EBDSA & SMC member Nickan F explains why tomorrow’s NPC meeting will be crucial in determining how socialists can shape national politics in the 2028 election. As DSA members, you deserve a say in whether we endorse a candidate for President. Share and sign on to our open letter!

Isn't this the person who told me I should be imprisoned by Israel? Very strange to see!

This you?

Sign on here:

The 2nd point is strong, & 3rd valid. But why keep insisting that we’re mandated to hold an all-member poll, when it was clearly written for the scenario where a coalition partner endorses a candidate— No such coalition (or candidate even) exists rn!!

Probably bad that you choose to let the worst fucking Zionist in DSA bar shlumpsters rep your shitty caucus. Go to hell

18 username changes and blocks half of left twitter? That’s the best you can do?

DSA tried this with AOC before and it fell apart in 2024. That June, the NPC awarded her a conditional endorsement three days before her primary, when she had already basically won, and with conditions on Israel/Gaza that she did not meet, which was rescinded within weeks after NYC-DSA’s own steering committee called for a walk back. That episode is our best proof that “move fast and break things” isn’t always “move fast and break clean”. Where it becomes problematic is whether AOC’s real ideas, especially on Israel, can help keep an endorsement that doesn’t immediately being challenged from within. The essay’s endorsement process, a national poll based on 2020, doesn’t solve that; it simply transfers the debate from the NPC floor to the membership floor, where the same fault line will re-emerge on a much larger scale and in a much broader arena. There’s also a premise problem: DSA hasn’t approved a presidential candidate for 2028 yet, and DSA’s own national spokesman has said it’s “too soon to say” who they’d support, even as individual leaders say they’d be thrilled by an AOC candidacy. The vote in April 2026 from NYC-DSA was an endorsement for her House seat, not for president. The narrative is worded as if AOC’s candidacy and DSA’s support for it are givens that merely need a procedural trigger. Indeed the more contentious topic — whether AOC will run at all and, if so, whether she’ll advocate beliefs the membership will really endorse — is precisely what a rushed timeframe is least well-equipped to accommodate. It’s the 2024 dilemma, played out in the heat of an announcement, no time for the kind of dialog the piece decries as “navel-gazing,” enthusiasm outrunning verification, followed by a public retraction that costs DSA more credibility than sitting out would have. A stronger version of this argument would stick to the “move first” instinct but pair it with a clear, pre-negotiated framework of conditions — democratically decided now, before an announcement, not as a hurried rider onto the endorsement poll itself — so DSA doesn’t have to renegotiate its own withdrawal publicly a second time. There is nothing wrong with the infrastructure-building argument on its own terms, whether or not it is sponsored by a particular candidate who is not yet a contender. The real issue here is to attach it to a politician who is not yet a contender.

Purge the zionists from your goddamn org

Join The Pro-US, Pro-Palestine Organization, DSA:

What’s the mechanism to stop capitalists from creating thousands of fake paper members and ensuring the DSA stays in line with their agenda? 120,000 members of DSA*15 dollars per month*12 months = 9,000,000 per year, which is less than they spend on a single House race