AOC Could Shake Up 2028: Foolish to Underestimate Her
“It would be the height of arrogance to assume she couldn’t win the 2028 nomination.”
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) is preparing for her next move in 2028, and Democrats may not like the options she has in mind. She is weighing whether to mount a presidential campaign or challenge Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. Either path threatens to blow open the Democratic Party’s fragile balance of power.
“Ocasio-Cortez’s 2028 decision could shake up the presidential race or the Senate’s leadership. A fellow New Yorker, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, 74, is up for re-election in 2028.”
That would set up a bitter choice for Democrats: stand with the entrenched establishment or throw in with the progressive firebrand who built her career on radical ideas and Instagram politics.
She’s already making moves.
“This year, Ocasio-Cortez — widely known as AOC — has campaigned across the country and in parts of New York State far from her Bronx and Queens district, all while investing millions to grow her already formidable online presence.”
Her team has brought on former Bernie Sanders advisers, an unmistakable signal of national ambition. At a town hall in Plattsburgh, N.Y., she told voters:
“Plattsburgh, we are here because every town, every city, every neighborhood in this state matters. Every corner matters. No one deserves to be ignored.”
The progressive base has responded with fervor. She joined Sanders on his “Fighting Oligarchy” tour earlier this year, greeted by chants of “AOC! AOC!”
Her digital operation is massive. Analyst Kyle Tharp observed:
“Her team has spent more on digital advertising than almost any other politician in 2025, and as a result, they have brought in hundreds of thousands of new small-dollar donations.”
The scale is staggering: 36.7 million followers across Instagram, TikTok, X, Facebook, and Bluesky, dwarfing Schumer and most of the potential Democratic field. Former Sanders aide Ari Rabin-Havt warned:
“She has a supporter base that, in many ways, has a larger potential width than Bernie’s… It would be the height of arrogance to assume she couldn’t win the 2028 nomination.”
Whether Ocasio-Cortez decides to target Schumer or the White House, one reality looms large: it would be foolish to underestimate her.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Like Biden* and then Harris, if enough of the Communist satraps want her then she is in. The genocidal rank-and-file has no actual say in the matter.
I don’t trust follower numbers. Social media is infested with bots.
Correct.
“36.7 million followers across Instagram, TikTok, X, Facebook, and Bluesky”
Many of those “followers” are the same people, who have accounts on each of these platforms. At best, the 36 million is more like 9 million unique “followers.”
Lemmings follow other lemmings too.
Friends jump off bridges, and followers follow them.
AOC may be a force to be reckoned with, in the Democratic Socialist Party. That does not make her a force to be reckoned with nationally.
She is nothing more than a Kamala Harris with less time on her back. She is a dimwit.
never underestimate the enemy …so why her?
Ridicule is the best disinfectant.
AOC is deserving of ridicule. I don’t understand estimate her. I ridicule her.
Planting a seed, so to speak. It will blossom for all to see how she needs to be ridiculed.
Kamala H’s vacuousness and stupidity made her prime for ridicule. That ridicule made her unelectable.
“Under estimate”
Frickin spell check.
I’d like to believe that but a whole lot of fools will vote for Mamdani. Those same self-destructive idiots will support her.
I think having her run in 2028 would be agreat test for our nation’s future. If a voter could picture this ex-bartender sitting down with world leaders negotiating world events with her thumb on the nuclear button, then by all means vote for her. I believe she would be the end of the Democrat party for ever!
Just becuase a bar in New Dork think she walks on water doesn’t mean the country does.
The Newsolini-Donkey Chompers ticket? It is remotely possible she could replace Slimey Chuck Schumer.
Chuck should be worried. If the commie wins in NY I could see her run against Chuck.
agreed….
I agree with this article. AOC has some natural charisma, wide name recognition, and lots of fundraising tentacles. Sure, she’s an idiot. But let’s not forget that we had 4 years of Biden who successfully campaigned for POTUS from his basement. A large segment of the American population does not make decisions from logic but from emotions. And she’s good at manipulating emotions.
She’s a threat. Take it seriously.
I don’t get her appeal at all. She is just a shrill and a nag and a narcissist and a sociopath.
Oh nevermind sounds like the perfect representative for the modern democratic party.
I agree she is absolutely stupid
I would love to see what Vance or Rubio would do to her in a debate
Indeed. A big threat. Fundamentally democracy is a bad system as should be obvious to everyone. At least officially, Harris got over 48% of the presidential vote. Someone with no accomplishments, who can’t even speak coherently. Even worse, Biden, who probably can’t dress himself, or figure out how to operate a doorknob won! The founders of the American republic understood all this which is why they limited the franchise to white male property owners, People with skin in the game. Once the masses figure out that they can vote themselves benefits, they can’t earn, democracy becomes an exercise in give aways. Europe is even worse. They can no longer afford the welfare state originally created by Bismarck. Especially with mass migration. Pretty much every western democracy has ended up in the same place. Out of control spending and debt with collapsing fiat money, all that while surrendering to Islam. Monarchy might be better.
AOC could very well become the next American president as democracy gives us the worst and the dumbest.
That would infer that Biden actually had 81 million votes. Far beyond any other candidate in history, and far exceeding the votes of Saint Barack Muslim.
But where did those “votes” disappear to?
I think she has an excellent chance of winning the nomination. Here’s my thinking:
Moderate White Democrats are discouraged. The union workers and traditional blue-collar supporters have no one (at least as of now) who is talking about the things they care about: jobs and prices. They may not switch to being Republicans but they might very well stay home for the primary elections.
I also tend to believe the Blacks and Hispanics are not on board with the sexual fixation that the current Democrats have. So, again, your traditional ‘faithful voters’ may not find anyone for whom it is worth leaving the house on Primary Day.
This leaves:
A. The “Intellectual Class” of activist Whites, especially post-menstrual females, and the excitable youth who want to “stick it to the man.”
THEY will turn out to vote.
B. The machine. The machine stopped Bernie Sanders at least once when he would have taken the nomination. However, the Republicans have been doing their very best to chew bites out of the machine and weaken it. Having said that I din’t think they can force California to stop “no-Id” voting by 2028, and I don’t think they can keep Illinois from digging up the dead.
Is the machine still powerful enough to install someone else? They did it with Kamala, and Biden, and Hillary. Can they do it again?
Finally, there is an old tradition of not wasting a viable candidate in elections which you know you are going to lose. John McCain comes to mind. The machine might just left her run and strategically wait another four years. It’s a long, long game.
Post menstrual females? Sounds like wording for Mutual of Omaha’s Wild Kingdom. Maybe you meant to write older women or senior women.
When the Democrats start fielding prepubescent terrorists, will you complain about us noting that as well?
“The union workers and traditional blue-collar supporters have no one (at least as of now) who is talking about the things they care about: jobs and prices.”
This has been spoken about by Trump and other republicans often. The issue is that you can’t unwind the inflation of prior administrations and people have very short memories.
Here’s why you are right:
1) Centrists are leaving the Democrat party, so hard core leftists will sway the vote.
2) It’s a vacuum of real leadership. They only have clay-mation caricatures of people with any sway. Any centrist is back benched at this point.
Here’s why you are wrong.
1) Wack-a-doodles are losing their lustre. The non-stop hate and violence is wearing thin. Even with centrists leaving, there is a high probability someone partially sane with charisma will take the wheel.
2. USAID money is gone and so is much of the other grift cash. +25 points to Trump for cutting the legs out from under their ATM machine. Soros has money, but in reality he was just using our own tax money against us.
3. The media hate machine is getting an Ike Turner back hand, AND lower audiences.
4. Gen Next is not having this slop. The tweens and teens who lived through COVID are a little more cynical than the Obama brats. Those who spent the 5th and 6th grades masking, being isolated and having their childhoods ripped away have memories.
4.a – Those girls who had creepy boys invade their spaces… yeah- they have memories too. This trans violence is winning Dems a ticket to the bottom of the ocean.
I pray you’re correct in why he is wrong.
A threat indeed. She’ll sweep the votes of AWFLs and simps, and, based on the success of TikTok and OnlyFans, there are buckets full of both.
Shoot…meant for Semper Why.
If Harris could get 75 million votes….
Exactly correct. Unable to string together two coherent sentences in a row, Harris still managed to win 48.3% of the vote. AOC won’t do any worse than that. 48% is their low-water mark. While AOC will still face the same headwinds that Harris did in the Battleground states, in a landscape that included weak economic/jobs metrics, AOC could absolutely win.
it’s amazing what having your retirement portfolio double in 4 years will do to voters AFTER seeing it cut in half the prior 4 years.
I would put her floor a bit lower. The Democrats hatred of Trump encouraged additional voter turnout. Without Trump on the ballot that will depress Democrat turnout. Furthermore Kamala being declared black also probably drove black female turnout which won’t be the case with AOC.
“48% is their low-water mark”
Doesn’t take into account party walkaways and independent flippers.
I do t belt she did but I’m pretty sure she got at least 60
Something no one has mentioned yet:
She’s very attractive. In fact, she’s a truly beautiful woman.
As a conservative man, she reverts to Methuselah as soon as she opens her pie hole but I’m not her audience. The people who voted the clean, articulate man (Storybook, man!) with perfectly creased pants, that’s her audience.
Make no mistake: the politics of envy and the socialist creed are far from dead. AOC is not an aberration from NYC, as I am sure you’ve figured out by now.
Her problem is that she’s not very bright, and she yells, screams and cries to fill that void. It works. There are plenty of stupid voters that will happily check the box for her.
I’m not underestimating her ability to win and I’m not underestimating her ability (paraphrasing BHO) her ability to (bleep) things up.
Medusa, not Methuselah.
I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue.
airplane .. Mr. Lloyd Bridges .. star of Sea hunt where I learned to want to scuba dive…
You’re sniffing glue? Surely you can’t be serious.
Oh dear God she is NOT beautiful, surely you jest
I will agree not beautiful but quite attractive physically ( especially for a politician). The question is how long will her looks last before they fade
They’ll fade after the first kid. Happens to a lot but not all hispanic women.
Unlike the anointed one there are so many bad stupid video clips of AOC available that the commercials write themselves. The anointed ones stupid statements came after he was elected.
AOC has no command of the facts and can’t debate. Any repub will clean her clock. She also can’t handle a town hall. Her constituents routinely pillar her. She can’t run a basement campaign. What is going to be her strategy?
I have a two word answer for you:
Kamala Harris.
I am certain we could find thousands of women that would do a terrific job as POTUS but those women are smart enough to not want the job
Harris is a talentless hack who played on her skin tone and lady parts to advance herself in the political sphere.
In spite of the fact that she was wholly incompetent and would have been an utter disaster in office, she nearly won.
And stop calling me Shirley!
Harris was also able to advance politically because her career was in California. Once she left her home state her career started heading south.
The negatives associated with AOC are greater than those associated with Harris. Also AOC is even more to the left of Harris. Finally, Harris was muzzled a lot. AOC can’t keep her mouth shut.
Here’s a recent one
She attacks Charlie Kirk and refuses to cote to honor him
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/09/pure-evil-aoc-launches-absolutely-disgusting-attack-charlie/
I will agree she is physically attractive but I would not say beautiful and I will agree that will help her get additional votes but as you point out a lot of that advantage will disappear once she starts speaking as she will come across as a TikTok harpy.
She’s pretty hot until she starts talking. Her voice pitch is like a little girls, Major turn off.
She should extend her social network to OnlyFans. She’d cleanup and make a ton of money, at least in the short term. Kamaltoe could give her some pointers. Politicians are basically whores so it wouldn’t be much of a stretch.
AOC has noticed the huge appetite NY voters have for foreign-sounding socialists (like Mamdani), and has concluded that she is going to make her move. Schumer isn’t up for the contest, and should start cleaning out his desk.
She would be smart to seek Schumer’s seat first. She isn’t national material, yet.
NY can tolerate her. The rest of the nation? Nope.
If she were smart, she would then consider being in a VP slot.
But no one said she was smart. Even her DEI Economics degree proves that.
Congenital Democrat overreach says: go for broke, Sandy!
I have said all along that she is dangerous.
We can find her ideas and ideology stupid, but like it or not, she has a following of her own, and the Democrat Party knows how to mobilize and motivate its voters to support any one of its champions.
She would also be aided by the fact that the Republican Party leadership in New York State is terribly weak. It seems to have no idea how to select smart, articulate candidates that know how to win elections.
She can win the nomination of a radicalized, shrinking political party.
Absolutely. Then the question becomes whether a shrinking party can win an election.
Well, modulo the usual cheating, of course.
Said differently; never underestimate how many people are as ignorant of history and economics as AOC that spend their whole lives mired in victim-hood.
She is just too stupid. I would love to see Sandy debate JD Vance. It would show to all that she is a bad joke.
so she takes small steps ..
takes over Chucky’s office …
waits … one cycle … and then
goes for it …
Kamala version 2.0. Only win 3 states. Newscum running mate?
Do not underestimate any democrat. Remember, they look you in the eye and lie.
I do not remember ever seeing her on a debate stage against a Republican like Cruz or DeSantis or Rubio, people who have a record of accomplishments.. That will be the test
same way I knew Ovomit would beat hillary and be potus and I said it when she first showed up
she is the it girl they need
the identity politics is what the do as the communist side of their agenda dictates and she speaks better and looks better than kamalalaa
now as far as debates go..she is another loser
but lefty dont debate //// they rig elections they rank choice vote///they mail in false ballots they have the msm as their offensive ( pun intended) lineman and their blmplo street armies as their backups
with omars calling for a holy war and the big cities melting down into a sewer pot of dung…its only a matter of time as we
pray for peace
dont forget
if you want peace
prepare for war
IMO the lowest position that AOC runs for in 2028 is Senator and she would easily beat Schumer. Does she want to run for a higher position and maybe lose? Time and the primaries will tell. She does come with the unusual qualification of likely being able to mix a good drink.
Good with alcohol is a prerequisite for being a senator.
Consuming it, not vending it.
A hollow leg is an advantage; a hollow head is not.
The Kennedys were pretty good at both running whisky and drinking it.
The rest of the country is not as dumb as New York is. She will turn off more than she turns on. She’s no different than Harris in terms of intelligence, and performance only gets you so far. She would be rejected wonderfully.
She is very wrong on policy, as is Harris, but she is far better than Harris at sounding semi-coherent.
She is much better at speaking to her base and motivating it. She is a true believer in her Marxist policy positions, whereas Harris is much more of an unaccomplished political construct.
Three points:
1. It doesn’t have to be the rest of the country. Just most of the country.
2. Harris achieved 48% of the vote. She barely lost in those swing states.
3. AOC is a better campaigner than Harris.
Do not dismiss her politically.
Except 2028 is not 2024, and AOC’s popularity will wane, except for the hard core progressive wing.
the 1983 attack led by women and downplayed by the msm even to this day:
The May 19th Communist Organization — which initially identified itself as the “Armed Resistance Unit” — took credit for the bombing, saying it was a response to U.S. involvement in Grenada and Lebanon. The organization was a far-left terrorist group created and led by women, according to experts.
vance/rubio
vs
newsom/aoc
It’s high time to get women out of politics.
If AOC or any woman becomes president of America, they will be eaten alive by Russia and China.
America keeps playing with this stupid fire.
AOC could win the Senate in NY and probably could secure the d/prog nomination for President. She’s younger, photogenic, large and effective social media presence, she’s already a household name. If she leans a bit to the center and runs a center/left populist campaign focused on affordable health insurance/health care, stagnant working class wages, huge concentration of wealth/assets among top 10% today v 50 years ago, same for home affordability (ave age of 1st purchase is 38) she will appeal to many voters. Not sure the d/prog want to risk a fracture if they try to scuttle the Bernie/AOC wing hopes again in ’28 like they did in ’16 and ’20. Doubly so b/c of the shenanigans to anoint/install Harris as the nominee without a real vote in ’24 when Biden imploded.
Until the center/right takes on health insurance and health care affordability to make major reforms to get to transparency in pricing and eliminate the ‘have v have not’ problem due to tax treatment of health insurance there’s an opening for the left. Same for asset valuations and wealth concentration among the top 10%. Same.for home affordability and statement wages.
No I ain’t arguing for a wealth tax or confiscation. I am communicating the very real facts and frustration with those facts expressed by a large % of the population, particularly younger folks who simply can’t, despite their best efforts to ‘work hard/play by the rules’ can’t replicate the same life trajectory as their Parents b/c the economic facts are far different than faced by their Parents. Telling them to ‘bootstrap’ isn’t gonna solve the problems they face and will just alienate them.
Demanding Europe pay the market prices for drugs would reduce drug costs in the United States dramatically. The great thing about that is we have the leverage to do it and won’t end up increasing prices in the United States (the result of tariffs).
On topics of how bad is the economy today
“Alabama’s Labor Force Participation Rate Increases to 57.7% Wages Reach New Record High; Employment and Labor Force at Record Highs”
https://adol.alabama.gov/2025/03/alabamas-labor-force-participation-rate-increases-to-57-7-wages-reach-new-record-high-employment-and-labor-force-at-record-highs/
Both labor force and wages are up to record highs
“I’m also excited to report that Alabamians’ paychecks are growing,” continued Reed. “Average weekly wages increased by nearly $80 a week since last year, representing a 7.7% increase, which is also a new record high.”
Now for real wages
https://usafacts.org/answers/are-wages-keeping-up-with-inflation/country/united-states/
“Yes. From July 2024 to July 2025, wages grew 1.5 percentage points faster than inflation. Nominal wages — the literal dollars earned regardless of cost of living — increased by 4.2% while inflation stood at 2.7%. When wage growth outpaces inflation, it indicates that workers are experiencing an increase in purchasing power from the previous year.”
Wages haven’t just kept up they have exceeded cost increases.
For example Alabama again
“Yes, wages in Alabama have more than doubled since 2001. In 2001, the average annual pay for employees in Alabama was $30,102, and by 2023, it had increased to approximately $58,996.
This represents an increase of about 96%, which is a significant rise but not quite a doubling.”
If you wish for a cost of living decrease you need to decrease costs related to the relevant businesses.
Pay higher lumber prices, higher metal prices, higher labor prices etc you will get a more expensive house.
Or remove houses from the market due to regulations and prevent new houses from being built due to regulations while the population size increases…….
A socialist solution like price control will just get people not to build or rent houses and keep prices high.
Maybe also myths about how easy it was back in the day have to die?
I am guessing you wouldn’t want to have children or grandchildren working in 20th century cotton fields for low wages?
Nostalgia can be extremely harmful when it doesn’t match reality.
Now use 1970 as the baseline instead of the ’01 post dotcom bubble and 9/11 impacts. Then do a breakout by age cohort. How’s Gen X, Gen Y, Gen Z and Gen Alpha doing v Boomers at similar age points? What % of wealth was held by each economic quintile in the ’70s v today?
No one needs to be a socialist to view objective facts that demonstrate today’s younger workers under 40 do not have the same opportunities as prior generations. Just keep in mind that the center/right populists helped create the MAGA/MAHA majority and telling these folks to ‘suck it up’ or ‘bootstrap’ while simultaneously being dismissive of their very real economic realities comes across as boomer BS.
FWIW my folks bought their home for $92 month mortgage payment in ’66. Their combined income was just under $800 so they needed less than 1/8 of their household income to pay for a home. Show me where you can buy a middle class home in a nice, safe neighborhood with a monthly nut of 12.5% of household income. I’ll wait.
Again higher population means higher housing demand and building new houses has become well to say the least not common.
Are there major housing regulations being routinely passed?
Lets ask the ai again using Alabama so Apples to Apples
“The current housing regulatory landscape in Alabama is significantly more complex and detailed than it was in 1970, with numerous new regulations governing construction, manufactured housing, and tenant rights. While the foundational framework for housing was established decades ago, modern regulations have expanded to cover specific areas like manufactured homes, energy efficiency, and fair housing enforcement.”
Lets also ask the ai if higher lumber tariffs translate to higher construction prices
“Yes, higher lumber tariffs mean building houses will be more expensive. Tariffs on imported lumber, particularly from Canada which supplies about 85% of U.S. softwood lumber imports, increase the cost of this key building material.
These added costs are typically passed on to consumers in the form of higher home prices, as the National Association of Homebuilders has stated.
The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) estimates that recent tariff actions could add $10,900 to the cost of a single-family home, with some analyses suggesting increases between $7,500 and $10,000.”
In other words the policies you advocate for are exactly the ones increasing housing prices.
If you wish for simplifying building regulations, eliminating tariffs to serve the interests of American quality of life I am with you.
If you wish to throw out capitalism…….
Registered Republican, I have always been a registered Republican, the reason I am a registered Republican is in no small part being a capitalist.
So ‘Agree with Danny or you’re a commie who hates capitalism’? Nah, I reject that false premise. What policies did I advocate here that would raise home prices? Be specific.
We’ve got plenty of timber to create lumber from US Domestic Timber land…lots of it in Alabama by the way. It would be nice if the crony capitalism over regulation that benefits the large companies who can comply with them at scale were lifted. How about opening up Federal land to timber production and a return to competent forestry management practices?
You keep ignoring the issue; generational tension due to very different economic realities for younger workers. You are coming across as pitching a message of ‘suck it up, do what we did, boomer bootstrap platitudes’. That is the point I am making; they can’t do what prior generations did b/c the opportunities to do so don’t exist. Average age of 1st marriage is now 31, average age of 1st time homebuyer is now 38.
This generational divide is real. I ain’t impacted. FWIW I’ve done very well. Zero debt, nice pension well above US average wage, and well in the top 3% of assets, not quite a multimillionaire but close. Nice home with multi acre ponds, gardens, small orchards, big yard and some timber. Newish vehicles. Plenty of toys for my hobbies. Nice bank and investment account balances. Got both DoD Tricare and VA health IN to choose from. I’m very well positioned.
I’m set for SSA being cut by 20-25% b/c as Gen X I viewed this as inevitable due to Boomer and Silent Gen intransigence on making reforms with shared sacrifice across generational cohorts.
Take a look at Federal Spending by generational company you’ll find a huge shift. In essence the spending followed the Boomers. When young the amounts spent on education and other young folks stuff was higher, when Boomers aged spending reversed from young folks stuff to spending on ‘old folks stuff’.
Not just govt spending. All sorts of policy choices made that directly benefited Boomers and Silent Gen v younger generations.
Don’t shoot the messenger and don’t distort my message with bad faith reinterpretation. It’s like saying Romans Reagan was cheerleading the Soviet Empire when he ran his ‘There’s a bear in the woods’ campaign ad. Pointing out the very real economic struggles of younger generations and their justified anger isn’t the same as advocating socialism. The song ‘Rich Men North of Richmond’ encapsulated this generational struggle. Ignore and dismiss this reality at your political peril.
Not what I said
Housing has gone up because the population has grown exponentially and the number of houses constructed has not gone up exponentially and it is today significantly more expensive to construct a house thanks to red tape and higher material prices and higher labor costs.
In other words intervention in the market has resulted in higher prices.
Solution is in no way more intervention.
Want price control like Tucker says?
Fine you will get fewer house constructions, and fewer people will be willing to rent their accomodations leading to higher prices.
Want a market sollution?
Lower tariffs to reduce prices, stop making new regulations, repeal some regulations and you have lower costs.
Want to know why houses cost less in 1950?
Lower population, more houses, more construction, lower material cost, lower labor costs, a tiny miniscule amount of regulations in comparison to today making the legal costs insignificant.
We already had state intervention in housing costs it caused the prices to go up.
By the way don’t shoot the messenger but the actual working class is not the harbinger of socialism here.
It was literally on the ballot on in New York
Working class vote went to
ANDREW CUOMO
Black vote went to
ANDREW CUOMO
Hispanic vote went to
ANDREW CUOMO
Rich vote went to
MAMDAMI
College degree vote went to
MAMDAMI
Post bac degree vote went to
MAMDAMI
Why is it when put up for a vote common sense back to capitalism less state intervention politicians actually get the working class votes while socialists need to cobble a coalition of college degree, and rich white ladies?
You also haven’t answered why exactly more of the same policies with different rhetoric wouldn’t mean the same results?
I used Alabama as a microcosm for the country
Why do you think Alabama pursuing exactly the same policies of increased regulation, and more red tape will have a different result today than yesterday?
Rent control?
Why not look at what it has done EVERYWHERE it has been tried
There is a reason why in every election around the country that features socialist victories you find rich and middle class socialists vs capitalist working class.
How about just stop with red herrings. TC has jack crap to do with the facts or with the points I raise but you keep ignoring.
I didn’t argue for more regulation. I specifically pointed out rent control and NIMBY as bad ideas contributing to lack of housing stock.
Of course getting 20-25 illegal aliens thrown the heck out of the Nation will open up quite a few places to rent or buy. They surplus supply will do wonders to pop the home.price bubble and bring down sales price and rents as that inventory opens up.
I ain’t arguing for socialism. Heck other than tax reforms, a return to good forestry management practices and ending over regulation in general (housing in particular) and raising rates to match the real ‘interest rate’ v the BS understated CPI I haven’t called for specific policy changes. Do the things I suggest and the real free market will take care of the rest.
You are debating with yourself and making the error of ignoring the very real economic issues faced by younger generations. That is what gives AOC an opening …to fill the void you create by ignoring the issues. There’s A good number of center/left populists out there that have much in common with center/right populists that elected Trump and provided HoR/Senate majority. We should be courting them. Instead you and other mainstream GoP folks are stuck in old outdated policies that don’t fit the challenges of today. Adapt or die is just as true for political coalitions as it is for a species.
Yes, she’s an idiot, and I would never vote for her. But I agree that it would be foolish to underestimate her. Comparing her with Harris is instructive in this regard. Unlike Harris, Ocazio-Cortez is not a DEI hire (she’s a tribal hire), and is vastly better at talking on her feet in interviews. The latter will count a lot for leftist voters.
Undermine capitalism and endorse socialism in all but name now you get AOC in 2028.
If you agreed with Tucker Carlson’s lies about how much America sucks than AOC actually is the correct candidate.
Demonize capitalism today get socialism tomorrow.
Pointing out flaws in our current version of ‘capitalism’ isn’t an automatic shift to socialism. If you continue to ignore the populist center/left you’re gonna be as gobsmacked as the d/prog were about the righteous fury at the polls by the center/right populists who twice elected Trump and keep pushing for solutions to the problems.
You come across as arguing on behalf of the ‘Rich Men North of Richmond’ who view working class, middle class struggles as ‘tough cookies’. Maybe you don’t mean to but it comes across as not just disinterested but uncaring. Younger generations are getting kicked in the teeth economically. Average age of 1st marriage is 31, average age of 1st home purchase is 38 …both of those are due to a far different economic reality today than for boomers. The cost of a home for boomers was roughly 2-3x annual salary while today the price requires 5-6x salary. Wages have not come close to keeping up with inflation.
Downplay, ignore and trivialize the very real economic struggles for younger generations at your political peril.
What part of Gen Z doesn’t want to return to the Cotton Fields at slave wages don’t you or Tucker or other modern capitalism sucks people understand? Or for that matter the way poverty has been taking a nosedive compared to the 20th century?
https://www.aei.org/articles/have-wages-stagnated-for-decades-in-the-us/
“Have wages stagnated for decades?
Using July 1990 as the base period, average real wages using the CPI grew by 21 percent over the three-decade period ending in February 2022. Real wages grew by 39 percent using the PCE.
So far, I have been discussing average wages. Because the analysis has focused on production and nonsupervisory workers — workers who are not managers, roughly speaking — there is less reason than usual to be concerned that average wages produce a distorted picture of what is happening to “typical” workers because of growing inequality. Still, some concern may remain. Figure 3 shows real wage growth for the median worker and at other points in the distribution.”
Housing is getting more expensive because the population has dramatically increased since the 20th century but supply of houses haven’t.
You could go to the Tucker direction and trash capitalism for it, do nothing to lower the price of raw material and do nothing to make the permitting process easier for developers or you could lower tariffs on goods we need and make changes at the state legislature and city council level.
Real helpful change isn’t sexy which is why populist never advocate for it.
What with the vitriol? Why do you keep returning to equating my pointing to economic facts with some embrace of socialism? Nothing is further from the truth. Your attitude towards the younger generations is what’s gonna lead to younger workers refusing to go along with funding higher taxes or later eligibility age for SSA and ensuring the looming 20-25% cut actually happens in 8-10 years.
Here’s a couple facts. Since 1970 the M2 money supply has increased by 35X. The value of the dollar has had a corresponding decrease in purchasing power. This decades long financier backed loose money policy has dramatically skewed both prices of assets (real estate/stocks) and led to historic levels of concentrated ownership of those assets in the top quintile.
Here’s a few more facts. In 1970 the average hourly wage was $3.50 an hour. For the value to be maintained (purchasing power) in inflation adjusted terms then we multiply that by the increase in M2. So $3.50 times 35 = $123 an hour. I am sure you are aware that ain’t the average hourly wage rate, instead it is roughly $27.
I ain’t trashing ‘capitalism’. What we have isn’t ‘capitalism’, instead it is crony capitalism and a rigged financial system where access to borrowed capital has led to an asset bubble. Wages were suppressed by imloetation of foreign workers and it accelerated with globalists offshore US manufacturing, industrial jobs. This is what’s priced folks out of home affordability in most of the Nation. The commie/socialist ‘rent control’ policies and NIMBY boomers demanding no new homes be built accelerates the existing affordability issue.
The best thing that can happen is to raise interest rates to 9-10%, pop the asset bubble, wipe out the illusory ‘gains’ in real estate and equity markets and reset the economy. This puts Mom/Pop savers in the driver seat giving them an alternative to shovin $ into an over inflated stock market to get a positive real rate of return. Follow up with a simple flat tax for all income; wage, passive, divided, interest, capital gain. Scrap estate taxes and apply inheritance above $2M to the income tax. Set it at 18% and be done. Cap Spending to revenue and bring SSA/Medicare on budget, no separate tax it comes out of the 18%. A simple standard deduction set at minimum wage x 2K hours. No other deductions on income, no rebates, no credits.
FYI my Paternal Grandfather worked for Birmingham Steel as a steel worker and my Maternal Grandfather worked for L&N RR. Neither grew cotton. Be nice if we could still have steel worker jobs in the USA as we did in the 19th and 20th century before globalist/financiers refused to act with tariffs to protect such a vital industry and instead chose to make a few more cents per share per quarter with outsourcing.
All I did was point to the fact that real wages have gone up over the decades and have been increasing the entire 21st century.
For poverty 21st vs 20th century
https://news.nd.edu/news/long-run-decline-in-us-poverty-continued-in-recent-years-despite-pandemic-new-report-shows/
“Poverty has fallen by 27 percentage points since 1980, according to new research from the University of Notre Dame, the University of Chicago and Baylor University. This change is in sharp contrast with official U.S. Census Bureau numbers indicating that poverty has fallen a mere 1.5 percentage points in that time.”
20th century nostalgia is not reality.
Again looking at trend from 1990 (peak 20th century) to today despite The Great Recession, despite Covid 19, despite multiple bubbles is
“Since 1990, real median wages grew by 34 percent. Real wages at the tenth, twentieth, and thirtieth percentiles grew over this period by 50, 48, and 38 percent, respectively.”
That real wage growth is including everything, people today have a lot more disposable income.
Again the way to lower housing costs that intervention in the free market dictated should rise is remove red tape that prevents housing from being constructed, lower the price of the goods.
What tariffs do is increase the price of goods needed for construction, and what more red tape like rent control does is it makes people remove their properties from the market and not construct new ones.
Basic economics 101
You increase the demand (in this case population size, the American population today dwarfs what it used to be) while keeping supply the same
What happens to the price?
Increase cost of production
What happens to the price?
Attack construction companies and landlords today
Get no construction and no new rental properties tomorrow.
You are confused with Keynesian nonsense if you believe ‘inflation’ is anything other than a monetary policy problem. The price of goods reflects the perceived value (purchasing power) of the dollar. Print more dollars and the value of the dollar declines by an equivalent amount.
Since 1970 the money supply has increased 35 fold. That’s one heck of a lotta debasement of the dollar. Those ‘gains’ in your stock portfolio and real estate? Mostly illusory and based on expansion of M2 so more dollars chasing supply raised the price but not the real value of the underlying assets.
Then there’s the importation of 20-25 million illegal aliens. Plus all the many visas and the roughly 1 million ish per year importation of LEGAL aliens since the late ’60s. They take up quite a bit of housing stock and have artificially depressed wage growth. To argue either of things is untrue is unserious.
Please don’t repeat the country club GoP errors of ignoring the very real issues of the broad middle-class, the 70% between the bottom 15% and top 15%. If you do y’all are opening up a void to be filled by someone like AOC from the center/left populists just as Trump filled the same void y’all created and courted center/right populists to victory.
Shake it up how? By beating McGovern’s and Mondale’s record losses?
You left the word “Handlers” off the end of the headline.
“Her team has brought on former Bernie Sanders advisers, an unmistakable signal of national ambition.”
What, the Adlai Stevenson advisers were all dead?
It would definitely be foolish to underestimate her weight.
Sandy’s really been packing on the pounds this last year.