• Carrolade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 months ago

      She just did the calculus that Biden was our best shot, due to a whole shitton of different factors from Biden’s support among elderly voters, union support, money raised, polls being pretty crap for a few cycles now, shit like that.

      Now there will be logistical challenges, we have a lot of uncertainty ahead. She wanted to avoid that until we got some better answers.

    • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Or you could read her arguments, which were direct and pragmatic. She was talking about how difficult this would be logistically, and that it would have been better to do 6 months ago, you know, when the progressive wing of the party raised the issue.

      AOC was “shilling” for some consistency, backbone and party unity out of a pragmatic need to beat back fascism. Now that this choice has been made, I’m betting she will continue with the same intent.

      • TipRing@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Further, Bernie and AOC are rather well aware that the progressive wing of the party would likely be blamed for “party disunity” if Biden stayed in and lost. They will not do anything to let the DNC scapegoat their caucus.

    • the_tab_key@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Which is hilarious because Pelosi, Schumer, and Schiff were all against Biden continuing in the race…

      AOC understands politics and thinks things through, that’s it.

    • revelrous@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Imo she’s trying to shield progressives from being the scapegoat, like how we got the blame for dem dysfunction in '16.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Politics is about getting the things you want, not dunking on people that disagree with you on a couple of things. You gotta compromise with people to get what you want. People feel like being uncompromising is somehow admirable, but in politics it means you get nothing. MAGAs are uncompromising, and they get a lot of likes on social media for it, but they’ve accomplish exactly nothing after winning the House in 2022.

      Biden has been good for the progressive wing of the party, and they may not get as good of a deal with Harris as they did with Biden. They will have to negotiate compromises with someone new and may not get as much.

      So do you rather politicians compromising and getting something to benefit you, or grandstanding and accomplishing nothing except providing a small amount of entertainment for you?