A 28 year old former bartender just beat virtually every megacorporation in the US for congress

[Paratus]

Best idea she has.

https://qz.com/1316082/alexandria-o...al-could-make-the-us-a-climate-change-leader/

But hardcore traditional Dems and Reps will oppose this. It's necessary, but "Don't let perfect(what is absolutely needed) stand in the way of good (Looking good with half measures to invoke catastrophy)

Well someone else gets it, so that's a small consolation.

I like it. Thanks for the link.

 

[interchange]

I don't think that given her budget it's reasonable to expect that she has the ability to flesh it out as of right now. All Interchange has said is that he is being reserved because he wants her to flesh it out and see specifics. This is because there are two options.

A. She has a desire for these things, but, no plan on how to enact them.
- This would be a problem as it would make her like every other pie in the sky politician and she is not new.

B. She has a desire and some sort of plan on how to enact them. It might be flawed, but it could give some insight on how she works and things which may be worth voting for.
- This would be good.

The problem is that because he seems to be withholding his support, you are taking it as a criticism and a slight at her. He is saying that big ideas and big promises should not be the only thing, because, that is how other bad politicians get elected. Thus, you are asking him to not be skeptical of claims without evidence because her heart is in the right place and she wants these things that might be unobtainable.

@interchange

I'm taking a lot of liberty here and if you don't mind, could you validate if I'm still on track here?

That's essentially correct. But I will say generally:
- I'm not in her district
- I lean liberal and some things that align with her campaign poster I would absolutely support, but generally I'm personally far from a socialist or progressive
- I would rather vote for someone whose policies I don't align with but think are reasonable if they show integrity, honest desire to help their community, and capacity to support healthy government function

So in those ways I could certainly get behind her except not vote for her.

 

[realibrad]

That's essentially correct. But I will say generally:
- I'm not in her district
- I lean liberal and some things that align with her campaign poster I would absolutely support, but generally I'm personally far from a socialist or progressive
- I would rather vote for someone whose policies I don't align with but think are reasonable if they show integrity, honest desire to help their community, and capacity to support healthy government function

So in those ways I could certainly get behind her except not vote for her.

That is what I figured. Okay, I'm not sure anything else I could say here would be productive. Thanks for the reply.

 

[Commodus]

That's essentially correct. But I will say generally:
- I'm not in her district
- I lean liberal and some things that align with her campaign poster I would absolutely support, but generally I'm personally far from a socialist or progressive
- I would rather vote for someone whose policies I don't align with but think are reasonable if they show integrity, honest desire to help their community, and capacity to support healthy government function

So in those ways I could certainly get behind her except not vote for her.

If it came down to her versus the current crop of Republicans, I would vote for her every time. An idealist with the right overall mindset and determination beats corrupt pragmatists.

 

[hal2kilo]

If it came down to her versus the current crop of Republicans, I would vote for her every time. An idealist with the right overall mindset and determination beats corrupt pragmatists.

I love this idea that Republicans are somehow pragmatic.

 

[realibrad]

I love this idea that Republicans are somehow pragmatic.

Well, he could mean that they try and sell themselves as such. It does not look like his statement for sure means what you think it does.

 

[Commodus]

I love this idea that Republicans are somehow pragmatic.

Pragmatic in terms of serving themselves and the companies bribing them, I mean. 😛

 

[Jhhnn]

I love this idea that Republicans are somehow pragmatic.

They're very pragmatic about the money, honey. They'll do whatever it takes to get latched onto that big right wing mega rich donor teat in the sky.

 

[Moonbeam]

You’re right, all those kids who are homeless because their parents can’t afford a place to live will really enjoy the natural splendor of the outside, haha.

Edit: it’s really sad that you’re willing to cause such enormous suffering to so many people in order to force them to live the way you think they should. They need your help and not only are you refusing to help them, you’re crushing them further while saying you’re doing them a favor.

All I am saying is that the solutions you imagine lack vision of what a real human heart desires, and that includes contact and closeness to nature, not living in a sardine can. You are like a person who would preserve tigers by keeping them in cages and feeding them intravenously with soya protein.

I propose we go down a different road than you do, what I would campaign on were I running for Congress, that we solve the miserable feeling we get looking at animals in cages by building animal parks and natural settings.

I am saying that like our young new progressive candidate under discussion here is that I dream bigger than you do, that I know better than you do what the heart desires. I want a world built on entirely different principles than the ones that currently prevail, a world built not on the logic of how a virus spreads through its host but on the science of self understanding. I want the earth to look like heaven.

This is what I call progressive.

But when we go to the polls, we vote instead for the world we feel we deserve, a world full of bars and prisons, of cages we build for ourselves in which we imagine we will feel safe.

The bias that you detected and felt motivated interchange’s caution is not that different than what I see in you here.

Only progressives will take money out of politics because only they can carry the one ring. We Hobbits cane from a world of dreams, of dreams we can’t forget.

 

[blankslate]

That's what happens when you play not to lose.

It seems like the national Dems are avoiding any big confrontations and just letting Trump beat himself. That's also how they lost 2016.

Pretty much this. We know that 2016's campaign was badly mismanaged but Dem's are not allowed to say that or the establishment shills will come out and argue against you in forums and on Twitter, Facebook, etc.

running more status quo positions in the face of Trump's fake populism has led to disaster for the DNC and yet they still oppose candidates like Alexandria Ocasi-Cortez.
Furthermore the media leaves out details.
For example almost none of the big media outlets are covering the fact that Ocasi-Cortez is a Justice Democrat and that one of the main points of that group within the Democratic party is to refuse corporate money. It's not something that big media outlets owned by corporations want to focus on I guess.

Her platform. Universal Jobs Guarantee, wonder how she plans on doing that

She is going to fight for them if she wins in November and goes to the House in 2019.
Of course centrist Dems still have such a numerical advantage that those proposals will get pushed forward.
As long as her constituency sees that Ocasi-Cortez is fighting for those proposals I'm sure the status-quo Dems will have a hard time finding someone to unseat her.
Given the absolutely abhorrent behavior of I.C.E. recently under the Trump Administration I'm pretty sure that a movement to abolish I.C.E. reinstate a less gestapo-like Immigration and Naturalization server would get surprising support.


_____________
*edited for grammar (but probably haven't caught them all)*

 

[IronWing]

That's a whole lot of taxes right there.

Works for me.

 

[Starbuck1975]

I propose we go down a different road than you do, what I would campaign on were I running for Congress, that we solve the miserable feeling we get looking at animals in cages by building animal parks and natural settings.

Even the most beautiful of animal parks still require barriers and fences to keep the predators separate from the prey. Who do you truly help if the predators forget how to hunt and the prey forget how to survive.

 

[Victorian Gray]

If she says she’ll do something knowing that she can’t I don’t think that’s very sincere, no?

There's the concern we all know and love.

 

[fskimospy]

All I am saying is that the solutions you imagine lack vision of what a real human heart desires, and that includes contact and closeness to nature, not living in a sardine can. You are like a person who would preserve tigers by keeping them in cages and feeding them intravenously with soya protein.

I propose we go down a different road than you do, what I would campaign on were I running for Congress, that we solve the miserable feeling we get looking at animals in cages by building animal parks and natural settings.

I am saying that like our young new progressive candidate under discussion here is that I dream bigger than you do, that I know better than you do what the heart desires. I want a world built on entirely different principles than the ones that currently prevail, a world built not on the logic of how a virus spreads through its host but on the science of self understanding. I want the earth to look like heaven.

This is what I call progressive.

But when we go to the polls, we vote instead for the world we feel we deserve, a world full of bars and prisons, of cages we build for ourselves in which we imagine we will feel safe.

The bias that you detected and felt motivated interchange’s caution is not that different than what I see in you here.

Only progressives will take money out of politics because only they can carry the one ring. We Hobbits cane from a world of dreams, of dreams we can’t forget.

I bet my housing plans look a lot closer to hers than yours do, haha. You're of course free to want whatever you want but you're causing immense human suffering through this position. Of course I don't know what families suffering from homelessness or on the brink of homelessness would think if you told them that you were preventing affordable housing they could live in from being built because you know the human heart really wants to be in touch with nature but I suspect they would want to punch you in the face.

What you're supporting is evil and it's hurting people. I hope you're someday able to see that.

 

[jackstar7]

Even the most beautiful of animal parks still require barriers and fences to keep the predators separate from the prey. Who do you truly help if the predators forget how to hunt and the prey forget how to survive.

Possibly it leads to a new evolution...

 

[Starbuck1975]

Possibly it leads to a new evolution...

Survival is one of the primary drivers of evolution.

 

[jackstar7]

Survival is one of the primary drivers of evolution.

And linked to that is scarcity, until it isn't.

You think things can only work one way because that's all you've ever known.

 

[Jaskalas]

If she says she’ll do something knowing that she can’t I don’t think that’s very sincere, no?

Why the “in the next session” qualifier. I think it’s reasonable to not want our politicians campaigning on lies..?

I want them to support the nation moving in the proper direction. The actual plans on "how to" will emerge once we hit critical mass and have enough supporters to actually make a difference.

First step is building support, and electing a person of her policy is how we accomplish that.

 

[Blackjack200]

The night is darkest just before the dawn.

https://twitter.com/jacobinmag/status/1012331523566112768

Are you ready for the sunrise? They're afraid of her because she fights for the people. Their anger is a good sign.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Pretty much this. We know that 2016's campaign was badly mismanaged but Dem's are not allowed to say that or the establishment shills will come out and argue against you in forums and on Twitter, Facebook, etc.

It is not that no one is allowed to say that, it is that no one knows what the hell to do about the Trump movement. By all conventional wisdom he should not have won, in fact he should have lost by a landslide. Did we see a major change in American politics or was this just a really low probability occurrence that can not be repeated? Is the stupid and petty now the votes we have to chase? Do we tailor our campaigns to the lowest common denominator and just promise free beer and call our opposite childish names instead of debating topics? Is President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho the future of politics?

The next two elections are going to be a test bed for where American politics are going. If Trump and his allies continue to win that is what we will have to do. We will become an idiocracy in truth.

 

[interchange]

Even the most beautiful of animal parks still require barriers and fences to keep the predators separate from the prey. Who do you truly help if the predators forget how to hunt and the prey forget how to survive.

Did you know that sharks kill about 6 people per year?

And that people kill over 100 million sharks per year?

Humans have truly found a way to usurp nature, and somehow we expect to maintain that position, protect nature, protect ourselves from nature, and bend nature to our will for the purpose of enjoyment.

I think a more interesting question is whether we might have longer lifespans on average if we do as @Moonbeam suggests despite undoubtedly having more deaths by animal attack.

 

[fskimospy]

It is not that no one is allowed to say that, it is that no one knows what the hell to do about the Trump movement. By all conventional wisdom he should not have won, in fact he should have lost by a landslide. Did we see a major change in American politics or was this just a really low probability occurrence that can not be repeated? Is the stupid and petty now the votes we have to chase? Do we tailor our campaigns to the lowest common denominator and just promise free beer and call our opposite childish names instead of debating topics? Is President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho the future of politics?

The lesson I took from it was that campaigns don’t mean much and partisanship is super strong. Trump got about the same percentage of the vote that Michael Dukakis got so it’s not like his campaign resonated with the American people particularly strongly.

My takeaway is that any candidate the Republicans nominate is likely to get at least around 46% of the vote, meaning that it doesn’t matter how bad a candidate you nominate, everyone has a chance.

 

[UglyCasanova]

So about Mexico paying for that wall...?
If people actually paid attention they could see that was a lie, but people still voted for him.
Apparently you can lie about pretty much everything and still get elected and praised.

I don't think democrats can rely on people's intelligence to shine through unfortunately. At least her platform is a bit more "noble" for the average person.

What Trump lies no way. What about the public opinions vs private ones. I can’t name you a single politician I trust. Their sole motivation is fund raising and re-election. Sell off the government to the highest bidder and lie your way to office, all it is. Dems are some magical form of human that’s only motivation doing good for humanity, they want money and power just as much as the Pubs. To think otherwise is incredibly naive.

 

[Jhhnn]

Pretty much this. We know that 2016's campaign was badly mismanaged but Dem's are not allowed to say that or the establishment shills will come out and argue against you in forums and on Twitter, Facebook, etc.

running more status quo positions in the face of Trump's fake populism has led to disaster for the DNC and yet they still oppose candidates like Alexandria Ocasi-Cortez.
Furthermore the media leaves out details.
For example almost none of the big media outlets are covering the fact that Ocasi-Cortez is a Justice Democrat and that one of the main points of that group within the Democratic party is to refuse corporate money. It's not something that big media outlets owned by corporations want to focus on I guess.



She is going to fight for them if she wins in November and goes to the House in 2019.
Of course centrist Dems still have such a numerical advantage that those proposals will get pushed forward.
As long as her constituency sees that Ocasi-Cortez is fighting for those proposals I'm sure the status-quo Dems will have a hard time finding someone to unseat her.
Given the absolutely abhorrent behavior of I.C.E. recently under the Trump Administration I'm pretty sure that a movement to abolish I.C.E. reinstate a less gestapo-like Immigration and Naturalization server would get surprising support.


_____________
*edited for grammar (but probably haven't caught them all)*

Just spreading the FUD between Democrats, huh? Let's not take our eye off the goal, which is to win the midterms, bigly. We can sort the rest out later.

Ocasio-Cortez looks like a winner to me & that's what we need to do- win. Here's hoping she inspires young Americans to vote.

 

[jackstar7]

What Trump lies no way. What about the public opinions vs private ones. I can’t name you a single politician I trust. Their sole motivation is fund raising and re-election. Sell off the government to the highest bidder and lie your way to office, all it is. Dems are some magical form of human that’s only motivation doing good for humanity, they want money and power just as much as the Pubs. To think otherwise is incredibly naive.

Sad cynic is sad.

Buck up! I'm sure there'll be something for you to be concerned about soon.