
No concessions on Genocide support.
good for you, nothing to see here
A 100 minute video from AOC? I’d love to watch it, why would she only post it to Instagram? Are there any mirrors out there?
Found a mirror: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFqWmoyDN1s
She meets people where they are. People are, unfortunately, on instagram
She should post her stuff on lemmy. All 15 of us would be so happy and informed
^ yes. Elected officials speaking about elected stuff should never post to closed platforms only.
Why in the hell twitter was ever used for emergency management / communication, particularly exclusively, was a mystery to me
Good. Democrats know how to treat a pile of dirt like AOC. Maybe she will grow a spine one day and be mean back to these people.
Well I still hate the establishment Zionists more than I could ever hate AOC and wouldn’t call their rat fuckery “good.”
She is endorsing the establishment Zionist. She is the establishment Zionist.
A pile of dirt? I don’t get it. How could someone not like AOC? I am not being sarcastic and mean this literally. She’s extremely likable.
She is bending over backwards to support establishment Zionists while they rightfully insult her. How can you possibly like this person.
I disagree, she’s been changing her tune lately even over defensive spending and I think she’s generally aligned in good ways towards the left. I agree looking at the whole record is sometimes imperfect, but enemy of good is perfect and all that.
She is budging under extreme pushback from even moderate centrists against Schumer and Jeffries. She is far to the right of even centrists.
Then why does she keep trying to be their friend? I don’t understand. If someone keeps punching me in the face I’m not going to want to be besties with them I’m going to do everything in my power to MAKE THEM GO AWAY. SHE NEEDS TO FUCKING FIGHT! She has an entire coalition that would stand behind her if she would just grow a damn spine.
Friend?
If there’s a quality you want in a politician it’s to be diplomatic with others, full stop.
Consider how Mamdani has handled Trump. Breaking bread with bullies, “reaching across the aisle”, overlooking insults, stroking egos, shaking hands, they are all activities that superficially resemble things that friendly people do. But make no mistake, it’s not friendship in the strictest sense. They might actually hate each other, but they’re able to act “friendly”, regardless. We want our representatives to build relationships with people that hold power so they can operate enough to get things done.
Also, it’s not spineless activity. If anything, the capacity to withhold outward expressions of negative emotions is really hard for most people to do. It takes guts, self control, and strength to act in spite of all that. AOC has more spine than most because keeping your powder dry every single day is her job, and she chooses to do that.
She’s shooting for a higher goal, she’s going to take them over from the top.
why does she keep trying to be their friend?
Money. Look at what happened in the Montana Senate race this year: a mysterious SuperPAC poured infinite money into getting Alani Bankhead through the primary over several other, more popular candidates. The Democratic leadership then encouraged her to drop out because they figured that while deep-red Montana would never elect a Democrat, they could get Seth Bodnar in as an independent who would caucus with the Dems. So dark money got Bankhead through the primary, immediately vanished, and split the vote so that the Republican won with only 48% of the vote.
Being able to dump infinite money into a primary means that, if you don’t play ball, the neolibs will keep you from office by any means necessary.
Because that’s how the government actually functions? It’s all committees and favors and the longer you’ve been around the more influence you amass. If the progressive arm thought they had the numbers to freeze out the establishment they would be doing so already.
This seems a little like asking why would the right fielder for the Dodgers keep trying to interact with the other players
You can try to get others traded but there’s only so much you can do on that
Ma’am, with the greatest possible respect, that’s how colored, LGBTQ, First Nations, and immigrant peoples have been treated in America for fucking decades.
She was a working class brown woman; what the fuck do you even mean by this?
This patronizing shit is tiresome, speaking as a “colored”.
She’s been saying this the whole time she is in office to be fair. It is a great time to remind everyone the way democrats are acting right bow though.
You’re absolutely correct. Have you forgotten that she is a woman of color herself?
Nope, but if it’s that bad for her, how much worse it is for those that don’t have her station?
Of course. Establishment Democrats are anti-labor, and AOC is pro-labor.
And she’s not a Zionist.
I remember her speaking about this quite candidly not too long ago (I want to say last year or two but time flies these days) about going into a side room off the House chamber and seeing herself giving an interview on a major outlet, and a fellow Democrat – knowing she was there – just shaking his head at the TV.
That cruelty exemplifies what is wrong with the party, and precisely why the likes of Schumer and Jeffries must go.
She needs to overhaul the party. I kind of lean toward her primarying Schumer, but I am amicable to a 2028 run. Whichever she decides, I’m with her.
If she doesn’t, the best compromise I can see that can viably win is probably Ossoff, which given what he said here I think is generally the right message to carry forward.
Their unabashed support for Israel, including AOC’s decision to vote against discontinuing Iron Dome funding (in other words, if you remove the double-negative, voting to continue funding it), seems like a bit more apt exemplification of “what is wrong with the party” than someone shaking their head at a TV.
She’s part of the problem. Ilhan Omar is a much stronger example.
(Edit: My mistake, she actually voted "Present’, and her excuse was basically “the bill didn’t do enough so I decided we should do nothing at all”. Very Democrat of her indeed.)
I have no problem with AOC’s ethical stance — mirroring that of El-Sayed’s recent words himself noting protecting all children, including Israeli children. The needle can be threaded, and I condemn just as much those child deaths on O7 as I do the greater atrocity by Israel that came after, proportionally. Only the humane would.
Additionally AOC would later state that Israel can fund its own defensive systems and refused to further provide such aid. Presumably this is in part due to the risk of Israel misappropriating these resources as well.
Overall AOC rarely misses the mark, and I’m no single-issue voter. Climate Change, Women’s Rights, LGBTQ+ rights, Healthcare, Support for Ukraine against the Ruzzian genocide, Campaign Finance / Election Reform, protection for immigrants, etc. — there is a lot to consider, and even within the framework of Palestinian human rights, we wouldn’t have a problem standing up to Israel if every person in Congress was like her.
We need to remind ourselves too that Democrats are better for civilians than Republicans in every way and end more wars than they start, at least in the past 30 or so years. For example, Trump with Musk’s help gutted USAID, which has now led to over 600,000 civilians deaths in just a year’s time, and continuously rising. That dwarfs the deaths in Gaza and Ukraine, combined. Naturally one atrocity does not detract from another, but it’s important to put into context the Greater Evil in what is often an inevitably binary-choice outcome for elections. In other words, never let perfect be the enemy of better.
First, given the technological and military gap, Israeli children are under no threat at all compared to Palestinian children. And second, calling for the dismantling of Israel and the creation of a multi-ethnic democratic Palestine would do more to protect all children than giving Israel the means to continue their genocide. Israel, as a settler colonial project, invites violent resistance against itself. Israeli would be more safe if the Israeli state didn’t exist.
mirroring that of El-Sayed’s recent words himself noting protecting all children, including Israeli children
The existence of israel guarantees the continued death of Palestinian children. You don’t get to have your cake and eat it too.
The rest of your points are fair but I don’t trust her. I don’t trust any Democrat (or other politician) unconditionally, but Ilhan Omar is by far in the lead for me. I hope I’m wrong about AOC but that vote tells me she’s more of a political opportunist than a truly principled person - and changing when the winds blow differently could support that conclusion just as much as it could support the conclusion that she saw the error of her ways.
For example, Trump with Musk’s help gutted USAID, which has now led to over 600,000 civilians deaths in just a year’s time, and continuously rising. That dwarfs the deaths in Gaza and Ukraine, combined. Naturally one atrocity does not detract from another, but it’s important to put into context the Greater Evil in what is often an inevitably binary-choice outcome for elections.
Right, but the weak leadership of the Democrats (and their corruption in rigging the primaries against their populist uprising in the form of Bernie Sanders) enabled Trump’s rise. So it’s binary in the narrative, but under an oligarchy, it’s really just one choice (so no choice) with different theatrical performances attached.
I think my opinion of Israel and its future existence as a state is independent of Hamas murdering children — regardless of nationality. I’m fairly sure El-Sayed would say something similar.
I do greatly appreciate Ilhan Omar as well, don’t get me wrong! She’s just not in a position to challenge Schumer.
Right, but the weak leadership of the Democrats (and their corruption in rigging the primaries against their populist uprising in the form of Bernie Sanders) enabled Trump’s rise. So it’s binary in the narrative, but under an oligarchy, it’s really just one choice (so no choice) with different theatrical performances attached.
But that’s not the opinion of the very guy for whom they allegedly rigged against, is it?
By all means, I think we have our work cut out for us to clean Democrats up, but the likes of Bernie’s acolyte, AOC, is by no means the problem. Very low if not next to last on the totem pole.
Also I don’t find it performative when we know if Harris won, 600,000 people would be alive who now are not. When we’d still be in the JCPOA and not have bombed an Iranian school and more. When we’d still be in the WHO. When we’d still be in the Paris Climate Agreement.
I’m not sure what you mean by the first line. My meaning is you don’t get to frame enabling Israel’s continued existence via funding for the Iron Dome as being about some sort of net-effect of protecting children when Israel’s mere existence guarantees the opposite, as demonstrated again and again throughout history.
Indeed, Bernie’s movement outgrew him, starting from the day he caved and endorsed Biden. And look what that got us: I was duped into voting for genocide, in the name of “lesser evil” politics. That paradigm is how we ended up in a world where the “lesser evil” is “maybe they’d do a little less genocide than the other guy.”
Harris promised the “most lethal fighting force in the history of the world” or whatever the quote was, and promised “no deviation” from Biden’s openly-genocidal policies. You can dream of a kinder genocidaire, I’ll dream of the end of genocide and empire.
Well I think the cart is being put before the horse; for we must deal with the present reality instead of far-fetched idealism: Israel exists, and that fact isn’t changing anytime soon. If we want to talk about net data: then providing defensive missiles so errant rockets don’t strike civilians isn’t necessarily a bad thing because ultimately a net-reduction of child deaths occur. The absence of funding for the Iron Dome further yields no evidence as to the damage wrought by Israel (e.g., Iranian and Hamas missiles have in no way shape or form deterred Israel from carrying out its offensive strikes of genocide).
It just leads to a net-increase in civilian deaths, overall.
When each child’s life is sacred, I can see why one would advocate to mitigate all. Either way, I suppose this is water under the bridge considering AOC’s position has since shifted anyway and she’s still better than any Republican – which is why every single true dissenter to the war caucuses with Democrats, at least while in elected office. A few Republicans protest, but mostly from the sidelines and having since been primaried out.
Not sure what you mean with respect to Sanders; for independent of the movement outgrowing Bernie, you do see why Bernie continues to caucus and endorse Democratic candidates under the same principle of “lesser evil” politics? Why the man himself does try to play the game of sitting out of elections or partaking accelerationism? Why Ilhan Omar does the same. Even Ilhan Omar endorsed Harris, rightfully so. So how can they be both sides of the same coin when one side is simply better than the other on practically every issue, including Gaza, USAID, and Ukrainian support?
Some of your quotes from Harris are anachronistic. She went further, called for Palestinian self-determination, ceasefire, and two-state solution. In order to deal with the greater evil of Trump, she had to toe the line on battleground swing states with considerable populations of Jewish supporters who at the time were still somewhat sympathetic to Israel (we all saw what happened to Cori Bush). She got scared, tried to play safe by listening to advisors. In spite of this she was still better (again, see Sanders and Omar’s endorsement).
Disagree with the starting premise. Rhodesia existed. Then it didn’t. Israel must meet the same end.
I remember Pelosi especially was vicious. AOC didn’t get brave again for a year + after that shit. Great point about Angie, she would have won with minimal support. We need to form a 3rd party, enough is enough.
Nah, take over the Democratic party from the inside. Like the tea party did, which paved the way for maga inside the Republican party. Without first fixing our voting system, third parties do nothing but harm
The tea party did that with the blessing and funding of oligarchs. Leftists don’t have oligarch funding.
We need to form a 3rd party, enough is enough.
“How Republicans Never Lost an Election Again: The Realities of Vote-Splitting”
How about taking over the Democratic Party? That process is already underway, let’s keep it going
Might I suggest the Working Families Party instead of forming a new one? Just make sure to take into account the realities of FPtP voting, if your district hasn’t implemented a better system.
I hate how so many progressives are calling for AOC to run for President in 2028. If she wins and has a Democrat-controlled senate, she’ll still have Schumer as as blocker. If she primaries Schumer and is successful, a huge obstacle to progressivism is removed and a progressive Senator is installed. While that doesn’t guarantee that the Senate would be led by a Progressive, it puts senators like Warren, Wyden, and Merkley in the running.
She could also stay there for 6-18 years, building the political capital to make a very strong run for President, and let more of the generational shift happen first. I personally think that a run in 2036 or 2044 would be a better target for her.
Since Presidents historically come out of Governor’s or Senate offices, I think this would be the best way for her to make a successful run.
