793
'Do I Look Like I Care?': AOC Shreds Trump's Border Czar In Blunt Free Speech Reminder
(www.huffpost.com)
this post was submitted on 03 May 2025
793 points (98.9% liked)
politics
23305 readers
2794 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Still more chance of it happening than a viable third party, that's the argument.
Why? It's longer and less obvious than "establish party now run for president tomorrow," but with a progressive leftwing third party a clear path to success exists. Now technically one also exists within the Democratic Party, but to take that path you'd need to antagonize the old guard so much that you might as well not be a party member at all, and they'll still demand ideological or practical compromises to keep you in the party. This will lose you legitimacy with your base in the same way many progressives are souring on AOC, either significantly curtailing the effort or destroying it entirely. The problem with working within the party is simple: You'll never get anything done by appeasing neoliberals.
You have to do this regardless. You cannot have a viable third party without pulling a majority of Democratic voters away from the existing party. There simply isn't enough votes to beat the GOP by starting a new progressive only party. And if you think you're gonna pull conservative voters, hello Kamala Harris' campaign manager.
We have a greater advantage in the primaries than we do during the general election, but my fellow progressives just refuse to fucking show up. Bernie absolutely could have won ,even with the DNC putting their thumb on the scale. You can say it's rigged against us, but the numbers don't lie, progressive voters haven't shown up to vote and it only benefits the GOP.
Of course, but my point is that if they're gonna hate your guts and sabotage you anyway, you might as well make sure you have a free hand to take them on rather than pointlessly try to appease them. This way you give them less leverage over you, or in other words you don't give them consent to sabotage you to their heart's content. Of course they can still try, but for example tools like party bylaws and appeals to party unity cease to mean shit. This is crucial because while neoliberals like to play dumb, they're not dumb; when they come to wreck your movement they're going to go for the jugular. See for example how AOC lost the Democratic Socialists of America's endorsement by compromising on Israel and how the DNC is trying to kick David Hoggs out of the party. The way I see it is that while there are a few paths for a progressive group trying to take over/cannibalize the Democratic Party, all of them are mutually exclusive with compromise with neoliberals.
Sounds about right but can you provide those numbers?
Establishing a party is very hard, in a country as big as the US it takes decades.
On the other hand, the political establishment will push back against a third party outside the Democratic Party just as much as inside. I honestly don't know what's the right path.