AOC—U.S. Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, representing New York’s 14th district—is widely regarded as among the most progressive of the Democratic Party. Ocasio-Cortez is the youngest woman elected to Congress, and a member of the Democratic Socialists of America. She is also what can only be described as the polar opposite of America’s 47th President, Donald Trump. While Trump stressed a crackdown on undocumented migrants, AOC has reaffirmed her support for the rights of immigrant communities and a humane approach to border control. While Trump is socially conservative, promising in his campaign to end “gender insanity” and limit access to late-term abortion, AOC has spoken up for the rights of the LGBTQ+ community as well as women’s right to choose.
And while Trump championed tax cuts, significantly geared towards corporations, AOC has made “tax the rich” a cornerstone of her political platform, even going viral for wearing a dress emblazoned with that message at the 2021 Met Gala, affirming that, “The time is now for childcare, healthcare, and climate action for all. Tax the Rich.”
But despite these major differences, many voters in the Bronx were somehow able to simultaneously support both Trump and AOC. How did that happen? And more generally—not just in the case of AOC—what was the rationale behind 2024’s vote-splitting phenomenon as a whole?
New York’s 14th congressional district served as the grounds for some interesting vote-splitting. AOC secured nearly 70% of the vote, outperforming the Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris by roughly five points. Meanwhile, Trump’s support in the district shot up by a whopping eleven points: from 22% in 2020 to 33% in 2024. This indicates that a significant portion of AOC voters were able to reconcile a vote for both one of the most progressive Democratic politicians and the conservative firebrand Donald Trump.
Interestingly enough, AOC and Trump have a history, with Trump being one of the first to acknowledge her rise in 2018. Then, he commented that she had “real potential” and a “certain talent” even though she didn’t know anything, likening her to cultural icon and Argentinian First Lady Eva Perón, or Evita. And although most of their exchanges consist of insults, Trump has admitted that, “she’s got a good thing going – a good thing for her. She’s got a spark – I will say that. A good spark that’s pretty amazing, actually.” When AOC lost her race for ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, Trump posted on Truth Social that it was “really too bad” she lost. In response, she joked that, “you know it’s bad when even Trump is feeling bad for me.”
Other similarities between the two include the “anti-establishment” message they project to voters, albeit in their own unique ways. Neither are what can be considered career politicians, and both are perceived by voters as authentic. And while AOC channels this energy through her opposition to corporate interests and the centering of billionaires in politics, as well as her progressive-left policies at large, Trump relies on his own brand of populism and memorable personality, especially on issues like the economy. Despite what their policies actually do, the two both give voters the impression that they genuinely care about the working class, and will bring about change—whatever that change is.
This is reflected in the reasoning of the split-ticket voters. Having asked her followers on social media, AOC received a number of responses explaining why voters cast their ballot for both herself and Trump. Looking at them, common themes emerge. For instance, balance. One voter reasoned that AOC and Trump are “a good counter-balance for each other. He’s a bully she doesn’t accept. She’s a fighter, progressive, and she loves democracy.” Similarly, another explained that they voted Trump for change, and “blue for the rest of the ballot to put some brakes.” This impression of AOC as a sparring partner for Trump may have been shaped by the two’s exchanges, as mentioned earlier. Other major themes in these responses are anti-establishment authenticity (“I feel you are both outsiders compared to the rest of DC, and less ‘establishment”’ “I feel like Trump and you are both real” “You are focused on the real issues people care about. Similar to Trump populism in some ways” “It’s real simple … Trump and you care for the working class”), and the ability to spark change (“You signaled change. Trump signified change. I’ve said lately, Trump sounds more like you.” “Both of you push boundaries and force growth”).
These themes are similar to that of the success of another unique Democrat figure, hailing from our very own state of New Jersey—Andy Kim. In 2020, Kim was one of seven Democrats that won in a district that Trump won. Having hosted listening sessions with his supporters, he reported a general sentiment of “deep disgust,” “severe distrust,” and “deep seated long-term dissatisfaction” in American politics at large. Perhaps that is why, in 2024, someone regarded as a “career” or “establishment” politician such as Kamala Harris underperformed in Democratic strongholds across the nation.
Figures like Trump, Kim, and AOC all represent something different, something more—a change from the status quo. For Kim, his 2020 ticket-splitting voters liked his focus on government reform and corruption, especially his decision not to accept corporate PAC (political action committee) funding. Similarly, AOC also stands out in her advocacy for better government accountability—for instance, she has openly criticized the practice of congressional stock trading. She is also one of the lowest paid members of Congress, and proudly refers to herself as “people-funded, takes no lobbyist.” And in his 2024 Senate campaign, Kim gained further recognition in his fight against New Jersey’s “political machine,” defeating the county-line ballot design in court and upending New Jersey’s Democratic primary. What also contributed to his “uniqueness” in 2024 could have been his anti-corruption campaign following the political corruption case of Bob Menendez, or his upset victory in the Democratic primary against New Jersey’s First Lady Tammy Murphy, who the majority of Democrats believed would win the nomination.
Overall, these attributes may have made Kim and AOC stand out amongst their Democratic colleagues as different, and as “outsiders” to Washington. It’s clear that Trump does this too, in his own unique way. After the results of the 2024 election, with Republicans gaining control of both houses of Congress as well as winning the presidency, maybe it is time for the mainstream Democratic Party to take a page out of Trump, AOC, and Kim’s playbook.
0
0
Average Rating