Beyond the Brand – Why We Need an ADOS President Now
The future is waiting. But who will answer the call? DahTruth is, we’re not waiting for permission anymore.
The older I get, the more I realize how deeply politics have shaped not just my life, but the lives of my parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, and those who came before them. In America, every generation of Black people has been impacted by decisions made by two political parties that have always had something to say about our worth, our labor, our economic conditions, and our place in this country. From slavery to Jim Crow, from the Civil Rights era to the so-called War on Drugs, American Descendants of Slavery (ADOS) have been exploited in the name of progress, manipulated through policy, and offered salvation through the illusion of voting.
Voting, once seen as a hard-won right and a tool of liberation, has increasingly become a mechanism of control. The Democratic Party, in particular, has given out just enough to maintain power while delivering financial windfalls to corporations and special interests. This reality has become painfully obvious to my generation. And like the Whig Party of the 1850s, the Democratic Party is now showing signs of collapse.
The cracks began to show in 2008 with the election of Barack Obama. Many Black Americans believed he would finally deliver policies tailored to the ADOS community. Instead, his presidency prioritized military strikes, Wall Street bailouts, auto industry rescues, and broad healthcare reform. The poorest among us were handed free cell phones with limited minutes, while companies like Safelink and T-Mobile raked in more than $2.2 billion by 2012. Once the free minutes ran out, poor Black families were forced to buy $10 and $20 refill cards just to stay connected. The program became a trap in plain sight—offering a symbol of help while turning economic hardship into profit for telecom giants.
This model extended beyond phones. It applies to housing, prison systems, Section 8 contracts, and other assistance programs where corporations profit while the poor struggle. During the crack epidemic, the language around Black communities became synonymous with criminality. Terms like "crackhead," "crack baby," and "crack house" defined the narrative, while the real profiteers in suits drove luxury cars into gated communities. The same people who created policies that criminalized our pain benefited from the aftermath.
For generations, ADOS people have been used, discarded, and recycled by the Democratic Party. Obama was the last straw for many. Joe Biden won his election because many Black voters feared Donald Trump more than they trusted Biden’s agenda. That vote was made in resignation, not enthusiasm. Many people within our community have started to see that the party we once believed stood with us has, in fact, held us in place.
Black Americans now find themselves both visible and invisible in the political landscape. We are expected to show up but not speak up. We are told we are essential, yet rarely prioritized. The call to dismantle the two-party system grows louder. And this moment mirrors a familiar turning point in history. In the 1850s, the Whig Party split over the question of slavery, an issue so morally urgent and long-ignored that the party imploded. Some leaders sought to resolve it through compromises like the Fugitive Slave Act and the Compromise of 1850, believing they could silence the issue with political deals. But a country built on bondage could not run from its reckoning forever. The Free Soil Party rose from the ashes and eventually formed the core of the new Republican Party. That collapse came when the people recognized that compromise was not enough.
Like the Whigs, the Democratic Party is beginning to fracture. While the media keeps its focus on the war in Gaza, the real fault line runs through the issue of reparations. This is the defining political divide of our time. On one side are far-left progressives and Green Party advocates who claim to support reparations for ADOS. On the other side are centrist Democrats, including many Black immigrants and long-time party loyalists, who either reject reparations outright or refuse to engage with it.
Reparations must go beyond slogans and become policy. It can begin with housing. Instead of continuing to give government funds to landlords who profit from Section 8, allow ADOS women receiving vouchers the opportunity to purchase their own homes. Rather than funnel federal resources to nonprofits and so-called venture philanthropists who decide who is “worthy” of funding, give those funds directly to ADOS entrepreneurs to build their own businesses. Stop using tax dollars to build more prisons and instead invest in schools placed in communities where Black families are purchasing homes. Create neighborhoods with small businesses and schools—not to enforce forced integration, but to create natural overlap between segregated communities in ways that reflect equity and ownership, not shame or exclusion. Reparations must repair. And repair starts with power.
This divide reveals more than policy differences. It exposes the failure of both mainstream and fringe factions to seriously address the legacy of slavery and the economic justice owed to the descendants of those enslaved. For years, I’ve said the same thing: the only real solution is an ADOS President. No more symbolic victories. No more surface-level representation. This must be a leader who comes from the lineage, who understands the cost, and who refuses to trade justice for party politics.
And as a Black woman, I want to be clear. I believe the only hope for America lies in the leadership of a strong Black woman. We have always been the voice of reason and the foundation of our communities. We carry generations of resilience, wisdom, and clarity. But I also understand that throughout American history, every generation has benefited from the upliftment of strong Black men. When they lead with integrity, Black women follow—not in silence or submission, but in power and solidarity. The illusion of Black leadership in this country has done enough damage. A Black face in a high place does not guarantee liberation. Now is the time to uplift the right Black man, even if real Black leadership still feels like a myth in America.
This past weekend, two podcasts offered competing visions for what future leadership could look like. Both Native Land and Sabby Sabs shed light on these tensions but arrived at very different conclusions about who should lead and what issues matter most. Reparations, though barely mentioned, remains the single most important issue dividing Black voters—and the clearest marker of whether any political movement is truly serious about justice.
Native Land Podcast featured a panel hosted by Angela Rye, Tiffany Cross, and Andrew Gillum, with guests Terrance Woodbury (a Democratic pollster) and Gary Chambers (a civil rights advocate and perennial candidate). Their conversation centered on the status of Black voters following Kamala Harris’s failed presidential bid. While there were moments of clarity, the discussion ultimately avoided addressing the shifting political tide among Black voters who are increasingly turning away from the Democratic Party.
Instead of focusing on that shift, the panel propped up political figures like John Ossoff and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. They chose to spotlight these candidates over established Black leaders in Congress such as Hakeem Jeffries, Cory Booker, Hank Johnson, and Stacey Plaskett. That decision reflected a continued reliance on symbolism rather than substance.
John Ossoff has at least signed legislation into law, including reforms that impact the Black community. But he lacks the experience and longevity to present a strong presidential case. Still, Native Land presents him as a viable option because, as they put it, “he looks the part.” Meanwhile, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has the following. She’s built a brand for herself as a progressive firebrand but has delivered very little in terms of actual policy. She has introduced bills on issues like water affordability and minimum wage increases, but none have passed. Her widely promoted Green New Deal gained attention, but never gained traction.
Her most notable failures include:
The Green New Deal, which failed to pass despite national attention.
The loss of job opportunities in her own district after she opposed Amazon’s arrival, which would have created thousands of working-class jobs.
A lack of understanding of government processes, demonstrated by her public misstatements about the role of judges and courts in blocking legislation.
Her stance on reparations remains her most disappointing position. AOC does not support reparations for ADOS but fully backs continued government support for illegal immigrants. Despite this, she is being positioned by the Democratic Party as a rising leader. This approach represents a familiar pattern, merely dressed in new language.
Meanwhile, Sabby Sabs presented another version of failed politics. On her podcast, she hosted Zeynab Dey (former press aide to AOC), Jason Call (former Jill Stein campaign manager and a self-proclaimed Marxist), Jason Chukwuma (political podcaster), and Ron Placone (a comedian). These are Green Party-aligned progressives who once backed Jill Stein and now support Bruce Ware, her former VP running mate. Many in the group voted Green and continue to encourage others to abandon the two-party system. Still, they support Democratic policies with one exception: they oppose pro-Israel stances and American funding of the war in Gaza.
The panel focused on AOC and Bernie Sanders’ “oligarchy” campaign, claiming it aimed to unify working-class Democratic voters. They ultimately concluded that AOC is unfit for a presidential run, not due to her lack of experience or policy failures, but because of her position on Israel. One panelist labeled her a sellout.
The problem with this approach is that it trades one form of political delusion for another. The panel rejected AOC for being too centrist while clinging to progressive ideologies that have consistently failed to deliver results for Black communities. Their conversation prioritized ideological consistency over actual policy outcomes.
To deepen this narrative, The New York Times published a piece suggesting that AOC may be positioning herself for a 2028 presidential run. This is the same pattern that led to the Democratic Party's loss in 2024. Without a course correction, the same outcome is likely to repeat. AOC may excite certain segments of the base, but she lacks the coalition-building skills, legislative accomplishments, and executive experience necessary to lead a nation. Her rise is not a victory for marginalized communities. It is a symptom of a party more concerned with visibility than viability.
Black Americans can no longer afford to support candidates based on image alone. No ADOS Black man has ever become president. Black women face even more systemic barriers. The lack of representation is not due to a lack of talent but rather a political system that continues to push our needs to the margins.
This is a moment to demand an ADOS candidate for president. Not a Black immigrant. Not a white liberal. Not someone who lacks constitutional knowledge or a track record of legislative success. Not someone who has never run a business or served a working-class community with integrity and tangible results.
Listening to both Native Land and Sabby Sabs felt like watching two disconnected factions of the same broken party. One is trapped in loyalty without accountability. The other is buried in ideology without strategy. Neither addresses the real needs of Black Americans.
It is time for an American Descendant of Slavery to run for president. Not later. Now.
_____________________________________________________
📢 Copyright Notice:
This article is my original work and may not be reproduced, copied, or distributed without my explicit permission. If you would like to reference or use any part of this content, please contact me at jmbeausby@aol.com for consent.
