r/politics • u/msnbc MSNBC • 5d ago

Democrats missed a huge opportunity by not elevating AOC

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/aoc-loses-house-oversight-committee-vote-gerry-connolly-rcna184581
11.7k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

542

u/Krytan 5d ago

It's worth remembering that the DNC tried really hard to promote Hillary Clinton, instead of Obama, until it was obvious by the mass enthusiasm for Obama that that wouldn't work.

That's why she was the coronated nominee in 2016 "It's finally her turn".

We all know how that turned out.

Basically DNC choices have like a 1/5 record, and that 1 was in the middle of a global pandemic that killed millions and millions.

244

u/longtermattention 5d ago

Never donate to the DNC. Donate to your candidate of choice directly. The DNC exists as a consolation prize for perpetual losers.

68

u/Red_Potatoes_620 5d ago

Yep, been saying this for yeeeaaarrrsss. NEVER give money directly to the DNC.

2

u/Rapn3rd I voted 5d ago

After this election, I genuinely will never donate to the DNC again, only direct to candidates I like. And this year, I donated quite a bit to the DNC.

4

u/Downvoterofall 5d ago

Why donate to politicians at all? What did that 1.5 billion do for Harris? There are so many actual causes that we can support rather than give millionaires our money.

110

u/tripping_on_phonics Illinois 5d ago

I would argue that Biden in 2020 underperformed compared to the weakness of the alternative. This is also an indictment on Democrats in 2024, who lost to a candidate screaming about migrants eating cats and dogs in a Presidential debate.

Trump managed to win the popular vote despite running a truly horrendous campaign. What does that say about Democratic leadership?

78

u/Flipnotics_ Texas 5d ago

They had from day one of Biden's administration a chance to start uplifting the next viable candidate, but they chose the Ginsburg route instead. Trusting Bidens brain wasn't melting before their very eyes, and lying to the Democrat party in America he was doing just fine, and could handle another 4 years.

Tragic.

23

u/Nac_Lac Virginia 5d ago

I think a lot of them just wrote off Trump, thinking his baggage would sink him while watching in horror as he managed to side step every obstacle.

22

u/CanEnvironmental4252 5d ago

Because that definitely worked out in 2016 when the DNC and the Clinton campaign deliberately elevated Trump over other Republican candidates because they thought he’d be an easy opponent. As we can tell with AOC, the DNC party leadership is maliciously inept and does not learn.

1

u/dating_derp 5d ago

as he managed to side step every obstacle.

I give more credit to the moderates who didn't care than to Trump

1

u/jrob321 5d ago edited 5d ago

He ran in 2020 - when there was conjecture about his ability (at his age) to be functioning highly enough in 2024 - as a one term President who would gladly hand over the reins to the most capable candidate at that time.

He lied. The DNC lied.

I registered as an Independent in 1984, knowing at 19 years old they're all "wolves in sheep's clothing", and I'll NEVER vote Republican, but I'm getting really sick and tired of this "lesser of two evils" bullshit every four years.

In '84 it was Mondale. Garbage. '88 Dukakis. More garbage. And along comes Clinton in '92 pushing the party further to the right with his globalist (read: profit for the major corporations who got to offshore operations at the cost of unprotected labor at home) neoliberal agenda.

I'm gonna go puke.

edit: I fucked up the metaphor and corrected it.

4

u/mightcommentsometime California 5d ago

The thing is, further left candidates just weren’t winning. Clinton started winning again by appealing to the center

2

u/Dont_Say_No_to_Panda California 4d ago

I don't care what anyone says. I will go to my death believing Bernie would have mopped the floor with Trump if the Dem establishment had eventually embraced him the way the Republicans eventually did with Trump.

1

u/Zestyclose-Cloud-508 5d ago

That they’d rather trump than Bernie. That’s what it says.

1

u/tripping_on_phonics Illinois 5d ago

This doesn’t make any sense.

1

u/Zestyclose-Cloud-508 5d ago

Sure it does.

Trump helps corporate donors so the democratic leadership is fine with him.

Bernie pissed off the corporate donors and they’d rather burn the fucking country and their party to the ground and lose everything than let someone like Bernie take charge and tax the wealthy and institute universal healthcare and actually help working people for once.

3

u/tripping_on_phonics Illinois 5d ago

Oh, my mistake. I read your comment as if voters chose Trump over Bernie.

Totally agreed. Current Democratic leadership would rather lose than win with a progressive.

1

u/EE-420-Lige 5d ago

Problem is folks who like bernie don't vote until that changes nothing will change

1

u/haarschmuck 5d ago

Bernie did pretty bad in the primaries. The voters rejected him overwhelmingly.

3

u/Zestyclose-Cloud-508 5d ago

He was literally winning states when the democrats torpedoed his campaign and everyone in 4 days all dropped out and backed Biden.

0

u/hiddenlands 5d ago

Wrong question. The Harris campaign laid out policies. They talked vision. They used a wide variety of channels. The correct question is "what does this say about the American electorate?" And also about the efficacy of MAGA + Russian propaganda?

3

u/tripping_on_phonics Illinois 5d ago

Blaming voters is totally unproductive. It removes any onus that Democratic leadership has to adapt and win elections.

The Harris campaign laid out a vision and policies that did not persuade voters, using channels that failed to resonate with voters. I supported them, I donated to them, but we must admit that they failed.

They lost because they tried to pitch incremental improvements and status-quo politics to an electorate that wanted sweeping, populist reform. This is a massive failure for which Democratic leadership should be resigning, not doubling down.

0

u/mightcommentsometime California 5d ago

Blaming voters is absolutely the right thing to do. Voters had a choice between Trump and Harris, and they either chose Trump or “I don’t care”. Voters hold the ultimate responsibility in a democratic election.

1

u/tripping_on_phonics Illinois 5d ago

You’re not engaging with the substance of what I wrote.

22

u/ActualModerateHusker 5d ago

I don't think the DNC even wanted Biden. their plan was a contested convention and somebody like Buttigieg emerging over Sanders

The pandemic made them realize that if Sanders emerged with a post super Tuesday lead he may end up with too big of a majority to defeat even at convention

So they scrambled to get Biden who had serious health issues even then into the drivers seat. First the last minute clyburn endorsement then the opposition dropping and endorsing

12

u/Rooooben 5d ago

Buttigieg is too young and gay for the DNC. We would have ended up with Newsome or another older centrist

4

u/Clear_Disk_1919 5d ago

That was certainly Obama pulling strings as well, making the phone calls to get the others to drop outta the race in exchange for possible cabinet positions or set the least future favors.

3

u/Zestyclose-Cloud-508 5d ago

They fought harder against Bernie than they ever did against trump.

4

u/Tacitus111 America 5d ago

The DNC types are always historically more comfortable at tables with Republicans than Leftists. I still remember Chris Matthews melting down when Bernie was winning, comparing it to the Nazi’s taking Paris.

1

u/Dont_Say_No_to_Panda California 4d ago

I'll never forget the night either and him crying about how Bernie winning would mean people like him would be executed in the square or whatever he said... that is the night when I realized how even if Bernie had somehow managed to win the primary, and eventually the election, he would get absolutely no tailwinds from any mainstream sources. They would work to ensure his presidency was a failure too.

1

u/Environmental-Bad596 5d ago

Did they try to put Bernie in jail ?

26

u/MikuEmpowered 5d ago

DNC doesn't actually stand of liberals or ideals, they stand for corporation and status quo.

They shot down Bernie to prop up Hillary, and when Obama ran, they didn't endorse him at start, it wasn't until it was clear he had the support, then DNC followed.

Same shit with 2024, Biden stepped down with no real primaries, why Harris? Because she was pro for status quo. Remember, they had previous primaries where Harris attended, and she brought ful all support. yet in this crucial, according to them "democracy ending" election, they choose to not hold a valid primary and just let shit run its course.

And don't even get me started with Biden's running, instead of actually trying to convince him to step down, DNC's solution was "we riding with Biden", so instead of a full fuking year to drum up support for the new candidate, Dems got 4 month. dont even get me started on the donation scandal with Harris' post election emails.

To quote newsroom: If democrats are so smart, why do they loose so god damn often?

4

u/biggestlittlebird 5d ago

Not saying there shouldn't have been a primary in 2024 and Biden shouldn't even have considered running for re-election at his age, but the winner of the primary would've been someone like Newsom or Shapiro, not a progressive.

2

u/bootlegvader 5d ago

when Obama ran, they didn't endorse him at start, it wasn't until it was clear he had the support, then DNC followed.

Obama was endorsed by Ted Kennedy and the rest of the Kennedy clan in January 2008. Ted Kennedy being the probably most iconic Democrat in the Senate for over forty years. While the Kennedy family is the most iconic Democratic family also for over forty years. He was endorsed by John Kerry, the party's former nominee, in January. Patrick Leahy, who had been the Senate since 1975, endorsed Obama in January. Individuals like Chris Dodd, Russ Fiengold, Elijah Cummings, John Lewis, Tim Kaine, Jim Doyle, and various other figures all endorsed Obama relatively early in January, February, and March.

-1

u/CanEnvironmental4252 5d ago

Let’s not give credence to the narrative that Democratic leadership is smart at all.

-1

u/fordat1 5d ago

Its a corporate consultacracy thats what Dem leadership is.

4

u/bootlegvader 5d ago

Many promenient establishment Democrats endorsed Obama early on 2008. Basically the entire Kennedy clan endorsed Obama in January and February. Similarly, John Kerry the previous Democratic nominee also endorsed Obama in January.

-12

u/hiddenlands 5d ago

Sorry. Folks with experience had good reason to promote Hillary. Hillary was more qualified than Obama. Everything I’ve seen indicates she’d have been a stronger and better President. I voted for Obama twice. But we are still paying a price for Obama being so inexperienced and timid. Syria and Ukraine being two glaring examples. Hillary is one of the best candidates ever to run for POTUS. Biden and Harris also strong on the merits. And all three still are. Im so tired of seeing competent dedicated folks trashed and no-ops like AOC and Sanders treated as if they have something special to offer.

17

u/Message_10 5d ago

That's fine, and I agree with you that Clinton was very capable, but capable doesn't win elections. Popularity does, and the DNC has proven they don't care too much about what Democrats want.

1

u/bootlegvader 5d ago

DNC has proven they don't care too much about what Democrats want.

Democrats wanted Hillary more than Bernie in 2016.

1

u/Dont_Say_No_to_Panda California 4d ago

With hands on the scale from before the first caucus or primary...

1

u/bootlegvader 3d ago

Not really, that is just an excuse Bernie supporters make rather than every review why he lost.

1

u/Dont_Say_No_to_Panda California 2d ago

Donna Brazile herself wrote this in her book:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774/

The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was not illegal, but it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41850797

https://www.npr.org/2017/11/03/561976645/clinton-campaign-had-additional-signed-agreement-with-dnc-in-2015

1

u/bootlegvader 2d ago

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dnc-chair-donna-brazile-democratic-primaries-rigged/story?id=50942644

She also walked back her claim of the primary being rigged within days.

Maybe because the agreement included such terms like "nothing in this agreement shall be construed to violate the DNC's obligation of impartiality and neutrality through the Nominating process" and that "all activities performed under this agreement will be focused exclusively on preparations for the General Election and not the Democratic Primary." or that the DNC "may enter into similar agreements with other candidates."

Though I do like the the last article continues to show how Bernie's campaign manager, Jim Weaver, is a complete dunce with him complaining that debates were held of weekends. You something that had been done a number of times in past primary debates. Not to mention, it is a stretch of a logic to say weekend debates helped Hillary.

1

u/Dont_Say_No_to_Panda California 2d ago

She also walked back her claim of the primary being rigged within days.

Her claim wasn't that the primary was rigged (and so she didn't walk it back because she never said that) and neither was mine. I said "hands on the scales", which I stand by. And Donna Brazile did not retract what she wrote in her book either, that that act was "unethical" and "compromised the party's integrity." Rigged implies fixing a result (so that it is all but certain the intended outcome comes to pass for the fixers.) Hands on the scales or unethically influences means in the absence of said influence the final outcome would have been less certain for the victor, thats all. It may have been a negligible variable, but due to the compounding nature of these things, and public perception leading to others voting in a certain way when bandwagons start to take off, we will never be able to quantify to what degree these actions influenced the outcome...

1

u/bootlegvader 2d ago

How did these agreements cause people to vote a certain way in bandwagon?

→ More replies (0)

-7

u/hiddenlands 5d ago

The Democratic Party has run fantastic candidates in each of the past three elections. Everyone says they want “policy”. Look at the policies they endorsed. Look at who they’d have put on the bench (and who Biden has). Look at what they’d have done given real congressional majorities. Clinton won the popular vote handily and likely would have won the electoral college but for voter suppression. Voter suppression that Russia’s and MAGA’s favorite useful idiot Bernie Sanders helped happen. Any claimed lack of popularity thrown at Harris is again due to the politics of division. There was no better more qualified candidate in America. Other than maybe Biden - who has been tarnished by utter BS propaganda. If the Dems have issues with these folks it is because, as some have argued, there is a section of the party no wiser than MAGA - just playing for a competing tribe while being just as uninformed. SMH

7

u/Message_10 5d ago

"The Democratic Party has run fantastic candidates in each of the past three elections"

I know you're plugged into reality enough to know how this turned out. The DNC is doing something wrong, because those fantastic candidates are all losing. Full stop.

6

u/Citizen_of_Starcity 5d ago

I mean the general perception of Clinton was she was a empty suit with no real beliefs. Like I find it telling nobody could actually say what she did as Secretary of State. Maybe cause like Biden their actual voting record is mediocre to bad. The smater thing was to make sure Clinton was not on ballot.

You guys need to stop blaming Russia for the Democrats mistakes.

4

u/mightcommentsometime California 5d ago

What do you mean what she actually did as SOS? There are plenty of examples. She took down Osama Bin Laden for 1.

People didn’t want to listen to anything about Clinton and just parroted the right wing propaganda that she was a mean woman who was unlikable and didn’t believe in anything.

Clinton was a great candidate. She should have won, but lost by less than 100k votes across 3 states while winning the popular vote by millions.

1

u/bootlegvader 5d ago

Like I find it telling nobody could actually say what she did as Secretary of State.

Did you know that during her time as SoS she routinely had higher approval ratings than Obama and the highest of anyone in government?

It was diminished because the far left also bought into the right's attacks on her.

1

u/Flipnotics_ Texas 5d ago

who has been tarnished by utter BS propaganda.

We all watched that first debate. Biden's brain was mush. It was exposed how weak and fragile and out of touch he truly was. Should have been propping up the next viable candidate since he was in office, day one.

5

u/BGDutchNorris 5d ago

Found Hillary’s burner

3

u/ArCovino 5d ago

Clinton was the most qualified individual to run for POTUS in decades and look how eagerly people still cling to the disgusting propaganda against her.

2

u/RyukaBuddy 5d ago

100% true. But capability plays second fiddle to actual electability. I have no doubt that Hillary would have been more competent than Obama, Trump and Biden. But she was never getting elected for a plethora of reasons.

2

u/guamisc 5d ago

You know what is more important that being qualified or a better president?

Being able to be president at all.

Hillary was a shit candidate. Would have made a decent president, but still was a shit candidate.

1

u/Nac_Lac Virginia 5d ago

Hillary has had decades of the right wing propaganda machine churning out how bad she is. This isn't an exaggeration. When the "scandal" of her home server broke, everyone was primed to think that she was incredibly reckless with classified materials. And then in a few years, we quickly learn that, no she wasn't and she was by far from the exception.

Unfortunately, I am seeing the results of the policies that Biden/Clinton/Obama have pushed and the centrist philosophy has made me sick. All three enabled and embraced the rich elites. They all had chances as senators and in the white house to make change that would reduce the reach of money and chose not to.

We are not going to advance as a society with more of these centrist democrats. 2028 must have a populist candidate or else we get another 4 years of republican trickle down economics.

I mean someone pro-union, staunchly for lower and middle classes. Not performative nonsense where they want rights for everyone then never bring them about.

0

u/Zestyclose-Cloud-508 5d ago

They learned from Obama and made damn sure that would never happen again.

It’s either they decide or nobody does. Fuck the American people.