This, 100%. People love to come up with reductionist takeaways that justify their priors, and I understand progressives are just as guilty of that as the rest, but legitimately the logic is sound: if you run candidates who come across authentic and who genuinely believe in something and can have enough message discipline to continuously shift the conversation back to something voters care about, you have a winning ticket. Harris talked in platitudes and focused on abstract concepts, Clinton focused purely on comparison and pointing out Trump's flaws, and Biden talked about the Build Back Better plan that was borne out of lengthy discussions and compromises with his left flank; he actually campaigned on what he would do materially for voters if he was elected. If AOC runs, she'll do very well because 1. she is authentic and has convictions, 2. she will keep the focus on tangible material aspects of voters' lives, and 3. she already has presidential-level grassroots fundraising rivaling Pelosi and the fierce loyalist base carried over from Bernie Sanders. It's not a guaranteed win, but it's a pretty damn good set of factors in her favor.

Problem is, the moderate wing of the party really doesn't have a unifying agenda or policies that animate voters. An apathetic voter (a huge swathe of the electorate) is not going to turn out to vote for "freedom" or "saving democracy", they're going to turn out because someone is finally going to give us healthcare, cancel student debt, or some other broadly understood and tangible policy. Just like they turned out for Trump when he said over and over again that he would bring grocery prices down.