Marx made regular writings and letters to contemporary movements up until his death. At no point did he back down on violent, sudden revolution as the path to achieving Socialism. Marx was many things, but he wasn't anti-gun.

I think it's worth bearing in mind that when Marx wrote that, guns were still using powder and percussion caps.

The Gatling Gun predates came out a 5 years before Das Kapital. Sure arms hadn't had the revolution they'd get during WW1 yet, but they were plenty capable.

1.5% was her popular vote margin. Hardly some blowout. Maybe instead of scapegoating brown people we look at the legitimate ways in which her campaign should have been better but couldn't be because of corruption in the DNC. That corruption is correctable.

Exactly. The Primary process is about getting your policies in the platform as much as it is getting you candidate(s) the nomination. She should run, a "standard neoliberal" should run, a corporatist should run etc.... the process is allowed to be messy.

She also ran an incredibly poor campaign (Not completely her fault). Assuming she would have a run a Biden free open (which I'm not convinced of given how poorly she did in 2020), she would have done so by being good at campaigning and testing which messages swayed the electorate. Every winning canadite gets it.

Additionally the people you beat, give you a feel for the parts of the party that you need to bring into the coalition which you can satisfy as you build out your proposed VP and Cabinet. Think of how Obama brought in Clinton as Sec of State, Trump brought in Pence as VP to satisfy the religious right, how Biden brought in Harris etc... Harris didn't have any of that feedback and picked a pretty questionable VP as a result.

At the end of the day she lost by 1.5% of the popular vote. And I got to imagine that the whole process lost her significantly more than that.

Actually they stopped claiming that during the Bernie-Hillary primaries. It's part of why the candidates

Losing the nomination would not be the end for AOC. But as a champion for the "Democratic Socialist" wind of the Democrats there's really not a better candidate to speak at the primaries and ensure that even in a primary loss the eventual winner adds parts their goals to the administrations goals.

This is why the "Christian Conservatives" always run a few candidates in the Republican party, and why they've always got a spot in the Republican party platform.

She should absolutely run. I don't know if she should win the nomination, but running brings a voice to the wing of the party she represents.

Primaries are about coalition building. And to have your ideas represented by the eventual candidate you need a champion to promote them in the process.

The other is offensive yes.

Militaries tend to do both this things.