What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thread (1 Viewer)

Leftist twitter needs to look deep and see that the attacks of socialism were pretty effective even with a candidate like Biden.
Agreed.  But what is the real lesson? If the socialist label is going to stick to even candidates like Biden, why even worry about avoiding it?  

 
I'm definitely opposed to writing an Enemies List, but I do think that people who actively supported Trump should own it.  In the future "worked in the Trump administration" should rightly be a blot on a person's resume.*  If that's what AOC is getting at, that's fine with me.

* There are lots of exceptions to this of course.  By all accounts, James Mattis saw himself as doing his patriotic duty to minimize the damage done by an incompetent and malicious president.  People who tried to be the adults in the room shouldn't be punished for having done so.  We needed more of those folks.
Agree with this 100%

 
Agreed.  But what is the real lesson? If the socialist label is going to stick to even candidates like Biden, why even worry about avoiding it?  
Maybe true yeah...and maybe don't avoid...but do better getting message across and educating the public.  Fight propaganda with truth and keep doing it.

Obviously easier said than done...as we have seen how effective the attacks and propaganda are.

 
What I have learned about AOC is that she Tweets first then does research later.  Much like the person in the White House. 
To be fair, that's why she's popular.  Same with Trump.  They aren't classical politicians who have a team of researchers carefully craft their statements, tweets, etc.  They tweet what they think.  Like most people. 

 
Yeah, I'm opposed to a list of private citizens in this capacity.  That said, the idea of filing away comments, tweets, and statements made by public officials is fair game.  I'm not opposed at all to busting out in 2022 the "Just remember voters, in 2019, Trump did X and candidate John Doe said Y, even though he's now saying Z."

 
A few progressives might join her. 
But most Democratic politicians, while they won’t say anything, probably wouldn’t be too comfortable being seen to be too close to Never Trumper Republicans. 
It'll be interesting because those Never Trump Rs are largely without a party then. 

R's= party of Trump

D's= not comfortable close to them as you alluded to

Unless the GOP reforms a bit (which could happen, but 70 million people just voted for the guy, it's Trump's party), those guys like Wilson and Nichols don't have a political home.

 
It'll be interesting because those Never Trump Rs are largely without a party then. 

R's= party of Trump

D's= not comfortable close to them as you alluded to

Unless the GOP reforms a bit (which could happen, but 70 million people just voted for the guy, it's Trump's party), those guys like Wilson and Nichols don't have a political home.
Believe me I know.  I’m probably closer to them than I am to either of the parties.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ButI have to repeat this again with regard to Steve Schmidt, whom I mostly admire: Donald Trump would never have been possible if Schmidt and McCain hadn’t opened the Pandora’s box with Sarah Palin. 

 
That money sent to Kentucky was a total travesty. Over a 100M for a completely unwinnable race. Could have went to so many better places. 
 

Personally I think the Lincoln Project was in it for totally selfish reasons (to build a brand they could eventually profit off of), but to be fair their videos were quite good, were shared heavily, did likely influence people and probably played some role in getting trump out. 
Well I think there are a few scenarios as to their motives:

1. Opportunists like you said (although if this were the case, they could have easily just stayed in their own party and road the Trump opportunity like many Rs did)

2. They put country over party (on the flip side, perhaps this is slightly "fairy tale" thinking in some aspects)

I can't really make the argument they were on a sinking ship and were trying to catch a ride off it because they never were really on the Trump ship. I don't really know how they can profit off their brand because well, what is their brand? Their former brand was GOP, but by many indications, GOP is the party of Trump now. I guess the goal was to remove Trump from office, but now Biden is in. So what's next? Those guys still don't have a political home. 

 
I just scrolled through her feed fairly quickly.  She posted one congratulatory tweet to J&K...then went right back to attacking people.  Sigh.

 
I just scrolled through her feed fairly quickly.  She posted one congratulatory tweet to J&K...then went right back to attacking people.  Sigh.
She’s a bulldog for the left. A lot of people think she has a future as a leader in the Democratic Party but I think she’s far too adversarial for that. She shares Bernie’s views but lacks his congeniality. 
IMO she needs to lower the vitriol or she’ll just end up being another Maxine Waters. 

 
She’s a bulldog for the left. A lot of people think she has a future as a leader in the Democratic Party but I think she’s far too adversarial for that. She shares Bernie’s views but lacks his congeniality. 
IMO she needs to lower the vitriol or she’ll just end up being another Maxine Waters. 
The funny part about AOC is she is just like the person she despises most...an egomaniac who is a bull in a china shop...she is going to be a major headache for the dems...she and the squad will not back down and I truly do not see a middle-ground with that crew...it will be their way or the highway...a Shumer/AOC primary fight would be as good as Ali/Frazier.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ButI have to repeat this again with regard to Steve Schmidt, whom I mostly admire: Donald Trump would never have been possible if Schmidt and McCain hadn’t opened the Pandora’s box with Sarah Palin. 
Sarah Palin isn’t possible without Ronald Reagan and “govt IS the problem”.  

 
Lots of slogans, pretty good looking, but not very intelligent. I wouldn't say she won't gain more power because the media loves her, but wow. Wow.

If Democrats listen to her ideas, they will be in trouble in GA and beyond.

 
She’s a bulldog for the left. A lot of people think she has a future as a leader in the Democratic Party but I think she’s far too adversarial for that. She shares Bernie’s views but lacks his congeniality. 
IMO she needs to lower the vitriol or she’ll just end up being another Maxine Waters. 
A bulldog...maybe. Just somebody who gets outsized attention for bad ideas or insane rhetoric.

 
Lots of slogans, pretty good looking, but not very intelligent. I wouldn't say she won't gain more power because the media loves her, but wow. Wow.

If Democrats listen to her ideas, they will be in trouble in GA and beyond.
Not very intelligent?  What? 

 
"Not intelligent" seems like a stretch.  You may not like her policies.  You may not like her methods.  Sometimes, I question whether some of her actions are likely to advance some of what I perceive to be her goals, even in some cases when I agree with those perceived goals.  That said, seems pretty clear she's intelligent.

I'd say the same about Mitch McConnell.  I find many of his actions revolting.  I find may of his policies revolting.  At times, I think his actions may be counter to what I perceive as his goals.  That said, he's clearly intelligent.

 
"Not intelligent" seems like a stretch.  You may not like her policies.  You may not like her methods.  Sometimes, I question whether some of her actions are likely to advance some of what I perceive to be her goals, even in some cases when I agree with those perceived goals.  That said, seems pretty clear she's intelligent.

I'd say the same about Mitch McConnell.  I find many of his actions revolting.  I find may of his policies revolting.  At times, I think his actions may be counter to what I perceive as his goals.  That said, he's clearly intelligent.
There are many intelligent people who come across as not intelligent.   The Green Deal can`t be wrong because it has not failed or hurt the country economically yet. Just because people are intelligent does not mean their ideas are good. The problem with smart people is that they will defend their ideas and logic to the death rather than admit they could be wrong.   Cortez and McConnell both might fall into this category.

 
Leftist twitter needs to look deep and see that the attacks of socialism were pretty effective even with a candidate like Biden.
Meanwhile progressive ballot measures passed across the country, healthcare for all has incredible popular support, etc. The Democrats always allow the GOP to frame everything in their terms. 

Defund the Police is a good example - that’s an idiotic way to present the idea of police reform. How about - we want to target our law enforcement resources towards violent criminals, or something like that instead. 

 
Lots of slogans, pretty good looking, but not very intelligent. I wouldn't say she won't gain more power because the media loves her, but wow. Wow.

If Democrats listen to her ideas, they will be in trouble in GA and beyond.
Depends on what you mean by her ideas. Ideas on how to run a campaign? They should listen. Should they be hammering Georgia residents over the head with some of her actual policy positions? Probably not, but who knows. If the Democrats win won’t it be due to massive turnout in ATL? I’d imagine her ideas are incredibly popular there   

 
Meanwhile progressive ballot measures passed across the country, healthcare for all has incredible popular support, etc. The Democrats always allow the GOP to frame everything in their terms. 

Defund the Police is a good example - that’s an idiotic way to present the idea of police reform. How about - we want to target our law enforcement resources towards violent criminals, or something like that instead. 
Yeah, this is on the people who were actually advocating for exactly that.  They tried to spin it later, but the Democrats embraced some extremist views (this was originally a Black Panther slogan) without thinking about it enough and had to do damage control.  Problem was the term was out there too far to stop it, so they had to try the whole, "yeah, but that's not what we meant..." routine.  You play in the mine field of politics long enough, eventually you'll step on one.

 
That money sent to Kentucky was a total travesty. Over a 100M for a completely unwinnable race. Could have went to so many better places. 
 

Personally I think the Lincoln Project was in it for totally selfish reasons (to build a brand they could eventually profit off of), but to be fair their videos were quite good, were shared heavily, did likely influence people and probably played some role in getting trump out. 
The amount of money spent on politics is obscene when we have kids that go to bed hungry at night.  I understand it's not as simple as diverting those funds to needy kids but if people like the Koch brothers or their equivalent wanted to do actual good with that money they would push it to worthy causes.

 
The amount of money spent on politics is obscene when we have kids that go to bed hungry at night.  I understand it's not as simple as diverting those funds to needy kids but if people like the Koch brothers or their equivalent wanted to do actual good with that money they would push it to worthy causes.
It’s true about so many things in our society though. It’s getting harder to be a sports fan, particularly college. 

 
The amount of money spent on politics is obscene when we have kids that go to bed hungry at night.  I understand it's not as simple as diverting those funds to needy kids but if people like the Koch brothers or their equivalent wanted to do actual good with that money they would push it to worthy causes.
I am actually in agreement with you, but there are many that argue the political influence is a more valuable investment due to the wider reach and long lasting effects of governmental policy.  They believe it is more like curing the disease instead of just treating the symptoms.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The amount of money spent on politics is obscene when we have kids that go to bed hungry at night.  I understand it's not as simple as diverting those funds to needy kids but if people like the Koch brothers or their equivalent wanted to do actual good with that money they would push it to worthy causes.
So very true.  

 
I am actually in agreement with you, but there are many that argue the political influence is a more valuable investment due to the wider reach and long lasting effects of governmental policy.  They believe it is more like curing the disease instead of just treating the symptoms.
This is also true..but both sides differ on the disease and the cure.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am actually in agreement with you, but there are many that argue the political influence is a more valuable investment due to the wider reach and long lasting effects of governmental policy.  They believe it is more like curing the disease instead of just treating the symptoms.
That sounds great and I’m sure politicians want folks to believe that but the reality is politicians typically get little done to address social issues.  Ultimately, we collectively just don’t care enough.

 
Yeah, this is on the people who were actually advocating for exactly that.  They tried to spin it later, but the Democrats embraced some extremist views (this was originally a Black Panther slogan) without thinking about it enough and had to do damage control.  Problem was the term was out there too far to stop it, so they had to try the whole, "yeah, but that's not what we meant..." routine.  You play in the mine field of politics long enough, eventually you'll step on one.
Were there any actual Democratic politicians saying "defund the police?" I thought that was something that was a rally cry at protests on the streets. I don't believe that was a coordinated messaging campaign by the Democratic party and most of them I have heard have not used that phrase because it is obviously really bad messaging. This is part of the whole looking at sides like monoliths that is killing all reasonable discussion. Protestors on the street yelling "defund the police" = if you elect Democrats they want to defund the police. And it does seem to be a bit one-sided. I'm sure there are awful things said at conservative rallies and whatnot but I don't often see them attributed to actual Republican politicians. 

 
TripItUp said:
Very few Democrats in Congress or the Senate have called for "defunding the police" that I can think of - it has mostly been on the local level, in city counsels in places like Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Denver, or Portland.

 
I just scrolled through her feed fairly quickly.  She posted one congratulatory tweet to J&K...then went right back to attacking people.  Sigh.


AOC is passionate but dumb.  To her credit, she comes prepared and comes to fight. Early on, she blitzed her lazier opponents and just ran them over. That's not going to work anymore. She's not a good public speaker and anytime she talks about the economy, she will begin to terrify people on the national level. She'd make a better prosecutor than a career politician.

She would get torn apart in any debate cycle. To get the DNC nomination in 2024, they will have to hand it to her.

She doesn't come from old money nor political legacy, she's going to have to marry into more power.

I wouldn't let AOC even open a checking account for me. It's not because she used to be a bartender, it's because she's dumb and says dumb things. You get a limited window of opportunity in politics to impress the public and she doesn't do it consistently enough.

She's the embodiment of "The Jason Wood Principle" - If you keep screaming things at the top of your lungs, some people will be convinced you know what you are talking about, without realizing they are wrong.

 
AOC is passionate but dumb.  To her credit, she comes prepared and comes to fight. Early on, she blitzed her lazier opponents and just ran them over. That's not going to work anymore. She's not a good public speaker and anytime she talks about the economy, she will begin to terrify people on the national level. She'd make a better prosecutor than a career politician.

She would get torn apart in any debate cycle. To get the DNC nomination in 2024, they will have to hand it to her.

She doesn't come from old money nor political legacy, she's going to have to marry into more power.

I wouldn't let AOC even open a checking account for me. It's not because she used to be a bartender, it's because she's dumb and says dumb things. You get a limited window of opportunity in politics to impress the public and she doesn't do it consistently enough.

She's the embodiment of "The Jason Wood Principle" - If you keep screaming things at the top of your lungs, some people will be convinced you know what you are talking about, without realizing they are wrong.
Can you please point to the things she's said and done that make you think she's dumb, not a good public speaker, the things she has said that will terrify people about the economy, and where you think she hasn't impressed the public consistently?

 
AOC is passionate but dumb.  To her credit, she comes prepared and comes to fight. Early on, she blitzed her lazier opponents and just ran them over. That's not going to work anymore. She's not a good public speaker and anytime she talks about the economy, she will begin to terrify people on the national level. She'd make a better prosecutor than a career politician.

She would get torn apart in any debate cycle. To get the DNC nomination in 2024, they will have to hand it to her.

She doesn't come from old money nor political legacy, she's going to have to marry into more power.

I wouldn't let AOC even open a checking account for me. It's not because she used to be a bartender, it's because she's dumb and says dumb things. You get a limited window of opportunity in politics to impress the public and she doesn't do it consistently enough.

She's the embodiment of "The Jason Wood Principle" - If you keep screaming things at the top of your lungs, some people will be convinced you know what you are talking about, without realizing they are wrong.
This is misogynistic and really gross. This kind of crap doesn't belong on this forum anymore.  

 
AOC is passionate but dumb.  To her credit, she comes prepared and comes to fight. Early on, she blitzed her lazier opponents and just ran them over. That's not going to work anymore. She's not a good public speaker and anytime she talks about the economy, she will begin to terrify people on the national level. She'd make a better prosecutor than a career politician.

She would get torn apart in any debate cycle. To get the DNC nomination in 2024, they will have to hand it to her.

She doesn't come from old money nor political legacy, she's going to have to marry into more power.

I wouldn't let AOC even open a checking account for me. It's not because she used to be a bartender, it's because she's dumb and says dumb things. You get a limited window of opportunity in politics to impress the public and she doesn't do it consistently enough.

She's the embodiment of "The Jason Wood Principle" - If you keep screaming things at the top of your lungs, some people will be convinced you know what you are talking about, without realizing they are wrong.
AOC is passionate, but Trump is passionate too. Does passion on one side override passion on the other side?  That's the question.  Just because people are passionate people does not make them correct on issues.

There are 535 members of congress yet most only know a handful because of media coverage. The media is all over AOC for the same reason they are all over Trump.   Controversy gets more views, ratings and clicks. And like Trump Cortez gives them plenty to work with as they both tweet first and think later.

I don`t thing Cortez is dumb at all, she might say some dumb things but at times I think words are being put into her mouth and she just delivers them.

 
AOC is passionate but dumb.  To her credit, she comes prepared and comes to fight. Early on, she blitzed her lazier opponents and just ran them over. That's not going to work anymore. She's not a good public speaker and anytime she talks about the economy, she will begin to terrify people on the national level. She'd make a better prosecutor than a career politician.

She would get torn apart in any debate cycle. To get the DNC nomination in 2024, they will have to hand it to her.

She doesn't come from old money nor political legacy, she's going to have to marry into more power.

I wouldn't let AOC even open a checking account for me. It's not because she used to be a bartender, it's because she's dumb and says dumb things. You get a limited window of opportunity in politics to impress the public and she doesn't do it consistently enough.

She's the embodiment of "The Jason Wood Principle" - If you keep screaming things at the top of your lungs, some people will be convinced you know what you are talking about, without realizing they are wrong.
This is the opposite of a well-reasoned, fact based argument.  

 
The coalition lasted long enough to defeat Trump. It wasn’t going to survive a second longer. 
I always knew this but it wasn't until after the election I heard Kasich pontificate and realized oh yeah, the marriage of convenience is definitely over. 

I don't agree with his ideology but I respect his willingness to put country over party and am happy to go back to disagreeing with him now. 

 
That money sent to Kentucky was a total travesty. Over a 100M for a completely unwinnable race. Could have went to so many better places. 
 

Personally I think the Lincoln Project was in it for totally selfish reasons (to build a brand they could eventually profit off of), but to be fair their videos were quite good, were shared heavily, did likely influence people and probably played some role in getting trump out. 
I agree with all of this take, and dems could learn a thing or two from them. I'm glad for every ally against trump regardless of their motivation. 

I also don't think that it's a safe assumption that people who gave to the Lincoln project would have given elsewhere. I gave to a bunch of senate candidates running against republican incumbents that all lost so what do I know though? 

 
I always knew this but it wasn't until after the election I heard Kasich pontificate and realized oh yeah, the marriage of convenience is definitely over. 

I don't agree with his ideology but I respect his willingness to put country over party and am happy to go back to disagreeing with him now. 
Exactly how I feel.  I will return the favor if the Democrats ever stoop to the level we’re seeing Republicans at and start nominating incompetent reality show hosts to lead the country.  

And while I appreciate the support from the vocal anti-Trump conservatives the past few months, I don’t think many of them have owned how much they contributed to the current state of the Republican Party. Trump is a symptom, not the disease.  

 
When people made fun of her for not knowing what a garbage disposal was, a bunch of people in here pretended like they barely even knew about them so they could afll all over themselves throwing coats over puddles.

She thought the GOP changed the constitution to get FDR out of office, instead of you know, death, and again a bunch of people in here rushed to defend her.

Why would you expect people to waste their time engaging after that? 

 
When people made fun of her for not knowing what a garbage disposal was, a bunch of people in here pretended like they barely even knew about them so they could afll all over themselves throwing coats over puddles.

She thought the GOP changed the constitution to get FDR out of office, instead of you know, death, and again a bunch of people in here rushed to defend her.

Why would you expect people to waste their time engaging after that? 
Thanks for answering the question in a roundabout way.  I don’t have the entire history of the forum memorized, nor do I follow the career of AOC - and thus literally had no idea what you were referring to.   Thanks for explaining.  I Googled both references to find out more.

 
Very few Democrats in Congress or the Senate have called for "defunding the police" that I can think of - it has mostly been on the local level, in city counsels in places like Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Denver, or Portland.
I agree, I doubt defunding will happen anytime soon.   Minneapolis city council just approved hiring more police officers as violent crime is skyrocketing in the city.

 
After googling the references, do you think they support the claim that she’s dumb?
The FDR thing seems like she was modestly misinformed paired with being a bit too loose with her words.  It’s a nuanced topic, and people have chosen to ignore the nuance.  
 

No clue what to think about the garbage disposal situation.  It certainly doesn’t make her dumb.  More likely that either A) she really never had one, in which case people are making crude jokes because of her socioeconomic background, or B) she was lying and pretending to be dirt-floor-poor.   If it’s “A”, shame on folks.  If it’s “B”, shame on her.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top