• Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    because she’s too polarizing.

    She shares a lot of views with Bernie Sanders, and Berni would almost surely have defeated Trump where Hillary failed.
    As I see it, she is not nearly as polarizing as Trump. The only ones strongly against her, are probably extreme Christians and Nazis.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        That doesn’t really make her polarizing, that’s just the right wing media treating her unfairly, as they do with every progressive Democrat, except a bit more, because she is popular.

        • just_another_person@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          31
          ·
          5 months ago

          No, it makes her polarizing because the viewers of certain media thinks she’s a fucking liberal who will literally sweep your house, take you gums, sell them, and give the profit to "illegals’.

          This was a literal interpretation about her from ImfoWars. It’s a fucking thing. She won’t win.

          • Buffalox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            29
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            People who follow infowars are already radicalized, and will say any moderate is polarizing. They want a Fuhrer, they want to exterminate LGBT and colored people. Their opinion is irrelevant, because there is no talking sense to those people. Just see how the MAGA people threw a fit, because their house leader “compromised” after 8 months of negotiating, and getting everything they asked for!!!
            They are beyond reach, and they are the ones polarizing, not rational sensible people like AOC, that actually tries to make life better for most people.

            If not only wanting to do things for the rich, the white and Christians, makes you polarizing, then a polarizing candidate is the only reasonable option.

          • ultranaut@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            20
            ·
            5 months ago

            Literally, anyone who threatens the interests served by right-wing media is going to see themselves transformed into a bogeyman by right-wing media. That’s how it works. That AOC is “polarizing” according to them is because of the threat she poses to them. If you’re letting right-wing media define the boundaries of who is an acceptable candidate, you will never defeat them.

          • John Richard@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            5 months ago

            That is why she’d be so successful. She’d give them strokes. She’d get constant media coverage. They would give her so much publicity the news would always be about her. She’s good looking and talks well. She’d look badass in the White House.

    • Eldritch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      23
      ·
      5 months ago

      Republicans boosted Sanders, not because they liked him. But because they knew it would, and did divide their opposition for the next decade or more. Had Sanders gotten the nomination. They’d have smeared him worse than Clinton.

      • Rookwood@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        That’s the thing about Bernie. He’s hard to smear. Unlike, “my husband cheated on me while serving as President” Hillary. You’re delusional.

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

          The fact that they didn’t take the time to really try to smear him doesn’t mean he’s hard to smear. There were a lot of accusations that could have gotten a lot of play Propaganda wise. Like him and his wife honeymooning in Russia. That got bare minimal play during the campaign because it was much more handy to keep the Democrats divided. In fact I think it was probably Democrats that pointed that out. But since they don’t directly control the messaging machine. And the people who do did not want that message out it didn’t get out.

          Just to point this out to you since you seem to not understand. Smears don’t have to be true. Often they aren’t. All you need to smear someone successfully is a consistent message driven into them.