In a recent display of political theater, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) has taken a page straight from the Barack Obama playbook. She is pulling out all the stops, raising significant funds and campaigning alongside Bernie Sanders while employing the classic rallying cries of unity that characterized the former president’s speeches. However, upon closer inspection, her rhetoric raises some eyebrows—and not for the reasons her supporters might hope.
At a recent rally, AOC attempted to captivate her audience by invoking themes of togetherness and solidarity. She likened her experiences as a girl from the Bronx to the feelings of pride and belonging to all Americans, regardless of race or geography. This tactic echoes Obama’s penchant for weaving personal anecdotes into broader narratives about America. What is particularly interesting, though, is the nuance—or lack thereof—in her messaging about unity. AOC urges people to resist the illusion that they are separated by race or geography, calling for a single unified America.
However, it isn’t just her delivery that merits scrutiny. AOC’s choice of words on social media contrastingly appears to create divisions rather than bridge them. When she tweeted about preventing trickery that could compartmentalize Americans into rural and urban or black, white, and Latino, she capitalized ‘Black’ and ‘Latino’ while leaving ‘white’ in lowercase. This seemingly innocuous typographical choice has sparked some debate. By emphasizing some racial identities over others, AOC inadvertently reinforces the very separations she claims to oppose.
The irony here is delicious; while calling for unity, AOC’s tweet seems to support a narrative that acknowledges some identities as more deserving of prominence than others. It’s almost as if her tweet is whispering that some groups need to step aside for others to be elevated. This misstep highlights the hypocrisy often found in progressive ideologies that publicly advocate for equality while subtly reinforcing divisions.
Moreover, consider the implications of this approach for her broader campaign strategy. Is AOC genuinely seeking to unite all Americans, or is her brand of “unity” merely a strategic facade meant to rally her core base and drive funding? While appearing to embrace inclusivity, her actions suggest a preference for prioritizing select identities—potentially alienating wider segments of the population who may feel overlooked or even vilified.
As she continues to engage in what can best be described as an Obama-inspired charm offensive, AOC must tread carefully. The road to political success is often paved with clarity and genuine outreach, not ambiguous messaging that undercuts the very ideals one professes to uphold. It will be intriguing to see whether voters across the political spectrum buy into her smooth talk or see through the clever, albeit misguided, moves she is making. Ultimately, voters are likely to prefer genuine unity over clever wordplay that seems to play favorites.
