We’re cooked. The conversations of universal healthcare, freeing Palestine, student loan forgiveness…really any policy discussion is toast. AOC on her instagram tonight is out here talking about how Biden stepping down isn’t feasible and she knows how to win elections and blah blah blah. We’re so far removed from making the changes in this country we need that one of our once leading voices of change is the last defender of Biden. It’s crazy, there’s literally no one we can turn to. 
user
Isn't the simplest explanation that she wants to be a careerist in the Party, but she'll brand herself as a Progressive for as long as that branding works for her?

These are the limits of what can be accomplished through electoralism, especially under the constitutionally-enforced duopoly.  The oligarchy will never allow you to vote out the oligarchy.  The Democratic party will never allow itself to be turned into a party of workers such as that which exists in Canada, Brazil, etc.
assistant
&gt;Isn't the simplest explanation that she wants to be a careerist in the Party, but she'll brand herself as a Progressive for as long as that branding works for her?

No because if she was a careerist, a 50 min IG live where she specifically and explicitly calls out Dem leadership and "anonymous comments" to press is about the worst way to approach a long comfortable Dem career. She is directly opposing Nancy pelosi, Adam Schiff, Chuck Schumer, and others. I think her position is bad, but it's not careerist. At least not in the nefarious way you are suggesting.
user
John McCain made his career out of pretending to be a "Maverick" while still going along with over 95% of what the GOP - AND TRUMP - whom he claimed to oppose - wanted.

Party leaders do not care if you insult them if you vote for their agenda at the end of the day.
assistant
&gt;John McCain made his career out of pretending to be a "Maverick" while still going along with over 95% of what the GOP - AND TRUMP - whom he claimed to oppose - wanted.

This doesn't really disprove what I'm saying.  I'm not claiming careerists don't exist, I think someone like fetterman is a significantly better example. A guy who doesnt seem like he actually has many convictions of his own. He's going to do what the party wants. That's extra obvious for him when he has to bumble through a foreign policy question he has literally no idea about. Whereas, I think AOC has her own convictions and beliefs, I just think her strategy is way too trusting of democratic establishment and its process to work out.

&gt;Party leaders do not care if you insult them if you vote for their agenda at the end of the day.

It's not just "insults", it's being politically opposed. There's not a vote at play here, but supporting Biden if the establishment now wants Biden out *is* operating against their agenda.
user
Not saying I have proof I am right but yes, while people like Fetterman are the most obvious of careerists, I believe the label applies to anyone choosing the safest option for their career.  This one is subject to interpretation still, but for the most part this is what AOC has shown us she is for at least a couple years now - not the same AOC she used to be at the start of her career.

I don't really think this move by AOC/progressives guarantees support from the party though.  Which is why I agree with Hasan's assessment that this is a bad move and they should stay out of this.

The ONLY scenario where this pays off for them is if Biden stays AND beats Trump.  In all other scenarios, the Party can paint the progressives as the bad guys / traitors / idiots.

Meanwhile, slightly changing the subject, I believe AOC just put out a new 'explanation' of why she is doing this leading me to further believe she is full of shit.  Doesn't mean I am cancelling her, just saying I don't believe her explanations.  So far I have only seen Rational National cover it on youtube
assistant
&gt;I believe the label applies to anyone choosing the safest option for their career.

Which is why going against the interests of party leadership would be an example of her *not* taking the "safest option".

&gt;Which is why I agree with Hasan's assessment that this is a bad move and they should stay out of this.

I also agree that it's a bad move, I don't think it's going to accomplish what she thinks it will.

&gt;In all other scenarios, the Party can paint the progressives as the bad guys / traitors / idiots.

They already do this regardless, so that's not a new thing. And they still will by saying progressives started the ball rolling and were doing this too early.
user
&gt; Which is why going against the interests of party leadership would be an example of her not taking the "safest option".

You make good points.  I think what is safest in reality is still subject to debate.  It is possible that AOC/progressives 'believe' they are playing it safe.  

For example a recent statement by AOC claims that what she is doing is best for the Party, which I think both her and people like us would argue would be 'playing it safe'.  

However I do not believe her recent statement and find it ridiculous that she is asking us to believe that

- her and the progressives are the ONLY ones smart enough to realize what is good for the Party
- her and the progressives are the ONLY ones saving the Party from itself by taking this position
- but don't worry, AOC supporters, she is still OpPoSiNg ThE dOnOr ClaSs just like you would want her to...!

Again I want to stress I am not cancelling her and I would most likely vote for her if I had the chance (Unlike Biden) I just happen to think she is full of shit here, as politicians tend to be.
assistant