more evidence that it's not just Republicans who are worked up about AOC https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/11/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-democrats-establisment-1093728
The threat AOC poses to democrats is exactly the same one Bernie posed and that Trump posed to republicans, that they can go around the party apparatus and appeal straight to the constituency. It was somewhat obvious people like Paul Ryan really dislike Trump but were helpless when they realised that their voters weren't into many of their pet policies. The democrats though have much better party mechanisms to hold back upstarts, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if in a decade, she pulls off the same thing.
Most dems are moderates and unlike the right arent tribal or have a stick with the team mentality. This is why someone like AOC will never rise to power or have the influence the right fears. There is no nativism for her to rally democrats around. There is no single issue. All she will do is isolate herself once the honeymoon is over. She is popular mainly because of the current political environment and the rights attacks on her is helping her get publicity and sympathy. Notice that the people who bring her up is always on the right.
I think the biggest difference between AOC and Trump is that AOC is a complete moron AND an actual Socialist (not a fake Socialist like Bernie). That's considerably worse than Trump just being a moron.
Small potatoes. Some like the idea of independent thought and style, instead of always tolling the party line and following whatever the party leader said. I said we need more of that everywhere. Diversity and healthy. If your attempt is said, they "worked her" in similar way. You are completely off base. Fake nude video? Yick, the dancing! Much focused attention on her clothing. That type of frenzy abnormal behaviors belong squarely to a group.
They’re all populist who care more about style than substance. AOC is reminding me of Ted Cruz under Obama.
I think both are deranged and looney. Literally two sides of a coin. If AOC ran for the dems I could see her winning though I wouldn’t want her to by any stretch. If a decent Repub was opposite her I’d vote for him/her. These aren’t the leaders we need but sadly the leaders we deserve.
Niave idealism with good intentions is definitely better than pandering jingoist red meat that divides. Her core principles don't divide the country. Removing money from politics, her biggest shtick, isn't some divisive wedge issue. It's a legitimate issue, arguably the most important issue of our time as it effects everything. She wouldn't make a good President because of her lack of experience and niaveness, not her general principles .
Scary socialism.... Remind me, how were schools paid for when you attended them? Where’d all the roads come from to take your to school? What about the right of ways for electric lines to deliver electricity? You older folks sure enjoyed some socialism in the past but now that you’re older....
It maybe “morally better” but it will only lead to more gridlock and more do nothing government that is more concerned about posturing.
I agree. The vast majority of politicians have a death grip on that corporate inflow of money. However, if you are a middle class non politician, you are shooting yourself in the foot thinking her general principles are dabgeorus and stupid.
This. Unfortunately “crazy/populism” is en vogue. All of us left and right of centers folks are asking ourselves, “what’s wrong with you folks?” It’s weird seeing a lot of “conservatives” embracing Trump’s use of the government to guide markets when they wouldn’t support mean old Obama.
70% tax on the wealthy is absurd and is the type of absurdity that leads to stupid things. Then again, I’m more of incrementalist.
This is a common theme in history when plutocracy becomes more prevelant. It is nothing new. How are you surprised by this?
I'm just making sure you understand what the 70% rate means... It doesn't mean it's a 70% tax on all income that is generated. Let's say the marginal tax rate for income above 10 million dollars is 70%. That 70% rate only applies to income over 10 million dollars. It shows how removed we are from reality when stating such a rate is so absurd to our ears and sensibilities when that rate existed during one of the best economic times in American history.
I don't disagree, honestly what I want more than anything is someone running for president that I can actually support. AOC is currently too young to run for president, but even if she wasn't, I don't think she'd get the kind of support to even win the nomination. Her views are just too extreme and ridiculous even for the current state of the party that has moved considerably to the left over the past decade. To me that's the primary difference between Trump and AOC, Trump doesn't actually have any real ideology. He's just winging it and he's coming from the viewpoint of a life long Democrat which gives him more of a moderate default stance on most things. IMO that's what made him electable. While hardcore Democrats will hate his stance against illegal immigration, that's just one issue. There are many more where he's more of a mushy moderate....it's just that no one focuses on those issues, they focus on his hard line stance against illegal immigration or his hard line stance that the member states of NATO live up to their obligations. Stuff like that. I do agree that garbage like AOC and Trump is what we deserve though. While most people flipped out over Trump being elected, I had already done my flipping out much earlier when I realized that we really were going to get stuck with either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump as President. For a long time I was pretty ashamed of the general population for that and I guess I just got it out of my system before the actual election. By then I just thought it was hilarious.
Megan McArdle's column about AOC in the Washington Post, "No, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The fact is, it’s not because you’re a woman." excerpt: Ocasio-Cortez’s problem isn’t that she’s stupid, or that she’s a compulsive liar; she just got famous before she got wise. But neither is she being oppressed by the power structure — subjected to heightened scrutiny because she’s a woman, or browbeaten by ignorant slaves to neoliberalism who ought to study up on Modern Monetary Theory so they can grasp the revolutionary brilliance of her fiscal ideas. Intellectually, this is about on par with … well, with believing the United States spends more than $2 trillion a year on defense. Some of her critics are female, after all, and we’re not all victims of patriarchal false consciousness. Rather, we have some familiarity with the federal budget, and with monetary economics, and after careful consideration, have concluded that the parts of the Modern Monetary Theory that are true aren’t interesting, while the bits that are interesting aren’t true. And thus, that Ocasio-Cortez’s fiscal prescriptions are reckless bunkum. Professional women do frequently get undeserved flak because of their gender, but everything Ocasio-Cortez does, and not just her dumber utterances, gets more attention than is usually granted a freshman member of Congress. If you want to be famous, you have to take the good with the bad. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...t-because-youre-woman/?utm_term=.730c999d7bf3
