As Edward McCaffrey writes on CNN.com, “[Representative] Ocasio-Cortez is pointing a spotlight on the pressing issue of economic inequality in America, and on the role of current American tax policy in fomenting it…. Granted, [Rep.] Ocasio-Cortez is not getting as much attention for her tax policy as for her dancing, but at least the coverage of her tax ideas is a start toward talking about things that really matter.”
America is paying attention to her policies because Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a vibrant young woman of color, and in 2019, America would rather hear its truths from women such as Rep. Ocasio-Cortez than from old, white men such as Sen. Bernie Sanders or Sen. Mitch McConnell.
Her opponents know this, which is why members of the GOP (both in a professional and an amateur sense) are working hard to damage her reputation. Have you seen any college-year videos of a freshman representative from California or Michigan? No, because the GOP isn’t hunting for them. The GOP sees in Rep. Ocasio-Cortez their downfall: she’s young, progressive, female, and brown.
So she has our attention. And what does she do with it? She turns the spotlight on some the country’s biggest problems and suggests radical, sense-making proposals as solutions.
She points to the effects of climate change and says, “America, we need a Green New Deal.”
She points to the effects of income inequality and says, “America, we need to make the bosses’ bosses pay.”
Given America’s attention, she has produced a radical agenda, and because of her passion, her charisma, and her seriousness, we’re willing to consider it.
This is the job of a self-proclaimed radical. It’s why Sen. Sanders and Donald J. Trump were so appealing in 2016, when voters felt like the promise of America was slipping away and Sen. Sanders and Mr. Trump offered radical solutions for saving it.
Sen. Sanders did not win the nomination of the Democratic Party in 2016 (as we all know). Instead, party elders in the form of superdelegates and their allies in the media-conglomerate-financial complex opted for a world-tested, business-friendly hawk who offered moderate advances in a socially left-leaning and economically right-leaning direction, advances that might have progressed the ball downfield a little but didn’t, for certain, consider the clock.
The political moment of 2016 didn’t call for moderation. Voters lived with a foreboding sense of financial ruin, cultural ruin, and climactic ruin, and they weren’t willing to settle for the same old thing.
So they took the only radical path on offer: the fascist one.
In 2019 and 2020, America needs to hear radical proposals of all kinds. We need to consider all the options and not just the ones that satisfy the interests of a rich and powerful cabal (of which there are many).
Rep. Ocasio-Cortez is too young (legally) and too inexperienced (respectfully) to run for president in 2020, but the attention she’s received and the way she’s handling it might make her the best candidate for communicating a set of radically progressive solutions for America’s ills.
But it also might make her outshine Sen. Sanders as America’s favorite radical, just when Sen. Sanders will need his star to shine the most.
If Sen. Sanders decides to run for president in the upcoming Democratic primary, he needs to earn Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s endorsement before he announces. She needs to be on stage when he announces — and may even need to make the introduction — if he’s to capture the crest of her blue wave.
This should not be a difficult “get” for Sen. Sanders. Rep. Ocasio-Cortez worked on his primary campaign in 2016, and one would think she’d work for his campaign again — unless recent reports of sexism in his organization (and the organization’s lax sexual harassment policies) prevents her from doing so in good faith.
Sen. Sanders has attempted to dismiss these stories by saying he was too busy running for president to worry about the human resource policies of his campaign, but hearing now what happened when he ran in 2016, he promises to address the problem if and when he runs in 2020.
I for one believe him, and I suspect Rep. Ocasio-Cortez does as well, which is why he needs to earn her endorsement sooner rather than later. As an influential young woman who worked on his campaign, she can help him lay the stories to rest in a clear and authentic manner, both as a partner in the creation of the eventual solution and as his messenger.
I love the idea of democratic socialists having two powerful and beloved voices driving portions of our national conversation, but when one of those voices comes from an attractive, young, brown face and the other comes from a wrinkly, old, white face, I wonder how much that wrinkly, old, white face even needs to be there. After all, there are other, younger, and browner faces who may offer radically progressive songs of their own.
In my heart, I don’t think Sen. Sanders can win the Democratic nomination, not because he is too radical, but because he is too old: 79 may the new 69, except when it’s not, like when people under the age of 45 consider which candidate to support.
I don’t know which candidate will best represent the interests of the current wave of progressive activists, but I do know they won’t be someone older than President Trump.
In which case, what should Sen. Sanders do? If he doesn’t run for president (not because he shouldn’t win, but because he won’t), should he sit back and let Rep. Ocasio-Cortez take the lead for democratic socialism? Rather than working for her endorsement, should he offer her his?
This is not to suggest Sen. Sanders should retire or retreat, but it is to say that he should turn his political intentions away from 2020 and on to 2028, when Rep. Ocasio-Cortez will be eligible for the presidency (and presumably more experienced in [and partially responsible for] the new national politic).
He should also work as hard as he can, in concert wth Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, to influence the national agenda, despite not running for president. The two of them could offer identically radical legislation in their respective chambers of Congress, which might allow them to seize the news cycle for a few days, or they could double-team Democratic candidates who dare to protect the status quo. However they use the combined power of their binary star, these two democratic socialists would be able to demand responses from whatever candidates are running for office.
Again, if Sen. Sanders runs for president, I will most likely vote for him, but that doesn’t mean I think he can win.
And if he can’t win, then why, oh why would he run? With Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s star power ensuring that democratic socialism maintains an influence upon the national conversation, he’ll no longer need to “get the message out.”
And without the need to spread his message, what need would remain?