• BURN@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’d argue AOC has the name recognition, but she’d be way too polarizing to ever get her past the establishment.

    • batmaniam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Very mixed feelings. I love having her around but the president shouldn’t be a “super duper senator”. I disagree with AOC on a ton but wish there were 6-28 more of her.

      But the best executive shouldn’t have an agenda. The ideal executive turns around and says “you vote these folks in every two years, don’t yell at ms”

      That’s obviously not the world we live in, but it’s where we need to go.

      And to that… There’s no equivlancy here… You can vote for or against fascism next year in the US. It should be different, but that’s a hypothetical. Just imagine going to an occupy Wallstreet protestor, and explaining they’d be begging for Romney. There is no choice.

      • thantik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        The problem is that if we keep "Middle-of-the-road"ing our candidates, the overton window just keeps moving to the right.

        • ares35@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          the alternative now, though, is the very real prospect of plunging deep(er) into the far-right. recovery from which would take decades.

      • Zoboomafoo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I also think parties need to put forward people with executive experience, such as Governors and Mayors. Senators have only tangential experience