Pelosi throwing shade at AOC

[EradiatedHaggis]

Boy, I knew you were dumb but I didn't know you were that dumb.

But mah AoC is loved by all...

 

[kpt018]

But mah AoC is loved by all...

Not what I said. Yup, you're a bottom of the barrel poster here.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Like what? It's hilarious to me since folks on the right view me as very liberal.

too many to list, tbh. To my eyes you are more in line with Obama/ Hillary, which is to say moderate Republican povs.

I think his intellect, stated principles and presentation is very impressive. And of course it's way too early and I reserve the right to change my mind. Again, that's how I feel now and they haven't really hit the trail yet, done debates, etc.. It's ok to be thin on policy points at this time but as the campaign pushes on he'll have to express them.

He is an interesting guy, that is for sure. He has a great story, too. His positions, as fleshed out as they are are underwhelming.

Agree on the DNA thing (although it doesn't matter to me personally) and maybe she isn't "viable", although I'm skeptical about being able to predict that (it's impossible).

The DNA doesn't matter to me either, but it was mortal wound to her chances. She also hurt herself in 2016 by not fighting for Sanders, or even running herself.

Also, for the record, if Bernie is definitely in my top 3 and I like and admire the guy. I'd happily vote for him over Trump. If he wins I think you guys could be in for disappointment if he can't pass medicare for all. I think the odds to win back the Senate are long and you'll need a big swing to get really progressive policy passed.

Maybe you're being honest, but this comes off as lip service. Warren I can understand. Bernie I can certainly understand. I don't see how you can put either of those candidates, with their records (especially Sanders) of being on the right side of issues behind a virtually unknown like Pete. I do believe you would vote for Sanders.

And that leads me to why you probably think I'm an establishment guy (which if you knew me in real life it would be silly). It's a legitimate question to ask - do we split the loaf or go for the whole thing and potentially get none? I share most of the policy outcomes that progressives want (affordable healthcare for everyone, strive towards equality of opportunity, protections for our environment, etc.). I know you guys want a revolution but if it comes down to moderate, incremental progress (which will only happen with Democratic control of government) or another 4 years of Trump I choose the former.

Incrementalism is a sellout position, imo. And that is not to suggest that there is only a win or lose option on policy positions, but the idea that somebody should gimp their positions before negotiations even start is ridiculous on its face.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

Not what I said. Yup, you're a bottom of the barrel poster here.

Oh just kidding she's more popular than ever.

Being a denial troll is barely being a troll. It takes no skill. Stop. Improve. Try something new. Sure, its better than being an actual AoC fan, but not by much...but perhaps youll bring at least a little more entertainment and get more likes and bring something...to someone...perhaps.

 

[kpt018]

too many to list, tbh. To my eyes you are more in line with Obama/ Hillary, which is to say moderate Republican povs.


He is an interesting guy, that is for sure. He has a great story, too. His positions, as fleshed out as they are are underwhelming.


The DNA doesn't matter to me either, but it was mortal wound to her chances. She also hurt herself in 2016 by not fighting for Sanders, or even running herself.



Maybe you're being honest, but this comes off as lip service. Warren I can understand. Bernie I can certainly understand. I don't see how you can put either of those candidates, with their records (especially Sanders) of being on the right side of issues behind a virtually unknown like Pete. I do believe you would vote for Sanders.

Quite frankly it's too early and I could barely separate Pete and Warren. Those two are much more intelligent than Sanders imo and I have a bias for intellectuals. I think the job is incredibly difficult and I want the smartest. But I certainly respect Sanders.

Incrementalism is a sellout position, imo. And that is not to suggest that there is only a win or lose option on policy positions, but the idea that somebody should gimp their positions before negotiations even start is ridiculous on its face.

I can understand that view if you have specific objectives that are significantly different from where we are now (if you strongly believe we need an extreme change like medicare-for-all). But what if you get it? Is incrementalism from there still a sellout position?

I really believe the difference is half the loaf or all/none. Of course I want the whole loaf but I have to make an assessment if that's possible and if it isn't I'd be better off with half. If I had a magic wand that I can wave and get a perfect implementation and execution of a healthcare plan I'd have a medicare-for-all plan (or something like it). But we have to acknowledge there is a lot of heavy political lifting (people aren't going to like tax increases), it will be actively undermined, it may not get implemented perfectly, there may be downsides that we didn't foresee, etc..

 

[Fawlty]

Isn't Pelosi right though? If Dems really want to win in 2020, are the more moderate Democrats not the best option to win? Not only win, but maintain power and pass more and effective policy after being voted in?

I say this because I can picture someone like Biden (who I'm not even the biggest fan of) being able to work better with the Republican Party. I'd also picture him better able to work with his own party. You add someone very far left and I can picture it being incredibly more difficult, ultimately being less effective for all involved. Translate that to each level, and I think she is very accurate here.

Sort of, yes. I think a progressive and a moderate are about equally likely to beat Trump, and that a progressive has a slight edge in the primary this time around. I don't know if there is any strategy that Democrats can use to effectively engage the no-holds-barred obstruction of the McConnell era. It's really off the rails now, dude. We're talking stolen supreme court seat-level of off the rails, which is historically exceptional to say the least. "Working with Republicans" may need to take a back seat to the raw power struggle in this sort of political fight.

 

[kpt018]

Being a denial troll is barely being a troll. It takes no skill. Stop. Improve. Try something new. Sure, its better than being an actual AoC fan, but not by much...but perhaps youll bring at least a little more entertainment and get more likes and bring something...to someone...perhaps.

Listen, we were talking about her election odds and you posted national and statewide polls. She is a House Rep in a specific district in New York so the point you thought you proved came out like a wet shit. And I don't know if you understand how the House of Representatives work or your logic that a national/statewide poll would determine her electibility in a specific district in NY was piss poor but you bombed bud. Do better next time. And maybe avoid smearing groups of people (Leftists don't live in reality comment). It's embarrassing.

 

[kpt018]

Sort of, yes. I think a progressive and a moderate are about equally likely to beat Trump, and that a progressive has a slight edge in the primary this time around. I don't know if there is any strategy that Democrats can use to effectively engage the no-holds-barred obstruction of the McConnell era. It's really off the rails now, dude. We're talking stolen supreme court seat-level of off the rails, which is historically exceptional to say the least. "Working with Republicans" may need to take a back seat to the raw power struggle in this sort of political fight.

100% true for the foreseeable future (maybe when the dinosaurs in the Senate die off?). If Dems don't win back the Senate with the Presidency they'll get no major bill passed (and maybe nothing at all). It's still important to win (need to remove Trump, potential to appoint SC Justice(s), etc.) but people need to understand this.

As far as figuring out electibility? Good luck. It's an impossible task (professionals can't do it).

 

[Fawlty]

100% true for the foreseeable future (maybe when the dinosaurs in the Senate die off?). If Dems don't win back the Senate with the Presidency they'll get no major bill passed (and maybe nothing at all). It's still important to win (need to remove Trump, potential to appoint SC Justice(s), etc.) but people need to understand this.

As far as figuring out electibility? Good luck. It's an impossible task (professionals can't do it).

If it's true that we're hard-divided now and nobody will budge in 2020 then yeah no matter who wins it seems like gridlock is inevitable as Democrats aren't losing the House, but probably aren't winning the Senate, though picking up a seat or two is likely. I'm okay with the "infighting" in the House too, I guess. AOC is going to be an important political figure within the party (if the parties survive) and Pelosi is right to challenge her to learn how to get votes to pass on the floor.

 

[kpt018]

If it's true that we're hard-divided now and nobody will budge in 2020 then yeah no matter who wins it seems like gridlock is inevitable as Democrats aren't losing the House, but probably aren't winning the Senate, though picking up a seat or two is likely. I'm okay with the "infighting" in the House too, I guess. AOC is going to be an important political figure within the party (if the parties survive) and Pelosi is right to challenge her to learn how to get votes to pass on the floor.

That's how I see it as well (I think healthy debate is great) but the lefties on here will call you establishment!

 

[Fawlty]

That's how I see it as well (I think healthy debate is great) but the lefties on here will call you establishment!

When that charge has been made at me, I get the feeling that the people making the charge have not spent enough time considering the most effective ways to take back power, but rather the most emotionally-satisfying calls to action...(and I'll be the first to admit there's bigly uncertainty as to how to approach it)

 

[Otto!]

The Dems are too divided still.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

Listen, we were talking about her election odds and you posted national and statewide polls. She is a House Rep in a specific district in New York so the point you thought you proved came out like a wet shit. And I don't know if you understand how the House of Representatives work or your logic that a national/statewide poll would determine her electibility in a specific district in NY was piss poor but you bombed bud. Do better next time. And maybe avoid smearing groups of people (Leftists don't live in reality comment). It's embarrassing.

Deny article showing her local constituents are pissed at her with bullshit.
Deny article showing her entire state begging for Amazon to reconsider with bullshit.
Deny article showing her national approval ratings with bullshit.

At least you are consistently full of shit and not living in reality...like the few people that still support that full of shit reality denier AoC.

 

[zebby23]

Listen, we were talking about her election odds and you posted national and statewide polls. She is a House Rep in a specific district in New York so the point you thought you proved came out like a wet shit. And I don't know if you understand how the House of Representatives work or your logic that a national/statewide poll would determine her electibility in a specific district in NY was piss poor but you bombed bud. Do better next time. And maybe avoid smearing groups of people (Leftists don't live in reality comment). It's embarrassing.

You are engaging with literally the worst poster on here. Highest troll level possible.

AOC got that clown shook though.

 

[kpt018]

Deny article showing her local constituents are pissed at her with bullshit.
Deny article showing her entire state begging for Amazon to reconsider with bullshit.
Deny article showing her national approval ratings with bullshit.

At least you are consistently full of shit and not living in reality...like the few people that still support that full of shit reality denier AoC.

Did you read anything I wrote? Jesus man you're really dense too.

 

[Trotsky]

The Dems are too divided still.

That's what naturally happens when the members of your coalition actually have policy prescriptions and beliefs: they are going to run into differences of opinion. For Republicans, policies have never really mattered: they'll find a way to justify their support later. It didn't matter that Trump's campaign policies were considerably different than the Republican base and then it didn't matter that he welshed on half of them (such as healthcare, entitlements, tax reform, corruption) and became a standard Republican with a few tariffs. Whatever Republican runs, the party's policies are going to - every single time - be those that are most favorable to private capital: deregulation, suppressing wages, busting union rights, flattening taxes, etc. You might get some unnecessarily punitive entitlement reform or immigration enforcement just to throw some red meat, but that's about it.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

Did you read anything I wrote? Jesus man you're really dense too.

Did you read anything I wrote? Jesus man you're really dense too.

 

[Reactionary Corporatist]

Did you read anything I wrote? Jesus man you're really dense too.

You're literally too stupid for your writing to approach anything approximating "readable"

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

You're literally too stupid for your writing to approach anything approximating "readable"

Sure thing troll account of person recently banned.

 

[Mcountry]

The corporatist Democrats are shook AF!

They have been in full attack mode on the progressive wing of their party the past few weeks and its disgusting to behold.
The worst being their attacks on Ilhan Omar.

Disgusting? Im enjoying this cannibalism.