Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
JohnnyU

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thread

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, BobbyLayne said:
7 hours ago, JuniorNB said:

Sounds like it may have been another attempted Fox News scandal that fell on deaf ears.  Except their viewers, of course. 

British tabloids and the NY Post were also "outraged."

Amazing how this stuff propagates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JuniorNB said:

It's just funny seeing someone who supports Trump call Obama classless. Please tell me you see the humor in that. 

More whataboutisms.  Particularly when it's been extraordinarily clear that I have little but disdain for DJT.  Your assumptions are off, as is your conclusion.  

In this instance Obama allowed his political bent to trump common sense and respect (heck, this is exactly what a VP is good for).  

 

7 hours ago, timschochet said:

IMO, you were trained

I train myself.  Don't put words/thoughts/ideals into my mouth.  I'm fully capable of developing my own. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Sand said:

More whataboutisms.  Particularly when it's been extraordinarily clear that I have little but disdain for DJT.  Your assumptions are off, as is your conclusion.  

In this instance Obama allowed his political bent to trump common sense and respect (heck, this is exactly what a VP is good for).  

 

I train myself.  Don't put words/thoughts/ideals into my mouth.  I'm fully capable of developing my own. 

It really is fascinating to watch your mental gymnastics and inability to admit you posted something that was dead wrong.  fascinating.

/spock 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, IvanKaramazov said:

It's not sexist to notice this.  If it makes you feel bad to talk about a female politician this way, try focusing on men instead.  Does anybody here honestly believe that George W Bush or Obama would ever have been elected president if they weren't both handsome and "looked" the part?  I don't.  

Physical attractiveness is important in the labor force, and it's especially important for politicians.  There's nothing wrong with acknowledging that. 

I don't think you're being disingenuous, but I do think this is an area where you could be more self-aware.  You might not consciously think about attractiveness when you're evaluating a leader, but it's almost certainly affecting your judgement.  

 

I think there’s a threshold attractiveness requirement, but after that some people care much more than others.  George HW Bush wasn’t a gargoyle or anything, but he certainly wasn’t better looking than Dukakis in 88

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Nobody forced Hillary to dress nearly exclusively in monochromatic pantsuits.  

In the words of the Trump Russia thread, “You can’t prove that.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

I think there’s a threshold attractiveness requirement, but after that some people care much more than others.  George HW Bush wasn’t a gargoyle or anything, but he certainly wasn’t better looking than Dukakis in 88

I’m not sure we’re still allowed to rate the sexiness of Presidential candidates on this board.

  • Like 1
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


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

I’m not sure we’re still allowed to rate the sexiness of Presidential candidates on this board.

Hubba Hubba Herbert Hoover. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, joffer said:

It really is fascinating to watch your mental gymnastics and inability to admit you posted something that was dead wrong.  fascinating.

/spock 

:golfclap: 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I’m not sure we’re still allowed to rate the sexiness of Presidential candidates on this board.

Still dreaming about Carter vs Ford in '76.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I’m not sure we’re still allowed to rate the sexiness of Presidential candidates on this board.

Presidents you'd go gay for:

  • JFK (duh)
  • Clinton (got to see what all the fuss is about)
  • Lincoln (they didn't call him Stovepipe because of his hat)
  • Beto (future pick)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Henry Ford said:

I think there’s a threshold attractiveness requirement, but after that some people care much more than others.  George HW Bush wasn’t a gargoyle or anything, but he certainly wasn’t better looking than Dukakis in 88

Image matters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not really paid much attention to Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, other than knowing who she is, and that she defeated a Dem Elite in the primary.

 

But, I like that she is not afraid to speak her mind.  I like that she fired back at McCaskill.  Sure, she is young, and has much to learn, but I think she brings a fresh perspective to an aging institution.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I like that she fired back at McCaskill.

I really thought the last few pages would have been about this.  Old guard not wanting to acknowledge they are not what America wants and being passed up for new ideas seems to be a pretty good discussion, but then I read through the last few pages and was disappointed. :thumbdown: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

I have not really paid much attention to Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, other than knowing who she is, and that she defeated a Dem Elite in the primary.

 

But, I like that she is not afraid to speak her mind.  I like that she fired back at McCaskill.  Sure, she is young, and has much to learn, but I think she brings a fresh perspective to an aging institution.

 

Demographics changed...the district is only 18% white now..old white establishment guy did not have a chance against a fresh faced Cortez.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The Commish said:

I really thought the last few pages would have been about this.  Old guard not wanting to acknowledge they are not what America wants and being passed up for new ideas seems to be a pretty good discussion, but then I read through the last few pages and was disappointed. :thumbdown: 

How do you spend two pages discussing a congresswoman elect responding to comments about her from an outgoing soon to be nobody? 

Share this post


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

How do you spend two pages discussing a congresswoman elect responding to comments about her from an outgoing soon to be nobody? 

:shrug:

I think there are many fascinating angles that discussion can take.

Personally, I am disappointed that McCaskill chose to go after Ocasio-Cortez for being too idealistic.  I understand that governing is often about compromising your ideals to make policies that everyone can live with.  But, I also think its important to have those ideals - have something for which you fight.

 

As for the discussion, we could talk about the difference in democrats in middle America v. Coastal America, we could talk about the generation gap - youthful exuberance v. aged experience, we can talk about the importance of women supporting women, we can talk about white democrats v. ethnic democrats, we can talk about rural democrats v. urban democrats. 

 

For me - I am just happy to have new voices, raising new concerns, from sometimes new perspectives.  I don't have to agree with or even understand people's concerns, but its important to raise them as part of the discussion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I have not really paid much attention to Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, other than knowing who she is, and that she defeated a Dem Elite in the primary.

 

But, I like that she is not afraid to speak her mind.  I like that she fired back at McCaskill.  Sure, she is young, and has much to learn, but I think she brings a fresh perspective to an aging institution.

 

Same here.  I don't agree with her politics, but I think it's good to get some younger people in Congress.  And there's something wrong with you if you don't like the Starbucks-to-Congress aspect of her story.  She's a good role model for other folks.

  • Like 5
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

:shrug:

I think there are many fascinating angles that discussion can take.

Personally, I am disappointed that McCaskill chose to go after Ocasio-Cortez for being too idealistic.  I understand that governing is often about compromising your ideals to make policies that everyone can live with.  But, I also think its important to have those ideals - have something for which you fight.

 

As for the discussion, we could talk about the difference in democrats in middle America v. Coastal America, we could talk about the generation gap - youthful exuberance v. aged experience, we can talk about the importance of women supporting women, we can talk about white democrats v. ethnic democrats, we can talk about rural democrats v. urban democrats. 

 

For me - I am just happy to have new voices, raising new concerns, from sometimes new perspectives.  I don't have to agree with or even understand people's concerns, but its important to raise them as part of the discussion.

If you take that in depth of an approach to her retort, you are proving mccaskill right. 

AOC stating congress shouldnt get paid during shutdowns is far more valid of a topic of discussion and worthy of praise. 

 

Share this post


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

How do you spend two pages discussing a congresswoman elect responding to comments about her from an outgoing soon to be nobody? 

Personally, I think there is a lot to be discussed about a party where there's a battle for direction and control :shrug:

This crap by McCaskill is evidence of that.  There's plenty to be discussed starting with the validity (or not) of the perspectives of the new blood like AOC coming into office.

Share this post


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

Personally, I think there is a lot to be discussed about a party where there's a battle for direction and control :shrug:

This crap by McCaskill is evidence of that.  There's plenty to be discussed starting with the validity (or not) of the perspectives of the new blood like AOC coming into office.

You know McCaskill is a goner right? 

Share this post


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

You know McCaskill is a goner right? 

Yep....pot shots as you're walking out the door isn't a good look and seems to be a pretty good example of the rift among "keep it as it is" and "moving in a new direction".

Share this post


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

I have not really paid much attention to Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, other than knowing who she is, and that she defeated a Dem Elite in the primary.

 

But, I like that she is not afraid to speak her mind.  I like that she fired back at McCaskill.  Sure, she is young, and has much to learn, but I think she brings a fresh perspective to an aging institution.

Cut the crap - we know you just like her because she's hot.  You're a pig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw her on "Firing Line' a while back.

 

'Ill-equipped' and 'not ready for prime time' is what I saw from her.

Share this post


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

Cut the crap - we know you just like her because she's hot.  You're a pig.

 

12 minutes ago, identikit said:

'Ill-equipped' and 'not ready for prime time' is what I saw from her.

Are these euphemisms?  Asking for a friend  :oldunsure:

 

On a more serious note - she could not have sounded any less prepared or "ready for primetime" than Donald Trump.

I like that she had the gumption to even run for Congress, I'll accept that she may not be as nuanced as a seasoned politician.  I would not expect anything more from a 29-yo.  I like that she has a voice, and is not afraid to raise issues that are important to her - and presumably many in her generation. 

From a Dem perspective, I think there needs to be a changing of the guard, and a fresh look at issues - we need both the sage hand, and the youthful exuberance, to help craft policies for the coming generations. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, identikit said:

Saw her on "Firing Line' a while back.

 

'Ill-equipped' and 'not ready for prime time' is what I saw from her.

Very promising young lady with a bright future.  Not sure how you define prime time. But she's already there in my book. You can tell by the right's obsession with her.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Very promising young lady with a bright future.  Not sure how you define prime time. But she's already there in my book. You can tell by the right's obsession with her.

Did you watch it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, identikit said:

Did you watch it?

No, but I've seen her speak many many times. Very bright young lady. 

Share this post


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

She's got hundreds of memes out there from the pissed off right.  Must be doing something well to make so many white males angry. 

Exactly.  if you want to know what the other side is afraid of, watch the memes they post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, JuniorNB said:

Exactly.  if you want to know what the other side is afraid of, watch the memes they post

She's not even in office and there's hundreds of them.  And if we're grading the right on level of humor, let's just say they need some work.  Yeesh. 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, General Malaise said:

She's got hundreds of memes out there from the pissed off right.  Must be doing something well to make so many white males angry. 

Bunch of Republican snowflakes getting their panties in a bunch. They need a safe space.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it’s clear a new Hillary is needed. Pelosi, Warren, AOC, a new motif is being sought out.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mario Kart said:

Bunch of Republican snowflakes getting their panties in a bunch. They need a safe space.

You know they are scared to death of her and I ####### love it!  

I want her to never shut up, never back down to the demonization.  ####, this #### gets old.  Demonize, demonize, demonize everyone and everything they dont like.  I hope people are catching on to their complete BS.  The GOP has proven over and over again that they cannot govern.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She says a lot of silly things, but I don't think it's from being an ignoramus like it is with Trump.  She's probably just trolling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, identikit said:

Saw her on "Firing Line' a while back.

 

'Ill-equipped' and 'not ready for prime time' is what I saw from her.

Well what's Trump waiting for? Give this woman a cabinet position!

Share this post


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

She says a lot of silly things, but I don't think it's from being an ignoramus like it is with Trump.  She's probably just trolling.

Could you provide an example? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2018 at 11:54 AM, Da Guru said:

Demographics changed...the district is only 18% white now..old white establishment guy did not have a chance against a fresh faced Cortez.

Bad info here.

Archie Bunker’s old neighborhood was 58% white in 1990, but that figure plummeted to 28% by 2002. Not because of redistricting, but because of gentrification and immigration. At the time of the June, 2018 primary:

The current district is 46 percent Hispanic, 11 percent black, 16 percent Asian, and 25 percent white, and many of the whites are affluent hipster transplants to gentrifying sections of Astoria, Sunnyside, and Jackson Heights.

Crowley was going to lose the seat sooner or later, but not because of demographics alone as you imply. He was the classic outer borough moderate and his district was more liberal than he was. But that didn’t happen overnight because of redistricting; the change had been coming for decades.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "I got a 3.3 in Spanish and I also took 3 classes in business at We Are Barely Accredited State" is good shtick btw :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two likely presidential candidates, Warren and Booker, have now shown support for AOC's Green New Deal. She seems to have shifted the Overton window on climate policy very quickly.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2018 at 11:03 AM, Sinn Fein said:

I have not really paid much attention to Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, other than knowing who she is, and that she defeated a Dem Elite in the primary.

 

But, I like that she is not afraid to speak her mind.  I like that she fired back at McCaskill.  Sure, she is young, and has much to learn, but I think she brings a fresh perspective to an aging institution.

 

 

On 12/30/2018 at 11:11 AM, The Commish said:

I really thought the last few pages would have been about this.  Old guard not wanting to acknowledge they are not what America wants and being passed up for new ideas seems to be a pretty good discussion, but then I read through the last few pages and was disappointed. :thumbdown: 

 

On 12/30/2018 at 3:45 PM, parasaurolophus said:

How do you spend two pages discussing a congresswoman elect responding to comments about her from an outgoing soon to be nobody? 

 

On 12/30/2018 at 4:04 PM, Sinn Fein said:

:shrug:

I think there are many fascinating angles that discussion can take.

Personally, I am disappointed that McCaskill chose to go after Ocasio-Cortez for being too idealistic.  I understand that governing is often about compromising your ideals to make policies that everyone can live with.  But, I also think its important to have those ideals - have something for which you fight.

 

As for the discussion, we could talk about the difference in democrats in middle America v. Coastal America, we could talk about the generation gap - youthful exuberance v. aged experience, we can talk about the importance of women supporting women, we can talk about white democrats v. ethnic democrats, we can talk about rural democrats v. urban democrats. 

 

For me - I am just happy to have new voices, raising new concerns, from sometimes new perspectives.  I don't have to agree with or even understand people's concerns, but its important to raise them as part of the discussion.

 

On 12/30/2018 at 5:36 PM, The Commish said:

Personally, I think there is a lot to be discussed about a party where there's a battle for direction and control :shrug:

This crap by McCaskill is evidence of that.  There's plenty to be discussed starting with the validity (or not) of the perspectives of the new blood like AOC coming into office.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2018 at 8:11 AM, The Commish said:

  Old guard not wanting to acknowledge they are not what America wants and being passed up for new ideas  

I don’t quite agree with this interpretation. 

McCaskill didn’t offer an opinion about whether or not Medicare for All is a good idea or if it’s what America wants. What she said is that it’s not what Missouri wants,  based on polling and that right now Missouri is an important swing state and you risk pushing it and other swing states into the red category if you pursue this idea. 

I think it’s a valid argument. 

Share this post


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

I don’t quite agree with this interpretation. 

McCaskill didn’t offer an opinion about whether or not Medicare for All is a good idea or if it’s what America wants. What she said is that it’s not what Missouri wants,  based on polling and that right now Missouri is an important swing state and you risk pushing it and other swing states into the red category if you pursue this idea. 

I think it’s a valid argument. 

You're free to dance around the personal jabs and attempt to create whatever nuance you feel is necessary Tim.  It's not going to change the fact that there is a battle within the party for control.  If her concern was simply policy, she'd have left it at policy.  There wouldn't be any personal jabs.  You don't get to ignore words simply because you don't want to face them and why they are there.

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.