Does AOC have a realistic chance to become U.S. President one day?

[T'Chenka]

She clearly has some skeletons that have yet to be uncovered

Do the Islanders have what it takes to get through the Penguins this year? I'm filling out my fantasy playoff pool picks tonight and some advice from a psychic would be REALLY helpful.

[Frodo]

She has to first prove she can appeal to upstate New Yorkers in any statewide race at home before she can even think of running for President.  

[T'Chenka]

She has to first prove she can appeal to upstate New Yorkers in any statewide race at home before she can even think of running for President.  

She actually doesn't though... that's not how running for president works.

You declare you are running - officially, filing paperwork and with the blessing of your party, unless you're an independant - and then you're in the race. That's what Trump did.

[Fuzzy Bear]

She has to first prove she can appeal to upstate New Yorkers in any statewide race at home before she can even think of running for President.  

She actually doesn't though... that's not how running for president works.

You declare you are running - officially, filing paperwork and with the blessing of your party, unless you're an independant - and then you're in the race. That's what Trump did.

New York is Democratic enough these days to where AOC would be elected to the Senate if she got the Democratic nomination.  She wouldn't carry the small town and rural counties, but she's likely carry Erie County (Buffalo) and Albany County (Albany). 

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

She has to first prove she can appeal to upstate New Yorkers in any statewide race at home before she can even think of running for President.  

She actually doesn't though... that's not how running for president works.

You declare you are running - officially, filing paperwork and with the blessing of your party, unless you're an independant - and then you're in the race. That's what Trump did.

New York is Democratic enough these days to where AOC would be elected to the Senate if she got the Democratic nomination.  She wouldn't carry the small town and rural counties, but she's likely carry Erie County (Buffalo) and Albany County (Albany). 

Nope. She would most likely not win the nomination.

[Figueira]

I don't think there's a greater than 10% chance of any specific person becoming President, with the possible exception of  some 2020 Democrats.

[Badger]

People who support AOC shouldn’t accuse Republicans of living in a fact free world because they are supporting a politician who lives in a fact free world as well.

"Fact free".

Do you make that assessment based on complete BS Fox News assessments like the green New Deal is going to prohibit procreation and cow farting? Or just a near religious like, not to mention ahistorical, belief that Reaganomics was wonderful and the only way to grow the economy is to give rich people tax breaks?

The cost of Trump’s Tax cuts were 1.5-2 trillion , the Bush ones were around 2.5 trillion



The cost of AOC Green New Deal are significantly higher and would cost more in one year than either the Bush or trump tax cuts did in 10 : https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/miltonezrati/2019/02/19/the-green-new-deal-and-the-cost-of-virtue/amp/

Congratulations, you found a Republican hack study from a Republican hack group that blows things way out of proportion.

Published in a republican hack magazine, don't forget.

Congratulations, beep boop. You've hit the fact free trifecta!

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/forbes/


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/

Your first link rather proves my point, and your ladder link is a pathetic red herring attempt at whataboutism.

BTW, check out the Wikipedia page for the website you are citing. Columbia journalism review refers to it as an amateur media bias website his results are in no way scientific. Admittedly, it's somewhat difficult to be scientific about something this subjective, but you aren't exactly reaching for the stars in terms of citing credible Authority here.

Find me a source which says the Green New Deal will cost under 20 trillion In 10 years

Gee, literally 5 seconds on Google and factcheck.org regarding Trump statements about it show otherwise.

You're not even trying here.

[OSR stands with Israel]

People who support AOC shouldn’t accuse Republicans of living in a fact free world because they are supporting a politician who lives in a fact free world as well.

"Fact free".

Do you make that assessment based on complete BS Fox News assessments like the green New Deal is going to prohibit procreation and cow farting? Or just a near religious like, not to mention ahistorical, belief that Reaganomics was wonderful and the only way to grow the economy is to give rich people tax breaks?

The cost of Trump’s Tax cuts were 1.5-2 trillion , the Bush ones were around 2.5 trillion



The cost of AOC Green New Deal are significantly higher and would cost more in one year than either the Bush or trump tax cuts did in 10 : https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/miltonezrati/2019/02/19/the-green-new-deal-and-the-cost-of-virtue/amp/

Congratulations, you found a Republican hack study from a Republican hack group that blows things way out of proportion.

Published in a republican hack magazine, don't forget.

Congratulations, beep boop. You've hit the fact free trifecta!

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/forbes/


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/

Your first link rather proves my point, and your ladder link is a pathetic red herring attempt at whataboutism.

BTW, check out the Wikipedia page for the website you are citing. Columbia journalism review refers to it as an amateur media bias website his results are in no way scientific. Admittedly, it's somewhat difficult to be scientific about something this subjective, but you aren't exactly reaching for the stars in terms of citing credible Authority here.

Find me a source which says the Green New Deal will cost under 20 trillion In 10 years

Gee, literally 5 seconds on Google and factcheck.org regarding Trump statements about it show otherwise.

You're not even trying here.

Lol nice job deflecting and playing the whataboutism game

[Badger]

People who support AOC shouldn’t accuse Republicans of living in a fact free world because they are supporting a politician who lives in a fact free world as well.

"Fact free".

Do you make that assessment based on complete BS Fox News assessments like the green New Deal is going to prohibit procreation and cow farting? Or just a near religious like, not to mention ahistorical, belief that Reaganomics was wonderful and the only way to grow the economy is to give rich people tax breaks?

The cost of Trump’s Tax cuts were 1.5-2 trillion , the Bush ones were around 2.5 trillion



The cost of AOC Green New Deal are significantly higher and would cost more in one year than either the Bush or trump tax cuts did in 10 : https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/miltonezrati/2019/02/19/the-green-new-deal-and-the-cost-of-virtue/amp/

Congratulations, you found a Republican hack study from a Republican hack group that blows things way out of proportion.

Published in a republican hack magazine, don't forget.

Congratulations, beep boop. You've hit the fact free trifecta!

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/forbes/


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/

Your first link rather proves my point, and your ladder link is a pathetic red herring attempt at whataboutism.

BTW, check out the Wikipedia page for the website you are citing. Columbia journalism review refers to it as an amateur media bias website his results are in no way scientific. Admittedly, it's somewhat difficult to be scientific about something this subjective, but you aren't exactly reaching for the stars in terms of citing credible Authority here.

Find me a source which says the Green New Deal will cost under 20 trillion In 10 years

Gee, literally 5 seconds on Google and factcheck.org regarding Trump statements about it show otherwise.

You're not even trying here.

Lol nice job deflecting and playing the whataboutism game

Do... Do you even know what those words mean? You asked if I could find any Source showing that the green New Deal would cost less than 20 trillion dollars. And I did so, literally doing everything but linking the article itself for you. That's... The exact opposite of either deflection or whataboutism.

You are really not good at this.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

This is absolutely impossible to say.

[Proto]

She is too vulger a person, hence she has good chances to rule the country.

[Badger]

She is too vulger a person.

( citation needed)

[T'Chenka]

She is too vulger a person, hence she has good chances to rule the country.

Are you David Pakman's bored trolling account?

LOL "too vulgar". Where do you crackerjacks come up with these gems?

[T'Chenka]

With Pelosi and Trump both attacking AOC in the last few weeks - Trump's July 14 attack in particular - average Americans (and non-Americans) are all seeing her face and hearing her name now more than ever. She is being (accurately) depicted in the media as a credible threat to Pelosi and Trump and Americans are internalizing that.

In my opinion, all of this bodes quite well well for her 2024 or 2028 presidential campaign. Do you agree? Disagree? Why do you feel that way?

[free my dawg]

Yes, especially if Trump wins a second term.

[smoltchanov]

My sincere hope: no, under no circumstances...

[emailking]

I don't see how she couldn't have a realistic chance (which is different from whether she's likely to be). I would think almost anyone in Congress has a realistic chance. Her chances are probably better than most of theirs though.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

People who support AOC shouldn’t accuse Republicans of living in a fact free world because they are supporting a politician who lives in a fact free world as well.

Can you provide an example? And not just an example of where she has made a mistake, but an example of where she has been factually wrong and then doubled down and refused to reverse course?  Because doing that over and over and over is why people think Republicans live in denial of reality.

[Gustaf]

Based on your parameter in your question (at least 10% chance), I had to answer Yes to your poll.
Without your 10% chance, I would have answered No.

I was thinking the opposite. 10% is a pretty good chance, that would make her at least top 10 likeliest people to be presidents.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

I am getting serious Michele Bachmann vibes. Hopefully the congressional party unequivocally rejects her in her bid to get a leadership role and then the voters send her packing for good and she makes her rounds on the podcasts scamming socialists forever.

Unfortunately, I have considerably less faith in milennials rejecting crazy than I do Republican Evangelicals.

[Pandaguineapig]

No, she is already toxic outside of her far left bubble, she would also get destroyed in a democratic primary without the media acting as a 24/7 bodyguard for her

[GP270watch]

 She's nowhere near presidential material yet. One of the permanent stains of Donald Trump's legacy will be that people who are not qualified to be President will now have no shame about running. It started with the GOP primary 2016 which culminated with Trump, we're seeing the ridiculousness continue with the Democratic primaries where backbenchers are trying to get to the oval office.

 I'm just waiting for an app to be created where anybody can launch a Presidential campaign and we get millions of Americans simultaneously running for President using nothing but their social media platforms.

[Ilhan Apologist]

Of course. Every major politico in the US has a realistic chance to become POTUS one day.

[OSR stands with Israel]

People who support AOC shouldn’t accuse Republicans of living in a fact free world because they are supporting a politician who lives in a fact free world as well.

Can you provide an example? And not just an example of where she has made a mistake, but an example of where she has been factually wrong and then doubled down and refused to reverse course?  Because doing that over and over and over is why people think Republicans live in denial of reality.

People who support AOC shouldn’t accuse Republicans of living in a fact free world because they are supporting a politician who lives in a fact free world as well.

"Fact free".

Do you make that assessment based on complete BS Fox News assessments like the green New Deal is going to prohibit procreation and cow farting? Or just a near religious like, not to mention ahistorical, belief that Reaganomics was wonderful and the only way to grow the economy is to give rich people tax breaks?

The cost of Trump’s Tax cuts were 1.5-2 trillion , the Bush ones were around 2.5 trillion



The cost of AOC Green New Deal are significantly higher and would cost more in one year than either the Bush or trump tax cuts did in 10 : https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/miltonezrati/2019/02/19/the-green-new-deal-and-the-cost-of-virtue/amp/


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nextbigfuture.com/2019/02/green-new-deal-is-impossible-and-a-partial-attempt-would-cost-over-50-trillion.html%3famp

[Badger]

People who support AOC shouldn’t accuse Republicans of living in a fact free world because they are supporting a politician who lives in a fact free world as well.

"Fact free".

Do you make that assessment based on complete BS Fox News assessments like the green New Deal is going to prohibit procreation and cow farting? Or just a near religious like, not to mention ahistorical, belief that Reaganomics was wonderful and the only way to grow the economy is to give rich people tax breaks?

The cost of Trump’s Tax cuts were 1.5-2 trillion , the Bush ones were around 2.5 trillion



The cost of AOC Green New Deal are significantly higher and would cost more in one year than either the Bush or trump tax cuts did in 10 : https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/miltonezrati/2019/02/19/the-green-new-deal-and-the-cost-of-virtue/amp/

Congratulations, you found a Republican hack study from a Republican hack group that blows things way out of proportion.

Published in a republican hack magazine, don't forget.

Congratulations, beep boop. You've hit the fact free trifecta!

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/forbes/


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/cnn/

Your first link rather proves my point, and your ladder link is a pathetic red herring attempt at whataboutism.

BTW, check out the Wikipedia page for the website you are citing. Columbia journalism review refers to it as an amateur media bias website his results are in no way scientific. Admittedly, it's somewhat difficult to be scientific about something this subjective, but you aren't exactly reaching for the stars in terms of citing credible Authority here.

Find me a source which says the Green New Deal will cost under 20 trillion In 10 years

Gee, literally 5 seconds on Google and factcheck.org regarding Trump statements about it show otherwise.

You're not even trying here.

You want to necrobump a post of yours to prove a point? Fine, I'll necrobump my response. Which, incidentally, other than lamely trying to call deflection and whataboutism hyphen hyphen in a parent ignorance of what those words mean - - you never even tried to refute.

So, there's your facts. Being so adamant about not living in a facts free world oh, I assume this now changes your opinion?