Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thread


JohnnyU

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, jm192 said:

I think it's pretty easy to say "Look at the suffering of Puerto Rico" and show generic pictures that aren't of your grandmother's home.  "It's time for the US to act."

She went the polarizing route because that's who she is.  

This is the fallout.  She's not a saint that's getting attacked.

Which would have been met with a collective :yawn: and people saying, "So what, what's it to her? Just another bleeding heart liberal that thinks PR needs our help."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, squistion said:

Which would have been met with a collective :yawn: and people saying, "So what, what's it to her? Just another bleeding heart liberal that thinks PR needs our help."

I mean, I guess since you’ve decided you know how everyone will respond, who am I to argue?

Obviously she does not have any history of being controversial or polarizing to support my argument.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, jm192 said:

I mean, I guess since you’ve decided you know how everyone will respond, who am I to argue?

Obviously she does not have any history of being controversial or polarizing to support my argument.

Well, I guess that was a bit presumptuous. :lol: 

But, honestly, I don't think it would have gotten close to the same degree of attention if Grandma had not been mentioned - only way to know if to rerun history and this time not mention the family connection. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, squistion said:

Well, I guess that was a bit presumptuous. :lol: 

But, honestly, I don't think it would have gotten close to the same degree of attention if Grandma had not been mentioned - only way to know if to rerun history and this time not mention the family connection. 

You’re saying that using grandma helped her cause?

While we’re debating about who used grandma as a political tool?

Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, jm192 said:

You’re saying that using grandma helped her cause?

While we’re debating about who used grandma as a political tool?

Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.

Personalizing any issue helps a politician. Having a personal connection makes talking about a stance on any issue much more believable.

Edited by squistion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jamny said:

Both sides playing politics.

Shocked!

Absolutely.  I just get tired of the “Look at Republicans politicizing grandma.”

When that’s literally what AOC was doing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Max Power said:

It shows AOC isnt a leader or problem solver. She's just a complainer 

This doesn’t jibe with the facts. AOC has directly written or co-sponsored a LOT of very important bills. You can disagree with them (I do, often) but you can’t legitimately accuse her of not being a leader or problem solver. 

Edited by timschochet
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, timschochet said:

This doesn’t jibe with the facts. AOC has directly written or co-sponsored a LOT of very important bills. You can disagree with them (I do, often) but you can’t legitimately accuse her of not being a leader or problem solver. 

Facts are...

Her abuela's house needs repair

She complained and blamed Trump

Money was donated for repairs

Family declined money

She still blames Trump 

 

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Max Power said:

Facts are...

Her abuela's house needs repair

She complained and blamed Trump

Money was donated for repairs

Family declined money

She still blames Trump 

The money donated fund was a publicity stunt created just to ridicule her.

Of course the family would decline money under those circumstance.

And yes, because Trump never followed through on the funds he promised in PR relief, he still should be blamed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, squistion said:

The money donated fund was a publicity stunt created just to ridicule her.

Of course the family would decline money under those circumstance.

And yes, because Trump never followed through on the funds he promised in PR relief, he still should be blamed.

You do know part of the reason Trump denied funds was because RP wasnt giving aid to it's own people? 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, squistion said:

The money donated fund was a publicity stunt created just to ridicule her.

Of course the family would decline money under those circumstance.

And yes, because Trump never followed through on the funds he promised in PR relief, he still should be blamed.

The disconnect is thinking it was just to ridicule her. Yes, it was used as an example of a different way to help but I dont get the ridicule part. Why can't it be a helpful gesture with political motives?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, jamny said:

The disconnect is thinking it was just to ridicule her. Yes, it was used as an example of a different way to help but I dont get the ridicule part. Why can't it be a helpful gesture with political motives?

There was no serious goal in helping her, it was all a joke to mock her comments about her Grandma. 

Edited by squistion
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Max Power said:

Facts are...

Her abuela's house needs repair

She complained and blamed Trump

Money was donated for repairs

Family declined money

She still blames Trump 

 

What does any of this have to do with what I wrote? 

  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, squistion said:

And yes, because Trump never followed through on the funds he promised in PR relief, he still should be blamed.

 

Direct Headline: FBI Arrests Former Top Puerto Rico Officials In Government Corruption Scandal

Bobby Allyn July 11, 20196:13 AM ET

https://www.npr.org/2019/07/11/740596170/fbi-arrests-former-top-puerto-rico-officials-in-government-corruption-scandal

 

VIDEO: HUD Secretary Ben Carson Discusses Puerto Rico Recovery Efforts with OAN •Sep 26, 2018

As the Carolinas begin to rebuild in the aftermath of Hurricane Florence, Puerto Rico is still recovering more than a year after Hurricanes Irma and Maria. HUD Secretary Ben Carson just returned from Puerto Rico and sat down with One America's Emerald Robinson for this exclusive interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuZwHQ8Y1hY

 

******

Julia Keleher from Puerto Rico's Department Of Education was arrested for fraud by the FBI regarding Hurricane Maria relief funds.

Ángela Ávila-Marrero from Puerto Rico's Health Insurance Administration was arrested for fraud by the FBI regarding Hurricane Maria relief funds.

Dr. Ben Carson, a successful black neurosurgeon who rose from poverty to the top of his field, is extremely difficult for the radical woked out left to cancel. He's not trolling for social media engagement, he's not trying to divert all discussion in the daily media cycle upon himself, he's generally very quiet and reserved and sticks to the mundane realities on the ground.

Since the left leaning MSM can't cancel him, they just ignore him. They pretend he doesn't exist. Since the narrative can't be used, information about Puerto Rico's internal corruption would never be allowed to be fully accessible by the average American through Big Social Media, leftist news outlets and complicit left leaning Big Tech.

This is the point where you can no longer hide behind low value posting where you rob every situation of every last bit of actual context, and then you just predictably start either attacking the messenger ( in this case,  Dr. Ben Carson or myself) or the source involved ( in this case, NPR) because it's the cheapest laziest way for you to rob this community of actual diversity of opinion.

I suppose at this point, it becomes confusing for you, since the Identity Politics Playbook clearly states that the only way to burn all context the ground, for the sake of Orange Man Bad, would be to call Dr. Ben Carson a racist and/or a bigot. Yes, you'll have to call a black man, who rose from horrible conditions as a youth to become an example for his community while he gave service to the public at large and saved lives, a racist. Not because he's actually a racist, but because he's a Conservative/Republican who worked for the Trump Administration.

Waiting patiently for you to convince everyone that NPR is secretly run by a cabal of white supremacists.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, timschochet said:

What does any of this have to do with what I wrote? 

 

Direct Headline: FEMA Official Accused of Taking Bribes While Rebuilding Puerto Rico

Adrian Florido September 10, 20194:37 PM ET

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/10/759554158/former-fema-official-accused-of-taking-bribes-while-rebuilding-puerto-ricos-powe

 

*****

There is obviously a much deeper context as to why Trump and Dr. Ben Carson held back the relief funds.

In terms of actual political strategy, there is no value in holding back the funds. What do Trump and Ben Carson gain from it? They don't.

So then you'll run out of rope and say Trump is just being a jerk then ( Since attacking Ben Carson is just not going to end well for you)

Except you and many of the other wokies make it a point to remind everyone Trump is a stone cold grifter. I won't argue that Trump is a grifter. Here's the problem, a grifter's actions are always aligned to self interests and your narrative then falls apart accordingly.

Do you know why Trump held back that money? Because good business is actually the most refined form of self interest. Once any mass corruption comes forward without any oversight, then the left leaning MSM would finally dig into all of it, since it can weaponize the narrative, and then Trump would be seen as being ignorant and casually dismissive of the actual rank and file people of Puerto Rico being openly robbed by those tasked to help them. This is a case where Trump's self interest ( based on basic business strategy) actually lines up with practical oversight in how the money is used.

The left leaning MSM and the establishment Democrats were GOING TO ATTACK IN EITHER CASE. If Trump held the money back, they would say he was punishing innocent people. If he just forwarded the money without any actual practical oversight in how it would be spent to actually help real people, they would say he was careless and cruel and he was pushing innocent people with his irresponsibilty.

It can't work both ways. You can't keep calling Trump a grifter solely driven by self interest and then decide he's not when it serves Orange Man Bad better.

I should give you a little while here to sit back, dig through your Identity Politics Playbook and decide on another angle as to how to set actual diversity of thought on fire. When you make your opinions into irrefutable facts and everyone else's opinions into lies for the crime of disagreeing with you, in your own woked out mind, you've sacrificed diversity of thought on the altar of Identity Politics.

Watch it burn. Does it make you feel warm?

Edited by GordonGekko
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, timschochet said:

This doesn’t jibe with the facts. AOC has directly written or co-sponsored a LOT of very important bills. You can disagree with them (I do, often) but you can’t legitimately accuse her of not being a leader or problem solver. 

She was noted as one of the most ineffective legislators based on how many bills she sponsored had passed.  I don't know how many she's co sponsored but if they're not passing I'd say she's neither a leader or problem solver

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/4/2021 at 5:02 PM, kodycutter said:

“If we want to reduce violent crime, if we want to reduce the number of people in our jails, the answer is to stop building more of them,'” Ocasio-Cortez said during a Bronx event Thursday.   :loco:

If she’s referring to for profit jails then I would tend to agree with her.  People running for profit jails are like people running for profit hotels - they kind of don’t want them to sit empty.  It’s also been shown that those who have been jailed are more likely to commit violent crimes.

I don’t think much of AOC - she’s not in my district.  And by don’t think much of her I don’t mean I don’t think highly of her - I literally don’t think about her until this thread is bumped.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/4/2021 at 11:42 PM, parasaurolophus said:

Yes it does mean this. That shouldnt be controversial.  

Huh.  My grandfather dropped out of high school, lied about his age, and joined the army.  When we asked why, his answer was "so I could eat".  I never thought of him as a dunce.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, jm192 said:

I mean, I guess since you’ve decided you know how everyone will respond, who am I to argue?

Obviously she does not have any history of being controversial or polarizing to support my argument.

To be fair, we do know how 60-70% of current GOP members will respond to pretty much any statement, or at least we have a multiple choice menu.

A. Russia hoax!

B. Biden is senile!

C. Socialism!

D. Stop the steal!

 

Edit, I definitely missed two.  E. Nuh-uh!  F. BLM/Antifa!

Edit: To be clear, this is not all GOP members and conservatives.  It does not apply to you, @jm192, for example.  But let's face it, when we're talking about Trump, MTG, Jim Jordan, Sean Hannity, et.al., this is accurate.

Edited by Rich Conway
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

To be fair, we do know how 60-70% of current GOP members will respond to pretty much any statement, or at least we have a multiple choice menu.

A. Russia hoax!

B. Biden is senile!

C. Socialism!

D. Stop the steal!

This is a weird post considering the forum you are in.  I mean, the posters with the top post count are almost all exclusively lefties here.  

And were you not here from 2016-2020? 

For one who claims he was a conservative at one point - let's not try to be so tone deaf next time.

Edited by BladeRunner
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

This is a weird post considering the forum you are in.  I mean, the posters with the top post count are almost all exclusively lefties here.  

And were you not here from 2016-2020? 

For one who claims he was a conservative at one point - let's not try to be so tone deaf next time.

:shrug:  Your last six posts prior to this one.  I will admit that I probably should have listed one additional choice, so will do so now.

 

E. Nuh-uh!

 

28 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

Wait, are you talking about Rebekah Jones?  I can't read the article because it's behind a paywall or something. 

Fair, not one of the multiple choice options, simply a request to see an article someone else posted.

 

30 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

Wait, what?  :lol:

Dude, the guy doesn't even know what day it is.

B. Biden is senile!

 

2 hours ago, BladeRunner said:

Make no mistake - Kamala doesn't want out at all.  She's chomping at the bit.  She knows she can't win the POTUS legitimately in an election so she needs to back into it by removing Old Joe.  She can't back in if Joe is still in office so she needs to get this done and soon.

B. Biden is senile! (admittedly, one does need to read up a couple posts on this one to see the context)

 

2 hours ago, BladeRunner said:

He's literally the definition of "keep getting repeated here and eventually are accepted as gospel".  This coming from the guy who I understand used to copy/past Twitter posts all day long as if they WERE gospel?  I mean, Twitter... :doh:

The fact that he continues to deny it means he's probably figured out if he repeats HIS denial long enough it will eventually be accepted as "gospel".  The bad news for him is the everyone is on to his game so he just comes off as foolish at best.

Yup, this is definitely E, not one of the ones I originally listed.  My mistake.

 

2 hours ago, BladeRunner said:

Have you seen the current guy?  He doesn't even know what day it is or what pants even are.

I'll take the guy who doesn't have his pants on right for $1000, Alex.

B. Biden is senile!

 

2 hours ago, BladeRunner said:

That's embarrassing.  At this point, it's just elder abuse letting this guy go on any longer.

The plan to have Kamala back into POTUS needs to be moved up before the regularly scheduled time.    Whoever is running this country for now needs to act quick.  He's getting worse by the day.

B. Biden is senile!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

To be fair, we do know how 60-70% of current GOP members will respond to pretty much any statement, or at least we have a multiple choice menu.

A. Russia hoax!

B. Biden is senile!

C. Socialism!

D. Stop the steal!

You forgot

E.  BLM/Antifa

F.  Did you forget the last 4 years?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

:shrug:  Your last six posts prior to this one.  I will admit that I probably should have listed one additional choice, so will do so now.

 

E. Nuh-uh!

 

Fair, not one of the multiple choice options, simply a request to see an article someone else posted.

 

B. Biden is senile!

 

B. Biden is senile! (admittedly, one does need to read up a couple posts on this one to see the context)

 

Yup, this is definitely E, not one of the ones I originally listed.  My mistake.

 

B. Biden is senile!

 

B. Biden is senile!

 

I have ZERO idea what you were trying to prove with this post.  It has nothing to do with my response to you and seems like a knee-jerk reaction - but a knee-jerk unrelated to anything you and I were talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

I want people in Congress that try to take care of everyone's families.

I want people in congress that ensure our laws allow citizens to live freely and drive their own success.  I also want them to ensure our laws provide protections and assistance for people that are vulnerable.  I don't want congress to create laws to take care of everyone, its not the responsibility of our government to ensure everyone is taken care of like children.

  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rich Conway said:

To be fair, we do know how 60-70% of current GOP members will respond to pretty much any statement, or at least we have a multiple choice menu.

A. Russia hoax!

B. Biden is senile!

C. Socialism!

D. Stop the steal!

 

Edit, I definitely missed two.  E. Nuh-uh!  F. BLM/Antifa!

Edit: To be clear, this is not all GOP members and conservatives.  It does not apply to you, @jm192, for example.  But let's face it, when we're talking about Trump, MTG, Jim Jordan, Sean Hannity, et.al., this is accurate.

I agree with everything you said.

But in the context of the conversation with @squistion

Jim Jordan and Hannity still don't care about it.  Even with Granny being thrown in, they aren't persuaded.  I don't say this to give you a hard time, just adding the context. 

The original sticking point with @squistion was Republicans are using granny as a political tool.  I think that to some extent, so was AOC.  And Squiston even goes on to admit that using granny probably helps her get more attention.  But if you don't want granny talked about by the other side--don't use her to help your issues--even if important/family related.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, squistion said:

There was no serious goal in helping her, it was all a joke to mock her comments about her Grandma. 

Knowing nothing about how Puerto Rico handles relief money and whether or not they are deserving of more, it seems clear to me that AOC used pictures of her Abuela's house to personalize the issue and push her agenda.  She wanted more aid for all of Puerto Rico, not just her Abuela.  The gofundme was clearly ridicule, and maybe there is some humor in it, but to claim it as anything but derisive towards AOC seems willfully ignorant or naive.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, John123 said:

She was noted as one of the most ineffective legislators based on how many bills she sponsored had passed.  I don't know how many she's co sponsored but if they're not passing I'd say she's neither a leader or problem solver

Not a good measuring stick IMO, because AOC is deeply progressive and most of Congress is not. Therefore, most of the bills she sponsors are not likely to pass. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jm192 said:

I agree with everything you said.

But in the context of the conversation with @squistion

Jim Jordan and Hannity still don't care about it.  Even with Granny being thrown in, they aren't persuaded.  I don't say this to give you a hard time, just adding the context. 

The original sticking point with @squistion was Republicans are using granny as a political tool.  I think that to some extent, so was AOC.  And Squiston even goes on to admit that using granny probably helps her get more attention.  But if you don't want granny talked about by the other side--don't use her to help your issues--even if important/family related.

I'm not a huge fan of AOC.  I think most of her causes are worthwhile or at the very least, complex and worthy of real discussion.  I often don't care for the way she goes about it, though.  She's clearly a lightning rod and she knows how to grab headlines.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, quick-hands said:

I dont want a nanny state at all.   Ill take care of my own family and my community.

This is meaningless unless you unpack it. 
Do you want no Social Security? 
No Medicare? 
No police? 
No fire department? 
No roads or highways? 
No clean water supply? 
No FDA telling you what food and drugs are safe? 
 

Unless you’ve lived in a forest all this time, you’re already in a nanny state and you’ve spent your whole life in it. Who are you trying to kid? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, timschochet said:

This is meaningless unless you unpack it. 
Do you want no Social Security? 
No Medicare? 
No police? 
No fire department? 
No roads or highways? 
No clean water supply? 
No FDA telling you what food and drugs are safe? 
 

Unless you’ve lived in a forest all this time, you’re already in a nanny state and you’ve spent your whole life in it. Who are you trying to kid? 

Having clean water and roads = nanny state?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, John123 said:

She was noted as one of the most ineffective legislators based on how many bills she sponsored had passed.  I don't know how many she's co sponsored but if they're not passing I'd say she's neither a leader or problem solver

Quantity > Quality for her and her defenders 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, timschochet said:

This is meaningless unless you unpack it. 
Do you want no Social Security? Yes, please.  I wish I could have opted out when I turned 21.  I'd be much wealthier and probably looking at retirement in the very near future.
No Medicare? I don't know enough about Medicare to have an opinion on this one.
No police? LOL no.  That's a lefty thing. 
No fire department? LOL no.
No roads or highways? LOL no.  Are we really doing the "libertarians oppose police, fire departments, and roads" thing again?  You know better than that . . . 
No clean water supply? Big fan of clean water.
No FDA telling you what food and drugs are safe? The FDA is directly responsible for killing at least tens of thousands of people during the pandemic that we just got through, and that number may be off by an order of magnitude.  The FDA is much better at indirectly killing Americans than it is at keeping us safe.  The sooner it's abolished, the better.
 

Unless you’ve lived in a forest all this time, you’re already in a nanny state and you’ve spent your whole life in it. Who are you trying to kid? 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

 

Putting aside a strong disagreement about the FDA, I think you get my point- there’s no such thing as a libertarian society, and sporting a libertarian philosophy today is going to be full of inconsistencies- you like some government things, you dislike others, fine. But “nanny state” is a meaningless term. None of us “take care of our families”, or ourselves, without help from the government. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@IvanKaramazov as regards what you wrote about the FDA, it’s pretty much the same argument we’ve been having about the mainstream media. You point out flaws and use them to justify your rejection. I am making the point that, whatever the flaws, society needs an authoritative voice on food and drug safety, just as we need an authoritative voice on what happens in the news. Because in either case, the alternative is far far worse than whatever errors have been committed. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Unless you’ve lived in a forest all this time, you’re already in a nanny state and you’ve spent your whole life in it.

 

14 minutes ago, timschochet said:

But “nanny state” is a meaningless term.

Interesting that you are able to proclaim we live in a nanny state…but that the term has no meaning.  Clearly you’ve given it meaning (like clean water = nanny state)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, djmich said:

 

Interesting that you are able to proclaim we live in a nanny state…but that the term has no meaning.  Clearly you’ve given it meaning (like clean water = nanny state)

My point is that it could mean any kind of government involvement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Putting aside a strong disagreement about the FDA, I think you get my point- there’s no such thing as a libertarian society, and sporting a libertarian philosophy today is going to be full of inconsistencies- you like some government things, you dislike others, fine. But “nanny state” is a meaningless term. None of us “take care of our families”, or ourselves, without help from the government. 

There's nothing inconsistent about libertarians supporting police and roads.  That's the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, timschochet said:

Not a good measuring stick IMO, because AOC is deeply progressive and most of Congress is not. Therefore, most of the bills she sponsors are not likely to pass. 

Then don't use them as a measuring stick of her leadership and/or problem solving.  If her colleagues seriously thought they'd solve the problem they're supposed to address they'd get passed, especially considering her party controls both sides of congress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, John123 said:

Then don't use them as a measuring stick of her leadership and/or problem solving.  If her colleagues seriously thought they'd solve the problem they're supposed to address they'd get passed, especially considering her party controls both sides of congress.

AND the Executive branch as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, John123 said:

Then don't use them as a measuring stick of her leadership and/or problem solving.  If her colleagues seriously thought they'd solve the problem they're supposed to address they'd get passed, especially considering her party controls both sides of congress.

Are you suggesting that only bipartisan types and consensus builders can be defined as leaders and problem solvers? That would rule out a vast majority of politicians. 
I could accept this as a definition of a problem solver, but not a leader. A leader is anyone who prominently espouses a position that is held by a group of people. Certainly AOC is a leader among the left. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Are you suggesting that only bipartisan types and consensus builders can be defined as leaders and problem solvers? That would rule out a vast majority of politicians. 
I could accept this as a definition of a problem solver, but not a leader. A leader is anyone who prominently espouses a position that is held by a group of people. Certainly AOC is a leader among the left. 

I'm glad you finally admit it.  We've been told in this very thread by members of your own side that she's not effective, not a leader and they just don't understand why "the right" is so focused on her.

Thanks for the confirmation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BladeRunner said:

I'm glad you finally admit it.  We've been told in this very thread by members of your own side that she's not effective, not a leader and they just don't understand why "the right" is so focused on her.

Thanks for the confirmation.

No. What you’ve been told is that she’s not effective as a leader among Democrats-not yet. There is a big difference between Democrats and the left- at the moment. You and other conservatives could help us keep this difference in place if you were to get together with us traditional Democrats more often. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, timschochet said:

No. What you’ve been told is that she’s not effective as a leader among Democrats-not yet. There is a big difference between Democrats and the left- at the moment. You and other conservatives could help us keep this difference in place if you were to get together with us traditional Democrats more often. 

traditional Democrats like Joe Manchin?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BladeRunner said:

traditional Democrats like Joe Manchin?

Sure. He’s for the voting rights act, the budget, the infrastructure plan. He won’t break the filibuster to get them but he’ll vote for them when and if they come up for approval. All he needs is 10 Republicans to join him and progressives won’t get their way and the filibuster won’t be broken. Why not support this? 
 

Don’t you see that the AOC’s of the world don’t want this to happen? They don’t want Republicans to work with Democrats. They don’t want compromise! They want you conservatives to push your leaders to oppose EVERYTHING the way you’re doing now, so that they can say “see? The only way is our way!” You’re playing right into their hands. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
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.

  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
  • Create New...