Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thread (4 Viewers)

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I haven’t read all 170 pages of this thread but was there an extended discussion anywhere of the Netflix documentary “Knock Down The House?”

I can’t believe I’ve been posting in this thread for months without having watched it before. I’m curious if @jon_mx or any of the other “she’s a puppet” folks have seen it.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Kyle Griffin

@kylegriffin1

Authorities say an Ohio man has been charged in federal court for a Facebook post saying Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez "should be shot."

Good.  I am not a fan of AOC, but saying or posting stuff like that is not okay.  I'd be fine with this clown getting hit hard by the feds; make an example out of him. 

 

[rockaction]

I just read a user review of her movie -- the person called her a socialist that uses "anti-Semantic" slurs.

Our AOC. Is she a democratic socialist or a social democrat? 

 

[parasaurolophus]

I just read a user review of her movie -- the person called her a socialist that uses "anti-Semantic" slurs.

Our AOC. Is she a democratic socialist or a social democrat? 

So like, she hates @Henry Ford ?

 

[parasaurolophus]

I feel like their should be some funny anti semantic slurs, but i just cant come up with any. That comment plays well cinsidering this quote of AOC's 

"I think that there's a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right."

 

[Snickers]

I’m guessing 6-12 months down the road a couple of workers at the Metropolitan Correctional Center suddenly retire and/or wind up dead themselves.

George Mitchell got to know some IRA folks real well that could have arranged this suicide but damage was a bit down on him already. I suspect it was someone that would have been revealed on the next document dump but literally could have been any of a few hundred folks with ties to this creep.

 

[rockaction]

I feel like their should be some funny anti semantic slurs, but i just cant come up with any. That comment plays well cinsidering this quote of AOC's 

"I think that there's a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right."

Oh wow. I had no idea of that. That's actually kind of brilliant, then. I thought it was auto-correct. I should never underestimate people, often don't, and am often pilloried for it. Never listen to the crowd about how smart the peeps are -- the peeps are smart. 

In the spirit of the thread, Reason has given her this blurb. Apparently she was talking with her follower on Instagram about libertarian viewpoints. I'd definitely be interested in both the documentary about her and the IG video. She sounds a lot more well-learned than people are giving her credit for, despite the GND's vagueness and problems with political acumen to the contrary.

https://reason.com/2019/08/08/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-i-have-a-lot-of-common-ground-with-many-libertarian-viewpoints/?utm_medium=email

 

[rockaction]

Grist for the mill, and I'll cross-post in the Republican Death Spiral thread...

That should be a band name, by the way. Egalitarian Death Spiral or something else suitable that hearkens back to the French Revolution.

From the link above:

"[H]ypocrisy isn't lost on the congresswoman, who criticized the intellectual inconsistency within their ranks. 'The Republican Party in Congress is no longer ideological conservative, they are kind of this political mob,' she said. 'You can't count on them to reliably hold certain views anymore because they will advance certain views if it helps the president but then abandon those same principles if it doesn't help the president.'"

 

[Henry Ford]

So like, she hates @Henry Ford ?

I don’t even know how you’d make up dirty words based on semantics.  

Cunning linguist? Master debater?

 

[parasaurolophus]

I don’t even know how you’d make up dirty words based on semantics.  

Cunning linguist? Master debater?

Happy you took that the right way. Was trying to make a double play there, based on real henry ford's history and your devotion to proper definitions. 

Actually was trying to abort mission on the post and go back to forum, but a couple months ago the board started making a last second downward shift on me on my phone for some reason. Got me again. 

 

[Mario Kart]

I haven’t read all 170 pages of this thread but was there an extended discussion anywhere of the Netflix documentary “Knock Down The House?”

I can’t believe I’ve been posting in this thread for months without having watched it before. I’m curious if @jon_mx or any of the other “she’s a puppet” folks have seen it.

Thanks for mentioning the documentary. What a powerful 90 minutes it is. It's a simply breakdown overall...

Grassroots vs. Established

Young and Fiery vs. Older and Static

 

[jon_mx]

Thanks for mentioning the documentary. What a powerful 90 minutes it is. It's a simply breakdown overall...

Grassroots vs. Established

Young and Fiery vs. Older and Static

Grassroots? 

 You have several multi-millionaires financing and organizing progressive campaigns putting out a few puppet candidates to do their bidding.  They use their media and Hollywood contacts to raise massive funds from all over the country and then concentrate that to pick off a few seats.  These candidates represent a far-left progressive agenda and have very little interest in the local interest of the people they allegedly represent.  These propaganda productions (movies, cartoons, comic books, slick computer generated ads) are all productions of the big money progressives supporting them.  

 

[Mario Kart]

Grassroots? 

 You have several multi-millionaires financing and organizing progressive campaigns putting out a few puppet candidates to do their bidding.  They use their media and Hollywood contacts to raise massive funds from all over the country and then concentrate that to pick off a few seats.  These candidates represent a far-left progressive agenda and have very little interest in the local interest of the people they allegedly represent.  These propaganda productions (movies, cartoons, comic books, slick computer generated ads) are all productions of the big money progressives supporting them.  

The projection way of life is working on you. Projection is strong with you. Continue on.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Grassroots? 

 You have several multi-millionaires financing and organizing progressive campaigns putting out a few puppet candidates to do their bidding.  They use their media and Hollywood contacts to raise massive funds from all over the country and then concentrate that to pick off a few seats.  These candidates represent a far-left progressive agenda and have very little interest in the local interest of the people they allegedly represent.  These propaganda productions (movies, cartoons, comic books, slick computer generated ads) are all productions of the big money progressives supporting them.  

I wouldnt bother with him in this thread. His replies are all just fishing. This fake over the top love of AOC shtick he has going is really weird, best not encourage it. 

 

[jon_mx]

The projection way of life is working on you. Projection is strong with you. Continue on.

Everything I posted is verifiable facts.  I am sorry if that upsets you.  Continue to watch your propaganda of your dear leader.  

 

[rustycolts]

I thought the Libertarians had some nutty conventions, but the Democratic Socialist might give them a run for their money.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHRxu3XrsHg

 

[Widbil83]

I thought the Libertarians had some nutty conventions, but the Democratic Socialist might give them a run for their money.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHRxu3XrsHg

I’m almost in tears over here I’m laughing so hard.  That derserves it’s own thread. 

 

[Mario Kart]

Wow, the last four posts are nuttier than a fruitcake. Attacks on me, I guess, are acceptable. Attacks on grassroots movements, I guess, are acceptable. It’s amazing, to me, the level of ignorance displayed in our country about our political history norms and history. Truly sad. 

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Grassroots? 

 You have several multi-millionaires financing and organizing progressive campaigns putting out a few puppet candidates to do their bidding.  They use their media and Hollywood contacts to raise massive funds from all over the country and then concentrate that to pick off a few seats.  These candidates represent a far-left progressive agenda and have very little interest in the local interest of the people they allegedly represent.  These propaganda productions (movies, cartoons, comic books, slick computer generated ads) are all productions of the big money progressives supporting them.  

Does this mean you’ve watched it?

 

[jon_mx]

Does this mean you’ve watched it?

I did watch their 10 minute green new deal propaganda piece, that was more than enough.  I am sure they presented her in the most favorable light possible in many stages scenes without showing the real behind the scenes shenanigans.  But the 10 minutes of manure piling I already sat through was more than enough for this lifetime.  

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I did watch their 10 minute green new deal propaganda piece, that was more than enough.  I am sure they presented her in the most favorable light possible in many stages scenes without showing the real behind the scenes shenanigans.  But the 10 minutes of manure piling I already sat through was more than enough for this lifetime.  

They show actual footage of lots of things that seem very inconsistent with the narrative you’re always pushing.  It seems like you would want to watch it given your obvious interest in these subjects.

 

[jon_mx]

They show actual footage of lots of things that seem very inconsistent with the narrative you’re always pushing.  It seems like you would want to watch it given your obvious interest in these subjects.

Sure, and I've seen photo's of AOC crying as she visits the 'concentration camps'.  Too bad those photos were staged before she even entered the camps.  

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Sure, and I've seen photo's of AOC crying as she visits the 'concentration camps'.  Too bad those photos were staged before she even entered the camps.  

I know you probably don’t care, but at least in my opinion your refusal to watch it basically destroys any credibility you ever had on this stuff.  You’ve posted hundreds of times about the sinister Justice Democrats that picked AOC as their puppet and control everything she does.  But you won’t take the time to watch a documentary that actually shows footage of the Justice Democrats meeting, and shows AOC in all sorts of seemingly unscripted moments, and shows the process by which AOC got chosen, and many interactions between AOC and the Justice Democrats, etc.  

If you want, we could do something where we each watch something we wouldn’t normally watch.  Like I’d be willing to watch something I consider right wing propaganda like Dinesh D’Souza or James O’Keefe.  And you watch Knock Down the House.  

 

[The Commish]

FG, you know as well as I do a person looking to form an opinion will see these things very different from one who is watching it find support for an already established opinion.  As an example, jon watching what you watched will be seen as "staged" or "edited" or anything else to dismiss the parts taking away from the narrative.  There's a segment of the population so incredibly fearful of the freshman Senator that they are attempting to create this sense of urgency that she must be eliminated or the world as we know it will be coming to an end.  Ironically enough, that same group of people has very little to say about the man child in the Oval office who has his pudgy little hands on the football.  There is ZERO reasoning with that juxtaposition of priorities.

 

[parasaurolophus]

FG, you know as well as I do a person looking to form an opinion will see these things very different from one who is watching it find support for an already established opinion.  As an example, jon watching what you watched will be seen as "staged" or "edited" or anything else to dismiss the parts taking away from the narrative.  There's a segment of the population so incredibly fearful of the freshman Senator that they are attempting to create this sense of urgency that she must be eliminated or the world as we know it will be coming to an end.  Ironically enough, that same group of people has very little to say about the man child in the Oval office who has his pudgy little hands on the football.  There is ZERO reasoning with that juxtaposition of priorities.

This is a stupid post. The obvious implication you are making is that jon is in this group. Thats just dumb. 

 

[The Commish]

FG, you know as well as I do a person looking to form an opinion will see these things very different from one who is watching it find support for an already established opinion.  As an example, jon watching what you watched will be seen as "staged" or "edited" or anything else to dismiss the parts taking away from the narrative.  There's a segment of the population so incredibly fearful of the freshman Senator that they are attempting to create this sense of urgency that she must be eliminated or the world as we know it will be coming to an end.  Ironically enough, that same group of people has very little to say about the man child in the Oval office who has his pudgy little hands on the football.  There is ZERO reasoning with that juxtaposition of priorities.

This is a stupid post. The obvious implication you are making is that jon is in this group. Thats just dumb. 

I'd appreciate you not putting words in my mouth.  If I felt jon or you or anyone else here were part of that group, I'd say so specifically.  That's never been an issue for me.

 

[parasaurolophus]

I'd appreciate you not putting words in my mouth.  If I felt jon or you or anyone else here were part of that group, I'd say so specifically.  That's never been an issue for me.

Oh bs. You knew exactly what you were doing. 

 

[rockaction]

I don't want to get into the intra-board crosshairs match, but there has been a sense of the right thrusting her into the spotlight for her radicalism in hopes of painting her as the face of the Democratic Party in 2020. Due to her telegenic nature and ideas that are simpatico with a large percentage of the younger electorate, it's probably been unwise of the right-wing news media to give a leftist such mainstream treatment, even if the intended effect is to pillory her and that mode of thinking.

 

[The Commish]

Oh bs. You knew exactly what you were doing. 

I'm talking about a significant problem we have with the way we approach many topics around here.  The rub seems to be what you WANT me to be doing isn't what I was actually doing....again, another significant problem around here.  But, of course, you know better my intentions than I do....a third significant problem we have around here.

 

[parasaurolophus]

AOC has been accused of campaign finance violations. There are women in this country that are so criminal and unethical they are just unfit for public office and should be locked up. 

Oh whats that? You think i am saying AOC is a criminal and should be locked up? I would appreciate you not putting words in my mouth there those were two totally separate thoughts that i just forgot to put a break in between and dont you dare accuse me of even implying that. 

 

[The Commish]

I don't want to get into the intra-board crosshairs match, but there has been a sense of the right thrusting her into the spotlight for her radicalism in hopes of painting her as the face of the Democratic Party in 2020. Due to her telegenic nature and ideas that are simpatico with a large percentage of the younger electorate, it's probably been unwise of the right-wing news media to give a leftist such mainstream treatment, even if the intended effect is to pillory her and that mode of thinking.

Better go run and hide for talking this crazy talk rockaction.  It's been interesting to watch the scramble to replace Hillary.  Though not all have moved on from her, which is pretty entertaining in it's own right, they have appeared to set their sights on a freshman Senator whose ideas have ZERO chance of passing in their lifetimes.

 

[The Commish]

AOC has been accused of campaign finance violations. There are women in this country that are so criminal and unethical they are just unfit for public office and should be locked up. 

Oh whats that? You think i am saying AOC is a criminal and should be locked up? I would appreciate you not putting words in my mouth there those were two totally separate thoughts that i just forgot to put a break in between and dont you dare accuse me of even implying that. 

So you CAN see the difference, you just choose not to in my case...good to know  

 

[jon_mx]

FG, you know as well as I do a person looking to form an opinion will see these things very different from one who is watching it find support for an already established opinion.  As an example, jon watching what you watched will be seen as "staged" or "edited" or anything else to dismiss the parts taking away from the narrative.  There's a segment of the population so incredibly fearful of the freshman Senator that they are attempting to create this sense of urgency that she must be eliminated or the world as we know it will be coming to an end.  Ironically enough, that same group of people has very little to say about the man child in the Oval office who has his pudgy little hands on the football.  There is ZERO reasoning with that juxtaposition of priorities.

The maker of the film, Rachel Lears, was devestated by the election of Donald Trump and from that day was determined to make this movie, even before AOC even thought about being a candidate.  So the storyline was written well before this happened.  This is more like a Reality TV show than it is a documentary.  AOC is sharp and articulate (and of course a young woman of color) which is why she was picked.  But she does not script her agenda.  Saikat does.  Saikat wrote her platform.  Saikat and his team wrote the Green New Deal.  Saikat used his media contacts and Hollywood friends to make this campaign happen.  People may want to characterize this as 'grass roots', but i call BS.  I have no doubt AOC worked hard and made some contributions.  But Saikat ran the show.  Pelosi now has separated the two, so it could get interesting.  I kind of see AOC fading into the shadows as Saikat focuses his efforts elsewhere, but it depends on how much of his team remains with AOC.  

 

[rockaction]

Better go run and hide for talking this crazy talk rockaction.  It's been interesting to watch the scramble to replace Hillary.  Though not all have moved on from her, which is pretty entertaining in it's own right, they have appeared to set their sights on a freshman Senator whose ideas have ZERO chance of passing in their lifetimes.

I don't know. Perhaps my view is colored because I'm using this particular board as tea leaves, and not using the electorate writ large (a mistake I plan on rectifying as this place has lurched really leftward), but I see not only an ineffectual strategy on the part of the right-wing news media, but also a mistake tactically. I think she's in a safe seat and a great place from which to become a party leader from the left. 

 

[The Commish]

I don't know. Perhaps my view is colored because I'm using this particular board as tea leaves, and not using the electorate writ large (a mistake I plan on rectifying as this place has lurched really leftward), but I see not only an ineffectual strategy on the part of the right-wing news media, but also a mistake tactically. I think she's in a safe seat and a great place from which to become a party leader from the left. 

I think time will tell on this.  She's essentially 8 months into her term.  She has support from guys like Bernie Sanders (who's only a democrat in election years).  She has support from Warren though it appears to be arm's length in that she says she supports the GND, but then provides policies that are completely different.  Many of the moderate Democrats running are pushing back significantly on the GND.  She becomes successful and has staying power if the electorate pushes vastly to the left and quickly.  As I said, it SEEMS like the most outrage and panic is coming from the group who's probably not even going to be around by the time she's in a position to attempt to act on her ideas.  

History will either see her as a nut job or a visionary.  Trying to declare that today, 8 months into her term seems a bit silly and childish.

 

[jon_mx]

I don't want to get into the intra-board crosshairs match, but there has been a sense of the right thrusting her into the spotlight for her radicalism in hopes of painting her as the face of the Democratic Party in 2020. Due to her telegenic nature and ideas that are simpatico with a large percentage of the younger electorate, it's probably been unwise of the right-wing news media to give a leftist such mainstream treatment, even if the intended effect is to pillory her and that mode of thinking.

She does resonate with a large portion of the younger crowd.  But she is also rabidly anti-establishment, even against Democrats, so she might not even have a positive impact for Democrats with the younger crowd unless the establishment adapts a radical agenda.  The democrats can win voters on positive ideas on climate change, but if they radicalize it to the point where the average family will no longer be able to afford to heat their homes or drive their cars, forget it.  They lose the middle.  

 

[rockaction]

She does resonate with a large portion of the younger crowd.  But she is also rabidly anti-establishment, even against Democrats, so she might not even have a positive impact for Democrats with the younger crowd unless the establishment adapts a radical agenda.  The democrats can win voters on positive ideas on climate change, but if they radicalize it to the point where the average family will no longer be able to afford to heat their homes or drive their cars, forget it.  They lose the middle.  

I take your point, but the incrementalism of environmentalism is not to be ignored. When stuff just starts incrementally adding up, people don't realize exactly how much it affects their lives. Wise heads phase these things in one by one, slippery slope logic arguments be damned.

That might be OT, but it goes to the bolded* text. We already have gas cans and toilets and dishwashers that don't work well in the name of environmentalism -- what's next?

*And this spell/grammar check really needs to let the word "bolded" be without any correction. If anyone is up on that, here's a gentle gripe in that direction. 

 

[rockaction]

I think time will tell on this.  She's essentially 8 months into her term.  She has support from guys like Bernie Sanders (who's only a democrat in election years).  She has support from Warren though it appears to be arm's length in that she says she supports the GND, but then provides policies that are completely different.  Many of the moderate Democrats running are pushing back significantly on the GND.  She becomes successful and has staying power if the electorate pushes vastly to the left and quickly.  As I said, it SEEMS like the most outrage and panic is coming from the group who's probably not even going to be around by the time she's in a position to attempt to act on her ideas.  

History will either see her as a nut job or a visionary.  Trying to declare that today, 8 months into her term seems a bit silly and childish.

Ah, I'll concede that. You're positing, if I'm not mistaken, that there is nothing to indicate that she's fully integrated into her own party yet and that it's really a right-wing news media thing to position her as the center of her party. That also sounds close, but I'd posit that it's a combination of the Democrats actually lurching leftward in real time and the right-wingers picking up on it. 

 

[The Commish]

Ah, I'll concede that. You're positing, if I'm not mistaken, that there is nothing to indicate that she's fully integrated into her own party yet and that it's really a right-wing news media thing to position her as the center of her party. That also sounds close, but I'd posit that it's a combination of the Democrats actually lurching leftward in real time and the right-wingers picking up on it. 

I think there is some of this going on.  But I'll also say its incredibly hard to judge the degree at this moment in time.  Remember, primary season is where the candidates always sprint to the fringes with their rhetoric only to come back to the middle for the general election.  The 2016 cycle was the first time, in my lifetime, I ever saw that sprint to the fringe and the candidate never really come back to the middle.  So, I decided to watch that exercise closely in 2018 and it SEEMS that things are back to normal in that regard.  DeSantis is a pretty good example of this.  In the primary, he was Trump's guy...best buddy.  The ads were comic genius and disgusting all at the same time.  However, once he won the nomination he re-centered himself.  Yeah, it pissed a lot of the right wing off, but they voted for him anyway.  Now they are pissed daily that DeSantis, to much surprise from a lot of people in this state...me included, is pretty moderate.  You would have never guessed that had you just gone by his approach to the primaries.

 

[jon_mx]

I take your point, but the incrementalism of environmentalism is not to be ignored. When stuff just starts incrementally adding up, people don't realize exactly how much it affects their lives. Wise heads phase these things in one by one, slippery slope logic arguments be damned.

That might be OT, but it goes to the bolded* text. We already have gas cans and toilets and dishwashers that don't work well in the name of environmentalism -- what's next?

*And this spell/grammar check really needs to let the word "bolded" be without any correction. If anyone is up on that, here's a gentle gripe in that direction. 

But that is the beauty of AOC.  She unclothes the incrementalism and exposes what the final massive government could look like.  And the Democrats immediately embracing the green new deal put them on record, despite the current backtracking from the major candidates.  

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

AOC is sharp and articulate (and of course a young woman of color) which is why she was picked.  But she does not script her agenda.  Saikat does.  Saikat wrote her platform.  Saikat and his team wrote the Green New Deal.  Saikat used his media contacts and Hollywood friends to make this campaign happen.  People may want to characterize this as 'grass roots', but i call BS.  I have no doubt AOC worked hard and made some contributions.  But Saikat ran the show.  Pelosi now has separated the two, so it could get interesting.  I kind of see AOC fading into the shadows as Saikat focuses his efforts elsewhere, but it depends on how much of his team remains with AOC.  

See, this is an example of something that is inconsistent with what's portrayed in the film. They show AOC prior to her ever even being chosen by Justice Democrats and she's articulating her political beliefs.  She wasn't just some blank slate that they got to regurgitate what they said.  It is fairly obvious from the film that at the time she was chosen by Justice Democrats and Brand New Congress, she already shared their political views.  The film also shows Saikat Chakrabarti and other members of the organization and you can get a feel for what they're all about and what they're trying to do.  In a previous post you accused AOC of just doing the bidding of some billionaires, but the people in the room shown in the film were like in their 20s, did not look like billionaires, and they were the ones making decisions about things. 

I'm not going to lie, I was always skeptical of the way you described AOC, but I guess a part of me thought maybe there could be some truth to what you were saying and it was at least worth discussing.  Now that I've watched the documentary you sound ridiculous and ill-informed.

 

[Sheriff Bart]

Bob Saiket?  Some people post the darndest thungs. 

 

[jon_mx]

See, this is an example of something that is inconsistent with what's portrayed in the film. They show AOC prior to her ever even being chosen by Justice Democrats and she's articulating her political beliefs.  She wasn't just some blank slate that they got to regurgitate what they said.  It is fairly obvious from the film that at the time she was chosen by Justice Democrats and Brand New Congress, she already shared their political views.  The film also shows Saikat Chakrabarti and other members of the organization and you can get a feel for what they're all about and what they're trying to do.  In a previous post you accused AOC of just doing the bidding of some billionaires, but the people in the room shown in the film were like in their 20s, did not look like billionaires, and they were the ones making decisions about things. 

I'm not going to lie, I was always skeptical of the way you described AOC, but I guess a part of me thought maybe there could be some truth to what you were saying and it was at least worth discussing.  Now that I've watched the documentary you sound ridiculous and ill-informed.

Sure, and one would think Donald Trump is the greatest president ever if you took as gospel a documentary produced by Sean Hannity.  You believe what you want.  You are accepting as pure gospel the story as presented by a staunch ally trying to make the most sympathetic and positive storyline possible.  AOC is absolutely a liberal who shares many of Saikat beliefs.  But if AOC did not accept nearly all of Saikat's agenda, she would still be a bartender.  That is not speculation, that is a fact.  Oh sure, you can be the echo chamber who dismisses me as 'ridiculous' and 'ill-informed', but that is what makes this place so asine.  There is nothing ill informed about my views, it is all based on observed factial evidence, not spun up propaganda from either side.  She was handpicked by Saikat, to advance his agenda in a well-financed and run campaign.  She did a great job in her role, but she is not the architect.   There is really no reason I have to accept the movie as an honest depiction.  It is a half-story and we don't know what all was left out.  The story teller is way too biased.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Sure, and one would think Donald Trump is the greatest president ever if you took as gospel a documentary produced by Sean Hannity.  You believe what you want.  You are accepting as pure gospel the story as presented by a staunch ally trying to make the most sympathetic and positive storyline possible.  AOC is absolutely a liberal who shares many of Saikat beliefs.  But if AOC did not accept nearly all of Saikat's agenda, she would still be a bartender.  That is not speculation, that is a fact.  Oh sure, you can be the echo chamber who dismisses me as 'ridiculous' and 'ill-informed', but that is what makes this place so asine.  There is nothing ill informed about my views, it is all based on observed factial evidence, not spun up propaganda from either side.  She was handpicked by Saikat, to advance his agenda in a well-financed and run campaign.  She did a great job in her role, but she is not the architect.   There is really no reason I have to accept the movie as an honest depiction.  It is a half-story and we don't know what all was left out.  The story teller is way too biased.

There's no doubt that the filmmaker is sympathetic to the views of AOC (and the other three candidates featured in the movie).  I'm not asking you to watch the film to persuade you of those views, I know you don't share them.  I'm not asking you to take anything in the film as gospel or unbiased.  I suggested the film to you because it shows video footage of the exact things you're always talking about.  I thought you might want to see for yourself.  And I wanted to hear your views on the film because you're pretty much the #1 AOC critic here.  If we both watched the same scenes and interpreted them different ways, that's interesting to me.

Also, I don't think there's anything wrong with the fact that AOC was elected because she happened to share the same agenda as the Justice Democrats.  That's how most people get to Congress.  Pro-life candidates get support from pro-life organizations.  Pro-gun candidates get support from the NRA.  That's how it generally works.  The only difference here is that you consistently present Saikat Chakrabarti and Justice Democrats as some sort of shadowy figures pulling the strings behind the curtain.  The movie tends to rebut that notion.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

There is nothing ill informed about my views, it is all based on observed factial evidence, not spun up propaganda from either side.

I don't think this is true of anybody.

 

[Henry Ford]

Oh bs. You knew exactly what you were doing. 

You're a lot of fun lately.  

 

[jon_mx]

Also, I don't think there's anything wrong with the fact that AOC was elected because she happened to share the same agenda as the Justice Democrats.  That's how most people get to Congress.  Pro-life candidates get support from pro-life organizations.  Pro-gun candidates get support from the NRA.  That's how it generally works.  The only difference here is that you consistently present Saikat Chakrabarti and Justice Democrats as some sort of shadowy figures pulling the strings behind the curtain.  The movie tends to rebut that notion.

No, this is not how most candidates get to Congress.  Most candidates are not selected amoung thousands of applicants by a PAC.  Most candidates are not provided a specific platform to which to run on.  Most candidates are not giving the leadership team to run their campaign.  Most candidates do not recieve their funding and fund raising organization from a PAC.  Most candidates for Congress are not given access to major media for coverage.  Most candidates are not followed around by an award winning director to make a film about their story.  AOC is the very first  successful Reality TV candidate for Congress.  There has never been 'support' to this extent.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

No, this is not how most candidates get to Congress.  Most candidates are not selected amoung thousands of applicants by a PAC.  Most candidates are not provided a specific platform to which to run on.  Most candidates are not giving the leadership team to run their campaign.  Most candidates do not recieve their funding and fund raising organization from a PAC.  Most candidates for Congress are not given access to major media for coverage.  Most candidates are not followed around by an award winning director to make a film about their story.  AOC is the very first  successful Reality TV candidate for Congress.  There has never been 'support' to this extent.

I'll try to take these one at a time.

"Most candidates are not selected amoung thousands of applicants by a PAC." -- Sure, that's true, but it's very common for political parties in particular to identify people that they think would be good candidates/officeholders and to approach them to encourage them to run.  Why is this worse?

"Most candidates are not provided a specific platform to which to run on." -- I'm not sure what this means exactly but lots of candidates have the same views as their political party or some other group that supports them.  And again, political parties often provide support to candidates with all sorts of stuff.  Why is this worse?

"Most candidates are not giving the leadership team to run their campaign." -- Is this talking about Saikat Chakrabarti?  Because the documentary showed him involved in many campaigns, does that really count as her leadership team?  The scenes they showed of her campaign office didn't seem in any way unusual from what I can tell.  And what do you mean by she was given her leadership team?  Like, there were people that volunteered to work on her campaign?  That's every campaign.

"Most candidates do not recieve their funding and fund raising organization from a PAC." -- Where is your info coming from? 

Here is the FEC report from AOC's campaign: https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00639591/?cycle=2018.  It shows that over $2 million of her $2.1 million came from individual contributions, and all the PAC contrbutions were received after the primary anyway.  

Here is the FEC report from Brand New Congress:  https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00613810/.  It shows a total budget of about $100,000 for the entire cycle for many candidates.  There are no reported contributions to AOC's campaign nor any reported independent expenditures in support of AOC's campaign.

Here is the FEC report from Justice Democrats: https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00630665/?cycle=2018.  It shows a total budget of about $2.5 million for the entire cycle for many candidates.  There are no reported contributions to AOC's campaign nor any reported independent expenditures in support of AOC's campaign.

"Most candidates for Congress are not given access to major media for coverage" --  Yeah, neither was AOC until after she won the primary.  Then she got coverage because she had just knocked off one of the leading House Democrats, it was a meaningful story that deserved coverage.

"Most candidates are not followed around by an award winning director to make a film about their story." -- I'm not sure why this matters --  the documentary didn't even come out until after she was elected so it's not like it benefited her campaign at all.

"AOC is the very first  successful Reality TV candidate for Congress." -- She wasn't on TV very much before the election, other than stuff like debates or her own campaign ads.  And I'm not sure how you can say this with a straight face when Sean Duffy has been a sitting member of Congress for 8 years after having appearanced on the Real World and the Real World/Road Rules Challenge.   

"There has never been 'support' to this extent." -- Hmmm, in the 2017 GA-06 special election, both the Republican and Democratic candidate received over $10 million in support from outside groups (https://www.opensecrets.org/races/outside-spending?cycle=2018&id=GA06).  I'd say that's many times the amount of support AOC got.  Not even close.

 

[parasaurolophus]

You're a lot of fun lately.  

Saw this on twitter...

AOC is radicalizing mass shooters with her rhetoric, and she has yet to disavow this attack by one of her supporters and followers.

Semi sort of widely shared. 

I don't think she should be doing that. 

 

[Henry Ford]

Saw this on twitter...

AOC is radicalizing mass shooters with her rhetoric, and she has yet to disavow this attack by one of her supporters and followers.

Semi sort of widely shared. 

I don't think she should be doing that. 

Totally.  You should find some warrant application affidavits to back it up and go after her.