Democratic voters overwhelmingly want a leader who will fight the superrich and corporate America, and they believe Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is the person to do it, according to a poll released this week.

While Democrats are often portrayed as squabbling and directionless, the poll conducted last month by the New Republic with Embold Research demonstrated a remarkable unity among the more than 2,400 Democratic voters it surveyed.

This was true with respect to policy: More than 9 in 10 want to raise taxes on corporations and on the wealthiest Americans, while more than three-quarters want to break up tech monopolies and believe the government should conduct stronger oversight of business.

But it was also reflected in sentiments that a more confrontational governing philosophy should prevail and general agreement that the party in its current form is not doing enough to take on its enemies.

Three-quarters said they wanted Democrats to "be more aggressive in calling out Republicans," while nearly 7 in 10 said it was appropriate to describe their party as "weak."

This appears to have translated to support for a more muscular view of government. Where the label once helped to sink Sen. Bernie Sanders' (I-Vt.) two runs for president, nearly three-quarters of Democrats now say they are either unconcerned with the label of "socialist" or view it as an asset.

Meanwhile, 46% said they want to see a "progressive" at the top of the Democratic ticket in 2028, higher than the number who said they wanted a "liberal" or a "moderate."

It's an environment that appears to be fertile ground for Ocasio-Cortez, who pitched her vision for a "working-class-centered politics" at this week's Munich summit in what many suspected was a soft-launch of her presidential candidacy in 2028.

With 85% favorability, Bronx congresswoman had the highest approval rating of any Democratic figure in the country among the voters surveyed.

It's a higher mark than either of the figures who head-to-head polls have shown to be presumptive favorites for the nomination: Former Vice President Kamala Harris and California Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Early polls show AOC lagging considerably behind these top two. However, there are signs in the New Republic's poll that may give her supporters cause for hope.

While Harris is also well-liked, 66% of Democrats surveyed said they believe she's "had her shot" at the presidency and should not run again after losing to President Donald Trump in 2024.

Newsom does not have a similar electoral history holding him back and is riding high from the passage of Proposition 50, which will allow Democrats to add potentially five more US House seats this November.

But his policy approach may prove an ill fit at a time when Democrats overwhelmingly say their party is "too timid" about taxing the rich and corporations and taking on tech oligarchs.

As labor unions in California have pushed for a popular proposal to introduce a billionaire's tax, Newsom has made himself the chiseled face of the resistance to this idea, joining with right-wing Silicon Valley barons in an aggressive campaign to kill it.

While polls can tell us little two years out about what voters will do in 2028, New Republic editorial director Emily Cooke said her magazine's survey shows an unmistakable pattern.

"It’s impossible to come away from these results without concluding that economic populism is a winning message for loyal Democrats," she wrote. "This was true across those who identify as liberals, moderates, or progressives: An unmistakable majority wants a party that will fight harder against the corporations and rich people they see as responsible for keeping them down."


From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.

all 57 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 61 points 8 months ago (16 children)

AOC is the moderate compromise at this point, IMO. I like her quite a bit, but I'd happily vote and fight for anyone campaigning on Nuremberg-style trials for every appointed federal official in this administration and every ICE agent deployed in the last year.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 8 months ago*

    Since Nuremberg had less than 0,02% conviction rate and was essentially a show trial kangaroo court and they promoted, supported, and hired the Nazis to government positions afterwards, I am hoping a very un-nuremberg like trial happens.

    Nuremberg proved that being a Nazi war criminal was the safest and lowest convicted crime in history.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -14 points 8 months ago* (13 children)
  • [–] 14 points 8 months ago (12 children)
  • [+] -8 points 8 months ago (12 children)
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago* (11 children)

    This tracker doesn’t endorse anyone who votes pro Israel. Nice try heritage foundation

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 8 months ago (11 children)
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Not impressed with your purity test because I trust track AIPAC. I also think she is a lot cleaner and braver than 98% of congress so bashing her really doesn’t make a ton of sense in the situation we find ourselves in. Washington is essentially occupied by Israel. Ghisline and Epstein were Mossad and most of congress is compromised so I think in the situation we find ourselves in someone who doesn’t take Israeli money and has voted to block aid on several occasions is counterproductive. Do you have a source?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 1 point 8 months ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago*

    There are a limited few in Washington fighting against Israel. It looks like she voted for the weaponizing of the term antisemitism several times too. Yea that sucks. I hope she learned a lesson but who knows. She’s still far better than most because she has voted to block arms against Israel on other occasions https://electronicintifada.net/content/aoc-votes-back-israel-lobbys-bogus-anti-semitism-definition/50066

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (4 children)

    She's made public statements she's against funding Israel genocide. Just the other day in munich she said this again.

    She's never voted to send money to Israel.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

    She did vote against an amendment that would have cut funds for the iron dome a while back. It was among some 2 part chess amendment or something, there was another vote about a different package related to that, but it made no sense to vote against that besides claiming "it's a defense fund, totally different, surely it won't be used as part of the genocide".

    I'm not taking that to claim she's pro Israel or pro genocide, but it was irritating at the time.

    Also, generally speaking, remember to take what politicians claim as separate from what they actually vote for. Don't take their public statements as evidence.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 0 points 8 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    She voted against an amendment to reduce dome funding , that had other changes too

    One example. And it was defensive funding.

    I still don't like it. But it's not the blatant Israel genocide support you claim it to be.

    Can you name any other politician that has always voted against Israel funding. ?

    AOC has the best track record, even if it's not as perfect as I would like.

    At least she didn't vote to send offensive weapons or other funding to Israel.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Isn't that what this argument is about? She's not perfect on the stance, has voted to fund the Iron Dome and voted to increase police funding in Washington DC, but shes worth settling on. Not sure about most the other elected Democrats.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (3 children)

    At least link a source or something. AOC has been, to my knowledge, one of the most outspoken people against the genocide.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 8 months ago* (3 children)
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    I do think it's worth noting that the vote in question was for funding for their Iron Dome missile defense system.

    I'm not defending her vote, but there is a difference between defensive capabilities over civilian airspace, and offensive munitions being used to murder civilians.

    Not defending her, but I do think it's an important distinction.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    It is different. Defensive money is not the same as offensive money.

    Also one of those people commenting has a brand new account. I mentioned it and my comment was deleted.

    Stay vigilant for fake accounts. AOC is the least corrupt potential candidate. And she's not even a Dem. She's an independent. The attacks on her are going to continue to ramp up from the opposition. Which includes corp Dems, Republicans, and aipac affiliations.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

    You are aware that tech companies can be hired to spread narratives on social media. ?

    We are all aware this is a thing.

    You make a new account and post multiple times a day , every day.

    Sure. Look at Op as well.
    Mods like 5 different country subs.
    Sure. Not suspicious at all.

    Using the tools and resources available to check on the people you are engaging with online should be a priority.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 32 points 8 months ago

    Whoever fights is going to win, and if they try and rat-fuck again, its time to focus on a write in/ independent campaign.

    Whoever comes out as the strongest voice, the biggest fighter, thats who is the person with the best chance to win the presidency. I want to see more than just AOC. I want a crowded field of people jockying to become the most outspoken critiques of the way that the DNC has been doing business for decades. Just like the 2020 primary became a race to see who could be the most progressive, this needs to be a race to see who can be the most brutal to these criminals.

  • source
  • [–] 25 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Let's wait and see how DNC will screw this up and somehow ends up with Kamala again.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Would be nice. I won’t hold my breath.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    After watching Bernie get buried by Michael Bloomberg buying the attention, I have serious doubt about the DNC doing anything to promote AOC. If anything she will be the straw that breaks the party into a right wing business centric DNC with Gavin Newsome and some Progressive/actual left wing option.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago*

    After watching Bernie get buried by Michael Bloomberg buying the attention

    Didn't Sanders win both California and Washington State, while Bloomberg dropped a cool billion out of pocket to place fourth in Texas? I'd hardly call that "getting buried".

    Bottom line, the entire Democratic Establishment rallied around Biden. Everyone dropped out except Liz Warren and even she failed to operate as the anti-Bernie spoiler as she was intended. But Sanders couldn't win against a fully mobilized party apparatus, so he slouched through the Midwest states and burned out by the convention.

    If anything she will be the straw that breaks the party into a right wing business centric DNC with Gavin Newsome and some Progressive/actual left wing option.

    I mean... I wouldn't hold my breath. Parties don't fracture along those lines, because you can't win office with 33% of the vote. If anything, they'd break regionally. California and New York Dem parties would go in different directions, as the Mamdani Collective distances itself from the Newsom Imperium.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    If their establishment figure doesn't get the nomination, fully expect them to run third party and try and throw the election. All that supporting the nominee only goes one way.

    A good candidate, running a popular reform ticket, would win even with a spoiler, especially with our own Republican spoilers. Not sure AOC is that candidate though, she's not.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago

    her candidacy is inevitable. if she primaries Schumer and wins, it will only cement her position

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    We should get a pres and vice who will act as two presidents: one to clean up the mess, the other to implement the progressive policies most Americans actually want. AOC would be best at the latter. Her paired w someone good at cleaning shit up, Mark Kelly for example? They would obliterate any MAGA candidate.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    If that’s what happens whoever the presidential pick is should very vocally and consistently discuss that thy are only there to clean shit up, are not seeking reelection, and will be endorsing the leftist/progressive VP in the next cycle. The time for compromise and status quo is gone although I will concede some stability would be good

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Even tho i consider myself a progressive I think we can all admit that drastic swings in either direction cause chaos and disruption in life and thus skepticism on the part of moderates. I would vigorously support a progressive agenda with some counterbalancing by a more moderate dem. Biden was actually the most progressive president we've ever had he was just way too old, hounded by corporate interests and made that huge mistake at the end by letting advisors control him.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    What part of the current society do you not want to disrupt?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    One, complex systems don't handle disruption well and chaos creates voids for bad actors.

    Two, given what we're seeing now, I don't even think disruption at scale is possible. Far more likely that you'll just hurt people and get nothing done.

    Three, small change over time is far more difficult than radical, drastic change in a short period of time. And the more difficult way is usually the right way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago

    It took me a bit to parse "superrich"

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    AOC with Ro Kahna or Ro Kahna with AOC both work for me

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Doesn't ro kahna take tech money? Not trying to shit on him, he is better than most. Google is his top donor. He says a lot of good stuff in interviews.

    https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/ro-khanna/contributors?cid=N00026427&cycle=2024

    Compare that to AOC, looks like most of her funding is small donations. I'd vote for more people funded like that given the choice (ha not like there's much choice).

    https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/alexandria-ocasio-cortez/summary?cid=N00041162

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    Agree I’d rather see AOC but this country is disgustingly sexist and please spare me the lecture I know from lived experience and the disgusting Epstein files really solidified that fact. Women are of lesser value and disposable in our society so that is a factor that needs to be considered for the next election.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    ro khanna is primarily an AIPAC fund recipeient, shes making noise to deflect attention from the others.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago*

    Track AIPAC has him as the only presidential candidate they recommend. They take a person out of red when they start breaking away from AIPAC and start improving their voting record and it looks like he is doing that. I don’t know why AOC isn’t on there but she’s not on their possible candidates list yet .

    ![] but they do recognize her as someone who doesn’t take the money.

    (https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/fca9bc63-e902-492f-9060-5fcbbfd5a0e2.jpeg)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Would make an excellent Senate Minority Leader (preferably Majority Leader).

    But this country has proved it is too backwater and pathetic to have a woman president.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 8 months ago

    Third way pissing themselves

  • source
  • 30 comments in c/pravda_news@news.abolish.capital view that post
    20 comments in c/usa@midwest.social view that post
    1 comment in c/lefty_news@ibbit.at view that post