• DarkCloud@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    They need more Bernies Sanders, AOCs… And that katie person… I forget their last name.

    • lennybird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Katie Porter. Basically a younger Elizabeth Warren (who was taught by Warren no less).

      • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        5 months ago

        If Katie Porter ran, I’d 1000% take a leave of absence at work and work her campaign.

        She is the progressive we need in the White House. I hope she runs in 2028.

        • lennybird@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          I’ve said the same thing for AOC and I’ll agree to do the same should Porter run.

      • njm1314@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Katie Porter just got beat. As much as I love her I don’t know why you think she’d be a strong National candidate when she couldn’t win a state race.

        • lennybird@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Well… To be fair there was some shady shit with that race. But put another way, does that mean Schiff would more likely win against Trump than Porter?

          But I tend to agree she’s not quite ready yet.

        • retrospectology@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          She lost because her party backed Schiff. The party is too heavily involved in picking winners during the party to know if a candidate could win a general.

          • njm1314@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            The party did back him, all the more reason she’s not going to be a viable candidate. I’d also point out that just because the party backed him doesn’t negate the fact that the people voted for him.

            • retrospectology@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              The people who vote for Biden will literally vote for anyone. Whether or not anyone voted for Schiff isn’t that strong of an indicator for the general since voter suppression within the Democratic party is much more severe than in the general.

              The party backing a candidate doesn’t mean they’re the best for the general, you’d think Clinton would’ve demonstrated that pretty clearly. In fact, party establishment picks are so anemic that they need to go out if their way to help prop up extremist GOP candidates to make their own guy look more electable. That’s literally their strategy to avoid supporting populist progressive candidates, to roll the dice with fascism.