Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez endorsed two moderate Democrats within ten days—and her socialist allies are not taking it well, the New York Post reports. The Democratic Socialists of America, once her most fervent boosters, now openly question whether the congresswoman has become the very thing she once railed against.

Last week, AOC threw her support behind Rep. Julie Johnson of Texas, a Democrat who voted earlier this month for $3.3 billion in military aid to Israel and who has been actively trading stocks in Palantir. Just weeks earlier, AOC endorsed Mary Peltola for U.S. Senate in Alaska—a candidate described as "pro-gun, drill-baby-drill."

The response from DSA members was swift and brutal. In party discussion boards this week, one member delivered the verdict plainly:

"I think it is patently obvious that AOC is a career opportunist."

The Socialist Breakup

The DSA's disillusionment with AOC has been building for years. The national organization revoked her endorsement in 2024 after she voted in favor of a resolution reaffirming Israel's right to exist. Her local NYC chapter still backs her, but the broader movement that once treated her as its standard-bearer has moved on.

The Johnson endorsement crystallized the break. AOC posted a video promoting Johnson on social media January 23, framing the race in familiar terms:

"We can't let the GOP gerrymander one of our strongest fighters out of Congress."

She continued:

"Julie Johnson is standing up every day in Congress to combat ICE overreach, MAGA extremism and to stand up for the freedoms of Texans everywhere. I'm supporting Julie in her run, and I hope you will too."

But Johnson's record doesn't fit neatly into the socialist framework. She voted for billions in Israel aid. She trades stocks in a defense contractor. The candidate AOC calls one of Congress's "strongest fighters" looks nothing like the DSA's vision of a progressive champion.

Following Pelosi's Footsteps

The comparison DSA members keep reaching for is Nancy Pelosi—and they don't mean it as a compliment. One member connected the dots in the party's discussion board:

"Given AOC's mental gymnastics for aid to Israel, her backing Biden long after it was obvious he couldn't run, and now her backing Julie Johnson, I see no reason why she isn't on the same path as Pelosi. I definitely think we need to cut ties with her."

The Pelosi trajectory is instructive. The California congresswoman once advocated for taxpayer-funded universal healthcare. Nearly four decades later, she occupies the center of her party. DSA members see AOC following the same arc—radical rhetoric giving way to institutional accommodation.

Another DSA attendee offered a theory for the shift:

"Her hopes to replace [US Sen. Chuck] Schumer or even run for president have led her to the dreaded 'Campaign Adviser Aristocrats' . . . who as always are telling her to. . . shift right."

The accusation is straightforward: AOC has traded her principles for ambition.

The Political Calculation

Political scientist Lonna Atkeson of Florida State University offered a more clinical assessment of AOC's moves:

"She is trying to demonstrate leadership in a very Nancy Pelosi way, and she's like, 'Who can win?'"

Atkeson elaborated on what the endorsements signal:

"She wants to show she's willing to put the party first — party over ideology — and that is sort of a step into a more moderate version of herself."

The analysis suggests AOC is playing a longer game. Endorsing moderates demonstrates she can be a team player—useful for anyone eyeing Senate leadership or higher office. The socialist credentials that launched her career may now be baggage she's trying to quietly offload.

A Losing Bet in Texas

If AOC is making strategic calculations, the Johnson endorsement raises questions about her political judgment. Johnson faces former Rep. Colin Allred in the March 3 primary for Dallas's redrawn 33rd district. Allred represented Johnson's current 32nd district for six years before she took office.

Current polls show Allred leading Johnson by more than 20 points.

AOC is spending her political capital on a candidate who appears unlikely to win. Either she believes the race is closer than the polls suggest, or the endorsement serves purposes beyond helping Johnson. Perhaps it's about building relationships with moderates. Perhaps it's about distancing herself from the DSA. Perhaps it's both.

The Left's Contradictions Exposed

What makes this internecine fight revealing is how quickly ideological purity collapses under political pressure. AOC built her brand on being different—on refusing to play the games that establishment Democrats play. She was supposed to be the future, not a younger version of the past.

Now she endorses candidates who vote for Israel aid. She backs politicians who trade defense stocks. She supports "pro-gun, drill-baby-drill" Senate hopefuls. Each endorsement chips away at the revolutionary image that made her famous.

The DSA's complaint isn't wrong on its own terms. AOC has changed. The question is whether she changed because the spotlight revealed who she always was, or because Washington's institutional gravity bent her trajectory toward the center.

Where This Leaves the Socialists

The DSA now faces a familiar progressive dilemma: what to do when its champion becomes indistinguishable from what it opposes. They've already revoked the national endorsement. Cutting ties entirely would be the logical next step—but it would also mean admitting that their most successful electoral project failed to produce the transformation they promised.

AOC, meanwhile, continues her pivot. The woman who once seemed ready to burn down the Democratic establishment now endorses its candidates, courts its approval, and positions herself for advancement within its ranks.

The socialists helped create her. Now they watch as she becomes Nancy Pelosi with better social media skills.

The revolution, it turns out, was always going to be televised. It just wasn't going to be permanent.