• DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    121
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    4 days ago

    Honestly we need her in the Senate for at least two terms before she’s president, once she’s served her terms as president she’ll be stuck as powerless as Obama probably feels rn, let’s milk having someone like her for as long as possible, and that starts with her taking that feckless shit head Schumer’s Senate seat.

    • jimmy90@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      poor aoc, great leadership qualities but when she had a chance to ditch the dsa she doubled down on the commie cesspit

      maybe by the time she does run the mamdani feedback loop will have turfed out the commie mystics

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      3 days ago

      Obama is only “powerless” because he has chosen to be.

      Taft became the Chief Justice of The US Supreme Court after leaving the office of president.

    • 4am@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      49
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Fuck everything about this; strike while the iron is hot or be ruled by pedofascists forever. You won’t get another chance. You do not realize the danger we are all in.

    • TrackenDaKracken@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      3 days ago

      I get what you’re saying but she’ll do much more good as President than sitting in Congress.

      Trump showed just how much power the office has, for someone willing to wield it.

      • BigBenis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        No president leaves office popular enough to win a race for a Senate seat

        Edit: *in our modern era, for the pedants

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          3 days ago

          I’m certain that isn’t true. They are just normally done with all the shit and don’t want to deal with a lot of the same shit but with the addition of being out ruled by any of the other assholes in Congress.

    • stickyprimer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s a symbolic run to shift the Overton window in the right direction and to take some of the lightning off some more moderate candidate, who will look less radical next to her.

      • DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        It’s so ridiculous saying moderate candidate would look less radical next to her, there is nothing radical about AOC, Bernie, El-Sayid, Mamdani, yet here you are carrying the enemy’s water and showing how biased they made you by describing them as radical, when you don’t have to at all.

        I get what your saying is meaning the voters, but my point is how is making sure people have healthcare, quality education, clean air & water, radical? The rich have done such a masterful job brainwashing the shit out of our society over the centuries of disinformation and religious indoctrination.

        • stickyprimer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Dude please give it a rest. We’re talking about how candidates are perceived in the general election. You know this is full of distortions, double standards, lies, and many dated associations.

          Giving me shit for calling clean air radical only shows you don’t know how to have a meta conversation about political discourse itself and are on a hair-trigger to give speeches at any provocation.

    • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      4 days ago

      No legislator is more valuable sitting as one of 100 for a decade or two than taking their turn as president.

      • CrimeIsLegalNow@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        36
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        Nah. Retiring after a presidency is a tradition, not a law. Hit them while you have momentum from midterms (hopefully).

        Then if she still wants anything to do with this trash fire she can just go back to being senator.

        • xtr0n@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 days ago

          It’s probably a tradition for a good reason. I suspect that 8 years of being president is exhausting and leaves even the best of us spent physically, mentally and emotionally (current golfer in chief being a notable exception)

          • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Mostly because a lot of recent presidents are too old to do anything else. The rest made enough money not to want to.

          • Obviouslywrong@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            4 days ago

            Obama is still young enough that after a long break now he could do another Senate term or a relatively brief federal judge shipfor 5to7 years comfortably.

          • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 days ago

            Even lazy-ass Trump is not immune to the rapid aging affect of being president. The difference is that it’s usually due to the stress of trying to effectively run the country, while his is due to his manic narcissism from being in the spotlight 24/7.