This stupid topic again
But sure
I will vote for any Democrat but I would prefer it not be Kamala
I preferred not to vote for Biden but he turned out to be a good president.
He’ll be remembered fondly if he doesn’t fuck up this election (i.e. not stepping aside).
But what if he doesn’t step aside and wins reelection?
Yeah that’d work too. But it won’t happen.
Pack it up bois, newnewaccount called it. We are done here.
Instead of pissing about how it won’t happen go do something else why don’t you? Your usefulness here - Now - has run its course.
For the millionth time: every time they’ve done it before, they lost in a landslide. NOT stepping aside is the marginally better play.
The best play is to roll the die on a real progressive but there’s no data to back it up because there is no time to test it.
He turned out to be a decent president, except for the massive, glaring failure to build any sort of meaningful bulwark against fascism. He had, like, the absolute best justification and mandate to aggressively crack down on the neofascists with Jan 6, but he pussyfooted around and dragged his feet on fucking everything so much that basically nothing has been dealt with or constructively changed since the coup attempt occurred.
I love how you skip the part where Congress blocked everything the SCotUS didn’t. That’s so efficient.
Well he has absolute immunity now. Could hang them all on the Whitehouse lawn. /s
I would vote for any viable candidate not Trump. I would prefer not Biden and not Harris. In fact I’d prefer a sane Republican… but there seems to be a distinct lack of them.
I’d vote for AOC though. She reminds me of the principled republicans of yore, albeit with different views
In fact I’d prefer a sane Republican…
This is a trap. Even with a “sane” Republican in office, the administration will still work to accomplish the policy goals of the GOP.
Yup, Project 2025 is not just Trump and a few MAGA extremists, it’s signed off on by all the right-wing think tanks. If people want to avoid Project 2025 they need to make sure Republicans are out of power for multiple election cycles at a minimum.
In fact I’d prefer a sane Republican
I can’t think of a single one. Even the ones that pretended to be sane and were pushed out by the party were horrible.
I’d prefer a sane Republican
It’s funny to me that Biden is currently both the most liberal and the most conservative presidential candidate.
You would prefer a sane Republican but you praise AOC that is at the opposite end of the spectrum…
The thing I really admired about Republicans was that they had principles and held to them. AOC fits that bill. Plus, I believe that you have a right to your viewpoint even if I disagree with you.
The thing I really admired about Republicans was that they had principles and held to them.
🤨
In 1953 they did, yes
Some weird little holdouts like John McCain and Liz Cheney survived into the modern era, somehow, but they’re about as rare and as realistic in the modern-day GOP as Bernie Sanders and AOC are in the modern Democrats.
If you wanna be able to vote for Adam Kinzinger, say so. It sounds like a good idea to me. But don’t pretend it is because he is a Republican when his principles are exactly what got him run out of the Republican Party on a rail.
What principles exactly are you referring to?
Crushing union strikes with a joy in her eyes that you wish you had when you looked at your kids.
principled republicans of yore
Is that before all the GoP a d DNC switched sides over slavery?
Moderate Democrats like Harris are like broccoli. Nobody really wants it, it’s not the highlight of the meal, but you need your veggies to get the proper nutrients to fight fascism. (Plus, if your diet has too little fiber you end up full of shit.)
Eat your broccoli!
Instructions were unclear, Secret Service did not approve of me nibbling on Kamala Harris’s elbow.
If they replace Kamala then they lose the black vote, so that is not happening.
This is one of the single most oversimplified political analyses I ever have seen
And it is correct as we just seen.
I’d vote for AOC, tbh
Bernie is too old, she’d be my top pick in Congress by far.
But the Party probably wants to go maximum hail corporate neoliberal, especially when there isn’t a pesky primary to deal with, because thats what they’re paid to do.
You know, someone who will come to continue to protect our beloved economy… from our society and the needs of our people. Better than fascism, but just extending the meaningless subsistence in service to the owner class.
AOC isn’t even in the conversation though. I think she’d face fierce opposition to even getting the nomination. She’s a pretty divisive figure.
She’s a pretty divisive figure.
Not for anything she does, AFAICT.
Republicans are terrified of her. She’s young, attractive, charismatic, outspoken, and intelligent to say nothing of her being a woman of color. They are giving her the full Hillary treatment. It seems like she’ll be a bit harder for them to tarnish that way, but not for lack of trying.
Yes, I agree, but we ought to draw a distinction between someone who acts divisively from someone who’s the target of the right-wing hate machine.
she’ll be a bit harder for them to tarnish that way
Well Hillary is only one or two of those traits you listed. I like Hillary, but she is not charismatic. I think she had good policy sense and could have been an excellent president, but policy doesn’t win elections.
I should be clear I’m talking about public perception here, not my personal opinions or any assessment of her policies.
When she voted to disallow train workers striking was pretty disheartening. Who’d expect someone so pro-worker to knock the teeth out of a union.
Probably voted that way because she was assured Biden would continue to hammer out a better deal for the rail union, which he did! Better healthcare, more PTO, and the addition of paid sick days!
Here’s the article right from the rail union thanking Biden for not giving up on their fight. https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid#:~:text=These 12 unions represent more,agreement for paid sick leave.”
The fact that she’s a conservative bogeyman is kind of besides the point. The neoliberal, corporate-friendly leadership of the DNC would NEVER let her get close to the nomination. They did the same thing to Bernie 8 and 4 years ago.
That’s exactly what I was referring to.
To be clear, the Democratic leadership is not all powerful. The people can push through a nominee leadership hates if we unite. But given the nature of this nomination process, party leaders have an exceptional amount of power this year, and the people have very little.
She’s a “radical” to centrists
“Centrists”
Hence the " "
Wha…what do you mean not in the conversation, you are literally conversing with someone about her, on a front page post about her. She is popular, and no presidential candidate has ever not been divisive. Not being trump is divisive.
not in the conversation, you are literally conversing
- big-c Conversation
- a comma is not a colon
- there are other adverbs
No its a little c
The conversation among those who will decide the nominee. I’ve not heard anyone seriously discuss this outside of online forums.
@LibertyLizard @pearsaltchocolatebar
Lol, it’s what happens when you speak truth to power.
I’d vote for her because of a myriad of reasons though.
She is the future of the party.Maybe maybe not but there’s 0 chance she’ll be the nominee this year.
Agreed, it’s not in anyone’s interest to test the supreme court ATM.
I said it once here, a couple times before, & I’ve said it a few times in passing conversation in person. I would vote for AOC and I think she’s wonderful. 👍I like her too but I personally am not sure her popularity is broad enough to be president. But we’ll see. I hope you’re right.
She’s not old enough anyway, need to be 35 to be president, she’s 34
Hmm interesting, looks like she turns 35 in October. I’m assuming you have to be of age to run? Or is it to be elected? I’m actually not sure.
If you will be of age to serve before inauguration you are eligible, AOC is legally eligible to run for president.
Not to mention that she’d be 35 before the election.
On the day you take the oath of office. She could turn 35 on January 19th and it works.
Who knows, maybe she’ll give it a go next cycle
You also can’t be president if you participated in an insurrection after taking an oath, but here we are.
Why is he being downvoted for providing the correct answer?
Because it’s not correct, she would be 35 by the time she took office.
It is correct if you understand American politics. The candidates are officially nominated in August and she will still be 34 then.
The law says you have to be 35 to BE president, it says nothing of nomination. She would be fine by the time she was sworn in.
People don’t like facts, I guess
And Katy Porter
I don’t want AOC to run yet. She’s got a long political career ahead of her and folks tend to bow out of politics after they’re president.
She would be an amazing elder statesperson after her time in office. I hope to some day see it.
Is there any reason she couldn’t serve a different position after 2 terms as president?
No reason, it’s just the way things tend to be.
We should bring back the idea of a former president running for senator. Show the world that the President isn’t any more special than Congress.
yeah but the democratic party would rather lose the election than nominate her.
It’s she old enough right now? Can she be a candidate at 34 if she will be 35 before Jan?
Yes. The age requirement is for serving, not for running.
She’s 35 on October 13th. Fully qualified.
Why? Do you loathe organized labor and want to see them crushed to maximize corporate profits?
I don’t think she could win even though I think she’s perfect. The US isn’t ready for a woman president, and a non-white one on top of that. I think that’d be pretty cool if Adam Schiff ran with her as his VP.
She’s not wrong.
Exactly. Like yeah girl spit your facts, but we will take what we can get and the age and health resilience are legitimate concerns we’ve been having. Kamala solves the age issue, that’s progress to me. I don’t want the president to be a puppet of someone who no one voted for.
Isn’t that all presidents, like, by definition? XD
If you want to make a spectrum of it sure, but the fact remains the more cognative function declines, the easier it is for bad actors to take advantage of them. Scammers target old people for the same reason, they’re more vulnerable.
I mean, like, structurally. The office of the president is not one that a person can occupy without becoming beholden to lobbyists.
Thats more a function of the economic system that creates people who have enough money to do that than the office itself. Regardless the above point still stands, it’s still easier to trick and take advantage of older people suffering mental decline.
Ugh. I agree that Kamala sucks, but I think it’d be a mistake to try to go with anyone else at this point. She has a pulse, a functional brain, lots of political experience, a long life ahead of her, and yeah, she’s made some terrible decisions and gaffs in her career, just like Joe Biden.
I don’t like that she was a cop, but Joe Biden chaired the Senate Judiciary committee for like 100 years, and got us Clarence Thomas, so…nobody has the moral high ground here.
We just need to win, and frankly I think if we try to go with someone new and untested, we’ll lose. We’ve been in a “lesser of two evils” situation for some time now.
There’s weeks left to go 'til the convention, plenty of time to run an actual primary if the DNC wanted to.
Ideally, yeah, but think about the logistics of pulling something like that off. And would it be a full primary redo? Like fresh ballots sent out to all dems? Or do you mean a mini primary just with the existing delegates? Because we already voted in the Democratic primary election…
I’m just really trying to be pragmatic about this, I can’t imagine a scenario where we pull this off and come out stronger. I would love to be wrong.
Saying a month is “plenty” of time to plan and run any kind of election on a national level is so ridiculously out-of-touch I read it back like five times thinking maybe it was sarcastic. Off the top of my head there’s booking polling places, securing & training staff, voting machines, ballots that need to make their way through the entire supply chain starting all the way back at pre-production. Mail in ballots alone usually go out like a month ahead of time to compensate for issues with the mail.
At this point in time, there’s a higher probability of Superman flying around the world backwards to rewind time and correct the gunman’s aim to actually hit Trump at that rally than there is of the Democrats being able to successfully pull off a second primary in a month. And that’s not even to touch the “coming out stronger” piece of it, which again, no chance in hell that happens with the kind of chaos a second primary would cause.
People live in their fantasies, where national primary elections are just a cut and paste affair that takes two days to set up.
You know, they could be. But I agree right now they aren’t.
Personally, I don’t think it matters in this case. It’s not like we had a robust primary from the Dems this time around.
The idea that elections take years is an artifact of our broken news cycle. England can call for snap elections and install a new government just 25 days later, and that’s England.
Um OK but surely they already have policy, processes, and infrastructure in place to successfully execute it within that time frame. There’s a big difference between being already set up for it and the Dems randomly deciding that they’re going to run another primary next week.
That sounds like the party’s problem.
They should spend some of Biden’s PAC money on it.
I guess the USA just can’t handle it. We must be pretty weak.
England is also a much, much smaller country in terms of both size and population.
Probly just the superdelegates choosing in secret, like they threaten too if they don’t like the public vote. If their going to only be Democratic when it’s convenient, they might as well as course correct. I am for replacing Biden, but if they are even talking about it now they best get a move on. Apathy is gaining ground every second they are not at the wheel.
Probly just the superdelegates choosing in secret, like they threaten too if they don’t like the public vote.
Feeling free yet?
If there is an actual primary, it will not be with actual voters, but amongst the named delegates (99% of whom are pledged to Biden and are obligated to vote for him of he is still in the race) and the superdelegates.
But only Harris can keep the funds accumulated for Biden’s campaign, right? Wouldn’t make much sense to go for another candidate I think…
Given the source of most campaign financing in the USA, I’d actually prefer a candidate who refuses to touch PAC money.
“The only candidate I like is the one who has no chance of winning!”
Fucking leftists getting played like a fiddle by purity testing.
Yeah, “Purity testing” like asking for left candidates to actually be left and not just more center-right neoliberals.
You fuckers call everyone center-right. By your insane definition, the Democratic party is center right so you should stop demanding they put up a candidate that statistically no one in the country wants.
By your insane definition, the Democratic party is center right
That’s most of the world’s definition. America has a conservative party and a right-wing nutjob party.
If you don’t like facts, you’re going to hate it when I start pointing out policy differences between them and left-of-center parties. XD
I’m not confident how this stuff works, because it’s dumb as hell, but any PAC can do whatever they want, as long as they don’t directly coordinate with the campaign. The Biden-Harris PAC can just use their money to support whoever the Democrats choose I believe. It doesn’t have to be spent supporting either of them.
You’re right and I wish they would, but I have near zero faith in their willingnes, ability, and coordination.
I don’t think there time for an actual primary. I’d favor an open convention tbh.
plenty of time to run an actual primary
Look at what a practical idea this is
As with other things e.g. Bernie Sanders as the nominee, there actually is a sensible option here, which is running a contested convention… it is highly notable to me that a lot of the people offering such constructive criticism on this topic are so studiously avoiding those sensible strategies when they are trying to “help”
I dunno, there are actually quite a few sensible and practical ideas in this thread, your thread, btw. Your post has elicited a good discussion, why throw shade on the people earnestly participating? If you actually want a contested convention, this thread is nothing compared to some of the wild shit that would go down in that scenario.
Because redoing the primary is an absurd idea
And I am, probably to an excessive and embittered degree, made cynical by the amount of open propaganda in and out of the media which is attempting to put out bad ideas on purpose to hurt the Democrats and help the fascists
And you’re not wrong. A contested convention would be a massive shit show which might doom the Democrats in the election irrevocably. But it might also produce a nominee with some kind of mandate, which would be nice. It would also be feasible to do, whereas holding another primary election would not.
If the party leadership goes with Kamala, we’d damned well better have a real primary in 2028.
Yep, I really do not like Harris, but in this context she’s the most realistic option and she’s slightly better than Biden on basically everything. Otherwise it becomes a battle against right-wing establishment democrats, and we have no more time for that really. Getting Biden out is hard enough.
I’m voting for the administration that will keep democracy alive in our country.
And it’s 🔵🔵🔵
I will too, but my concern is that Harris won’t be able to excite the voting base.
My vote is secured - it’s whoever has a D next to their name… I’m worried that not enough democrats will turn out if we choose poorly.
I’m worried black voters will not turn out in the needed numbers if they interpret skipping Kamala as the presumptive nominee to be a betrayal. I’m very concerned about a damned if you do, damned if you don’t scenario.
Biden has done a good job as President. I don’t love him as the nominee, but I’m afraid the chaos of him stepping down is going to create a no win scenario. Some folks think he is the no win scenario. If it’s truly impossible for us to put forward a candidate who can win, that’s not a problem we can pin on the other side - we did that to ourselves. And at the worst possible time for it.
Your concerns are valid, but the supreme court is being actively used for lawfare & some Washington backroom deal for the doner class outside of the norm for anyone else besides the republican party has double ungood chances for the switched candidate to succeed.
There is so much about donald’s project 2025 that isn’t known by average people. There will be no election for the democrats come 2028, only for MAGA if they get their way.
Does anyone like Kamala lol
Maybe if she did something, we could have something to like about her
VPs have no job except to succeed the president and break ties in the Senate, along with presiding for a few ritualistic things. That’s really it. What do expect want her to do?
VPs have no job except to succeed the president and break ties in the Senate
sinister Cheney chortling
Give speeches? Get people excited about voting, civil rights, etc
So you want a cheerleader like Ballmer. “Developers! Developers! Developers!”
She does those all the time. You aren’t paying attention.
Where?
She owned a couple initiatives, chaired a couple committees, cast a few votes. Surely, something there could have turned into a success. Heck, she could campaign for the ticket, present the platform, cheerlead for her running mate.
Given her track record, no, probably best she doesn’t do anything
Just because you’re not paying attention, doesn’t mean something didn’t happen.
Besides: post-9/11, the veeps stay in the shadows or at the off-site bunker.
First Past The Post voting ensures that a good portion of the people voting for her do not want her. Same for Joe biden. Same for the Republican and democratic parties.
first past the post isn’t responsible for that. it’s a tactic called “strategic voting” and it results in the consolidation of parties under fptp. the solution is not to vote for people you don’t want to win.
Gold medal in mental gymnastics there.
it’s a clear-eyed understanding of what to do about party consolidation under fptp.
First past the post isn’t responsible for that. It’s actually because of first past the post.
- you
this is a straw man.
That’s not what that means.
There’s a gaggle of coconut memes of her on tiktok, so I guess some people do.
Kamala and AOC would be a lit ticket. I still think we’re barreling towards another Reagan era victory by doing this. But that “medical emergency” + instant COVID was almost a sign from the universe.
VPs are usually picked to shore up an electoral weakness of the candidate in question. I don’t think adding a second brown woman to the ticket would make sense, much as I would personally love this.
The weakness this election cycle, for the dems, is the apathy of the base. In that context AOC would be a pretty solid choice.
Much as people on the left like to repeat this, I’m not sure it’s evident that this is the main weakness of the Democratic ticket. Even if true, you’d be solving one weakness by creating another.
But I’d be curious about polling on this, I could be wrong certainly. If Harris becomes the nominee, we might start to see some polling on VP picks.
You got a good point there. Its just, who else is palatable? Whitmer + AOC?
I think the VP for a woman or POC probably needs to be a boring white guy unfortunately. I think there’s still a lot of racism and sexism lurking beneath the surface in the US so you don’t want it to look like some kind of feminist or minority takeover.
In terms of quality I would prefer AOC/Kamala to Kamala/AOC, but neither combination is good for electability.
Well it’s risky either way. That said Kamala as vp was supposed to represent the “in case of emergency break glass” younger democrat - not too left, just neolib enough for the party, yet younger - that would step in if Biden’s age became an issue.
It’s now an issue and she didn’t play a role in reassuring the public, so…
As damning as it is to the US, the best bet for winning is a good-looking, smooth-talking white guy who will look presidential when compared with Trump.
Jon Stewart. He adamantly opposes the suggestion he run, which is exactly what we need. He’s got decades of experience in global politics, he’s likeable, got name recognition. And to your suggestion he’s a smooth talking attractive white man
He’s got decades of experience in global politics
It’s hilarious that people genuinely believe this.
He made the right call on a whole bunch of foreign policy issues that the Very Experienced Professionals were assuring us they had a handle on. Just because he doesn’t have the relevant real skills, doesn’t mean the establishment candidates have any of it, either.
He made the right call on a whole bunch of foreign policy issues
You’re confusing setting actual foreign policy with heckling from the sidelines. Stewart wasn’t overseeing any US Departments or writing big policy whitepapers adopted by either of the parties. He was spitting jokes from a news desk in a 30 minute segment four days a week.
Just because he doesn’t have the relevant real skills, doesn’t mean the establishment candidates have any of it, either.
Whatever you might say about Biden’s policies (re: bellicose, economically ruinous, genocidal), he definitely has the skills to implement them. That’s a big part of the problem. If he was properly incompetent, a bunch of these nightmare programs wouldn’t be put into effect.
Have you noticed a worrying shake to his movements ever since he started back with the daily show?
Dunno about him, but I did. I hope he’s okay, he’s a national treasure.
A little bit of Palsy would help him fit right in with the octogenarian candidates
Gavin Newsom you say?
You know, I’m not picky. My primary requirement is must be able to win.
Under conventional rules he has the best fighting chance.
the best bet for winning is a good-looking, smooth-talking white guy
Oh no, they’re trying to run Beto O’Rourke again, aren’t they? Dude’s going to come out on a skateboard playing the guitar and lose by double digits.
It would be very in character for the democratic party to disarm the population right before the Republicans force through their fascist plans.
Kamala is a brown lady cop. EVERYONE hates her and she was kept out of the spotlight for a reason.
If we do drop Biden, she is it. But anyone leaping at that is a useful idiot, at best
It’s not just that everyone hates her, it’s that people from different demographics hate her for different reasons.
Republicans hate her because brown+woman+democrat, left-leaning people don’t like her because cop; democrats don’t give a fuck as long as it’s not trump (is the lettuce that outlasted truss still available?), but if given a clean slate the DNC would probably try Hillary again as a token “first female president”, rather than do an actual primary.
Wide distaste does not a successful campaign make.
if given a clean slate the DNC would probably try Hillary again as a token “first female president”, rather than do an actual primary
The DNC seems to really want another Trump presidency
AOC should run. I’d vote for her.
She’s 34
She will be 35 by the election, or so someone said in another thread
Let’s remove the minimum age, since clearly there is no maximum.
Born 10/13/89, she’d be 35 at the time of the election and thus able to run
Delay the election. We do it all the time for baseball games.
Is that not old enough in the US?
Got to be 35 by the time you take office. Not sure if she would be cause I didn’t look it up.
Why? Do you enjoy crushing unions?
GIVE IT A FUCKING REST
The whole fucking front page is already filled up with this stuff
WE ARE AWARE OF THE BIDEN STEPPING DOWN THING
Dude I felt bad even posting these two
Because if the whole problem is “RED RED RED RED RED RED” overwhelming anything useful then “RED RED NO IT’S BLUE RED RED BLUE RED NO BLUE NO RED” is not really an improvement
But yes I did feel like both of mine were factually relevant and the minority report should be presented, and I anyway couldn’t produce any real percentagewise increase in the tide if I made it into a full time job and hired assistants
Ignoring issues doesn’t make them go away
Yet… First Past The Post voting continues to artificially limit the number of viable political parties.
Ask anyone that wants to remove people off the ticket: Who should they be replaced with?
I haven’t heard a good answer yet.
Kelly, Duckworth, Whitmer, Newsom, Buttigieg, Warren, Franken.
I would legit take time off and drive to a battleground to campaign for Franken…
Whitehouse would be solid as well. AOC would also be a fine pick if we got party unity behind her.
AOC would also be a fine pick if we got party unity behind her.
Centrists would vote for Trump.
I think you misspelled conservatives - nobody sane would vote for Trump.
Right. Like I said. Centrists.
AOC could unify the party behind her, but she’d need to do it with a primary. The Biden delegates and/or the party establishment aren’t going to make a wild swing-for-the-fences play like that with an appointment.
I don’t disagree. I think she’d be an excellent choice and absolutely trounce Trump but it’d be a hard fucking sell to the DNC.
She’s got more name recognition than Harris though so the “Harris is the only one voters would recognize” bunch can get fucked.
You legitimately think the Democratic party will get behind any of these nominations enough to defeat Trump? I’d say most are considered more controversial than fuckin Hillary was.
I legitimately think that this was what you intended to reply with regardless of what I said, and I very much doubt you actually bothered to read it.
Seriously. This is a pretty mild list of semi-proven politicians with national recognition. Warren (or maybe Franken) are the only ones I can see being potentially controversial and even they’re both still broadly liked within the party.
Also, how does someone who’s not familiar with Kelly or Duckworth have a strong opinion about who’s controversial in the Democratic party? They’re not superstars, but you weren’t exactly digging up no-names.
It is extremely notable to me that the “get rid of Biden” is so HUGELY emphasized over “let’s figure out who instead”
It makes me look suspiciously at what would initially be the pretty sensible idea of subbing in someone younger
That continues to be a piss poor rebuttal because the two questions are separate. Many people literally don’t care. And anyone who thinks this is some sort of ratfucking is either detached from reality or doesn’t actually know that many Democrats. The calls to step down (and frankly depression) have been coming from across the party right from the night of the debate. The gaslighting is just the worst possible response to an already bad situation.
You look suspiciously at anything but blind unthinking worship of Biden.
If you’re gonna call me a bot, come out and say it instead of hiding behind vague language like a coward.
No one is calling you a bot.
We’re calling you a right wing agitator.
until he’s gone, every other name is moot.
Incorrect, I actually looked up both Kelly’s and Duckworth’s backgrounds as I wasn’t familiar - I see why they were first!
Your ears must be full of wax.
The whole “but they might not be on the ballot in Ohio” rings a lot less worrisome when you see that Trump is +9 in the state vs Biden:
This is why you never listen to panicking morons by themselves. If you remove the whole ticket they won’t even have ballot access.
Idk if they can even remove half the ticket, unless Biden dies. Even then, that may result in a Trump acclamation
It really depends on how they do it. It will get challenged regardless, but I think Harris still has the best chance there too.
If Biden stepped down because of health reasons, Harris is his VP, her job is literally to step into the presidency in that case. It’s her and Biden’s ticket that got elected, so there can’t be any talk about it being undemocratic. The people who were allowed to vote in the primary voted for Biden-Harris.
It sounds like AOC is freaked out by all these incompetent idiots around her talking about their what their donors want, when really they should be coming up with a plan that has the best chance of running the gauntlet of legal challenges. The obstacle to success will be donor interference by rich idiots trying to handpick their own random people.
