Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
JohnnyU

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thread

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Dickies said:

This captures how I feel about her.  I loved her at first, and found her refreshingly genuine.  She caught some wind in the sail and has decided to get a bigger sail without really knowing how to operate it.  She reminds me a bit of myself in that she has a tendency to use antagonistic language to drive a point across, and it just detracts from the conversation.  Someday I will learn.  She is smarter than me and in a position where she gets immediate blow-back from her statements, so I'm hopeful she will learn faster.

The bold is a perfect way to put it.  She doesn't know what she doesn't know yet.  I'm still hopeful, too.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, zoonation said:

that AOC comment is reckless and shows her immaturity IMO.  Fight the fight.  But leave that bs rhetoric out of it. 

She is one and done

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dickies said:
12 hours ago, krista4 said:

I agree with this perspective, and in my opinion it shows a great deal of immaturity that she often seems only interested in her own viewpoint.  At first I found her refreshing, but the bloom is off the rose a bit.  She's still young, and I haven't given up on her - god knows I was more of an immature jerk at that age, too, though I also wasn't responsible for representing a constituency in the public eye.  As a couple of people have pointed out, she might sometimes be counter-productive to her causes at this point.

ETA:  Mr krista and I have argued these points a few time, as he's still a big supporter.  Could be because she's still hot, though.

This captures how I feel about her.  I loved her at first, and found her refreshingly genuine.  She caught some wind in the sail and has decided to get a bigger sail without really knowing how to operate it.  She reminds me a bit of myself in that she has a tendency to use antagonistic language to drive a point across, and it just detracts from the conversation.  Someday I will learn.  She is smarter than me and in a position where she gets immediate blow-back from her statements, so I'm hopeful she will learn faster.

She's not all that different than any of us when we were beginning our careers is she?  We thought idealistically.  We pushed for new things in our lines of work.  We were met with blowback.  I've seen it a billion times...it seems to be the circle of employment.  We hit the ground running then over time realize that the real world and our ideals don't really mesh with each other.  Over time we realize pushing the ideal is probably not as productive as becoming pragmatic, looking at the system and trying to figure out how to work in the system.  All this is why I never really gave (or give) her more than a :rolleyes: with some of her absurd comments.  The more she throws out there to be pushed back on, the quicker that process will go.  She's not "the voice" for an entire party.  She's not an existential threat to humanity.  She's an idealist just beginning her career.  We don't even know if she'll make it beyond her first term.  She's that poker player just starting a tournament.  She may very well go all in on day 2 and be escorted out as a result.  All depends on how she plays the hands she's dealt.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/29/2019 at 10:46 AM, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Do you disagree that most corporations are owned and operated primarily by white people?

I actually wonder if this is true. I don't know the % of ownership in china, India, brazil, indonesia, pakistan, nigeria, bangladesh, japan, etc. If you are technically saying that chinese companies or indonesian companies don't meet some canned definition of corporation then sure you are correct. 

But to isolate things to a POC vs white people argument is absurd on so many levels. So many factors involved. Especially when talking about deaths. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/29/2019 at 10:11 PM, Gopher State said:

She is one and done

78% of the vote btw

Get ready to stay mad in this thread for a long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, parasaurolophus said:

I actually wonder if this is true. I don't know the % of ownership in china, India, brazil, indonesia, pakistan, nigeria, bangladesh, japan, etc. If you are technically saying that chinese companies or indonesian companies don't meet some canned definition of corporation then sure you are correct. 

But to isolate things to a POC vs white people argument is absurd on so many levels. So many factors involved. Especially when talking about deaths. 

I'm curious, how would you feel if she made the comparison of rich vs. poor instead of white vs. POC?  To me, there seems to be more truth to the former.  The rich largely reap the financial benefits of damaging the environment while the poor are much more likely to live in areas that can be effected (for example, think about the poor areas flooded in New Orleans while the higher, richer areas suffered much less damage).  It's not a perfectly true statement but I think it is still fair.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/28/2019 at 11:59 AM, jon_mx said:

https://www.theblaze.com/news/aoc-claims-white-companies-helped-hurricanes-kill-off-black-and-brown-lives

 

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) blasted what she called "predominantly white" companies and corporations for their purported roles in exacerbating climate change.

Ocasio-Cortez slammed corporations for reportedly causing amped up storms that took the lives of "predominantly black and brown lives" in places such as Puerto Rico and Louisiana.

----------------

Fortunately most of her fireball racial rhetoric is religated to more fringe sources like the Blaze and the Hill these days.  

This is why we can't get people to take climate change seriously.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chicago Hooligan said:

78% of the vote btw

Get ready to stay mad in this thread for a long time.

Edited by Gopher State

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Juxtatarot said:

I'm curious, how would you feel if she made the comparison of rich vs. poor instead of white vs. POC?  To me, there seems to be more truth to the former.  The rich largely reap the financial benefits of damaging the environment while the poor are much more likely to live in areas that can be effected (for example, think about the poor areas flooded in New Orleans while the higher, richer areas suffered much less damage).  It's not a perfectly true statement but I think it is still fair.

I would still be against the rhetoric. Nothing takes place in a vacuum. Making environmental damage into a rich vs poor thing or black vs white thing is a foolish endeavor. Everybody at every level makes decisions to disregard sound advice or to selfishly damage the environment for their own benefit. 

It is like when the reports come out blaming certain industry segments for X% of greenhouse gases. As if those industries aren't relied upon and used every day by the american public all across the country. If we didn't fill up our cars, they couldn't blame Exxon. 

You bring up Katrina, but how on earth can a determination be made regarding such a topic? We know that tons of those areas have gone down in population by large %'s. People moved away. So were they forced to live in those areas? Many would argue that the system was set up against them so they had no choice. Many would argue it was in fact their choice. Many would say that it was too little government funding kept them in those areas. Many would argue that without wealthy people paying taxes that government funding wouldn't even exist. I could go on and on naming silly back and forth arguments that shouldn't be brought up when it comes to climate change.

Everybody does stupid stuff to the environment. From the ceo of a big company to the 12$/hr worker that forgot to close a valve. From the rich guy in malibu in his gas guzzling yacht to the poor guy that was driving through and flicked a cigarette out the window. From the manufacturer of a chemical to the person that dumps the last bit down the drain when they are done using it. From the manufacturer of bottled water to the driver distributing it to the person drinking it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

Of course she does. Vote pandering at its finest. 

The bolded would imply that she doesn't believe what she is saying here. Is that your opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, John Blutarsky said:

AOC backs anti-cop protesters who jumped subway turnstiles in New York

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/aoc-backs-anti-cop-protesters-who-jumped-subway-turnstiles-in-new-york

From reading a few minutes on this, I get the impression that she's backing the purposes of the protest (a crackdown on fare evasion and allegations of police brutality), not the anti-cop rhetoric.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, timschochet said:

The bolded would imply that she doesn't believe what she is saying here. Is that your opinion?

Correct. I dont think she thinks people should be able to just hop the turnstiles whenever they want. If she truly was concerned about these riders she would have probably done some outreach to her twitter followers to let them know about the very underpublicized half fare cards that are available instead of advocating for stealing. 

Wonder if she would have just let people run away with free fish tacos at her last job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

Correct. I dont think she thinks people should be able to just hop the turnstiles whenever they want. If she truly was concerned about these riders she would have probably done some outreach to her twitter followers to let them know about the very underpublicized half fare cards that are available instead of advocating for stealing. 

Wonder if she would have just let people run away with free fish tacos at her last job.

That's not the same thing though. The real question here is if she is in favor of people disrupting what is ordinarily acceptable behavior in order to protest what they regard as wrongdoing. I would suggest that, based on her history of arguments, the people she admires, and the history of the progressive movement in this country, she is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, timschochet said:

That's not the same thing though. The real question here is if she is in favor of people disrupting what is ordinarily acceptable behavior in order to protest what they regard as wrongdoing. I would suggest that, based on her history of arguments, the people she admires, and the history of the progressive movement in this country, she is.

Nope. The real question is if she is in favor of people jumping turnstiles in new york. 

"Arresting people who can’t afford a $2.75 fare makes no one safer and destabilizes our community."

In the video, protesters are shown helping each other jump turnstiles without paying the fare

Edited by parasaurolophus
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Juxtatarot said:

From reading a few minutes on this, I get the impression that she's backing the purposes of the protest (a crackdown on fare evasion and allegations of police brutality), not the anti-cop rhetoric.  

That is nice of you to assume.  But by putting out statements which are generally supportive of the anti-police demonstrations, AOC appears to be condoning the vandalism against police cars and the ugly rhetoric.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, parasaurolophus said:

Nope. The real question is if she is in favor of people jumping turnstiles in new york. 

"Arresting people who can’t afford a $2.75 fare makes no one safer and destabilizes our community."

In the video, protesters are shown helping each other jump turnstiles without paying the fare

I think there is a lot more nuance to it.

Im no AOC fan (at ALL), but one can suggest that ruining a life over a petty crime, especially considering how far worse (white collar) crimes go nearly if not totally unpunished, is not in society’s interests. 
 

Having an economy where some may not be able to afford even mass transit to get to employment is not in society's interest (yes, I recognize this is a small subset of those who might jump - but we are taking layers of nuance).

I don’t see AOC blanket supporting the jumping of turnstyles unless I’m missing something that she said. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Koya said:

I think there is a lot more nuance to it.

Im no AOC fan (at ALL), but one can suggest that ruining a life over a petty crime, especially considering how far worse (white collar) crimes go nearly if not totally unpunished, is not in society’s interests. 
 

Having an economy where some may not be able to afford even mass transit to get to employment is not in society's interest (yes, I recognize this is a small subset of those who might jump - but we are taking layers of nuance).

I don’t see AOC blanket supporting the jumping of turnstyles unless I’m missing something that she said. 

Saying it is more nuanced than that but then typing the bold is strange. It is a $100 fine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

Saying it is more nuanced than that but then typing the bold is strange. It is a $100 fine. 

Apparently it’s also about this incident that went viral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

Saying it is more nuanced than that but then typing the bold is strange. It is a $100 fine. 

That’s a more than fair point (and I didn’t realize it was that low).  
 

Of course, there is legitimate fear that during the course of an arrest things go wrong, which as I understand it was part of the protest (police brutality). Unless I am mixing up threads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Juxtatarot said:

Apparently it’s also about this incident that went viral.

That actually makes her tweet even worse since that isnt a case of fare evasion because he couldnt afford it. That was fare evasion because he jumped over the turnstile while cops were chasing him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

That actually makes her tweet even worse since that isnt a case of fare evasion because he couldnt afford it. That was fare evasion because he jumped over the turnstile while cops were chasing him. 

 

I missed the part about the cops chasing the guy but I’ll take your word for it.

Anyway, I think the issue stems from a distrust of police. There is concern that having cops stationed to bust people for fare evasion can lead to situations that get out of control — like an Eric Gardner situation or, perhaps, what some people perceived happened in that video.  There is concern that terrible events could occur over a minor infraction — perhaps even one that could have occurred due to a financial necessity.

It’s a complex situation. I don’t really have much of an opinion on it overall. I just don’t think the initial criticism of AOC backing “anti-cop” protestors is fair.  It’s possible posters might define “anti-cop” differently than I do, however.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Juxtatarot said:

 

I missed the part about the cops chasing the guy but I’ll take your word for it.

Anyway, I think the issue stems from a distrust of police. There is concern that having cops stationed to bust people for fare evasion can lead to situations that get out of control — like an Eric Gardner situation or, perhaps, what some people perceived happened in that video.  There is concern that terrible events could occur over a minor infraction — perhaps even one that could have occurred due to a financial necessity.

It’s a complex situation. I don’t really have much of an opinion on it overall. I just don’t think the initial criticism of AOC backing “anti-cop” protestors is fair.  It’s possible posters might define “anti-cop” differently than I do, however.

 

If you click on the hyperlinked "viral" in the article you posted that takes you to the twitter thread of the video. The guy that posted the video also tweeted about nbc new yorks story on it, thanking them for covering it. 

In that article it states that he was approached outside the subway because it was reported he had a gun(turned out he didnt when they caught him). He ran. They chased him. He jumped a turnstyle and ran into the platform area and onto a train in an effort to escape police capture. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez‏ @AOC 5h5 hours ago

It’s only when we talk about acting on climate do some ask,“how are you going to pay for it?”

As though climate inaction doesn’t have a price tag.

As though the Midwest didn’t flood.

As though California isn’t on fire.

As though 1000s didn’t die in María.

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1193273344138891264

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Another AOC success story...

 

Back in April, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s ludicrous Green New Deal inspired a group of New York City construction workers to unionize, becoming one of the first unions in the solar power industry. It didn’t last long, though.

On Monday, the union’s employer, Bright Power, decided to fire the whole staff and replace them with subcontractors. All this happened while the union was trying to negotiate for their first contract, too.

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

 

Another AOC success story...

 

Back in April, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s ludicrous Green New Deal inspired a group of New York City construction workers to unionize, becoming one of the first unions in the solar power industry. It didn’t last long, though.

On Monday, the union’s employer, Bright Power, decided to fire the whole staff and replace them with subcontractors. All this happened while the union was trying to negotiate for their first contract, too.

Some workers try to unionize and a company fires them all and the bad guy in the story is ... AOC.  Makes perfect sense.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Some workers try to unionize and a company fires them all and the bad guy in the story is ... AOC.  Makes perfect sense.

Well she was just the figure head for the New Green Deal, so the credit should go towards Saikat?  The funny thing is, if this was an AOC inspired success story, she would be wrapping herself with praise and credit and of course a photo-OP.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

Well she was just the figure head for the New Green Deal, so the credit should go towards Saikat?  The funny thing is, if this was an AOC inspired success story, she would be wrapping herself with praise and credit and of course a photo-OP.  

Let's not putting any blame on the company for mistreating workers.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Tool said:

Let's not putting any blame on the company for mistreating workers.  

They are scrondrals if they indeed are not providing the proper safety precautions.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

They are scrondrals if they indeed are not providing the proper safety precautions.  

As someone who has worked in the constitution field most of my life, my experience is when a company wants subcontractors instead of employees is because they dont want to pay workers comp insurance. 

Edited by Mile High

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

They are scrondrals if they indeed are not providing the proper safety precautions.  

Yup, seems like a situation where a union might be a good idea.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon’s article comes with heavy conservative spin.  The Vice article linked in his article is more thorough. 

 

Quote

Workers at Bright Power say the company’s lack of concern for their safety and well-being points to the need for unions in the burgeoning green energy construction industry. Most of Bright Power’s construction workers come from low-income communities of color, some are formerly incarcerated, many are decades into their careers, and most earn between $16 and $18 an hour, workers say, which puts them in a precarious position that could be strengthened by a union. (New York City’s minimum wage sits at $15 an hour.)

The IBEW union contract Bright Power workers aimed for would mandate at least $56 an hour, the minimum wage paid to electricians working on government projects in New York City and implemented in most union shops.

This year, workers decided to unionize following a couple work accidents and pressure from management to work outside in extreme weather conditions in the winter. Bright Power’s solar panel installers traverse high-rise housing complexes across New York City’s five boroughs with high voltage power equipment.

I often think wages and compensation get too high when labor unions get involved but safety concerns need to be addressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎25‎/‎2019 at 9:23 AM, Chicago Hooligan said:

This thread was started as basically "look at the crazy lib puppet" and since then it's been a haven for men to to regularly announce that they're totally NOT scared of AOC in any way. Somehow it's never convincing.

I open it in the hopes that maybe she was video'd doing another sexy dance, like her time at B.C., but so far no luck.

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎29‎/‎2019 at 9:46 AM, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Do you disagree that most corporations are owned and operated primarily by white people?

Most American and European ones sure.  Take into account China, Japan, India, Mexico, Brazil, I am not so sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/24/2019 at 6:56 AM, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Some workers try to unionize and a company fires them all and the bad guy in the story is ... AOC.  Makes perfect sense.

That vice author tweeted the story and said that the workers were inspired by AOC's green new deal which is how she got involved in the storyline.  

I have made this point in here repeatedly, but if AOC didnt receive the large amounts of unnecessary praise she gets, she wouldnt get anywhere near the criticism either. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Juxtatarot said:

Jon’s article comes with heavy conservative spin.  The Vice article linked in his article is more thorough. 

 

I often think wages and compensation get too high when labor unions get involved but safety concerns need to be addressed.

Alleged safety concerns. Those stories all came from anonymous former employee sources. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rebecca Davis O'Brien @rebeccadobrien

Amazon agrees to lease 335,000 square feet in NYC's Hudson Yards neighborhood, in a deal without any financial incentives from the city or state.

 

 

 

I really thought this thread would be full of apologies by now.  :kicksrock:

 

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew from the thread that she had done something colossally stupid, immature, reckless, or something else that betrayed sane thought. "She just...she just gets ahead of herself!" No, no she doesn't get ahead of anything. That's her worldview, plain and sample, stupid and unforthcoming and leftist.

Nobody can possibly support this persona and claim any iota of the moderate flag. None. 

  • Like 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another day, another viral misleading tweet from AOC. Amazon is leasing office space in Manhattan for 1,500 employees, which is 6% of the 25,000 jobs its HQ2 in Queens (her district) was supposed to add," The Daily Caller's Peter Hasson said.

"AOC could have had 25,000 jobs in her district from Amazon, but now, Amazon is only offering 1,500 jobs using rental space OUTSIDE her district. She's taking a victory lap for a 94% loss in jobs in NYC and 25,000 job loss in her district. Socialist logic is incredible," political strategist Caleb Hull wrote.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/aoc-blasted-for-misleading-tweet-taking-victory-lap-over-new-amazon-jobs-in-nyc

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Sinn Fein said:

Rebecca Davis O'Brien @rebeccadobrien

Amazon agrees to lease 335,000 square feet in NYC's Hudson Yards neighborhood, in a deal without any financial incentives from the city or state.

 

 

 

I really thought this thread would be full of apologies by now.  :kicksrock:

 

Lol...you must read her tweets.  Seems obnoxious and ignorant to expect an apology for losing at least 23,500 high-paying jobs and another 50,000 jobs which would have been created indirectly.  1,500 jobs is not 75,000 jobs nor is it the $30 billion in lost tax revenue for the city and state.  But math never appears to be her strong suit 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, John Blutarsky said:

Another day, another viral misleading tweet from AOC. Amazon is leasing office space in Manhattan for 1,500 employees, which is 6% of the 25,000 jobs its HQ2 in Queens (her district) was supposed to add," The Daily Caller's Peter Hasson said.

"AOC could have had 25,000 jobs in her district from Amazon, but now, Amazon is only offering 1,500 jobs using rental space OUTSIDE her district. She's taking a victory lap for a 94% loss in jobs in NYC and 25,000 job loss in her district. Socialist logic is incredible," political strategist Caleb Hull wrote.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/aoc-blasted-for-misleading-tweet-taking-victory-lap-over-new-amazon-jobs-in-nyc

 

Amazon wasn't coming to her district.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mile High said:

Amazon wasn't coming to her district.

This is new facility is not either.  But the headquarters was right next door, which is much closer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

POTUS Radio leans left and they says the only politician who misstates the facts on Twitter as much as Trump is Cortez.  They call her very Trumpoinian with her tweeting habits.   Not sure that was meant as a compliment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mile High said:

Amazon wasn't coming to her district.

Eh, but come on, it meant jobs for her district which is right next door.

I dunno, maybe this is a regional thing but now Amazon is buying into Hudson Yards, a connected piece of land, on the other side of NYC from where it was going to be. Rich property owners and Manhattan win there. The development for Astoria is lost. Maybe folks in that district and the surrounding precincts are fine with that. And I'm sure Cortez will be reelected in the Dem primary nonetheless, even though it runs counter to traditional Dem appeals for bringing home jobs and programs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Da Guru said:

POTUS Radio leans left and they says the only politician who misstates the facts on Twitter as much as Trump is Cortez.  They call her very Trumpoinian with her tweeting habits.   Not sure that was meant as a compliment.

I have said for a while that she is very similar to Trump: fairly clueless about most things, tweets non-stop and often it's over the top rhetoric, gets pissy any time anyone criticizes them for anything, etc. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Eh, but come on, it meant jobs for her district which is right next door.

I dunno, maybe this is a regional thing but now Amazon is buying into Hudson Yards, a connected piece of land, on the other side of NYC from where it was going to be. Rich property owners and Manhattan win there. The development for Astoria is lost. Maybe folks in that district and the surrounding precincts are fine with that. And I'm sure Cortez will be reelected in the Dem primary nonetheless, even though it runs counter to traditional Dem appeals for bringing home jobs and programs.

Using $3 billion in tax incentives to lure a company to one borough vs another is not really a good use of resources

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.