292 AOC-Vance 2028 as a Reprisal of William McKinley-William Jennings Bryan Circa 1896
To say it’s early is putting it mildly-it’s April of 2025 so November 2028 is still three years and seven months away. Though these are not normal times to say the least. But AOC is already putting up some very interesting and impressive numbers. She’s certainly raising money at a pace that is not normal for just three months into a new Presidential Administration
.
Then there are her poll numbers in a poential 2028 Dem primary run which are pretty shocking.
FN:
End FN
Again very early and I don’t know who I will vote for. Let’s see where things are in 17 months post what is hopefully a major wave Congressional election victory for the Democrats. But I’m certainly OPEN to voting for her-in a way I was never open to voting for Bernie. One thing that needs to be understood is she’s not simply the younger, female, Latina version of Bernie though obviously they’re friends and allies and their joint Against Oligarchy Tour has been pretty important in raising her poll numbers.
Full Remarks: AOC in Los Angeles, California | Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
She has developed her own brand which is quite different than his-which is why she has a better chance than he did if she is running-and how do you see a poll that shows you with 21% of the Democratic primary vote in under three and three quarters years before the Presidential election and not at least seriously consider running?
One major difference is that she’s built an inside game whereas Bernie was always an outsider to the Democratic party even though he always caucused with them. And this has actually led to some theater criticism from the Left which initially supported her Circa 2018
(592) Hasanabi on AOC’s Future – YouTube
FN: Who can forget Jimmy Dore’s clownish freakout when she skipped doing his show-which only further showcases her excellent judgement-‘She’s not your friend!’.
What’s been very interesting about AOC since 2018 and that she’s gotten much closer to liberals-the feeling’s been mutual as Vaush had chronicled about a year and a half ago when she discussed-as reported in Ryan Grim’s book.
(592) AOC Rails Against The Toxic Online Left – YouTube
Vaush himself-and Hasan of course-was pretty displeased when AOC stood by Biden as did Bernie himself a move that was understandable and wise both substantively and tactically. It was substantively logical as Biden atually was a very progressive President-Bernie regularly called him the most progressive President since FDR LBJ-he said FDR of course though in reality it’s LBJ-Bernie as a leftist child of the 60s can’t bring himself to admit it.
FN: Vaush has also claimed AOC is “too young” in his view and that she “sounds like a little kid” in an analysis that IMO might say a lot more about himself than AOC-I say that as a long term Vaush stan.
End FN
Tactically it was also smart though to understand this you have to get more into the weeds of the stakes of the interparty fight over Biden in July 2024. While the conventional wisdom was that the right strategic move was to push him out there was an argument which many of us on the liberal Democratic base on social media were making that changing horses that late was itself highly risky-many who made this argument were also Black and Brown Democrats-again see Chapter Nov 5 Reconsidered.
Overall AOC since early in her first term after early adventures like occupying Pelosi’s office developed an inside-outside strategy which would put her in a much better position to actually lead the Democratic party if she were to win the nomination-which in light of the above poll at least at this moment in April 2025 looks plausible.
While much of the Bernie or Busters a la Jimmy Dore were just in it to see candidates destroy everything AOC has been interested in a movement which actually gives you the ability to build power-which is wise assuming those who call themselves progressives have any actual interest in using the levers of power to improve people’s lives-which puts her on the same side of most liberals. I’ve been struck by how much support there is for her on Bluesky-the titular headquarters of #ResistanceNation headquarters.
An AOC-Vance 2028 election would truly be crazy truly McKinley-Jennings Bryan 2.0. AOC aka Jennings-Bryan 2.0 as an anti oligarchy radical who eschews corporate donations against Vance who would be the sitting VP of not just a pro oligarchic Administration but THE oligarchical Administration with a genuine cabinet of billionaires. Even better Trump has publicly expressed his admiration for McKinley and his desire to return back to the “golden age” he claims started in 1870 and ended in 1913-ie literally the gilded age.
Another fascinating subplot would be Israel. Can you imagine the freakout by the Israel lobby to an AOC nomination for the Democratic party? That on top of her perceived hostility to corporate America and her stated goal of reigning in the oligarchy will no doubt mobilize both her supporters and her opponents in the oligarchy who will spend record amounts to elect JD Vance.
Indeed specifically on the issue of Israel this will give the country-assuming again she is the nominee three years later-what the economists-or scientists in general though is economics a science but I digress.-call a natural experiment on a question I’ve been asking for some time and it goes back to the 1948 election and the issue of Israel-1948 of course was the year Israel was recognized as a country. Harry Truman would recognize Israel as a nation-though after both the UN and the Soviet Union.
And that’s because Truman was skeptical of a Jewish state. On a personal level he was a Presbyterian who had the classic mainline Protestant view of the need for separation of Church and State. He wanted to do what he could to support displaced European Jews after the Holocaust but didn’t like the idea of a theocracy-Jewish or otherwise. In addition his State Department was opposed as it believed this would damage US interests in the Middle East with our Arab allies-Saudi Arabia, Egypt, etc.
For my conjecture about the effect of the Holocaust on the founding of Israel start with location 109.
Ultimately, of course, he would succumb against his own better judgment and that of his State Department. Why? Because of the Zionist lobby-today you’d call it the Israel lobby but this was before Israel this was what the argument was about-wether or not Israel should be formed.
It was a battle between his principles and his felt political interests so Truman being a politician chose his political interests as is well laid out in an excellent book about his ambivalent relationship with the founding of Israel-while he ultimately greenlit it he had some very mixed feelings and it took him a few years to get there.
FN:
As Allis and Ronald Radosh document is that it was a change in the strategy of certain Zionist groups that was ultimately able to push him in the direction they wanted him to go. what won it for them was clearly a credible threat by a few leading groups that if Truman didn’t support the founding of a Jewish state he would lose the NY Jewish vote. It ought to be appreciated that this tactic was brand new AND CONTROVERSIAL in American Zionist circles.
Until this time-in the leadup to the 1946 election-most leading Jewish Zionists-as most US Jews in general-supported the Democrats. While there had been a Zionist movement among educated Jews since the early 20th century until 1945 they had spoken solely to Democrats about the founding of a Jewish state.
It’s an interesting historical point and controversial to many Zionists on social media even today but it’s pretty clear to me in reviewing the historical record that there’s a good chance without the Holocaust Israel would not have happened as this excellent book on Truman and the founding of Israel demonstrates-
Until the Holocaust most American Jews considered America to be the promised land.
“For many it was their Zion. But after the Holocaust, the assimilationists became Zionists. The inability of the Western democracies to save their brethren from the gas chambers and their refusal, even now, to admit the survivors, strengthened the Zionist argument that the Jews, persecuted throughout history in the Diaspora, would only be safe once they had their own country.”
American Jews did not want this other country for themselves, but rather for the suffering Jews across the seas. A large segment of American public opinion came to support them.”
FN: start on Location 109.
As most American Jews including most Zionist Jews were progressive the idea of threatening to support the Republicans struck many of wrong-as if threatening to take the country hostage to reactionary government unless they got their way on a Jewish state. The leader for this change in Zionist tactics was one man-Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver.
To his regret, in 1942 Weizmann had encouraged Silver to take a leading role in the Zionist movement. Now he was changing the rules on Zionism’s elder statesmen. Silver was not only confrontational and unyielding, but, unlike Weizmann and Wise, he was not charming. Many people who had contact with him found him abrasive and did not particularly like him, a group that unfortunately included both FDR and Truman. But Silver was a very effective political strategist and organizer. He was an inspired speaker whose “baritone-voiced oratory,” a New York Times reporter wrote, “would do credit to a Shakespearean actor.”29
FN: Starting on Page 8
End FN
Weizmann refers to Chaim Weizmann a major leading Zionist advocate who-not surprisingly he was born in Russia as it’s no accident that Russia was the birthplace of Zionisim-would go onto be the first Prime Minister of Israel in 1949. While historically I’m not exactly a fan of Silver though in fairness to him it’s not hard to understand why he felt the need for a more aggressive approach as it’s certainly arguable that FDR could have done far more to help the Jews in Europe during the war-though FDR did face very tough political calculus as many Americans during the 1930s didn’t even think Hitler was the heavy in all this and had to vow not to go to war with him in the 1940 election.
But whatever the merits of Silver’s approach from the Zionist perspective-and from this perspective he looks pretty good-the impact of his approach in US politics I’d argue has been negative and lamentable.
In 1942, the year Hitler’s Final Solution was made known to the world, six hundred American Zionists met at New York City’s Biltmore Hotel. The presence of Chaim Weizmann and the Palestinian leader David Ben-Gurion added to the importance of the event and signified that the United States had replaced Great Britain as the Zionist movement’s center of gravity. At the conference Silver launched an effective attack on the opponents of political Zionism. Silver argued that the only solution for the Jews was to establish their own state and that this should be their top priority. By the end, the attendees unanimously adopted what came to be known as the Biltmore Declaration, which stated for the first time (at least officially among American Zionists) that “Palestine be established as a Jewish Commonwealth.”
FN: Pg 8
End FN
This once again underscores my point that WWII and the Holocaust was the catalyst for making a Jewish state finally a reality-again as we saw above prior to this most American Jews considered the US their “Zion.” And while they had no intention of leaving America they saw Palestine as a refuge for displaced Jews in Europe post the Holocaust. After this the premise that Jews could only be safe with their own state became much more compelling. Notice though at that point even Silver didn’t speak of a “Jewish state” but just a “Jewish commonwealth.” During this period the Zionists were arguing that they DIDN”T want all of Palestine just wanted part of it and there were a number of Zionists who argued sincerely for a binational state-including Noam Chomsky of all people.
FN: Chomsky quotes
Silver, accused by many of his opponents of being a Republican, actually denied belonging to either party. He believed that both major political parties should be made to vie for Jewish support.30 It was a mistake, he thought, to be in the pocket of the Democratic Party and be taken for granted. To the chagrin of the Democrats, Silver proceeded to form a close alliance with Republican Senator Robert A. Taft of Ohio, a strong supporter of Zionist goals. Silver also argued that the Zionists’ focus should be on creating a climate of public opinion in the United States that would move non-Zionist Jews to support the goal of establishing an independent Jewish state in Palestine. ”
Although even if that’s true it’s not much better-it shows that at best he was indifferent to effect of his actions on American politics whereas previously most Zionists also cared about America.
“They should reach out and educate the non-Jewish majority, convince journalists, and put pressure on Congress and through it the administration. In a democracy, the people, Silver and his followers hoped, would have to be listened to.”
Remember too that many in the Republican party at the time remained Nazi apologists-nor was it just history as this group included Joe McCarthy. Ultimately you have to admit that what Silver did “worked” from the standpoint of creating a Jewish Commonwealth State. Indeed, even though he didn’t like Sliver’s tactics it ultimately it worked for Weizmann too as he would become the first PM of the new Jewish state. But what it hasn’t worked for I’d argue is American politics which the Israel lobbyists have successfully held hostage for years in inducing the two parties to get into a bidding war of who supports Israel more.
But here’s the very interesting question. Ultimately Truman blinked despite his misgivings pointing out that he had lots of Zionist supporters come to see him but he never got any visits from the Arab, Muslim other side. But what’s the counterfactual? If Truman hadn’t caved could have won anyway? To be sure this was an election he was seen as a huge underdog in with approval ratings in the mid to low 30s-his numbers were even worse than Biden’s which is one reason I had thought maybe Biden COULD have still won.
And he needed every vote so it’s understandable why he considered the loss of NY Jewish voters a real threat. Still-could he have won anyway? I’m not so convinced he couldn’t have while OTOH as I argued elsewhere in this book I do think that Israel’s brutal war in Gaza-which has been plausibly called a genocide by the Left-was a significant factor in Kamala’s defeat-not the only one but significant.
And you think about Trump’s complaints that despite “all he did for Israel” American Jews still won’t vote for him. Maybe-just maybe-that’s because he doesn’t understand the motivations of American Jews and indeed they have consistently been one of the most progressive voter demographics in the country-some are actually anti Zionist and those who are Zionist tend to be more liberal Zionist and still believe in the two state solution and a fair shake for the Palestinians.
BUT starting with FDR in 1944 and Truman the next four years the Democrats have assumed that if you rebuff the demands of the Israel lobbyists in any way shape or form you will lose the Jewish vote by a landslide-despite over three quarters of evidence to the contrary-in the form of the Democratic party continuing to win 75% of the Jewish vote election cycle after election cycle-and they were winning it before 1948 just as impressively.
Certainly I see no evidence that most American Jews are single issue Israel voters-and note that the Democrats consistently at least in principle support the two state solution and conditions on how Israel should treat the Palestinianism yet they continue to support Democrats
So if-big if-AOC is the 2028 nominee look for a new level of hysteria from the Israel lobby and dark predictions that the Democrats will become a “permanent minority party” if they nominate her. My guess though is that this is wishful thinking and that Jews will vote for AOC In the same numbers they always vote for the Democrats.
Part of me would love for her to be the nominee just to test this hypothesis of mine.
UPDATE: Notably Nate Silver and Galen Druke had a “way too early draft” for the Democrats in 2028 and they both had chosen AOC first-but Galen won the right to choose her. He then had Kamala #2 which interestingly are my top two favorite picks at this point too though OF COURSE Kamala is number one.
Way-too-early 2028 Democratic primary draft with Galen Druke
However one thing that worries me a little is a nasty primary fight between AOC and Kamala. At this point now-with the emphasis on at this point now-I suspect that if Kamala runs again she’ll again be my first choice as she has been since 2017 with her cross examination of Jeff Sessions. But AOC would be my second choice-well maybe tied for 2nd with Tim Walz. But some of the leftists-like Vaush-again I’m a big fan of his-and Hasan-whom I/m not such a fain of-have a tendency to talk about kamala has disdainfully as they speak about HRC. IF that attitude were widespread in the primary and the leftists acted like it HAD to be AOC and if it were Kamala they would stay home-not that Vaush or maybe even Hasan would EVER say THAT-but if there was any “AOC or Bust” that could divide the party. And we can’t afford that again-we need our #Liberal-Left alliance as as much as we get on each other’s nerves it’s our only chance to finally turn the page on this terrible Donald Trump era.
Hopefully both liberals and leftists will remember the big picture-the prize is finally turning the page on this terrible fascist era.
So what are her chances? Again very early. FD Signifier argues it will never happen-it will be Gavin Newsom. Right now the base has turned sour on Newsom after his podcast which seems to focus more on being anti woke than anti Trump-see chapter Democratic messaging problem.
Still he also used an anecdotebout the guy who told his wife in 2008 “We’re voting for the n***er” which might be the best argument SHE CAN WIN.
Desperate times call for desperate measures even for racists. In 2008 with the financial crisis and the disastrous Iraq War and Bush-Cheney era Americans even those who previously would never have considered it voted for a Black dude with the middle name Hussein for President.
There was that Rolling Stone quote from a high ranking GOP person close to the Trump WH who after Trump’s tariff war tanked the market said he’d be open to voting for Bernie Sanders. Exactly by 2028 my guess is that a lot of Americans who will vote for almost ANYONE if they can credibly promise to finally bring the utterly disastrous Trump years to an end.
(595) I might need to update my post election takes… – YouTube
4/16//2025
UPDATE: However one way to look at it-I like to look at it this way-is that the top two candidates for the 2028 primary who combine for close to half the vote are woman of color. In the immediate aftermath of November 5 one sentiment in the conventional wisdom was that the Democratic party would never nominate a woman again.
The idea was that Dems had lost because “The Woke”-they were too concerned about the civil rights of trans people allegedly though honestly there was scant evidence of that-the only evidence was a video Harris did back in 2019. But the alleged perniciousness of “Woke” certainly appears to be the article of faith of Gavin Newsom-obviously the premise that the Democrats need to nominate a white dude in 2028 is convenient to him. But currently polls show him in the single digits while the two brown skin women are at 50%.
I have to admit I kind of love this for the Democratic party recalling the movie title: “Life is what happens to you when you have other plans.”