Current Events > AOC said shes a "team player now" and wont challenge Dem Establishment

(+) Yeah! (+)

_____Cait posted...

Literally the imperfect woman

And it's never enough for the radical left.

LightSnake posted...

This isn't just what she was doing and you know it. She was throwing herself into every primary before she was even inaugurated, supporting protesters against her colleagues and the speaker, and constantly elevating minor disputes to her twitter followers. When people addressed things with her behind closed doors, she immediately ran to social media to complain about it. This isn't just "criticizing the bad," she pissed off a lot of her colleagues and it's a little hard to say this was effective.

If you think those first two things are bad, we see politics fundamentally differently. There's nothing wrong with valid criticisms and unseating each and every person who can be unseated and replaced with someone better. They should not be immunized from that simply because they're now your colleagues. Lord knows the establishment tries to get rid of each and every progressive rep or challenge at the earliest opportunity.

And as for the "minor Twitter disputes" when you operate on a class based, public focused version of politics, you have to rely on public pressure to move leaders, not just yourself and your ability to horsetrade behind closed doors.

This is literally not what she claimed or what this says, or what she said she was going to do. She didn't take a vow to never criticize anyone or fight for what she believes, she said she'd stop pointlessly antagonizing her own party and would knock off trying to jump into every race. This wasn't criticism, other Dems were mad she tried to help primaries to get them out.

What you consider pointless antagonism was what others considered the whole thing they liked about her and why she was a breath a fresh air at the time. That she came from a working class background, won by challenging the sleepy old guard, and would continue to do so and bring that voice where it was sorely needed. Yes, doing that means criticizing colleagues and advocating to unseat them. Of course they're mad about that, that's entirely separate from whether it's the right thing to do politically, ideologically, or strategically. The people that are in Congress right now are not the best representatives of their communities authentically speaking to their values and interests. They are the ones with connections, money, familiarity with the game, and a style and ideology that puts the media, donors, and party bigwigs at ease.

Also, I've seen you make those New Deal points before and while they're technically historically accurate, they don't respond to the central point that many of our biggest moments of political change came through radical, even illegal political and economic action or the threat of it, mass movements, etc. The historical compromises thought necessary to make it happen don't change that incrementalism is not the only way. We typically get the best things when there's a threat to the system that makes the system say "let's give them X concession that was previously thought unthinkable or we risk losing the whole thing."

You never get that through playing within the system, it's strikes, boycotts, mass protests, riots, and violence that get you there.

You never get that through playing within the system, it's strikes, boycotts, mass protests, riots, and violence that get you there.

The problem is that all the old ways don't seem to work in this online era, tech has given the elite so much more power over the poor now.

legendary_zell posted...

You never get that through playing within the system, it's strikes, boycotts, mass protests, riots, and violence that get you there.

With Trump now president, expect all this to be heavily suppressed thanks to Project 2025. Is this not what radical leftists wanted when they sought to disempower the Democrats?

we are helpless and doomed but maybe one day the spoke cracks and changes it all

Zero_Destroyer posted...

we are helpless and doomed but maybe one day the spoke cracks and changes it all

Honestly, the whole thing regarding Luigi Mangione has only further solidified my view that many radical leftists will gladly cheer on attempts to topple the elite while doing absolutely nothing to help.

legendary_zell posted...

If you think those first two things are bad, we see politics fundamentally differently. There's nothing wrong with valid criticisms and unseating each and every person who can be unseated and replaced with someone better. They should not be immunized from that simply because they're now your colleagues. Lord knows the establishment tries to get rid of each and every progressive rep or challenge at the earliest opportunity.

And when you fail, your colleagues will be rightfully annoyed at you for overstepping. AOC was jumping into almost every primary she could and most of her challenges fell flat on their faces. Sorry, but you might like it and agrees with it. Her colleagues are not obliged to make her a leader.

And when was the last time Jayapal had a challenger? When a progressive rep is in, the house Dems support them fully like anyone else, so genuinely spare me the persecution complex. Bush was an insane liar who pushed toxic politics, and Bowman was an idiot who decided to alienate his own Jewish constituents and was caught being a 9/11 conspiracy theorist in New York City.

Keep the progressive challenges to the grassroots. Stop acting the ridiculous sense of entitlement where it's nothing but "we deserve to win because we're so righteous and nobody is allowed to be mad about it."

And as for the "minor Twitter disputes" when you operate on a class based, public focused version of politics, you have to rely on public pressure to move leaders, not just yourself and your ability to horsetrade behind closed doors.

Literally confidential meetings about interparty issues and AOC was tweeting about them before she was even out of the room, resulting in her colleagues being brigaded by her followers online.

Look, I'm sorry, but this level of access and demand she gives is not normal for a politician and shouldn't be the norm. It is not sane or healthy for her to ask people to care so much about her having a ranking seat on a committee.

What you consider pointless antagonism was what others considered the whole thing they liked about her and why she was a breath a fresh air at the time.

You mean a small, but vocal group of online parasocial brats and didn't translate to literally anything electorally?

That she came from a working class background, won by challenging the sleepy old guard, and would continue to do so and bring that voice where it was sorely needed.

The entitlement is ridiculous. She won one mach in a super blue district against a sclerotic incumbent and failed miserably in almost every endorsement she made. Her political instincts *sucked* for years, and then she put her eggs into the Bernie basket and failed miserably.

Yes, doing that means criticizing colleagues and advocating to unseat them. Of course they're mad about that, that's entirely separate from whether it's the right thing to do politically, ideologically, or strategically. The people that are in Congress right now are not the best representatives of their communities authentically speaking to their values and interests.

Their communities decide that, not you. And AOC's habit of supporting unserious clowns in those seats backfired hard this year.

AOC was more interested from about 2018-2021 at being a social media star than being a congressperson. That's why she did things like bring cameras to watch her join a protest at Pelosi's office. It's why she straight up lied about her speaking spot at the 2020 DNC. And she jumped into numerous races without understanding the districts and when called on supporting terrible candidates, she couldn't even come up with good reasons why. Nevermind when several of the people she championed so much turned out to be abusive louts.

They are the ones with connections, money, familiarity with the game, and a style and ideology that puts the media, donors, and party bigwigs at ease.

Yeah, and AOC and Bush throwing around how we should be defunding the police unquestionably hurt us with even minority communities. Their support comes almost entirely from parasocial online communities from people who don't even begin to represent the people we need to win back.

Also, I've seen you make those New Deal points before and while they're technically historically accurate, they don't respond to the central point that many of our biggest moments of political change came through radical, even illegal political and economic action or the threat of it, mass movements, etc.

So go start one, nobody's stopping you.

The historical compromises thought necessary to make it happen don't change that incrementalism is not the only way. We typically get the best things when there's a threat to the system that makes the system say "let's give them X concession that was previously thought unthinkable or we risk losing the whole thing."

You never get that through playing within the system, it's strikes, boycotts, mass protests, riots, and violence that get you there.

Yeah, how'd all those riots and violence work out from 2020? Oh, right, it actively killed any chance of police reform when even the GOP was signaling it had no choice but to pass something. violence is an issue the left lost on, and there's a bizarre inability to accept it.
So go organize a boycott. Except the Left's too busy yelling at people for Starbucks. Mass protests where? Riots where?

Maybe we should accept the old ways don't work so much anymore. The Left cannot accept how bad we've been set back since the 2016 election. For some reason, these same people do not grasp we are now focused on protecting the gains made and going to be making the rest up for the next, oh, 30 years.

Instead, all we hear is this obnoxious weeping over every minor slight. AOC isn't entitled to a position in leadership, and with how bad she's done to ensure she isn't getting one, she doesn't deserve it. Yeah, I get it, the revolution'd be right there if not for the big bad Democrats, heard it all before.

I'm sorry you had a parasocial investment in someone who decided she'd rather get shit done than be an obnoxious gadfly. Very sorry she decided to improve the lives of millions instead of posting Che memes online, I guess.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/4/4c4cf3d3.jpg

LightSnake posted...

Yeah, how'd all those riots and violence work out from 2020? Oh, right, it actively killed any chance of police reform when even the GOP was signaling it had no choice but to pass something. violence is an issue the left lost on, and there's a bizarre inability to accept it.
So go organize a boycott. Except the Left's too busy yelling at people for Starbucks. Mass protests where? Riots where?

Maybe we should accept the old ways don't work so much anymore. The Left cannot accept how bad we've been set back since the 2016 election. For some reason, these same people do not grasp we are now focused on protecting the gains made and going to be making the rest up for the next, oh, 30 years.

Instead, all we hear is this obnoxious weeping over every minor slight. AOC isn't entitled to a position in leadership, and with how bad she's done to ensure she isn't getting one, she doesn't deserve it. Yeah, I get it, the revolution'd be right there if not for the big bad Democrats, heard it all before.

I'm sorry you had a parasocial investment in someone who decided she'd rather get shit done than be an obnoxious gadfly. Very sorry she decided to improve the lives of millions instead of posting Che memes online, I guess.

While we're at it, a growing number of Black activists online have been expressing discontent at white radical leftists talking over them and coopting their movements for clout all while giving very little in return. In all honesty, I don't think white leftists should be overly representing movements started by racial minorities. They can join, but cannot be designed as thought leaders lest the movements end up fragmenting as a whole.

"Leftists" are simultaneously an insignificant voting bloc that should all just die while also being the single most important deciding factor in all elections.

AOC is a woman who knows how the game should be played. I refuse to let any fool slander her and Jasmine Crockett, especially not from white leftists who are still hung up on Bernie Sanders.
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/c/c3247e4f.jpg
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/a/a80162f8.jpg
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/1/146eade7.jpg

Board_hunter567 posted...

"Leftists" are simultaneously an insignificant voting bloc that should all just die while also being the single most important deciding factor in all elections.

The way I see it, leftist voters are like seasoning. As a voting base alone, they don't have much of an impact. It's only when they're paired up with a bland main dish (liberals) that they are able to truly shine together.

The problem with so many "leftists" in the country is that not only will they not vote, but they effectively campaign against moderate Democrats by shitting on them during pivotal election seasons. For the ones that do vote, they basically do more negative impact with the constant shit-talking in trying to distance themselves from anything reminiscent of status quo Democrats, or blaming organized Democratic entities for the self-fulfilling prophecies these same people are imposing on all of us. I don't want to hear a fucking thing from progressives after being such shitty team players as a whole in 2024. They have no fucking room to speak.

AOC was notably one of the most sensible figures of the progressive wing in the past election. It's a shame she's so far from the stereotype in that regard.

Yeah, and AOC and Bush throwing around how we should be defunding the police unquestionably hurt us with even minority communities. Their support comes almost entirely from parasocial online communities from people who don't even begin to represent the people we need to win back.

I am curious who you think among the democrats is in a stronger position Light Snake, both of the" Leaders", Schumer and Jeffries seem so utterly inept uninspiring clowns. The only hope is that one of the current democratic Governors can rally the party to not fall apart at this point.

The problem with the whole de-fund the police thing is that all the corruption of the police is still a issue, and is going to get worst under Trump's new term...but I agree that the democrats were idiots for acting like they were pro anarchy.

The problem is that it feels like if the democrats say ANY thing the GOP's base will twist it to be pro " Commie" or something...and of course we saw that Biden and Harris saying that the status quo is just fine made everyone hate them so, if they try and be radical they lose, if they say nothing needs to really change they lose so, its lose lose.

Further more with Facebook giving up on fact checking its going to get worst and...and that's why things feel so damn bleak right now with how totally a grip the GOP has on so much of the country at this point.

Humble_Novice posted...

The way I see it, leftist voters are like seasoning. As a voting base alone, they don't have much of an impact. It's only when they're paired up with a bland main dish (liberals) that they are able to truly shine together.

To further compound on this logic, let's try some video game examples. Think of liberals as green herbs and leftists as red herbs. The red herbs have little to no effect on their own and only truly matter when combined with green herbs to create a potent healing mixture.

The problem is the online left are more concerned with ideological and aesthetic purity than they are in actually getting shit done.

Metal_Gear_Raxis posted...

The problem is the online left are more concerned with ideological and aesthetic purity than they are in actually getting shit done.

And that's a problem we're going to need to deal with somehow. The best thing we can do for now is just make them look delusional and out of touch to normies.

Humble_Novice posted...

And that's a problem we're going to need to deal with somehow. The best thing we can do for now is just make them look delusional and out of touch to normies.

You mean make the left look the same as the Democrats? I'm sure this approach along with blind support will reverse the party's fortunes

Necronmon posted...

Further more with Facebook giving up on fact checking its going to get worst and...and that's why things feel so damn bleak right now with how totally a grip the GOP has on so much of the country at this point.

If it makes you feel any better the rise of the far right is a global phenomenon and was pretty much inevitable.

Don't ask me why. Some think it could be wealth inequality reaching a boiling point, others say it could be due to heightened cultural barriers as immigration alters a population's make up. There are those who believe it could be due to growing apathy in regards to democracy as voices are left unanswered with change coming slowly, if at all. There's also an intriguing theory where social media systematically steers us towards sensationalist stories from major news outlets and independents alike for engagement and/or to push an agenda.

Personally, my money's due to a radical leftist on Twitter with their tweet that was critical of the liberal currently in office. Had they just not tweeted that everything would've been fine, forever, because everything was going great and would have continued to do so.

Again, global phenomenon. One that was observable long before 2024. Totally unexplainable except for in the US where it was probably Muslims or leftists or something. Not anything that could have been seen coming from a mile away but was dismissed entirely.

There's no hope. Leftists and Progressives despise the Democrats and after this election they're straight up done supporting any establishment pro corporate Democrat and will actively push for third party candidates or stop voting all together while at the same time rallying against Democrats in elections, which they have every right to do in a democracy as they do not want to be the same lockstep united in shit group the Republicans are, however, reality isn't as generous, those lock step fuckers because of their unity won everything, they're committed in their hatred, their ignorance and their self interests, how do you fight a giant like that in reality where unity is victory and fractured ideals, values and opinions are defeat? E.D.'s would tell you these people need to get over themselves and support them just as much if not more than the Republican base does their own where as the people themselves want establishment democrats fucking gone from politics so they can take over and they should be supporting them in lockstep, so when these sides keep clashing, keep building resentment, keep building antagonism among themselves they're never gonna unite and win, life isn't like those stories where the people of different backgrounds, values and desires come together for a greater good, this and I guess twenty sixteen election also showed that. Yet, we live in a world where people want easy solutions to difficult problems and only one side is morally bankrupt to say they can do that regardless of evidences and facts proving contradictory yet it works.

Its probably the best path to greater influence, but Im a little sad to see her turn away from trying to change the party through electoral means.

She quite rightly scared establishment Democrats after she beat Crowley and used that fear of young charismatic primary challengers like her to push the party in a better policy direction. Without that fear, the party platform will likely be much worse and less compelling to average voters.

tremain07 posted...

Leftists and Progressives despise the Democrats and after this election they're straight up done supporting any establishment pro corporate Democrat and will actively push for third party candidates or stop voting all together while at the same time rallying against Democrats in elections

You'd think California flipped red or something. You'd think that the swing states were lost by significantly less Democrats voting as opposed to significantly more Republicans voting. You'd think what online "leftists" say into the void has any impact on who rural counties ended up voting for. You'd think a lot of things when looking for a convenient, comforting scapegoat that was definitely your own idea.

This really bites

The way I see it, both "leftists" and "liberals" suffer from the same problems: too eager to throw the other side under the bus when they don't get their way, with both sides primarily consisting of white people who (if I'm being honest) have much lower stakes in any given election than their marginalized allies.

Liberals have too much vindictiveness and spite; leftists are too ideologically rigid (and tbh, I feel like many of them don't really care about leftism at all beyond being a way to feel morally superior to racist assholes).

Im a little concerned that no one has mentioned that what the twitter poster said doesnt quite match the actual quote.

LightSnake posted...

And when you fail, your colleagues will be rightfully annoyed at you for overstepping. AOC was jumping into almost every primary she could and most of her challenges fell flat on their faces. Sorry, but you might like it and agrees with it. Her colleagues are not obliged to make her a leader.

They can be mad all they want. If she failed at supporting challengers, that could be because she picked bad candidates or because it's extremely hard to unseat an incumbent without a serious scandal considering all the advantages they have. No one said they were obliged to make her a leader. But they also shouldn't decline to elevate one of their very best communicators because they're salty.

And when was the last time Jayapal had a challenger? When a progressive rep is in, the house Dems support them fully like anyone else, so genuinely spare me the persecution complex. Bush was an insane liar who pushed toxic politics, and Bowman was an idiot who decided to alienate his own Jewish constituents and was caught being a 9/11 conspiracy theorist in New York City.

But they do whatever they can to keep them from getting in in the first place whenever there's any other option, good or bad. And there's far more protection for fuckups by moderates than there is by progressives. The party loves to have Sister Soulja moments of throwing progressives to the dogs at the first criticism. I'm not advocating for kid gloves for the left wing of the party, I'm advocating for high standards for everyone. If Democrats did not play favorites, Henry Cuellar wouldn't be in the chamber voting for trans bans. He'd be in jail and they'd have Cisneros, a new rising star. But they didn't want that. That's the problem.

Keep the progressive challenges to the grassroots. Stop acting the ridiculous sense of entitlement where it's nothing but "we deserve to win because we're so righteous and nobody is allowed to be mad about it."

Yes, the people who are better should win. I'm not going to apologize for thinking that. It won't be automatic, but it should happen wherever remotely possible. People can be mad all they want, but it's a character flaw for them to do so or to block progress because of it.

The rest of your post is just a fundamental disagreement about what type of politics we should have and what is good. I just find it weird that you're claiming her and praising her now that she's promising to toe the line when from that post, you hated every fucking thing about her before, from her strategy, to her policies, to her methods of communication.

You'd only support her after she changed all of those things, either you're denying that she's doing those things or don't understand why people would be mad about a politician promising to change all the things that made her different?

legendary_zell posted...

The rest of your post is just a fundamental disagreement about what type of politics we should have and what is good. I just find it weird that you're claiming her and praising her now that she's promising to toe the line when from that post, you hated every fucking thing about her before, from her strategy, to her policies, to her methods of communication.

You'd only support her after she changed all of those things, either you're denying that she's doing those things or don't understand why people would be mad about a politician promising to change all the things that made her different?

Humble and LightSnake are only a little less factional than the GOP these days. They have (correctly) condemned progressives for things that they've overlooked in more establishment Dems and ignored legitimate criticisms potentially to the point of ruin.

Its AOC

Shes playing the long game. She hasnt tucked tail.

Dem establishment is what got us stuck with Biden running under the very last moment

dont do this AOC

legendary_zell posted...

They can be mad all they want. If she failed at supporting challengers, that could be because she picked bad candidates or because it's extremely hard to unseat an incumbent without a serious scandal considering all the advantages they have. No one said they were obliged to make her a leader. But they also shouldn't decline to elevate one of their very best communicators because they're salty.

Is she a great communicator or does she say things you agree with? Those are different things when she keeps stepping on rakes. Like, remember this?
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/505307-ocasio-cortez-dismisses-proposed-1b-cut-defunding-police-means-defunding/
This is an albatross around our necks. It's still there and frankly, she and Bush own it.

Maybe the best communicator could've been better at communicating with her colleagues instead of treating them like the adversary to be overcome while her idiot chief of staff was picking fights with everyone. What this comes down to is you think AOC should have different rules, be allowed to do whatever she wants and nobody should be able to get mad at her for it.

But they do whatever they can to keep them from getting in in the first place whenever there's any other option, good or bad. And there's far more protection for fuckups by moderates than there is by progressives. The party loves to have Sister Soulja moments of throwing progressives to the dogs at the first criticism. I'm not advocating for kid gloves for the left wing of the party, I'm advocating for high standards for everyone. If Democrats did not play favorites, Henry Cuellar wouldn't be in the chamber voting for trans bans. He'd be in jail and they'd have Cisneros, a new rising star. But they didn't want that. That's the problem.

Maybe more progressives should stop being publicly toxic? Sistah Souljah literally said Black people should murder more White people, Bill Clinton called it out as toxic and it was framed as some great portrayal despite the Rainbow Coalition knowingly hosting such a toxic activist to begin with. In 2020, Biden won in part because he didn't give a shit what the online thought.

And supporting incumbents means supporting people you may have disagreements with. Yeah, Cuellar sucks. Beating him was Cisneros' job, and she failed. I'm sure plenty Dems were privately rooting for Cisneros, but it goes back to when Ro Khanna planned a primary and asked Pelosi to at least be neutral. She refused, but told him to go for it. Khanna still won. If Cisneros couldn't beat Cuellar, that's on her.

Yes, the people who are better should win. I'm not going to apologize for thinking that. It won't be automatic, but it should happen wherever remotely possible. People can be mad all they want, but it's a character flaw for them to do so or to block progress because of it.

Swapping Eliot Engel for Jamal Bowman and William Lacy Clay were downgrades and we can admit that now. Now they're out of congress, replaced in Bush's case by a much better rep. Dan Lipinski losing was lso a good thing.

Nobody is 'blocking progress' because they're not elevating AOC to leadership either. She got lots of policy in through Biden by playing smarter politics. She's just not being handed top seat she hasn't earned. And when the party kept giving her rare honors for a freshman congressperson and she kept winking to her twitter followers these were insults, it just follows they're not going to be so eager in the future.

Again, this just comes down to "AOC can do watever she wants because she has good politics!"

The rest of your post is just a fundamental disagreement about what type of politics we should have and what is good. I just find it weird that you're claiming her and praising her now that she's promising to toe the line when from that post, you hated every fucking thing about her before, from her strategy, to her policies, to her methods of communication.

I mean, comparing how ineffective she was in the past to how much more effective she was after is pretty eye opening. She decided early on she wanted to be an influencer more than a congresspeson and, well, that backfired.

What she never understood is not every district shared her values and being ultra progressive isn't a key to victory. After about the 8th rake, it got a little tiresome. And yeah, she really does own that now we're saddled with "Dems are soft on crime and want the police defunded."

You'd only support her after she changed all of those things, either you're denying that she's doing those things or don't understand why people would be mad about a politician promising to change all the things that made her different?

I mean, setting aside that she didn't say what Fancy Boi is saying she's saying, and AGAIN why does this asshole have a voice after he put rape survivors through hell in a hare brained scheme to swap Biden with Bernie by elevating a complete con artist, maybe there should be a discussion of enjoying gadfly aesthetics over actual progress?

Necronmon posted...

I am curious who you think among the democrats is in a stronger position Light Snake, both of the" Leaders", Schumer and Jeffries seem so utterly inept uninspiring clowns. The only hope is that one of the current democratic Governors can rally the party to not fall apart at this point.

I mean, Schumer is a shitty majority leader for a wartime who's made a lot of unforced errors. Quite frankly, I think Sheldon Whitehouse would be a better choice for majority leader at this juncture, who showed a willingness to fight the GOP on judges and actively made an attempt to before Schumer and Durbin shut him down.

Jeffries, it's harder to say because he's not really had a shot at Speaker yet. But if the pendulum could swing back to Democrats only 5 years after 9/11, no one is ever permanently winning politics. Frankly, 2016 looked more dire and there was no real one leader then either.

I'd like to see more from Pritzker, Shapiro, Whitmer and Inslee at this point.

The problem with the whole de-fund the police thing is that all the corruption of the police is still a issue, and is going to get worst under Trump's new term...but I agree that the democrats were idiots for acting like they were pro anarchy.

Yeah, I agree police corruption is an issue and the cops are more an organized cartel. The problem is "Defund The Police" is agonizingly unpopular even in minority communities and the crime stance is having huge benefits for the GOP. In 2020, there seemed to be a chance to pass a major police reform bill. Even Trump signaled he was open to it. The riots sucked the air out of that, and even things activist groups had been asking for, for years, were dismissed as insufficient. Even places that did cut police budgets were quietly reversing that when crime went up.

The problem is that it feels like if the democrats say ANY thing the GOP's base will twist it to be pro " Commie" or something...and of course we saw that Biden and Harris saying that the status quo is just fine made everyone hate them so, if they try and be radical they lose, if they say nothing needs to really change they lose so, its lose lose.

Sometimes, there are factors you can't overcome. Inflation was a global trend. But nobody bought biden was a commie in 2020, let's be real. He just held the bag for a recovery and was incredibly old an slower than before. He was also the one guy to say "defunding the police is stupid and I won't do it," and atively kept it from sticking to him.

Further more with Facebook giving up on fact checking its going to get worst and...and that's why things feel so damn bleak right now with how totally a grip the GOP has on so much of the country at this point.

Yeah, that's gonna suck because social media is...gonna be an issue ahead. And Gen Z's brains are fucking cooked by a propaganda app

Ooooooranges posted...

With the recent losses progressives took in Dem primaries, I think she realized that the progressive wing isn't about to take over the party soon. The only way to make a difference is going to be to build bridges within the party so she can become more powerful.

It's as simple as this, and I wish more of you would see that. Progressivism isn't winning because the Overton window has shifted so far right, and the left keeps losing.

LightSnake posted...

Biden's Infrastructure Act was using huge parts of her policy as a checklist, seems she achieved more as a team player than a gadfly.

You are talking to a wall when it comes to the all or nothing people.

Certain people care more about virtue signalling than actually getting shit done. To them, anything AOC got done "doesn't count" because she didn't magically establish everything they wanted.

She's barely challenged anything. One thing I gotta give MAGA, they go hard on getting what they want.

There is obviously going to be a difference between the dynamics of a very narrowly defined, homogenous party like the Republicans and a big tent coalition part like the Democrats.

For example its composed of groups that are generally aligned but have areas of contention.

asdf8562 posted...

You are talking to a wall when it comes to the all or nothing people.

Certain people care more about virtue signalling than actually getting shit done. To them, anything AOC got done "doesn't count" because she didn't magically establish everything they wanted.

One can believe that AOC was within her rights to be a social media influencer who jumped about the country to support every primary she could before she was even inaugurated and to openly direct protests at her colleagues while constantly giving interviews talking how much her colleagues sucked. I mean, she had the right to.

But when the strategy didn't have the intended results, to expect her to be rewarded for it is just absurdity when the strategy again, failed. AOC is gonna need to put in the work to build the rapport necessary for these positions and repair trust. Keep in mind that Jeffries made an attempt to reach out and include her in the caucus more than Pelosi did, and she thought it was a great idea to run to the media and instantly complain how mean Pelosi had been to her. Her great political instincts have mostly been the product of hype.

Guys, we are literally like 20 years away from any real progress in this country. Not until the entire older generation is dead and gone and not voting will things ever get better.

Y'all need to have some faith in ya girl.

We know what kind of a person she is.

Let her cook.

SilvosForever posted...

Guys, we are literally like 20 years away from any real progress in this country. Not until the entire older generation is dead and gone and not voting will things ever get better.

Quite honestly, you need to look at Gen Z. "The Youth Will Save Us" is a theory that's dead and gone. Tik Tok has legit cooked millions of brains in really unnerving ways. Young men sided with Trump because they "feel bad" about being men and don't want to. Young conservatives ae even more viciously and rabidly Nazi than the old guard.

The youth isn't gonna save us.

The Dems are starting to close ranks. Even Suozzi voted to uphold trans rights in sports.

Just a matter of time before she starts telling people she Fiscally Conservative but Socially Liberal.

she did not say what the opening post or the tweet said she did

AceMos posted...

she did not say what the opening post or the tweet said she did

Nathan Robinson, who was caught coaching a witness to change his story to better smear a man of rape, isn't a credible reporter you say?

LightSnake posted...

Nathan Robinson, who was caught coaching a witness to change his story to better smear a man of rape, isn't a credible reporter you say?

you where just fucking defending the stance she did not even take

all because you want to shit on progressives

Holy putting words in people's mouths.

LightSnake posted...

Quite honestly, you need to look at Gen Z. "The Youth Will Save Us" is a theory that's dead and gone. Tik Tok has legit cooked millions of brains in really unnerving ways. Young men sided with Trump because they "feel bad" about being men and don't want to. Young conservatives ae even more viciously and rabidly Nazi than the old guard.

The youth isn't gonna save us.

Yeah I work with more zoomers now unfortunately and by and large they are already bigots or deluded or otherwise completely ignorant of what is going in anywhere.

AOC is right

yall are way too hard on zoomers. in the words of John Conner

"We need to be a little more constructive here, okay?"

Ironic to see which posters in this topic are claiming that Gen Zs brains are cooked