it's still fuck socialism as a staff, record label, and muthafucking crew
but I'm coming around to AOC stirring Dems shit up and getting shit done
She's got the momentum and good will for now, best not overplay her hand
pansy ass liberals are going in on her on Twitter, but they need more people
Watch how! she runs New York

"That dynamic was on full display Tuesday, when Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), a rising star on the left, made a splash on her first day of freshman orientation by joining more than 100 youth protesters outside of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) office to demand action on climate change.

“This is not about me, this is not about the dynamics of any personality,” the 29-year-old Latina, who toppled veteran Rep. Joseph Crowley in the New York Democratic primary, told reporters. “This is about uplifting the voice and the message of the fact we need a green new deal.”

“We are here to back up in pushing for 100 percent renewable energy,” Ocasio-Cortez added. “This is an encouragement of her.”

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/416564-historic-class-storms-capitol

she did one photo op with protestors and got credit for pelosi pushing to revive a climate change subcommittee that pelosi created in 2007 and was going to bring back anyway (since repubs disbanded it).

aoc is in no leadership position and hasnt taken a single vote. she heads up no caucus in the house even figuratively. what does she run? lol.

this damn social media generation i tell ya smh lol.

The way twitter libs are going in on her you'd think she was speaker of the House tho

the constant media attention and headlines she gets got me kinda on edge. cuz they are turning her into a celebrity. but theyre really setting her up for failure/disappointment.

folks expect her to be a revolutionary/innovative 'star' 24/7 instead of just letting her gradually grow into her job (a lot of that falls on her and her constant thirst for attention too). people like that have a history of flaming out in washington once the realities of their role hits them.

to come in guns blazing and stick to your goals, flame out in one term or to sit idly by and pay your dues and become a life long member of congress that stays inline?

i wouldnt mind for congress to be focused on one/two terms of actually taking action then get out.

>to come in guns blazing and stick to your goals, flame out in
>one term or to sit idly by and pay your dues and become a life
>long member of congress that stays inline?
>
>i wouldnt mind for congress to be focused on one/two terms of
>actually taking action then get out.


Do they want fresh faces who will fire up the base and say "fuck norms, fuck your feelings, we are going to get ours"

OR

Do they really just want things to be normal.


While I agree with Reeq in that AOC should pace herself, get oriented, etc...she should NOT stop being herself.

And Dems need to F I G H T.


AOC being a star isn't a bad thing either- the Dems need young stars these days.


Finally, Dems can't be the "calm down young lady, know your place" party AND the party that sticks up for women.

maybe that becomes how you get reelected moving forward.

But most of the representatives don't have that luxury. And if they pretend they do, we'll have a very fiery, exciting, inspiring caucus with about 120 members.

There's nothing new about any of this.

for sure some reps cant go for the same style but if you run on certain issues and are elected then i dont see how pushing for those issues once youre in is a bad thing. the issues of importance will vary but take action on what you were elected for.

That's also how it's always been.

But I don't really see how any of this counts as "taking action." I'm not criticizing Ocasio-Cortez here, she's not even seated yet. But simply speaking (in remarkably vague terms, if you listen to what she actually said) to a crowd of student protestors who themselves don't have a plan on the issue they're protesting --- that isn't action, it's pointless social media, theater for the people who are already on her side anyway.

i will be surprised if she is not pushing once shes seated though. i dont think shes worried about fitting in with the status quo.

im seeing it more as shes taking the energy from social media and trying to find ways to get it into DC. trying to turn it into something.

pushing, even if they know some of the people from swingier districts will probably never be out there with them. That's how these things eventually become mainstream enough for the rest of the party to support it.

Yeah, the people in the safe seats aren't beholden to anyone (and not entirely in a good way --- this freedom tends to make them irrelevant in the long run).

I don't agree that their pushing of issues brings those issues into the mainstream. The major breakthroughs of my lifetime have either come from rigid party discipline (Obamacare), or from sea-changes in public opinion over individual, personal experiences (LGBT rights/marriage equality, weed legalization). The "left" has been on the proper side of history on all these issues, but at best they were irrelevant to actually making it happen or even building the early support.

for being on the 'right' side of these issues too.

so while progressive patty in her dark blue coastal district celebrates being on the forefront of marriage equality before the rest of her caucus...moderate mary has to figure out how to keep her job while the democratic party in her home state of arkansas/tennessee/kentucky/missouri/iowa is getting wiped out at every level of government because of the national party support for pro-lgbtq legislation.

Do you just not like progressives? I'm not going to cosign dude below calling you a Republican obviously, but damn certain days you go full condescending moderate.

Also, dude mentioned Obamacare.


Do you feel that was a mistake? honestly?

It was an Obama passion project where he spent all of his political capital.

I don't think we're ever going to be at a place where major progressive legislation doesn't carry a potential political cost.

Activists (and whatever politicians they were able to get on their side) have spent decades working on those issues and pushing them into the mainstream. People didn't wake up and just randomly decide that they supported marriage equality. Hell, it took them a long time just to get the big LGBT organizations on their side back in the 90's.

And the rigid party discipline might have been what passed the ACA in Congress, but making that a top priority for the Democratic party was because of the people who had been fighting for health care reform forever.

Same with the Civil Rights Act, the VRA, any sort of environmental legislation, etc. Progress never comes from the top down.

Especially politicians in the House, where each member only represents a tiny fraction of the overall public.

You're absolutely right that activists are essential. The example of civil rights and voting rights is obvious, and clear cases can be made on all the other issues we've mentioned here. So I'm not diminishing the role of activists. They're essential. (Though sometimes, the way to be an effective activist is not obvious.)


But when it comes to making laws, the game theory of how our system is designed inevitably makes it such that the political side is always from the top down. LBJ (not a hero by any stretch) glad-handed every single member of the House and Senate to push the new society and civil rights legislation through. The issues didn't come from the top down, but the laws most definitely did.

The people in safe seats never need the support of the party, so they don't get it, and they don't expect it. But there are never enough of them to pass anything on their own. The people in swing seats DO need the support of the party. They need everything packaged in a way that they can sell to their shaky constituents. When all these interests align, *then* legislation can happen. But if the interests don't align, it remains an empty talking point.

Single-payer health care has been an empty talking point for the better half of a century. It was only when it was packaged into a palatable but overcomplicated mess (the Public Option in Obamacare) that it *nearly* became a reality. It could come back one day, with another swell of activist fervor. I hope it does. It's certainly a lot more likely than Medicare for all.

My point isn't that people shouldn't be progressive. It's that we shouldn't expect politicians to be overtly activist. The politicians who matter are, by nature, cowards, and they always will be unless someone is ever able to completely rewrite the Constitution. The job of activists is to turn progressive ideas into things that even the most cowardly politicians are compelled to support.

but not having the legal/institutional knowledge/experience to back it up yet.

she already has a track record of getting tripped up on policy in interviews (palestine/israel, govt spending, etc). thats because she spiked the ball and ran to the cameras before even learning the playbook (and the media loved her for it).

wait until she has to start explaining her votes. and why she put her name behind some non-progressive legislation instead of causing a shutdown and jeopardizing re-election for her entire caucus. or wait until she spends her political capital on some progressive passion project that is bypassed by the majority-moderate dem coalition in congress that is actually responsible for flipping red seats to blue and giving dems control of the chamber (0 'justice democrats'/'our revolution'-backed candidates flipped house seats in the midterms).

or wait until she becomes more known for firing on democrats than she is for firing on republicans. and even her democratic supporters grow tired of her.

theres a big difference between being an activist and a legislator.

just look at ayanna pressley and ilhan omar. 2 freshmen reps...just as progressive and committed...but with actual city/state legislative experience...and not as craving for the limelight. aoc would be best served long term to follow their approach.

One day you are "Dems need moderates"

Another day you are "Its fuck they feelings"

On day its "things aren't normal, the other side might not even give up congress"

Another say its "the Supreme Court will rule in our favor" and "new progressive dems need to ..." basically shut up.

etc etc.

If it really is "fuck they feelings" then it HAS TO BE LOUD man.


That's the point. And based on who she beat in the primary, it seems her district wants exactly this. I think if she changed, her voters would feel cheated.


>but not having the legal/institutional knowledge/experience
>to back it up yet.
>
>she already has a track record of getting tripped up on policy
>in interviews (palestine/israel, govt spending, etc).

She's what, 27? Was a long shot to win? We can't be patient with a progressive Dem as she gets more comfortable giving interviews, etc?

I mean, Fuck, Biden (who you want to run for PRESIDENT) often stumbles on his words.

Cmon Reeq.



thats
>because she spiked the ball and ran to the cameras before even
>learning the playbook (and the media loved her for it).


Honestly? You're being a hypocrite here, Reeq. Literally every politician runs to the cameras. From AOC to Pelosi to Beto to Bernie to Hil to the other side.

How are you mad at a politician, of all people, for running to the camera?


And how are you mad that a YOUNG, MINORITY, FEMALE progressive is getting attention and bringing awareness to issues that are important to other people who look just like her.

That should be embraced on principle AND strategy.

DEMOCRATS NEED YOUNG PEOPLE TO VOTE

Telling one of their young stars to quiet down, hide from the cameras, play in the background, etc would not only be hypocritical, but fucking stupid.

She shouldn't change too much. If she does, how is she different than the previous guy? Why did Dems in her district want a change?

Also, would you rather the media interview fucking Ted Cruz? You think Trump and the GOP should get MORE media attention?


>
>wait until she has to start explaining her votes. and why she
>put her name behind some non-progressive legislation instead
>of causing a shutdown and jeopardizing re-election for her
>entire caucus.

Can one person cause a shutdown? I don't think so. Barbara Lee is still in congress. In fact, a lot of people want her to be speaker...

So this idea that AOC is going to have to cave on her principles and shit is not true. Its also...weird that you said it.

It also sounds like you are rubbing your hands together waiting for her to trip up.




or wait until she spends her political capital
>on some progressive passion project that is bypassed by the
>majority-moderate dem coalition in congress that is actually
>responsible for flipping red seats to blue and giving dems
>control of the chamber (0 'justice democrats'/'our
>revolution'-backed candidates flipped house seats in the
>midterms).

**blinks**

So are you saying we don't want progressive passion projects? Are you saying people who we send to congress shouldn't be passionate and/or willing to spend their capital?

Are you saying every progressive Dem in congress should just give up because some moderates won in other districts?




When she comes up, you sound salty as hell. Do you just not like her? If so, how is she different than any other politician who had an audience?

No one is saying she doesn't need to learn, or that she isn't about to face some very tough decisions.

But you honestly sound like you are rooting for her (a progressive Democrat, no less) to fail.

>
>or wait until she becomes more known for firing on democrats
>than she is for firing on republicans. and even her
>democratic supporters grow tired of her.

This is 100% projection on your part. There is no way to say she will do this.

BUT

She is in a safe blue seat, and beat a popular Dem incumbent. Maybe firing on the Dem establishment is what her voters want?

AND maybe its what Dems need to hear. Look to the Amazon deal. What kind of hypocrite/Repub in Dems clothing is DeBlasio?? I knew the governor was like that, but I honestly didn't know Bill was.

He (and others like him) need to be checked. That's the idea.

>
>theres a big difference between being an activist and a
>legislator.

Reeq, you are coming across as "sit down young lady"

That ain't the jam in general, especially in this context.


She attended a protest to "show Nancy that we have her back when she attacks climate change"...

I mean, cmon. You don't want active reps? Okay, maybe thats not the precedent.


You and I say all the time, things aren't normal. So the GOP doesn't have to play by the rules, are you saying progressives do?

Don't we want fight, action, poc, and youth?

How are you mad at this young woman? It literally makes no sense.

>
>just look at ayanna pressley and ilhan omar. 2 freshmen
>reps...just as progressive and committed...but with actual
>city/state legislative experience...and not as craving for the
>limelight. aoc would be best served long term to follow their
>approach.

K. Have they reached out to mentor?

** Oh, and is the media trying to talk to them and they are hiding behind their desks? lol cmon man


It sounds like you just don't like her and you don't really have a good reason, because you don't have a ton of substance- which is really, really odd for you.


Are you mad she won the primary?


Do you not like progressives in general?



I mean, yes OAC needs to learn and grow into her role. But we should all be VERY HAPPY she is there for many reasons.

but i got some unix error when i tried to post.

i gotta type this shit up again tomorrow or something fam lol.

just know i aint blowing you off and i have no issues with aoc personally lol.

Word, I hate when that happens.

I'm not trying to take up a bunch of your time- but just reread your posts man.

Maybe you don't have a problem with her or progressives, but sometimes it feels like it lol

It’s not her fault.

I think heads are mad because she is young, raw and the media is trying to crown her in some Tebow shit. She isn’t first string but getting treated like a starter.

Feels like a set up but the reality is there is enough room for her and the other folks. Not sure she should be out here protesting Pelosi tho.

the left should try and control the narrative a little better.

I stumbled on this thread (I don't even know who dude is) but its on point-

https://twitter.com/johnastoehr/status/1062761886796668934


And skimming through his twitter, he seems really pro-Pelosi and wasn't bothered by the sit in (he is careful not to call it a protest)

Now, maybe he's trying to save face for Pelosi but he still makes great points and, again, Pelosi handled it well imo

Haha

Seriously though, I think we agree for the most part
at least

The issue is the GOP is great at making the Dems play defense in the media because the GOP operates on a basic level.

Hopefully she and others push the party/other Dems to stop making very GOP like business deals.


That deal is fucking terrible and horrible look for Cuomo and Bill. Fuck were they thinking?


And again, she will help bring young people to the party, man. That is a very, very good thing.

anything progressive from the D party...you go into attack mode

You're allowed to be a moderate republican...in the republican party

It's okay.

Shouldn't even be a debate on her policies and views

She won.

The bigger issue with folks that want to dig in against her

is what she represents

Female
Youth
Minority

Should be obvious post the midterms

Elections that had high turnout in those demographics went to the Ds

you want a blue wave?

How does that work by rejecting a young female minority elected official within the party?

Old and yt is not a winning strategy.

i prolly done more for progressive candidates/causes than both of yall combined.

do yall wanna start posting them actblue stats? lol.
https://i.imgur.com/Yz7sO4C.png

I guess I know who I'm hitting up next time I run lol

Damn.

You averaging 1570 a donation?

Shit.

Trying to get like you.

LOL

She is all positive and trying to do the right thing. It's crazy to me that anyone could possibly hate her (even if they disagree with her policies).

Compare her to someone like Tomi Lahren who is doing hateful shit and deserves to be hated.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

nah, i think theres a valid point that she isnt fully versed on a lot of these topics so she does have some public failures.

if she can mitigate that then shes good.

it's theater, but constructive. at least will show the Speaker what the new blood is about, and hopefully will get some of these things back on the table.

(I watch the Majority Report more than I do the Young Turks nowadays)

the unknown upstart
the upset victory
the buzz
the media frenzy
the Faux News assault
the establishment liberal crying on social media: it's not your turn, go sit somewhere, etc
Repugs going apeshit when her name is mentioned

I fully expect her to steal the show at the next DNC
POTUS talk to follow?

Mainstream Democrats were saying he'd be president before he even won a federal office.

I mean I also don't see how anyone thinks the establishment is opposed to Ocasio-Cortez. I've literally never seen a Democrat say anything negative about her.

It's not healthy for progressives to hate themselves so much.

>Repugs going apeshit when her name is mentioned

They really go excessive on Fox News comments about her. Sexual/appearance and intelligence-insulting comments and all

>the unknown upstart
>the upset victory
>the buzz
>the media frenzy
>the Faux News assault
>the establishment liberal crying on social media: it's not
>your turn, go sit somewhere, etc
>Repugs going apeshit when her name is mentioned
>
>I fully expect her to steal the show at the next DNC
>POTUS talk to follow?
>
>

She is approaching her representation as an organizer. Love it.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5bf0e5f6e4b07573881f184a/amp


█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

to watch her twitter feed and IG stories for one week.

she's the real deal. young, energetic, showing us the behind the scenes of Congress in ways we've never seen before, open to new ideas and fully into calling repubs on their lying ass bullshit

she's not afraid to be wrong or admit when she's made mistake. this the kind of shit so many of us have been waiting for, then when we get it, we hating.

she can hold her own and will be fine.

just tonight, she made a "brand is strong" quip regarding Bodega Boys and somebody tried to come at her on some "oh you trying to call yourself a brand already" LOL


d

A freshman rep from a safe Dem district with no committee chairmanship or power post is driving repugs batshit and I don't get it

https://www.newsweek.com/aoc-slams-disgusting-conservative-media-after-fake-nude-photo-published-no-1286203

You yellin my name, that's only giving me props
cuz the fans that you got, wondering what's got you hot (c)

theyre scared of the momentum she appears to have taken the lead on. they want to kill that momentum.

i love how she has been approaching this. i think shes way smarter than they expected. they probably thought they could make her stumble since shes inexperienced but shes rocking it.

Millennial. Woman. 'Mexican' (black-ish if you squint). Socialist. Coastal Elite. And now a celebrity.

one...going back to newt gingrich and the republican revolution...repubs want to nationalize the identity of the democratic party and define it by its most extreme elements. radicals, activists, nutbags, etc. this is why you see repub candidates in races across the country brand their dem opponent with being another liberal in a party that has gone too far left (even when the dem candidate is moderate or even conservative). its been very effective.

two...its to tarnish and kill her career in its infancy before she rises up the ranks and retains real power/influence and possibly starts winning senate/presidential/etc elections. basically the attacks dont even have to be substantive. just throw a bunch of shit at her to where she is constantly under a negative light and on the defensive (repub super pacs basically just do this the entire campaign season). and whenever she really does do something bad...youve already got confirmation bias in place to make past attacks look credible (the media has a history of abetting this behavior...either wittingly or unwittingly).

both of these approaches work well against a woman. and doubly well against a woman of color. even dems/liberals are liable to fall for some of it to some degree.

A little rough around the edges, but she'll get better.

I like that she fights back head on. I'm not saying she should run for Pres or be the face of the party, but I like what she is doing.

she's not white, and the streets seem to be fascinated with her. she already took out an entrenched politician so they know they gotta shut her down before she can actually build a resume.

>A freshman rep from a safe Dem district with no committee
>chairmanship or power post is driving repugs batshit and I
>don't get it

Obama changed the game. If this is 30 years ago, yes it probably doesn't make sense... but Obama went from State Senator to President in 4 years. The precedent has been set for a young, energetic personality to make quantum leaps through the Dem ranks and skip over the 'paying your dues" stage. Republicans will continue to spend a lot of energy attacking the bright new stars and try and head them off before they gather too much momentum.

https://www.politifact.com/personalities/alexandria-ocasio-cortez/


i definitely support her. But this was kinda eye opening

Look at this one.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jul/18/alexandria-ocasio-cortez/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-wrong-several-counts-abou/

She is clearly speaking hyperbolically.

No wonder she has a beef with them

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1082372063866834944

And she has a point.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

she asks very valid questions of the gatekeepers

.

Politifact stays updating their Trump page


so its kinda overkill to cover the bullshit spewing from Sanders




I think both can be true. They were quick with the fact check on her. And she sometimes either misrepresents or misunderstands the data


The stuff on pentagon spending/military budget is a little cringey

i like her but shes putting up a lot of bulletin board material thats chipping away at her political credibility and can be used against her and other democrats in a lot of elections.

she plays well to a good part of the base but she flubs a lot of stuff that other young office holders already have a grasp of (theyve been in city/state government, political staff positions, etc).

this is what i was warning about up top. theres a big difference between politically active civilian and politician. your words have far more consequences as the latter. it wouldnt hurt to learn the ropes before going primetime.

she gotta learn how to play the politics game. It's still run by old white men and she needs to learn how to navigate through that. It's the same for a lot of the grassroots new folks coming in. Until there's enough new blood to changes things, they all gotta learn how to play the game as it currently is.

her and others are creating a new game and playing that shit and that's good.

fuck the game.

d

love her - but I agree. She's in Congress now - and needs to button up on statements before she releases them without fact-checking. She has a staff now - there's no excuse to release any figure/stat/graph without having it checked.

But she's the youngest woman ever elected to Congress - and is not one of these manufactured, pre-packaged politicians that is uber careful not to offend anyone - and I love that - so I can tolerate some of the turbulence along the way as she finds herself as a Congresswoman.

The upside to her candidacy far outweighs the mis-steps here and there. Congress needs AOC - and her district desperately needed somebody like her to represent them.

-->

>The upside to her candidacy far outweighs the mis-steps here
>and there.

Her relatively minor flubs are also getting way more scrutiny than the blatant lies and misunderstanding of how anything works that we get from a lot of members of the House.

At the same time, she knows there will be more scrutiny, so she does need to tighten up. She's also been in office for a week, so it's not like there isn't time.

but their voters dont care as long as their politicians just continue to provide means to an ideological end. like as long as you still promise to shove the word of god down the heathens throat legislatively and keep nonwhite people in their place...you always have a vote.

but people on the left still hold our politicians accountable for falling below a certain bar. we still have standards independent of our political self-interests. intelligence, honesty, compassion, etc.

so theres an imbalance in the judgment criteria there.

and it carries over to the media too. basically dems are criticized when theyre 'uncivil', they 'overreach', theyre too 'overprepared', etc. but repubs are just judged by whether their words/actions resonate with their own political base or not.

dems are still expected to uphold humane values. repubs are just expected to win.

otherwise there would be nothing for the media to 'both sides' their horserace political coverage and provide false balance/equivalence. it would just be 90% negative against repubs (deservedly so since they are so much more extreme).

It's a political double standard, a gift and a curse to modern dems. Always on the right side of political and social issues but that doesn't necessarily translate to success with an ignorant and racist electorate. And as you touched on, the media plays right into the hands of the repugs by trying to assume legitimacy on both sides rather than viewing these things objectively. Which, as you said, would result in mostly negativity toward repugs (which would ultimately be best for the country and the world, and result in some much needed progress .... but I digress).


>RE: lets be honest. repubs can be dumb, blatantly fraudulent, etc.
>but their voters dont care as long as their politicians just
>continue to provide means to an ideological end. like as long
>as you still promise to shove the word of god down the
>heathens throat legislatively and keep nonwhite people in
>their place...you always have a vote.
>
>but people on the left still hold our politicians accountable
>for falling below a certain bar. we still have standards
>independent of our political self-interests. intelligence,
>honesty, compassion, etc.
>
>so theres an imbalance in the judgment criteria there.
>
>and it carries over to the media too. basically dems are
>criticized when theyre 'uncivil', they 'overreach', theyre too
>'overprepared', etc. but repubs actions are just judged by
>whether their words/actions resonate with their own political
>base or not.
>
>dems are still expected to uphold humane values. repubs are
>just expected to win.
>
>otherwise there would be nothing for the media to 'both sides'
>their horserace political coverage and provide false
>balance/equivalence. it would just be 90% negative against
>repubs (deservedly so since they are so much more extreme).

like the effect of their policies are literally the opposite of what they tell voters theyre doing. something that has been proven *every* time theyre in power. but the media *never* calls them out on this.

for the last few decades...the deficit has gone down with every dem president...up with every repub president. yet the media still treats the republicans like the party of prudent spending and deficit hawking.

at some point it goes from being wrong/inaccurate to just being willfully complicit.

>like the effect of their policies are literally the opposite
>of what they tell voters theyre doing. something that has
>been proven *every* time theyre in power. but the media
>*never* calls them out on this.
>
>for the last few decades...the deficit has gone down with
>every dem president...up with every repub president. yet the
>media still treats the republicans like the party of prudent
>spending and deficit hawking.
>
>at some point it goes from being wrong/inaccurate to just
>being willfully complicit.

I think it passed that point long ago but either way, you're right. There's total complicity among the base and the representatives.

And re: the deficit (and so many other repug fiscal policies that are proven failures for decades upon decades), not only does the media represent alternative facts about the party's spending platform in general as you said, but the base will spew that nonsense about how surpluses and deficits are the responsibility of the *prior* administrations, not the current ones experiencing the deficit/surplus ... despite all evidence to the contrary.

So these asshats legitimately take the concrete, indisputable evidence in front of them ... and *still* find a way to twist it. It's insanity. And they're only hurting themselves !

if dems wanna push for a simple gun safety plan thats approved by 80% of americans like universal background checks...they gotta roll out pie charts, nonpartisan studies, spreadsheets, pivot tables, etc.

if repubs wanna push for basically any of their entire agenda thats only supported by 1/3 of americans...they just say 'job killing regulations', 'guns dont kill people, people kill people', 'the wall will stop drugs and coyotes', etc. they never get asked to back up the initial premise with any form of supporting truth.

our politics have become a completely uneven farce masquerading as a serious forum/exchange of ideas.

And again, it is the media's responsibility, ultimately, to alert us to these crises of democratic values and they've failed us to the highest extent possible.

I'm curious as to whether the coverage of Nixon was this piss poor during the Watergate scandal. Obviously this prez and admin are corrupt at a level galaxies beyond that of Nixon and his admin, but I'd like to try and compare and contrast. Maybe I'll research that this wknd.


>RE: think about how evidence/data/fact-free republican policy is now.
>if dems wanna push for a simple gun safety plan thats
>approved by 80% of americans like universal background
>checks...they gotta roll out pie charts, nonpartisan studies,
>spreadsheets, pivot tables, etc.
>
>if repubs wanna push for basically any of their entire agenda
>thats only supported by 1/3 of americans...they just say 'job
>killing regulations', 'guns dont kill people, people kill
>people', 'the wall will stop drugs and coyotes', etc. they
>never get asked to back up the initial premise with any form
>of supporting truth.
>
>our politics have become a completely uneven farce
>masquerading as a serious forum/exchange of ideas.

Like CBS publishes this bullshit article.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/commentary-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-becomes-the-sarah-palin-of-the-left/

And when you run down the list, it's all so minor and bullshit.

I think the one about the economy and everyone having two jobs is the biggest croc of poo because it's hard to think it's a literal statement to say EVERYONE has two jobs.

I think the left is falling in the trap of allowing the right to define her gaffes.

There is no freshman congressperson who isn't making the same sort of misstatements but she gets compared to a former governor running for Vice President?! Bullshit.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

the coverage on her has been really unfair (from mainstream media). None of the Big 3 even interviewed her or ran a story about her candidacy until she got elected (even though it was quite newsworthy).

People act like she's Maduro when she's really more Norway.

-->

she has already shown a knack for effortlessly pushing policy discussions like the green new deal and a 70% marginal tax rate into the national conversation (something that democrats have struggled to do forever). so she can control media cycles and decide what they cover at her whim. thats a gift in this day and age. now she just has to perfect the framing of her argument once you have the ears/eyes. and more importantly...learn how to message as a part of a broader team/coalition (no successful politician is an island and repubs have mastered this).

i love her excitement and cheerfulness for her new role tho. it seems like public policy/advocacy is really her lifes passion. and we all know she is on the *morally* right side of the issues.

i just dont want washington to wear her down and burn her out. like i said up top...politics has a way of disposing of people like her. there have been young upstarts in the past who were just as idealistic/emphatic (but didnt have social media, etc). and they ended up eventually getting washed away because they failed to learn the terrain in dc and stake out a durable strategy.

>there have been young upstarts in the past
>who were just as idealistic/emphatic (but didnt have social
>media, etc).

She really is good at social media. Not just good for a politician (which is a low bar.) And it irritates some people, but let's be honest. John McCain and Lindsay Graham and the like have built entire careers out of being good on the Sunday Morning political talk shows. They knew how to answer questions in a way that satisfied the hosts, reached the (mostly political media types and older boomers) who watch those shows and were able to keep getting invited on again and again.

She's just doing the same for how people of her generation actually communicate and take in information. It's an increasingly useful skill and party leadership should take notes.

John McCain and Lindsay Graham and the
>like have built entire careers out of being good on the Sunday
>Morning political talk shows. They knew how to answer
>questions in a way that satisfied the hosts, reached the
>(mostly political media types and older boomers) who watch
>those shows and were able to keep getting invited on again and
>again.

'moderate republican' nowadays just means theyre able to come across as sane during interviews. policy-wise theyre just as extreme as the tea party.

They're so desperate for a "reasonable" Republican that doesn't exist anymore.

I know that's why you put "reasonable" in quotes.


>They're so desperate for a "reasonable" Republican that
>doesn't exist anymore.

for a whole decade. the standard bearer for fiscal restraint/responsibility. the future of the republican party.

dude had *one* term as speaker in a governing majority and ended up leaving washington with a trillion dollar deficit and 12% approval rating.

and he still never got 1/10th the criticism of nancy pelosi.

RIGHT. It's like we're living in a perpetual opposite day.


>RE: media treated paul ryan like a compassionate conservative policy wonk
>for a whole decade. the standard bearer for fiscal
>restraint/responsibility. the future of the republican
>party.
>
>dude had *one* term as speaker in a governing majority and
>ended up leaving washington with a trillion dollar deficit and
>12% approval rating.
>
>and he still never got 1/10th the criticism of nancy pelosi.

https://twitter.com/jeremymbarr/status/1083444029231194112

i forgot to add him to the list too.

dude voted with trump 80% of the time and supported mcconnell dismantling democratic norms in the senate. but since he gave nice speeches criticizing trump for abandoning basic human decency...hes a reasonable guardian of bipartisanship lol.

>RE: meanwhile jeff flake is in talks for a job at cbs news.
>https://twitter.com/jeremymbarr/status/1083444029231194112
>
>i forgot to add him to the list too.
>
>dude voted with trump 80% of the time and supported mcconnell
>dismantling democratic norms in the senate. but since he gave
>nice speeches criticizing trump for abandoning basic human
>decency...hes a reasonable guardian of bipartisanship lol.

Last week Bill Cristol, morning Joe and all the other RINOs were creaming themselves over Romney's Washington post op-ed on Trump where he pretty much said he agrees with just about everything Trump has done but is deeply concerned that he's such a dick.

Romney's in a safe enough place where he could be that thorn in Trump's side but he won't because he's Mitt Romney

So I expect a lot of "that's very concerning", "that's not who we are" soundbites with no bite

Romney, Collins, Flake, Rubio, Cruz, fucking McCain ... no spine, no morals, no values. Just talk and no action. They vote with this vile prez like 95% of the time, and watch democracy crumble ... but then go on TV, and in op-eds, and tell us they're the anti-Trump.

Fuck 'em all. This is why I said above, NO repug is to be trusted or believed. They are all the same. Trump's Republican party is just a more brash, confident, outspoken version of the Republican party that always existed behind closed doors.

Fuck 'em all. Forever.


>Last week Bill Cristol, morning Joe and all the other RINOs
>were creaming themselves over Romney's Washington post op-ed
>on Trump where he pretty much said he agrees with just about
>everything Trump has done but is deeply concerned that he's
>such a dick.
>
>Romney's in a safe enough place where he could be that thorn
>in Trump's side but he won't because he's Mitt Romney
>
>So I expect a lot of "that's very concerning", "that's not who
>we are" soundbites with no bite

The rest at most will just talk about being disappointed and other useless noise. Not that I expect them to be democrats. They're republicans so they're gonna vote republcian most of the time.. but some things exceed party. I mean kids in cages, or Russaia shouldn't be "well I'm a republican" issues

Some are under pressure to be replaced by someone more radical in their party so they have to walk a line. I get that, but Romney is as safe as it gets in Utah. He can do some good if he wants to, but Romney has always been a shitty, spineless, unprincipled human being, so I don't expect much.

The right is soo good, and I don't know how, at framing the conversation and setting the agenda and standard for people on the left.

"The impeach the motherfucker" is such a good example of that. We did all sorts of soul searching and finger wagging at old girl for a nothing moment talking to her base because we knew the right would pounce on it. Meanwhile Steve King openly talks white supremacy bullshit.

If AOC makes any mistake and misstep, or misspeaks we know the right is going to be all over her. Our mistake is we don't circle wagons but we tend to pile on our own WITH them even we know that they are insincere.

We got to stop having the expectation that are candidates must be perfect.


>she has already shown a knack for effortlessly pushing policy
>discussions like the green new deal and a 70% marginal tax
>rate into the national conversation (something that democrats
>have struggled to do forever). so she can control media
>cycles and decide what they cover at her whim. thats a gift
>in this day and age. now she just has to perfect the framing
>of her argument once you have the ears/eyes. and more
>importantly...learn how to message as a part of a broader
>team/coalition (no successful politician is an island and
>repubs have mastered this).
>
>i love her excitement and cheerfulness for her new role tho.
>it seems like public policy/advocacy is really her lifes
>passion. and we all know she is on the *morally* right side
>of the issues.
>
>i just dont want washington to wear her down and burn her out.
> like i said up top...politics has a way of disposing of
>people like her. there have been young upstarts in the past
>who were just as idealistic/emphatic (but didnt have social
>media, etc). and they ended up eventually getting washed away
>because they failed to learn the terrain in dc and stake out a
>durable strategy.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

given our current political/social landscape. im not imposing my own personal standards on her.

if it were up to me...democrats would be a party of left wing authoritarians/secularists...who keep their foot on the necks of corporations...revere social programs/safety net like its our religion...shamelessly employ cynical politics that benefit/strengthen activists/minorities/unions as our political/organizational allies...and ruthlessly pursue methods to weaken the conservative movement and permanently lock them out of power at all levels of government. so aoc certainly hasnt done anything 'wrong' in my own eyes.

but if she wants to be *effective/successful* at getting what she wants...she has to know how to survive the climate and master the environment shes working in.

theres a reason why barack has to be barack but trump can simply be trump. why rachel maddow is a stanford/oxford alum and rhodes scholar but sean hannity is a college dropout.

the bases are different. the expectations are different. the standards are different. the internal *and* external scrutiny is different.

liberals are more educated, more analytical, more skeptical, less dogmatic/conforming, etc. so being accurate/competent matters to us 10x more than it does to the other side.

look at the vast array of policy dialogue on the left. renewable energy, technological safeguards for privacy, countering racial extremism, criminal justice parity, healthcare efficiency, etc.

on the right...its basically taxes are bad, put up a wall, and kiss a christmas tree lol.

life is easier for a conservative politician. and thats even before tilting the playing field when you factor in race, gender, media preconception, etc.

aoc needs to be acutely aware of all of this in order to effectively manipulate it.

and you are right. liberals are responsible for eating our own. thats our reality. so we have to operate with that in mind.

shit i *wish* for nothing more than lefties not holding our politicians to high personal standards and just voting them in to maintain power and execute a liberal agenda.

ive been praying for a political hardening on the left since forever. just getting up and habitually voting d to further cement our power and hand out losses to regressive opponents and stack liberal policies on top of liberal policies. but we are a fickle party of pussies...the voters and the politicians. and operating based on how things *should* be will leave you vulnerable to the pitfalls of how things *are*.

i feel like most of my debates on here with other liberals come off as me espousing my values when im really espousing our pragmatic reality and how to feasibly achieve our objective within that framework.

you cant hack a system without first getting inside it and knowing how to disassemble the code.

btw the reason the right is 'good' at setting the agenda is because the entire rightwing media apparatus is built to coordinate unified messaging and mainstream media is still run by old white millionaires/billionaires who are either conservative themselves or still susceptible to the same social cues targeted at their race/gender/class.

I have arguments with my otherwise well-intentioned friends about this all the time. They are so hopelessly progressive that they lose sight of the reality we find ourselves in, and have always been in.

It's unfortunate that you can't just parade out the *best* candidate, the one who shares all our values, and expect to win based on normalcy, and morals, and principles, and humanity, and compassion, in a country that lacks so much of all of that. It sucks. But it's real. So we have to swallow our pride and put aside our idealism, and realize that the only way the dems can succeed is if they think strategically, and put aside *some* of the loftier goals and platforms, in pursuit of the more pertinent goal of putting people in the positions to even start the *conversations* about achieving those loftier goals.

It's not fair. But it never has been. And progress is only slower than it already is if we don't comprehend the reality we live in and plan accordingly.


>RE: im moreso coming from the perspective of effectiveness
>given our current political/social landscape. im not
>imposing my own personal standards on her.
>
>if it were up to me...democrats would be a party of left wing
>authoritarians/secularists...who keep their foot on the necks
>of corporations...revere social programs/safety net like its
>our religion...shamelessly employ cynical politics that
>benefit/strengthen activists/minorities/unions as our
>political/organizational allies...and ruthlessly pursue
>methods to weaken the conservative movement and permanently
>lock them out of power at all levels of government. so aoc
>certainly hasnt done anything 'wrong' in my own eyes.
>
>but if she wants to be *effective/successful* at getting what
>she wants...she has to know how to survive the climate and
>master the environment shes working in.
>
>theres a reason why barack has to be barack but trump can
>simply be trump. why rachel maddow is a stanford/oxford alum
>and rhodes scholar but sean hannity is a college dropout.
>
>the bases are different. the expectations are different. the
>standards are different. the internal *and* external scrutiny
>is different.
>
>liberals are more educated, more analytical, more skeptical,
>less dogmatic/conforming, etc. so being accurate/competent
>matters to us 10x more than it does to the other side.
>
>look at the vast array of policy dialogue on the left.
>renewable energy, technological safeguards for privacy,
>countering racial extremism, criminal justice parity,
>healthcare efficiency, etc.
>
>on the right...its basically taxes are bad, put up a wall, and
>kiss a christmas tree lol.
>
>life is easier for a conservative politician. and thats even
>before tilting the playing field when you factor in race,
>gender, media preconception, etc.
>
>aoc needs to be acutely aware of all of this in order to
>effectively manipulate it.
>
>and you are right. liberals are responsible for eating our
>own. thats our reality. so we have to operate with that in
>mind.
>
>shit i *wish* for nothing more than lefties not holding our
>politicians to high personal standards and just voting them in
>to maintain power and execute a liberal agenda.
>
>ive been praying for a political hardening on the left since
>forever. just getting up and habitually voting d to further
>cement our power and hand out losses to regressive opponents
>and stack liberal policies on top of liberal policies. but we
>are a fickle party of pussies...the voters and the
>politicians. and operating based on how things *should* be
>will leave you vulnerable to the pitfalls of how things
>*are*.
>
>i feel like most of my debates on here with other liberals
>come off as me espousing my values when im really espousing
>our pragmatic reality and how to feasibly achieve our
>objective within that framework.
>
>you cant hack a system without first getting inside it and
>knowing how to disassemble the code.
>
>btw the reason the right is 'good' at setting the agenda is
>because the entire rightwing media apparatus is built to
>coordinate unified messaging and mainstream media is still run
>by old white millionaires/billionaires who are either
>conservative themselves or still susceptible to the same
>social cues targeted at their race/gender/class.
>

that power comes before policy. so focus on getting the power then we can hammer out the policy once we have the power.

we expect the 2nd part to happen without emphasizing the 1st.

you gotta vote in a democratic president/governor. and a democratic congress/legislature. and democratic judges. just to bring *any* of your policy goals to fruition and ensure they persist.

the right is so much more politically literate than the left (mostly because all of their news outlets explicitly outline political approach/strategy). they attain power. then pass policy to maintain power. *then* pass policy they promised to pass when they got power.

meanwhile the left is constantly coming up with ways to unilaterally disarm ourselves and abandon the mission before we even engage the enemy.

... are moderates like Hillary/Obama vs. ultra-progressive types like Bernie/AOC, rather than fucking Trump/Putin/Bannon/Nazis vs. Hillary/literally everyone else. Imagine how insanely better off the world would be.


>that power comes before policy. so focus on getting the
>power then we can hammer out the policy once we have the
>power.
>
>we expect the 2nd part to happen without emphasizing the 1st.
>
>you gotta vote in a democratic president/governor. and a
>democratic congress/legislature. and democratic judges. just
>to bring *any* of your policy goals to fruition and ensure
>they persist.
>
>the right is so much more politically literate than the left
>(mostly because all of their news outlets explicitly outline
>political approach/strategy). they attain power. then pass
>policy to maintain power. *then* pass policy they promised to
>pass when they got power.
>
>meanwhile the left is constantly coming up with ways to
>unilaterally disarm ourselves and abandon the mission before
>we even engage the enemy.

I think we forget that sometimes cuz so many Congresspeople simply don't do it LOL

so its kind of impossible for her to fail at that...i'm sure she will be fine

d

She's not 'their' guy.

Yet all we hear is AOC

from the right and the left

Now ask yourself, why is that? (c)

“White nationalist, white supremacist, Western civilization — how did that language become offensive? Why did I sit in classes teaching me about the merits of our history and our civilization?” - Steve King

...but we've got her in our crosshairs...

porque

or really anywhere near as many media appearances.

before she even won her 1st general election...she was crisscrossing the country like a celebrity...parachuting into primaries...and doing press junkets and campaign rallies against other democrats.

i get being critical of some of the *type* of attention.

but shes had a big part to play in the *level* of attention. you cant poor little lamb everything when it comes to her.

than they are about the right of them

>she has already shown a knack for effortlessly pushing policy
>discussions like the green new deal and a 70% marginal tax
>rate into the national conversation (something that democrats
>have struggled to do forever).

She's been a spirited proponent of both - but is met with resistance from her own party. Pelosi and the Old Guard belittled the effort to form a committee to push the Green New Deal. That's precisely why we need AOC in Congress. People call her extreme - but what's extreme is taking fossil fuel money/big oil money and compromising your position on the environment because you want to remain relevant and in good favor with the powers that be.

While she may not have the support of the leaders in the party, she has the support of the people, and that's where her power generates. Last year she was bartending and experiencing the failures of the system in her district, first-hand. Now she's advocating for justice and policies that will benefit people and the planet, and she can't be bought.

If she doesn't correctly quote obtuse statistics on the economy accurately every time - I can live with that (though I'd prefer that she be precise). What I can't live with is toxic corruption that is corroding not just our government, but our societal framework.

so she can control media
>cycles and decide what they cover at her whim. thats a gift
>in this day and age. now she just has to perfect the framing
>of her argument once you have the ears/eyes. and more
>importantly...learn how to message as a part of a broader
>team/coalition (no successful politician is an island and
>repubs have mastered this).

No doubt. I think waves of allies will be coming into Congress as this generational shift in power kicks up momentum.

>i love her excitement and cheerfulness for her new role tho.
>it seems like public policy/advocacy is really her lifes
>passion. and we all know she is on the *morally* right side
>of the issues.

exact! It's so damn refreshing.

>i just dont want washington to wear her down and burn her out.
> like i said up top...politics has a way of disposing of
>people like her. there have been young upstarts in the past
>who were just as idealistic/emphatic (but didnt have social
>media, etc). and they ended up eventually getting washed away
>because they failed to learn the terrain in dc and stake out a
>durable strategy.

Washington has its way of sullying the pure and weathering the new. She's a threat to business as usual, and that's why she's everyone's favorite whooping boy (girl) right now. There are so many think-pieces smears coming at her (from all directions, both from the FOX Hannity wing and from the neo-liberal left that backed Crowley). She has to be strategic, she needs support/allies, and will have to fight against windmill momentum against her for the time being. That's one reason I like that she's so young -- she is tireless and has an inherent resolve about her - even against insurmountable odds (like her chances in the primary). I hope she's here to stay.

-->

I’m not with the idea of you not being able to fire on your squad JUST BECAUSE but I think you have to accomplish something substanative before you do it, and I don’t consider her winning the election as an underdog actually substantive, at least to the extent that it gives her cover to say she might back primary opponents for folks currently in congress.

Put your head down, do the work, then talk your shit.

Because she said she'll oppose PayGo?

Like, Tim Ryan's actively tried to out Pelosi twice in the last three years, but nobody seems to think he's being disloyal or not knowing his place.

supporting the democratic caucus.

theres a reason rookies dont come in the league criticizing veteran members of their team.

this isnt new.

and ryan/moulton/rice/etc caught plenty flack. just wasnt as clickbait worthy as aoc because hes less well known.

It's a pointless rule that nobody specifically ran on.

On the scale of "disloyalty" (which is weird, because I don't think anyone voted for their rep specifically because they wanted someone "loyal to Nancy Pelosi" as opposed to "they will fight for the things I want,") it seems fairly minor. Pelosi doesn't even seem particularly bothered by it.

I guess there was the environmental protest (which again, nobody even seemed mad at.) She supported Pelosi for Speaker and supports HR1.

I don't know what else she's done that really breaks with leadership. She's politically to their left on a lot of things, of course, so nobody should expect her to be 100% supporting whatever leadership wants. But I don't know where she's actually breaking with anyone.

She is speaking her mind on specific issues
which I love.

Should she tighten up on the facts for her own sake,
of course.

But she isn’t the enemy. Far from it.

I sideye any “progressive” or even democrat who
has a problem with AOC.

She is going to help engage young people. Dems
everywhere should be thanking her.


Oh, she also voted for Pelosi. This idea that she’s
“Firing” on Dems is sexist/ageist/centrist bullshit.

Comes across as “pipe down young lady” every single
time.

AND a lot of folks who are upset with her will tell
you not to attack other Dems using GOP talking
points.

But with her it’s ok?

Nah. Fuck that. All of us should be hyped she’s
there.

She isn’t firing on anyone.

Part of the reason she won is her district apparently
wants this. She isn’t running for national office.

She is a young star who knows how to use social
media and engage young people.

Yeah she needs to tighten up but that will come
with experience.

She’s an ally and Dems need to fall back on
attacking her.

Some of these Dems are as bad as Republicans and need to be run out the paint.

Expose the contributions they get and the votes they take.

I wouldn't be mad if we had a Democrat version of the Tea Party

https://twitter.com/DanCrenshawTX/status/1083818371647447040

he consistently does shit like this.

but hes a one eyed vet so...

most of these repub numbnuts like crenshaw wouldnt even be in congress without unconstitutional gerrymandering. i wish that was mentioned every time the media brought them up. like 'do you think you would be able to win an election if your party didnt draw your district specifically for you to win?' lol.

im legit more mad at that than the joke.

i have no idea why he was even brought up.

those are reliable voters, though.

But times are changing.

-->

last time there was a shutdown.... who controlled the House?

be reigned in by GOPers.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

From what I've read here the critique seems to be if she wants to affect policy she needs to move in the way that the party is moving. It's interesting at this particular moment because the party has some momentum. Yes there are a bunch of experienced politicians doing the work to shift the tide. And as that happens credit due. But to some those moves are mere corrections and not direction. Make no mistake we need the corrections but we also need new directions.

The importance of AOC is that is what she keeps bringing to light. The new directions a significant of the base would like. They may not have the numbers now, but that does not mean they should be disregarded. For AOC to fall in line would mean that the establishment is the direction. By her continuing to push my hope is that she is inspiring voters and potential candidates that believe in those new directions to keep fighting for them. Without that we'll just continue to get rinse and repeat political cycles.

So yeah Medicare for all may not stand a chance in hell, but if you believe in it that's no reason to shut up and follow the crowd. Keep speaking up and it will force some to show their true colors and maybe their seat will be the next to flip, until the momentum is in the more progressive favor.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

The two party system is broken and clinging to it out of a sense of fear is the wrong move. We've already hit rock bottom with Trump so now is the time for radical change in American politics to prevent this from ever happening again

We need a viable third (and maybe even a fourth) party and AOC is the start of that change. I hope she stays exactly where she is (in her ideology and focus).

d

Let her represent the farther left position and raise hell. Let the GOP know that's the alternative they face.

Look how she got the 70% marginal tax rate conversation going.

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1085221097426038784

Moderates weren't even anywhere close to that.

If 70% is on the table, then the GOP should be more open to more middle ground hikes.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Kids - we want to ask you to support the GND

Dusty Dianne - You should run for senate since you know better than me

What a complete and total cunt.

It's follows several women who previously hadn't held office that ran for Congress last year, but she was the only one in the doc who ultimately won. It was all right, highlights just how weird of an activity it is to actually run for office in this country.

Also, she's dating a guy who looks like Tormund from Game of Thrones if he never got his hands on that giant's milk.

that shit was inspiring to me.

it was also disheartening...to see how the system is rigged. I mean, I know it is but whenever I see it in plain sight I'm just bummed out.

Like you know it's a long shot, but work yourself up to believe you could *maybe* just pull this crazy idea off. And then in a few minutes it's all over because of course the family that's controlled that one Missouri congressional seat for 50 years isn't going to lose. And it's all contrasted with the one person who actually did pull it off, which has to feel bittersweet for them.

Watching that lady from WV make her concession call to Joe Manchin sucked too, because she had to listen to him do the "I was inspired by your campaign and look forward to incorporating some of your ideas" thing knowing he didn't mean a word of it. Her face during the call said everything.

>
>Also, she's dating a guy who looks like Tormund from Game of
>Thrones if he never got his hands on that giant's milk.

who wears shorts as soon as the temperature hits 40. Then lower your expectations a little.

First when old girl from Nevada lost. Then watching AOC watch herself win.

When it first came out I knew there was no way in hell it would move forward. I didnt see it as something that should happen but divergent thinking that should influence thought or perspective.

I I think of runway fashion and how at first it looks stupid but then after a while you're able to observe the influential ripples created by the work. I think the same thing is working here.

People on both sides have considered it a joke but now some of the points have entered the cultural mainstage and it's acting a anchor or landmark with which other ideas and policies are being measured.

as bold.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

one of the reasons its resonating is because there's quite a bit of folks who didn't see it as a joke to begin with.

I don't think she's above being challenged

But it does beg the question...WTF is going on at NBC?

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/482499-cnbc-anchor-caruso-cabrera-to-challenge-ocasio-cortez-in-primary

Her book seems to be out of print now, but it's got some really good reviews on Amazon. Matt writes, "This is actually the first book I've read in about 20 years and I have to say I was thoroughly impressed."

So early indications seem that she'll be a good fit with the same thoughtful, mainstream Democratic thinking that brought us Mike Bloomberg. If the best way to beat a Republican is another Republican, then a Republican must also be the best way to beat a Democrat. If we run nothing but Republicans, then the Democrats can never lose.

https://www.amazon.com/You-Know-Right-Prosperity-Government/dp/1400169623

As the popular anchor of CNBC's daily news show Power Lunch, Michelle Caruso-Cabrera puts a new spin on conservatism. Now, in You Know I'm Right, Caruso-Cabrera presents a modern and smart approach to correcting the economic woes of the nation. Denouncing the hypocrites, she calls out the radicals on both sides of the spectrum who have frustrated voters and left fiscally conservative but socially liberal Americans feeling like a people without a party.

Caruso-Cabrera maintains that by focusing on socially invasive policies, our country has lost its course. The answer is less government, not more; less spending, not more; and getting the government to stay out of our pocketbooks and out of our private lives. You Know I'm Right addresses the problems created by government overreach and speaks to the minds and hearts of nostalgic Republicans-those who believe in the strategy and approach used by Ronald Reagan. But it will also appeal to Clinton-era Democrats frustrated by the current level of exorbitant spending and excessive interference in the economy. Citing faults with both political parties, Caruso-Cabrera puts a magnifying glass on government structure, healthcare, and education, underscoring how we have gone wrong and, more important, where we need to go for a secure and prosperous future.

GE of course was a major supplier to the war machine and actually had a stake in the Iraq War.

ironically, Microsoft NBC, one of its subsidiaries, capitalized on anti-war sentiment when they realized people tuned in to Olbermann's off-script rants more than they did anything else.

and now they've become Third Way TV.

it's almost as if Bill Cosby actually DID buy them sometimes

nearly half of them from her own party.

Remember that the next time the DCCC lectures on the need to not primary incumbents.



-->

all democrats (thats how non-jungle primaries work).

the dccc cant stop people from running. im not even sure why you brought them up (i guess its better than bringing up almighty puppetmaster tom perez lol). is there any evidence that the dccc is endorsing any of her primary challengers?

There are 13 candidates running in the primaries to unseat her. 5 are Democrats.

https://ballotpedia.org/New_York%27s_14th_Congressional_District_election,_2020

DCCC has been concerted in its effort to discourage progressive primary challenges to incumbents - and had targeted orgs like Justice Democrats and BNC - who only exist because of a woeful lack of succession planning.

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/dccc-incumbents-primary-challengers/





-->

>DCCC has been concerted in its effort to discourage
>progressive primary challenges to incumbents - and had
>targeted orgs like Justice Democrats and BNC - who only exist
>because of a woeful lack of succession planning.
>
>https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/dccc-incumbents-primary-challengers/

what does that have to do with this primary? where does the dccc fit specifically in this race?

the dccc wants to keep their majority by discouraging primary challenges. but they cant stop people from running on their own volition (thats how democracy works).

there are a vast amount of dem congressional candidates with primary challenges nationwide. obviously not all of the incumbents are progressives. is the dccc somehow responsible for those too? how does the fact that the dccc is protecting/endorsing progressive incumbents play into that?

-->

...and you think there's no correlation to the # of primary challengers and AOC's standing in the party...?

Mere coincidence...or politics as usual...?

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

>it's still fuck socialism as a staff, record label, and
>muthafucking crew

This place is so stupid.

>This place is so stupid.

Like, I laugh when people say things like "why can't we progess as a people" or "why can't humanity progress" or shit like that.

uhhh. mofos are DEATHLY afraid of progress because it requires doing something different.

Not sure how anyone can disagree with this assessment.

Folks will convince themselves that trying to change for the better is bad.

who are trying to discredit and "dethrone" Bernie.

i get that some of his ideas seem radical, especially as it relates to regulating and taxing corps, etc....

but are y'all (meaning "establisment dems") that slimy that you don't want people to win, despite all the lip service y'all pay to that? i guess so. you just wanna win and don't wanna sacrifice no wins for anyone else to win.

shit is sad.

i want everyone to prosper.

is quite telling.

that's like the GOP being like "ey Nader, roll with us"

particularly with downballot candidates in the house, senate, and state legislatures.

the 'blue wave' flipped tons of republican seats across the country in 2018 running on a platform *unlike* bernie (bernie like candidates got their asses kicked in primaries in swing/purple/competitive areas that are necessary to win for a majority). a lot of those people are gonna have to spend 2020 distancing themselves from bernie in order to be re-elected.

The limited data available that we do have actually signals the opposite: that Sanders is a strong general election candidate vs. Trump.

Even Chris Hayes saw it fit to make this point on MSNBC.

Also - if that's your stance - you think Pete/Bloomberg/Amy/Warren/Biden are somehow stronger in a gen. election matchup? None of whom have amassed a grass-roots movement and diverse coalition capable of high turnout?

It's fair to point out the flaws in Sanders (and he certainly has his flaws) and to make the case that you disagree w/ his policies (that's what a primary is for) - but to ignore the data and what's actually happening on the ground - and then hide behind "he's not electable" instead of saying what you really mean is intellectually dishonest.


-->

-->

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

If the old guard won’t step aside and elevate her in the party

I hope she starts a separate party...progressives or democratic socialists, etc...

F’n love this woman.

Plaskett/AOC 2024

That's like 50 taking Rick Ross baby moms shopping

I saw a bunch of comments along the lines of "We should't help them because a lot of republicans live there". Some liberals are sounding like bizarro Trumpers out here lately...

thats one of the problems with the red/blue state dichotomy.

it doesnt capture the true diversity/complexity of the population.

even if you wanna play that 'they made their bed' game...theres a ton of folks there who didnt sign up for that shit.

>thats one of the problems with the red/blue state dichotomy.
>
>it doesnt capture the true diversity/complexity of the
>population.
>
>even if you wanna play that 'they made their bed'
>game...theres a ton of folks there who didnt sign up for that
>shit.

Exactly.

The electoral college map tells the same lies over and over. I know hella folks in Texas who haven’t voted red ever. But there’s that red ass Texas staring back at them every election. And when it’s time for the nation to bash a general area in the midst of a shitshow, even the alleged good guys can’t help themselves and get caught up in doing the same shit the villains do. Ie: Oh, those libbs in Cali? Fuck em! Ie2: even DT folks in Texas just fixed their mouths to say ‘oh, you’re sitting over there cold in the dark with no water? You asked for this wind turbine shiiiit!’.

Side: I’m very interested in what happens with the student loan discussion. I hope folks expand beyond the this or that bullshit. To me, it’s a dynamic issue that requires a dynamic solution. Aka running up on folks with up to 50k might not be the right answer. 10k? Same thing. To me, the focus should be on the absurd INTEREST that most folks can rack up with student loans without ‘doing anything wrong’ zoomed out.

And, like many, I’m more concerned about future college students who could very easily be staring at huge debts for going to even a rando school for 4.5 years only to get out and see that companies still aren’t really trying to pay folks. And this will only lead to a world where folks are either getting the debt and not even really trying to pay it (where we are now) or folks quit going to college and the fallout from discontinued education intensifies. And I guess damn near everyone would be side hustling their way through life? Dynamic. Maybe I need a podcast where folks have gone over this already.

And shit, grownups need to do better at continuing their learning outside of class structure. Aka I don’t love that folks won’t read an article about anything that isn’t gossip but they’ve see hella ‘Tick Tocks’ daily and they’re up on the scene with animal ears and shit all day long on Snapchat.

When you control Congress and the White House, why aren’t they dunking election reform on Rs...?

...Rs were ready with continued voter suppression legislation after the L of 2020...

Ds still sitting on their hands...having lost the POTUS election 2Xs while winning the popular vote

This is an alley oop...

and immediately the next legislative priority after passing covid relief.

https://twitter.com/HouseAdm_Dems/status/1362793575679983616

Didn’t see a mention about abolishing the electoral college for the popular vote...?

LOL@introducing a bill

Family separation was not a bill
The Muslim ban was not a bill

Ds still playing the wrong game...can’t be surprised when they Lose.

Rs would have disregarded the parliamentarian and dunked the bill on Ds

Ds still out here playing respectability politics

That’s not the game anymore.

and before you type out some civics lesson a$$ of a reply

Yes, I fully understand that the F415 did not die today

But can you admit it makes Ds look weak?

I saw some FIYAH from Connelly dressing down Jordan

I need more of that from the entire party
Fist pounding spittle shouting mad and dunking policy on Rs

This is starting to look real sus
Leaving F415 out of the relief bill
Child separation
Bombing Syria

They’ve done great with the covid response

The rest of this is starting to look like...build back samesies.

when they pass that through budget reconciliation. they altered the bill to comply.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EvJKHPTU4AMWZow?format=png&name=large

how come you dont actually go look up any of this stuff before you rant about it?

and what does the parliamentarian and the covid relief bill have to do with election reform?

>That's like 50 taking Rick Ross baby moms shopping

https://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13312589&mesg_id=13312589&page=4

It's cute that you like to act all brand new - but you didn't hop on the AOC bandwagon until it was safe to do so - and in fact - spent a lot of time shitting on her as she was on the ascent.

Nah playboy - that ain't how it works.

-->

you sound like a fat chick getting mad that your bff that you grew up with is spending time with a boy from her new high school.

>you sound like a fat chick getting mad that your bff that you
>grew up with is spending time with a boy from her new high
>school.

Nor would a grown man write that^ weak ass retort.

-->

dude has actually gone in in her for real shit..

but that link aint the dagger

this was a “Morris Day in the crowd at the end of Purple Rain” ass post

my nigga - ODB

we don't play

*drops it low in solidarity*

>
>we don't play
>
>*drops it low in solidarity*
>

you usually look out for your people too lol

>
>you usually look out for your people too lol

She moves in silence and has less time for twitter/ IG stories

Is there a larger point you’re making about Underwood?

I have nothing to say about Underwood cause this post aint about her. You tryna use her to make passive aggressive insults and throw shots about a strategy that is clearly working.

Social media gives elected officials access to a wider range of people outside of the bubble of establishment niceties and convolution you love so much.

Lmao. You're going in just cause a guy said he prefers Underwood to more social media present Congress people.

Much love to Lauren Underwood, but using her to throw weak ass shots to AOC is some hoe shit. Am i wrong here? Tell me. Whats up.

lol

I.e. no way is she winning a statewide race.

do you think anyone who wasnt a big fan of her initially automatically isnt progressive?

either way...her expanding her appeal should be a good thing no? especially since she took overt/public steps to urge progressives to think more about employing a big tent coalition mentality and not the same narrow base approach that only got bernie 25% of the vote in national primary.

yall should be applauding her intentional pivot for bringing in more/broader mainstream dem support and repelling toxic lefties like jimmy dore and glenn greenwald.

When people were in need she put people first. Fuck a political affiliation.

Meanwhile everybody else pointing fingers. People should be fans of that.

she does some objectively heroic shit in raising money for people facing extreme hardship. she essentially gets universal praise for it on here.

and niggas 1st reaction is to be mad that people that they thought hate her dont actually hate her lol.

theyd rather everyone still fight out the 'progressive' vs establishment proxy war they got going on in their online echo chambers. regardless of the events on the ground affecting real people.

you were the main person spinning every political post into a brogressive bash fest but here you go trying to be above it all now

nah b.

nice try tho

no matter how hard they hated on them in the past.

you really went into a tizzy cuz i showed aoc some affection lol.

thats some clinically diagnosable shit fam.

and now she is your boo

lmao, we see you

including about AOC, this is NOT the first time he has given her love.

Maybe the word "boo" triggered some of you guys, but he has complimented her before, etc.

Pretty weird that AOC fans would be mad that someone has grown...to like...AOC


I think Reeq- at times- gives traditional Democrats a little too much leeway and benefit of the doubt and I don't always agree with him, but gotdamn people can change their minds.

And, again, him being a fan is not out of the blue to anyone who has paid attention.

to them if youre slightly critical of one of their saints or you think differently than them...you must be an enemy.

and we have to hate each other. forever and ever.

if you aint with us...youre with them (c) gw bush

its like elizabeth warren started pressing bernie on his credentials/record and she automatically became a closet republican lol.

name any moderate policy position i hold or any legislation where i urged dems to negotiate a middle ground with republicans.

link to any reply where i even mention the term 'bipartisan' in a positive manner...outside of using it cynically to show that many liberal/progressive policies are *already* popular among voters of *both* parties.

also explain why a moderate/centrist like me supported bernie in 2016 and elizabeth warren in 2020 (in line with the majority of the board both times).

thanks in advance.

A whole lot of what I see you doing around here is shitting on "lefties" and bringing up Bernie disparagingly at times when nobody is talking about Bernie. And ain't you Mr. "Same Team"?

“who??? who is the centrist..”

“YOU” - Pharell

list something specifically that makes me fit the definition.

thanks in advance.

The type of liberals who regress into sexist insults whenever backed into a corner (like how you did in this exact post)

Instead of deflecting and playing semantic hide n go seek. You grown bruh

you're trying to feign like you're a "progressive" now? This is why the term ceases to have meaning in 2021. You're a Neera Tanden "progressive" - but even she no longer uses the term now and just refers to herself as a "liberal"

You've spent countless posts on here shitting on Sanders (while championing Clinton/Biden/Pelosi/Schumer old-guard stalwarts) - trivializing AOC and the Squad - and claiming that she would never have broad appeal and thwarting her at every turn - only to try and redefine your stance on her by calling her your "boo" lol. C'mon fam - this johnny-come-lately non-sense is absurd. Anybody who has read your political commentary over the past few years knows exactly where your politics have been: as a fanboy placeholder for the status quo.

It's ok to be a Biden/Kamala Democrat. Hell, I would think you would be owning that w/ your Clinton/Kaine bumper sticker still affixed to your car. We love you all the same - you ain't gotta like to kick it.


-->

ironic that youve claimed a term is losing its meaning while continuing to use a term irrespective of its real meaning.

these words have specific definitions that you clearly arent informed enough to know. so you run with whatever labeling is popular in your online echo chamber. so you just toss it at anyone who isnt a part of your lil marginal flock.

it makes complete sense why someone like you would be a bonafied groupie for progressive conservative independent democrat tulsi gabbard lmao.

He has literally no concept that people can change their minds about someone. We are talking about a guy who still hasn't come out and publicly taken his various Ls, including on being wrong about Tulsi or Glenn or whoever else he stans.

Its like arguing with a high school kid who can't accept that his heroes aren't who he thought they were. Which is why I refuse to believe he is older than like 20.


He also managed to mention Bernie L M F A O


He can't get through a post without mentioning him and he accuses others of it. Fucking hilarisad.

And as always, he assumes that progressive = never, ever criticizing Bernie at any point.

And L O L at him being MIA as so many of his Ls have piled up over the past few months and he's in here like someone put up the Agenda-man signal or some shit.

the ticket with the highest vote total in american history with a broad coalition that even flipped 2 historical red strongholds.

i guess im supposed to be the kind of democrat like him that only represents 25% of the left and doesnt win a single county in michigan in a democratic primary?

i like how vex still portrays himself as the hall monitor of progressive high tho.

meanwhile he *campaigned* for a chick that supports gay conversion therapy, wanted to shut down muslim refugee admission to the country, and became a mouthpiece for 2 of the most brutal authoritarians in the world (nevermind attacking trans kids and showing love to white supremacists).

its clear to see why bernie lost all that support from 2016 to 2020. people saw a bunch of niggas like vex speaking as authorities in the 'movement' and were like 'nah im good fam' lol.

Understandable though - I'd want to shape-shift as well if I was caught talking grotesque, sexist and denigrating trash about AOC - and then trying to cover it up by calling her "my boo" after I realized I was wrong and she was a political force of nature.

Trivializing her accomplishments by just focusing on her attractiveness is peak sexism - and you've got a history of doing that.

Seems to be an odd trend w/ you - saying dumb sexist shit and then trying to hide your hand after the stone is thrown.

But yea keep obsessing and talking shit about the first indigenous woman to win a delegate in a presidential primary. It's on-brand.

-->

i look forward to your upcoming thinkpieces on toxic masculinity, microagressions in everyday life, and how to reach black voters by ignoring them 2 presidential primaries in a row.

https://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13297461&mode=full#13306135

if anyone can point to where i ever gave a shit about progressives coming to the center to find common ground with republicans...id like to see it.

cuz most of my criticism of progressives has to do with failing to strategically align/appeal to the *majority* of the *democratic base* (most notably black people) to effectively gain and wield left wing power instead of undermining it and fumbling it away.

about how dems can radically trojan horse even more progressive policies across the finish line by using social/cultural avatars to comfortably embed the objectives of progressive wonks into mainstream consciousness.

https://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13312589&mesg_id=13312589&listing_type=search#13314549

Ds caving.

How long before the squad fractures from the party

Starting to look like some BS.

she was going to be
so I can see how the party would fracture from "The squad" over that

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at