They Think She Can Be President? Watch AOC Try and Fail to Explain Key US Policy During Germany Interview

I’d kind of assumed that, in eight years, New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez had managed to put her Margaret Hoover moment behind her.

In fact, it’s long enough ago that you probably don’t even remember what the “Margaret Hoover moment” was. It’s long enough ago that not only was AOC not being brought up as a plausible presidential candidate back then, she wasn’t even officially in Congress yet — although, given the fact she’d won a massive primary upset in a safe Democratic district, it was clear she was going to be and she was the party’s new star.

Appearing on the reboot of “Firing Line” on PBS in July of 2018, AOC was asked by host Hoover what she meant about the phrase “the occupation of Palestine,” something she’d used on the campaign trail. The answer, such as it was, became the stuff of internet legend:

Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez attacks Israel, calls them the occupiers of Palestine.

When pressed on what she meant she struggled to give an answer and then admitted she does not know what she is talking about. pic.twitter.com/e3Uq1eupD3

— Ryan Saavedra (@RyanSaavedra) July 16, 2018

But, all right: She was green. She wasn’t even “Green New Deal” green yet, but “unelected fresh face appearing on Stephen Colbert” green. Surely things have improved in the eight years since, where she now commands the second-best odds in some betting markets for the Democratic nomination for president in 2028, behind California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Right?

And then, taking her talents abroad to Germany for the Munich Security Conference, AOC managed to prove on Friday she hadn’t learned a thing — including about what may be America’s single most important foreign policy issue.

During a panel discussion on populism, moderator Francine Lacqua of Bloomberg TV asked the congresswoman what she would do in the case of mainland China ever invading Taiwan, which it claims is a renegade province that needs to be brought under Beijing’s heel. There’s more and more evidence that, if there is to be some kind of an invasion, it might well happen under an AOC presidency, if (heaven forbid) there is to be one.

The United States’ policy is one of strategic ambiguity; it’s that simple. AOC could not make it that simple. Instead, she had another Margaret Hoover moment. Yes, eight years after she was elected, and two before she’s probably going to be running for the highest office in the land:

AOC is asked if the US should defend Taiwan in the event China invades. Her answer is a word salad disaster that would even make Kamala cringe: pic.twitter.com/jgfMWiSfmE

— Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) February 14, 2026

And I quote:

“Um, you know, I think that, uh, like, such a, I think that this is, um, a very longstanding, um, policy of the United States, uh, and I think what we are hoping for is that we want to make sure that we never get to that point. And we want to make sure that we are moving in all of our economic, research, and our global positions to avoid any such confrontation, and for that question to even arise.”

What she said! AOC 2029! AOC 2029! Quick, if we make that trend, maybe we can trick everyone who thinks this woman should be in the White House into thinking the election is actually then! Somewhere, behind a laptop screen, Margaret Hoover is laughing and crying at the same time.

And yet, despite the damning nature of this clip, The New York Times buried it both at the end of its headline and in the eighth paragraph of a story hyping up her trip abroad as a ramp-up to a potential 2028 run: “Ocasio-Cortez Offers a Working-Class Vision in Munich, With a Few Stumbles.”

The first three grafs, meanwhile:

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, a progressive who made a name for herself focused on economic problems at home in America, might have seemed an odd fit for the Munich Security Conference, an annual gathering of foreign leaders and diplomats focused on international security.

But at two Friday panels, she tied worsening income inequality to the rise of authoritarianism, weaving her working-class worldview into a broader message about combating far-right populism and strengthening relationships with Western allies. Everyday people, she argued, were turning away from democracy because wealthy elites had failed to address their needs.

“Extreme levels of income inequality lead to social instability,” she said, adding that it was an “urgent priority that we get our economic houses in order and deliver material gains for the working class, or else we will fall to a more isolated world governed by authoritarians that also do not deliver to working people.”

It’s not until well into the story that reporter Kellen Browning noted that after she was asked the Taiwan question, “she stalled for roughly 20 seconds before offering a substantive response.” The “substantive response” was that part about how “we want to make sure that we are moving in all of our economic, research, and our global positions to avoid any such confrontation.”

That passes as substance for The New York Times. It’s a wonder the paper even called the first part a “stumble” in the first place.

The story continued to talk her up, noting that at another panel, “Ocasio-Cortez was clearly the draw, with conference attendees buzzing about her presence.”

Unless that buzz involved wondering how on earth this woman — who faceplanted so badly on the international stage — was going to survive in a presidential debate, I’d say it was woefully misplaced.

Whatever the case, one fervidly prays that AOC is never in a position to “stumble” our way into war with China, or into giving Beijing  control over Taiwan, or both.

Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.