Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-NY., is unpopular for one very simple reason: Most Americans don't like what she has to say.

It's not that complicated, unless you're Zack Beauchamp at Vox. Beauchamp says conservative media is to blame for Ocasio-Cortez's declining poll numbers. He draws a connection point between the heavy news coverage the freshman congresswoman has received and her declining poll ratings. And he implies that only biased coverage could drive Ocasio-Cortez into a position of disfavor.

But Beauchamp is wrong. For a start, the vast majority of Ocasio-Cortez-related coverage centers on what she has said and what her ideas might mean for the nation. Most politicians would love this chance to rise and fall on the merit of their ideas. Beauchamp and company simply can't acknowledge that her ideas lack merit. Ocasio-Cortez's supporters might believe her socialist ideas are intrinsically appealing, but the overwhelming majority of the nation does not. And that majority is right.

Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal was a recipe for national bankruptcy, empowerment of Vladimir Putin — who funds anti-fracking organizations outside Russia — and pernicious hikes in household energy bills. Her healthcare and tax plans would blow up the U.S. economy and replace it with a socialist command economy. And the congresswoman's knowledge of history is laughably deficient and often totally delusional. At the margin, Americans recognize this and don't like it. Most of them probably wonder why someone with such strange views and so lacking in skill to argue for them gets so much attention.

There's an irony in Beauchamp's lament. He concludes by quoting Ocasio-Cortez's statement that the media coverage she receives is defined by "ravenous hysteria." It's an interesting choice of words. I venture that many Americans would regard her apocalyptic "socialism or death" rhetoric to be just the same: ravenous hysteria.