New development: AOC will be giving a speech at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta. I think she’s running.
Interesting new poll (scroll down to “Democratic Primary Split By Age”) which shows that the Democratic primary is, well, split by age. Voters under 35 prefer AOC, with Harris a close second. Among older voters, Newsom and Buttigieg are the top choices; Harris still maintains a fair amount of support, while AOC pretty much drops off a cliff with over-45s.
Hypothesis: although she clearly has work to do with older voters, this data is potentially promising for AOC. Young voters tend to be progressive. It’s theoretically possible that all the centrist young voters in the country have rallied behind Harris, but it seems much more likely that once the campaign begins in earnest, many more young voters will move from Harris to AOC than vice versa.
Let me be clear. I like AOC. I wouldn’t have any problem voting for her if she were to win the democratic nomination. She is excellent at energising the base. I also don’t think there is any question that we have way, way, way too many politicians over the age of 70.
But how in the world would it be good news for AOC to have almost no support from people 45+? That isn’t good news for her campaign. It would be a death sentence. There are a lot more people over 45 than there are 18-44. What is worse is that older people are much more likely to vote.
The main positive from an election point of view I see for AOC is that it looks like she will be the only candidate running as a progressive\left wing of the party. On the other hand, I would argue we haven’t elected a president who campaigned as a left-wing progressive since FDR. (Note I am differentiating how they campaigned vs how they governed.) Of course, on the third hand, FDR is generally considered a top 3-4 president of all time.
Young voters (18-24), while not at all worthless, are not worth a whole lot on their lonesome. They are by far the most fickle voting cohort, in the sense of whether they’ll bother to vote at all. AOC can’t win without a very solid chunk of the over-45 crowd. If anyone should be thinking about working her way up slowly up the political food chain for another decade, it’s her (so the new over-45s a decade from now age up with her). At 36, she’s got plenty of time. Unless all she wants to do is to try and drive the Overton Window of the primary slightly leftwards, which seems like a waste of effort. Shooting for Schumer’s Senate seat in 2028 when she will only be 38 or lieutenant gov/gov in 2030 seems like a better path.
AOC has done things like condemn the opportunistic cozying up to far right populists like MTG. She’s somewhat to the left of me, but she’s definitely no far left horseshoe dweller.
Which is why the already dubious prospect of relying on “young progressives” to carry her into office is a fool’s errand. She’s already being outflanked from the left by the Platner types, accused of being a Neoliberal Zionist shill, and protested against with great intensity. Here’s just one of many examples of AOC being hounded for not being far left enough:
Young “progressives” won’t propell AOC into office, they’ll dub her the new Hillary Clinton and fight against her with far more ferocity than they have ever shown Trump.
AOC has plenty of room to grow, like Obama did a year before the '08 cycle started up (and, like Obama, she appears to be the most popular candidate with young Democrats). If she runs, and if she’s as talented as I think she might be (which is Obama or Bill Clinton level communications talent), then she’ll easily gain support and probably win. But that’s a few ifs, so we’ll see. If it’s not her, hopefully there’s another candidate with excellent communications talent that will rise to the top.
I’d argue presidential elections are the last place to try. Not that it is worthless, just that jumping feet-first into the most expensive and intense campaign cycle is what you should be doing last on your checklist.
As folks know, I’m not a huge Newsom booster (but not quite a full-on detractor), but he sorta did it the “right way” IMHO. Big city district supervisor at age 30 (first appointed to partial term, then re-elected) > big city mayor, elected twice > lieutenant governor, elected twice > governor, elected twice. Served mostly full terms.
There is absolutely no reason AOC needs to go that exact route. Maybe a single term in the Senate would work just fine. But I think a more local executive seat or higher national legislative seat would be more useful at this point in her political career than trying to grandstand with very thin hopes on the biggest stage.
Remember all the people saying the same thing about Obama? It’s true that a woman can’t win the presidency… until it’s not anymore. And it won’t be because the country is any different – it will be because a uniquely and especially talented woman runs for president. Obama didn’t win because the country was finally ready… he won because he was just too damn talented and skilled to lose. I think AOC might be that good (but obviously no one can know for sure yet). And mathematically, she’d just have to do a bit better than Hillary Clinton or Harris.
“They” are a private company. “They” also run things at the whim of the stockholders, and pay their executive $34 million. Is that how we want to run the nation?
The oldest active pilot (current) is Harry Moyer (USA, b.30 October 1920) who aged 100 years old, still flies his aircraft, as verified in San Luis Obispo, California, USA, on 30 October 2020.
Warren Buffet is 95. Dick van Dyke is 100. Harrison Ford is 83.
We’ve never had a President younger than 42 (and that was a VP elected when he had just turned that age) and only two younger than 44. So Ocasio-Cortez could comfortably wait another decade and still be on the younger side of the distribution. And she has been out there getting seen and heard. Governor or US Senate first, maybe? We know Senate-to-POTUS is not a very succesful path historically but having her running beyond her district means more practice at getting someone from the red lands to at least look at you. Plus Chuck really needs to chuck it. I know I’d rather NOT have some intermediary Dem POTUS put her in some Cabinet post where she has to execute Someone Else’s Program.
I comfortable about being ageist when it comes to the presidency. I like my Democratic presidents to serve two terms, so I’m not looking for anyone over 65, tops.
The same is true, in a way, about younger candidates. If you’re under 40 and running for president, you need to blow me away. AOC is one of the few Democrats who might be able to pull it off. I’d rather she take Schumer’s Senate seat, but if she wants to run for the big job, then more power to her.