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 (5 Viewers)

Of course, that is why I know he would destroy her.  You don't have to worry about that however because not in a million years would she debate Ben Shapiro.
Not disputing any of that.  I am just saying that we are listening to a different podcast if you think the intent is just to "have a talk on his show" is all.   His approach isn't really the best way to get somebody to engage in a debate with you.  

 
If he really believes his ideas for the country are superior to hers and he can convince an audience of that he should run for Congress and have a chance to debate her and present his ideas for months on end. Surely a prominent right wing pundit can handle that.
Love you GB, but this is a losing argument.  He shouldn't have to rent an apartment and run for Congress to debate her, but it would be nice if he reached out to her directly without all the hoopla.

 
Not disputing any of that.  I am just saying that we are listening to a different podcast if you think the intent is just to "have a talk on his show" is all.   His approach isn't really the best way to get somebody to engage in a debate with you.  
Having her on his show to discuss political issues is what it is.  She won't do it.

 
Whatever it is it won't fly to most Americans between the two coasts and never will.  Hell, even Obama wouldn't endorse this idiot. 
Because most Americans between the coasts are morons.  The conservatives' own study on socialized healthcare concluded it would save $2T over 10 years.  Instead they run with socialized healthcare costing $32T, ignoring that it would cost $34T if we keep our current model.

 
Maybe he should host Trump. Because He’d wipe the floor with Trump even more so if he weren’t a GOP ####.

 
To me, the most significant aspect of this is that conservatives see an advantage to propping this woman up as the new face of the Democrats. As would some progressives out there. 

But I remain convinced that the majority of Democratic voters are somewhere to the right of Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. 

 
To me, the most significant aspect of this is that conservatives see an advantage to propping this woman up as the new face of the Democrats. As would some progressives out there. 

But I remain convinced that the majority of Democratic voters are somewhere to the right of Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. 
Yes most are right to the left most part of the party, not a huge leap to say you'd have to admit.

 
Yes most are right to the left most part of the party, not a huge leap to say you'd have to admit.
Oh I think her ideas (which aren’t really socialist whatever she calls herself) are going to take over the party in a few years. But not quite yet. 

 
To me, the most significant aspect of this is that conservatives see an advantage to propping this woman up as the new face of the Democrats. As would some progressives out there. 

But I remain convinced that the majority of Democratic voters are somewhere to the right of Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. 
I agree.  Any smart democrat would be somewhere to the right of Cortez.  There is no way in God's green earth the democrats can succed if they are this far left.  Americans don't want a socialist agenda for crying out loud.  If the democrats were smart they would disassociate themselves from Mrs. Cortez and come up with an agenda that appeals to the working class of middle America.  I don't think they can because of identify politics.

I'd much rather use correct terms, but socialism in the manner in which the Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez is more closely defined as compassionate capitalism or democratic socialism, similar to the very successful Nordic countries.
Do some research on those Nordic countries now ;)

 
I agree.  Any smart democrat would be somewhere to the right of Cortez.  
That’s not exactly what I wrote. 

Cortez’s two biggest issues, the ones that she is the most “socialist” about, are healthcare and education. If you don’t think we’re headed toward universal healthcare you’re dreaming. The minute we removed pre-existing conditions we were on a one way trip to eventual Medicare for all and there’s no way off. 

 
I agree.  Any smart democrat would be somewhere to the right of Cortez.  There is no way in God's green earth the democrats can succed if they are this far left.  Americans don't want a socialist agenda for crying out loud.  If the democrats were smart they would disassociate themselves from Mrs. Cortez and come up with an agenda that appeals to the working class of middle America.  I don't think they can because of identify politics.
Her agenda should appeal to working and middle class Americans.

 
Your problem, JohnnyU, is that you think Americans are going to hear the word “socialism” and always be repelled. And that’s been true for 100 years and it’s true right now. But it may be true ten years from now. Times are changing rapidly. Trump’s tariffs and tax cuts for the wealthy aren’t providing long term answers for the middle class and most people know it. 

Personally I think we’re headed for another FDR type who is going to give us SOME socialism. 

 
Her agenda should appeal to working and middle class Americans.
I don't think so.  Not only has she failed with her attempts in recent primaries (look it up), but middle America are happy with low unemployment,of 3.9, more jobs for manufacturing, and the desire for border security.   Do you really think these people are going to listen to her?

 
I don't think so.  Not only has she failed with her attempts in recent primaries (look it up), but middle America are happy with low unemployment,of 3.9, more jobs for manufacturing, and the desire for border security.   Do you really think these people are going to listen to her?
Yeah I do. Eventually. Because the unemployment numbers don’t have long term stability, because the manufacturing jobs aren’t coming back, and because “border security” is a mirage that won’t improve anybody’s life. 

 
Your problem, JohnnyU, is that you think Americans are going to hear the word “socialism” and always be repelled. And that’s been true for 100 years and it’s true right now. But it may be true ten years from now. Times are changing rapidly. Trump’s tariffs and tax cuts for the wealthy aren’t providing long term answers for the middle class and most people know it. 

Personally I think we’re headed for another FDR type who is going to give us SOME socialism. 
I think Americans see what the economy is and what Trump is doing well.  They can ignore, and will ignore the other stuff.  I don't like Trump on a lot of stuff.  I am for abortion.  I believe in evolution. However, the things i care most about such as the economy, freedom of speech, and border security outweighs all the things I don't like about Trump.   You can grill me for that all you want, but I think I speak for most Americans between the two coasts.  Until the Democratic party separates itself from identify politics and starts to appeal to most Americans, they will continue to lose ground to the Republicans. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Israelis like to build. Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage. This is not a difficult issue. #settlementsrock

-Ben Shapiro 

 
Yeah I do. Eventually. Because the unemployment numbers don’t have long term stability, because the manufacturing jobs aren’t coming back, and because “border security” is a mirage that won’t improve anybody’s life. 
I think a LOT of those jobs are coming back (Obama said they wouldn't) and the unemployment is so good, the Democrats better have more on their agenda than just Trump hate.

 
Still waiting for you to explain why he doesn’t rent a cheap apartment andrun for Congress in her district so he can debate her with actual stakes.  Any time now ...
I'm pretty sure the deadline has passed to get on the ballot. I'm also pretty sure that running for Congress is a major pain in the butt. (And it's even worse if you end up winning.)

If he wants to debate her, he should offer to debate her. If he wants to run for Congress, he should run for Congress. It can be just one or the other -- it doesn't have to be both or neither.

Of course, she's free to refuse his offer.

If they can agree to the ground rules, however, she shouldn't refuse it. It would be a worthwhile discussion. (But he should pay way more than $10K.)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm pretty sure the deadline has passed to get on the ballot. I'm also pretty sure that running for Congress is a major pain in the butt.

If he wants to debate someone, he should offer to debate her. If he wants to run for Congress, he can run for Congress. It can be just one or the other -- it doesn't have to be both or neither.

Of course, she's free to refuse his offer.

But if they can agree to the ground rules, she shouldn't refuse it. It would be a worthwhile discussion. (But he should pay way more than $10K.)
Not sure if he should pay more than the 10K, but my guess is that he would.  It doesn't matter because no way in hell she would debate Ben Shapiro. 

 
I'm pretty sure the deadline has passed to get on the ballot. I'm also pretty sure that running for Congress is a major pain in the butt. (And it's even worse if you end up winning.)

If he wants to debate her, he should offer to debate her. If he wants to run for Congress, he should run for Congress. It can be just one or the other -- it doesn't have to be both or neither.

Of course, she's free to refuse his offer.

But if they can agree to the ground rules, she shouldn't refuse it. It would be a worthwhile discussion. (But he should pay way more than $10K.)
They have different goals.  He is an entertainer who is trying to line his pockets, she seems like someone who wants to try and make life better for her constituents.  His offer of money is probably not the motivation he thinks it is for her.

 
Not sure if he should pay more than the 10K, but my guess is that he would.  It doesn't matter because no way in hell she would debate Ben Shapiro. 
I assume he's offering to debate her on his podcast and he'd sell ads. Or that he'd rent out an auditorium and sell tickets. Either way, he'd make way more than $10K doing that.

 
I'm pretty sure the deadline has passed to get on the ballot. I'm also pretty sure that running for Congress is a major pain in the butt. (And it's even worse if you end up winning.)

If he wants to debate her, he should offer to debate her. If he wants to run for Congress, he should run for Congress. It can be just one or the other -- it doesn't have to be both or neither.

Of course, she's free to refuse his offer.

But if they can agree to the ground rules, she shouldn't refuse it. It would be a worthwhile discussion. (But he should pay way more than $10K.)
I think she should charge him a 100,000 free. That way she wins regardless of outcome

 
I assume he's offering to debate her on his podcast and he'd sell ads. Or that he'd rent out an auditorium and sell tickets. Either way, he'd make way more than $10K doing that.
He also offered to donate 10K to charity to debate her for an hour.  It doesn't matter because she would never do that.  It would be political suicide. 

 
That's what I'm responding to. I'm saying the number should be much larger than $10K.
I don't know Shapiro, but I would guess that he would up that amount.  The point is she wouldn't do it.  We all know it.  Shapiro would ruin her political career. 

 
I don't think that's remotely true. I'm fairly confident that his fans would think he won the debate while her fans would think she won. And they'd both benefit from the publicity.
I think you would think differently if you actually saw a debate of these two.  She is not intellectually equipped to deal with someone like Shapiro. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
As someone else mentioned, JohnnyU coming in guns a blazing with very non-partisan tact.  Just hoping for the betterment of his fellow man.  :rolleyes:  

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top