Sign in to follow this  
RKoch

Big upset in the Bronx.

Recommended Posts

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28yo political newcomer, upsets Joe Crowley, out of touch corporate establishment Democrat.

This photo is from Nov. 14, 2017. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, 28, was then working as a bartender. Less than a year later, she defeated the likely next Speaker of the House, and will almost certainly be the youngest woman ever elected to Congress
 
 
 

image.jpeg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fucking outstanding.

I'm convinced we need more women in politics. Added bonus of youth and brown skin.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who don't know who she is:

She had a campaign fund of $300K, 90% of which was donations under $200. Average donation of $18. She refused to take corporate money.  Crowley's  campaign raised $3 million...90% of it was large corporate donations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Sean said:

Fucking outstanding.

I'm convinced we need more women in politics. Added bonus of youth and brown skin.

Glad you think a Vagina and brown skin are somehow indicative of a good public servant. How white of you.  

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TMSAIL said:

Glad you think a Vagina and brown skin are somehow indicative of a good public servant. How white of you.  

Fuck off.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sean said:

Fuck off.

He's just got his panties in a wad because a young energetic Latina won. No doubt the mysoginist racist would like to deport her (to PR! )

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sean said:

Fuck off.

Couldn't have said it better.  Well done.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, TMSAIL said:

Glad you think a Vagina and brown skin are somehow indicative of a good public servant. How white of you.  

If she had an R after her name and an assault weapon in hand you'd be beating off too her and calling her the future of politics.

congrats to ms ocasio-cortez, hopefully she continues to value constituents above  donors. It's a representative democracy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, TMSAIL said:

Glad you think a Vagina and brown skin are somehow indicative of a good public servant. How white of you.  

I read it as supporting diversity in a world where old white men dominate.  But then, I can read.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Sean said:

Fuck off.

You are the one that made a point of how you judge a persons ability to serve.  I judge a public servant by their positions and dedication.  Not by their genitalia and skin color.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wall Street's grip on the parties just got a tiny bit weaker.  I see that as a good thing.  She sounds as if, like Bernie, she might understand the nature of the divide in this country, that working class people have less chance of joining the middle class than middle class people have of joining the working class.  We need more people like that in DC, especially if they are not members of either of the Wall Street parties.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, RKoch said:

He's just got his panties in a wad because a young energetic Latina won. No doubt the mysoginist racist would like to deport her (to PR! )

How am I the racist?   I was pointing out that skin color should not matter. 

Well you routinely get things wrong so this is not something new. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sol Rosenberg said:

Wall Street's grip on the parties just got a tiny bit weaker.  I see that as a good thing.  She sounds as if, like Bernie, she might understand the nature of the divide in this country, that working class people have less chance to join the middle class than middle class people have of joining the working class.  We need more people like that in DC, especially if they are not members of either of the Wall Street parties.  

I agree with that, but clearly having a vagina and brown skin is required to hold those positions.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TMSAIL said:

I agree with that, but clearly having a vagina and brown skin is required to hold those positions.  

either one might help someone have a different viewpoint to bring to the debate, also good.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

either one might help someone have a different viewpoint to bring to the debate, also good.  

Help - yes

Be a requirement -  no. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good on her. Real grassroots funded campaign. I hope she does well and more follow her lead, regardless of sex, colour, ethnic background, etc.

More of that is needed everywhere in Western democracies I think.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TMSAIL said:

Help - yes

Be a requirement -  no. 

 

Who required it?  She ran as an outsider against someone joined at the waist to Wall Street.  Expect more of this, from more young candidates, some female, some brown.  If you do not feel like you are getting representation, there is an issue about which you are passionate, and there are others who feel the same way, run for office and provide the representation.  That's the way our system is supposed to work.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Who required it?  She ran as an outsider against someone joined at the waist to Wall Street.  Expect more of this, from more young candidates, some female, some brown.  If you do not feel like you are getting representation, there is an issue about which you are passionate, and there are others who feel the same way, run for office and provide the representation.  That's the way our system is supposed to work.  

It seems pretty evident that female and brown Congressperson is a threat to TM. Makes him feel inadequate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

either one might help someone have a different viewpoint to bring to the debate, also good.  

Didn't Justice Sotomayor once say something about a "wise Latina"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Who required it?  She ran as an outsider against someone joined at the waist to Wall Street.  Expect more of this, from more young candidates, some female, some brown.  If you do not feel like you are getting representation, there is an issue about which you are passionate, and there are others who feel the same way, run for office and provide the representation.  That's the way our system is supposed to work.  

Hey good for her I don’t live there so I have no reason to object or support her.  Just found it ironic that while you talked about her views and the change from the previous seat holder others felt her sex and skin color were key reasons for her being in congress  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TMSAIL said:

You are the one that made a point of how you judge a persons ability to serve.  I judge a public servant by their positions and dedication.  Not by their genitalia and skin color.  

Liar. He said he was convinced more women should serve. As they make up about 50% of the population surely they should make up about 50%of the representatives?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TMSAIL said:

I agree with that, but clearly having a vagina and brown skin is required to hold those positions.  

Ideally you'd be working for ICE right now instead of spouting off rhetoric. You could be a 'progressive' ICE boot, looking out for vaginas and brown skinned scholars amongst the seriously dangerous rapists and criminals. You've clearly missed your calling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TMSAIL said:

Help - yes

Be a requirement -  no. 

 

The only one that has claimed it is a requirement is you, dipshit.

Chief apologist for the party of old white guys...

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TMSAIL said:

Hey good for her I don’t live there so I have no reason to object or support her.  Just found it ironic that while you talked about her views and the change from the previous seat holder others felt her sex and skin color were key reasons for her being in congress  

 

Perhaps those different views and different life experiences are related to her having different skin color and genitalia than the vast majority of representatives?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, RKoch said:

She had a campaign fund of $300K, 90% of which was donations under $200. Average donation of $18. She refused to take corporate money.  Crowley's  campaign raised $3 million...90% of it was large corporate donations.

Another illustration of the Power of $peech!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sean said:

Fucking outstanding.

I'm convinced we need more women in politics. Added bonus of youth and brown skin.

Someone who is convinced we need more men in politics, especially older white ones, would be a _______________. (Fill in the blank.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

Someone who is convinced we need more men in politics, especially older white ones, would be a _______________.


 

800px_COLOURBOX17750778.thumb.jpg.9847d482362d0df6cb34b087849ee7dc.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, B.J. Porter said:

The only one that has claimed it is a requirement is you, dipshit.

Chief apologist for the party of old white guys...

You got a problem with old white guys you agest sexist  bigot?

And it Sean who advanced the idea that gender and pigmentation were political attributes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Wall Street's grip on the parties just got a tiny bit weaker.  I see that as a good thing.  She sounds as if, like Bernie, she might understand the nature of the divide in this country, that working class people have less chance of joining the middle class than middle class people have of joining the working class.  We need more people like that in DC, especially if they are not members of either of the Wall Street parties.  

It's nice when people prove the uselessness of cen$or$hip by winning despite being out$pent by 10:1, isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

It's nice when people prove the uselessness of cen$or$hip by winning despite being out$pent by 10:1, isn't it?

A very good, if inconvenient, point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nothing racist about applauding this AMERICAN WOMAN..

In oz we call it batting for the underdog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TMSAIL said:

Glad you think a Vagina and brown skin are somehow indicative of a good public servant. How white of you.  

You prefer religious, right wing, white zealots with dicks??  Says a lot about you <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

The Supreme Court is taking notice and looking for new ways to eliminate speach without $peach.   Your link is dead BTW.    There is almost nothing the court has decided in years that wasn’t a way to assure power to the highest bidder.  Just because they occasionally fail in their vendetta doesn’t make them better, just less good at being bad for America.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TMSAIL said:

Help - yes

Be a requirement -  no. 

 

Maybe it should be a requirement, the US has a large diversified culture and is poorly represented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lark said:

The Supreme Court is taking notice and looking for new ways to eliminate speach without $peach.   Your link is dead BTW.    There is almost nothing the court has decided in years that wasn’t a way to assure power to the highest bidder.  Just because they occasionally fail in their vendetta doesn’t make them better, just less good at being bad for America.  

That one should work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Perhaps those different views and different life experiences are related to her having different skin color and genitalia than the vast majority of representatives?

Imagine that???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took a look around her website. She forced the first primary in 14 years? In a place where the general election outcome is already known, the primary (if any) is the election.

Good for her on that one!

As for her economic ideas,

 

Quote

 

Alexandria endorses a Federal Jobs Guarantee, because anyone who is willing and able to work shouldn’t struggle to find employment. 


A Federal Jobs Guarantee would create a baseline quality for employments that guarantees a minimum $15 wage (pegged to inflation), full healthcare, and paid child and sick leave for all. This proposal would dramatically upgrade the quality of employment in the United States, by providing training and experience to workers while bringing much-needed public services to our communities in areas such as parks service, childcare and environmental conservation. 


Furthermore, a federal jobs guarantee program would establish a floor for wages and benefits for the nation’s workforce. This program would provide a baseline minimum wage of $15 an hour and guarantee for public workers a basic benefits package, including healthcare and childcare. By investing in our own workforce, we can lift thousands of American families out of poverty.

 

Where Alexandria talks about this: 

The Nation: Why Democrats should embrace a Federal Jobs Guarantee
Bloomberg: Leading Democrats Are Backing One of the Most Radical Economic Plans in Years

 

 

Uh oh. It gets worse. Visit the Bloomberg link.

Quote

The most detailed version of the jobs guarantee aims to draw all those people back in. It’s been developed over the years by a group of unorthodox economists who call their school of thought Modern Monetary Theory, and argue that there’s more room for deficit spending than is widely believed.

What happened to Tiki Pete anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another sign of a pissed of electorate. Trump is the result of this same movement. The Government continues to still favor a few a (both in the Trump camp and the other side) and most people are mad that they are left out. Maybe this is the start of a trend of firing professional politicians and putting in citizens who want to do something as opposed to keeping their own cushy jobs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A journalist once explained "professional politicians' this way, "The thing to remember is that as soon as someone is elected, they have achieved the best job they've ever had in their lives and will do almost anything to keep it."

That's not necessarily a bad thing as long as the voters have enough influence to concern the pol's.  Unfortunately, our population growth has placed a strain on our system of government (somewhat like Rome) by having a Congressman represent more constituents that a Senator of years ago.  A simple solution not requiring a Constitutional change would be to double the number of Congress critters, making the districts smaller and races less expensive.  It would also shift the Electoral College influence back toward population.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, RKoch said:

He's just got his panties in a wad because a young energetic Latina won. No doubt the mysoginist racist would like to deport her (to PR! )

No - he's pointing out that someone mentioned attributes that have absolutely nothing to do with her suitability for office as the reason her win was a good thing.  He's right in doing so.

Listening to her on NPR this morning - she sounds like an articulate, but, naively idealistic young woman with a drive to make improvements.  Perhaps a perspective that hasn't yet been jaded by the realities of politics will produce new ways of looking at problems, and innovative solutions.  If she wins the general, I hope she can bring about some good. 

Everybody ragging on TM because he pointed out the silliness of Sean's post that her win was good because she was female and not-white wrongly assume that TM is opposed to her because of those things.  I read nothing in his comments then or later to suggest such.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, TMSAIL said:

How am I the racist?   I was pointing out that skin color should not matter. 

Well you routinely get things wrong so this is not something new. 

Well at least you didn't try to deny being a misogynist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, RKoch said:

It seems pretty evident that female and brown Congressperson is a threat to TM. Makes him feel realize how inadequate he is.

FIFY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rum Runner said:

Just another sign of a pissed of electorate. Trump is the result of this same movement. The Government continues to still favor a few a (both in the Trump camp and the other side) and most people are mad that they are left out. Maybe this is the start of a trend of firing professional politicians and putting in citizens who want to do something as opposed to keeping their own cushy jobs.

Of course many are tired of $pecial interest politicians, and vote on the fringes.     Presuming she wins the main election I don't see her having the power to do much.   A few extreme liberals will slightly balance the many extreme conservatives.   She isn't a wall street politician yet, and may manage to keep her soul clean.   

I heard her speak on the radio this morning.   She talked in full sentences and came across as intelligent but not polished.   She didn't eloquently speak inspirational phrases while saying nothing.    She spoke from her heart, praising her opposition for his classy concession and clumsily but fairly defending her position on immigration (against ICE, shooting Mexican kids, vindictively fragmenting the families of those that dare ask us for asylum, and the militarization of the border but not against the principles of the old INS and the need to control the boarder).    She seemed refreshing compared to many we have collectively elected, including the Trump supporting far right moron that claims to speak for me.   

She also seems unqualified.   Of course the same is true of our President, many Tea Party Congressmen, some on my school board, pretty much everybody IMO.   If a candidate is qualified for Congress just because he served in the military and has a gun, this candidate should be qualified.  She worked as a bartender (people skills) and activist, but doesn't have much leadership experience that I can see.    On the other hand she graduated Boston University and MIT named an asteroid after her in recognition of a High School science project.  She achieved this  upset without a corporate sugar daddy.   Clearly she's no dummy.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
12 hours ago, RKoch said:

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28yo political newcomer, upsets Joe Crowley, out of touch corporate establishment Democrat.

This photo is from Nov. 14, 2017. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, 28, was then working as a bartender. Less than a year later, she defeated the likely next Speaker of the House, and will almost certainly be the youngest woman ever elected to Congress
 
 
 

image.jpeg

Excellent.  We need new blood on both sides of the aisles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Everybody ragging on TM because he pointed out the silliness of Sean's post that her win was good because she was female and not-white wrongly assume that TM is opposed to her because of those things.  I read nothing in his comments then or later to suggest such.  

Denying the strain of racism and sexism that runs deep in the current GOP makes you look foolish.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Denying the strain of racism and sexism that runs deep in the current GOP makes you look foolish.

That's a pretty big stretch from what I said.  

Ascribing every disagreement or difference in perspective to racism is idiocy.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

That's a pretty big stretch from what I said.  

When the GOP picks fat old white democratic men to shit on in their talking points, get back to me. I had a whole thread where a state GOP hea complained about sexism and racism directed at her personally by the party and .... the usual suspects chose to shit on Maxine Waters.

You and people like you - in your genuine belief - are being used to screen and cover for the explicit racists in the GOP. The President is a racist piece of shit. He hires explicit racists who promulgate racist policy. There's no ifs and buts about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

When the GOP picks fat old white democratic men to shit on in their talking points, get back to me. I had a whole thread where a state GOP hea complained about sexism and racism directed at her personally by the party and .... the usual suspects chose to shit on Maxine Waters.

You and people like you - in your genuine belief - are being used to screen and cover for the explicit racists in the GOP. The President is a racist piece of shit. He hires explicit racists who promulgate racist policy. There's no ifs and buts about this.

Getting back to the responses to TM - where did anything he said indicate what many in this thread were trying to hang on him?   Quote it - or admit that the collective you were projecting your own bias in your replies.  Sean could have said - "What I meant to say, and thought was implied, was that I like her message, and that she's a Hispanc She brings a fresh perspective" .    It's kinda hard to infer that from a "Fuck YOU!" 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Getting back to the responses to TM - where did anything he said indicate what many in this thread were trying to hang on him? 

In his continued defense of a President that judges people unfit based on skin color and genitalia.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Getting back to the responses to TM - where did anything he said indicate what many in this thread were trying to hang on him?   Quote it - or admit that the collective you were projecting your own bias in your replies.  Sean could have said - "What I meant to say, and thought was implied, was that I like her message, and that she's a Hispanc She brings a fresh perspective" .    It's kinda hard to infer that from a "Fuck YOU!" 

Perhaps they are just responding based on their own interpretation of what TM said.  Like TM is doing with Rep. Waters. ;)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, I find it funny that President Trump seems to think Rep. Crowley's upset has something to do with him not being "nice" to the POTUS.  Hilarious!!

Screen Shot 2018-06-27 at 2.12.20 PM.png

Something tells me she may not be any more kind to the President, and even more outspoken about her disdain for his hateful rhetoric and actions.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Dog said:

You got a problem with old white guys you agest sexist  bigot?

And it Sean who advanced the idea that gender and pigmentation were political attributes.

I'm sorry I shorted you dog. You and TMsail are tied for as the #1 apologist for the old white guy party. 

Dead even really.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, B.J. Porter said:

I'm sorry I shorted you dog. You and TMsail are tied for as the #1 apologist for the old white guy party. 

Dead even really.

Bla...bla...bla...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dog said:

Bla...bla...bla...

Kudos dog. Your bla...bla...bla... makes you look more vacuous and inept in your defense of the geriatric oldwhiteguy party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, B.J. Porter said:

I'm sorry I shorted you dog. You and TMsail are tied for as the #1 apologist for the old white guy party.

Anyone who disagrees with the hard left circlejerk in this forum is considered an "apologist" for the GOP.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Kudos dog. Your bla...bla...bla... makes you look more vacuous and inept in your defense of the geriatric oldwhiteguy party.

Bla...bla...bla...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

Anyone who disagrees with the hard left circlejerk in this forum is considered an "apologist" for the GOP.

Nope. 

Anyone who vigorously defends any slight or criticism of the Messiah, real or perceived, is labeled “apologist”. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Nope. 

Anyone who vigorously defends any slight or criticism of the Messiah, real or perceived, is labeled “apologist”. 

As is anyone who debunks factually inaccurate criticism of Trump. When it come to Trump the TDS afflicted don't appreciate inconvenient truth.

When it comes to Trump they consider believing the truth because its true to be "strange".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dog said:

 When it come to Trump the TDS afflicted don't appreciate inconvenient truth.

Trump Denial Syndrome is a damn hard thing to overcome, isn't it Dog?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly do not agree with her politics, but I do have give the young lass credit... she kicked some serious ass...  now, let see what really happens to her once she hits the mind bender known as Washington D.C.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Getting back to the responses to TM - where did anything he said indicate what many in this thread were trying to hang on him?   Quote it - or admit that the collective you were projecting your own bias in your replies.  Sean could have said - "What I meant to say, and thought was implied, was that I like her message, and that she's a Hispanc She brings a fresh perspective" .    It's kinda hard to infer that from a "Fuck YOU!" 

 

 

First of all, I did not say “fuck you”. I said “fuck off”. That was in response to his “how white of you” quip. 

I stand by my comments. I believe women bring a somewhat different perspective to life and society than men, and that women should be well represented in government. After all, the majority of Americans are women, and only a relative handful are members of Congress (19%).

I said it was a bonus that she is Latina. Her district is 50% Hispanic. 

I said it was a bonus that she is young. That’s my opinion. If you don’t like it, fuck off. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Dog said:

As is anyone who debunks factually inaccurate criticism of Trump. When it come to Trump the TDS afflicted don't appreciate inconvenient truth.

When it comes to Trump they consider believing the truth because its true to be "strange".

It is in fact "strange", as the truth from Trump is so rare, uncommon, unusual, and alien to his personality and modus operandi that it can best be defined as strange.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nacradriver said:

I certainly do not agree with her politics, but I do have give the young lass credit... she kicked some serious ass...  now, let see what really happens to her once she hits the mind bender known as Washington D.C.

She's a populist who nailed a lazy campaigner who felt entitled.

Sounds familiar.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

She's a populist who nailed a lazy campaigner who felt entitled.

Sounds familiar.

That's just about what I was going to say.  The entrenched democrat didn't even bother showing up for a debate.  Fuck that guy

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

As is anyone who debunks factually inaccurate criticism of Trump. When it come to Trump the TDS afflicted don't appreciate inconvenient truth.

When it comes to Trump they consider believing the truth because its true to be "strange".

The words Trump and Truth are mutually exclusive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Clove Hitch said:

That's just about what I was going to say.  The entrenched democrat didn't even bother showing up for a debate.  Fuck that guy

He’ll keep his pension.   Now he can go to work as a lobbyist and make some real money.    https://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/top.php?display=Zdisplay=Z

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Clove Hitch said:

That's just about what I was going to say.  The entrenched democrat didn't even bother showing up for a debate.  Fuck that guy

He just had such a Wall Street-financed war chest that he felt untouchable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Clove Hitch said:

That's just about what I was going to say.  The entrenched democrat didn't even bother showing up for a debate.  Fuck that guy

Even better, he sent a surrogate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

He just had such a Wall Street-financed war chest that he felt untouchable. 

But, did he have a charitable foundation?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The USA needs a lot more of that sort of surprise.

Get the average age in the house down from 60 or whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.quorum.us/data-driven-insights/the-115th-congress-is-among-the-oldest-in-history/175/  thanks to the tea party crazies the Republicans got some young blood a few years ago.   The democrats desperately need politicians that held real jobs in the current century.   

6423C029-96C5-439F-94D1-FD2AA6021DB7.jpeg

4017BEBF-30A9-45BE-BE19-AC9A0086DE00.jpeg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/26/2018 at 9:14 PM, TMSAIL said:

Glad you think a Vagina and brown skin are somehow indicative of a good public servant. How white of you.  

Ever been to The Bronx? Demographics there are changing. Some level of representation is possibly indicative of a good public servant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

He just had such a Wall Street-financed war chest that he felt untouchable. 

He was probably counting on ballot access laws to take her out without any need to $pend.

Much more effective at keeping incumbents in their jobs. Just gerrymander up a district in which the other half of the Duopoly can't win and then make challengers from your own half spend ridiculous amounts of time and money getting signatures before being allowed to compete.

That war chest was a paper tiger. As Eva Dent. 

Her real accomplishment here is getting on the ballot in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Sean said:

First of all, I did not say “fuck you”. I said “fuck off”. That was in response to his “how white of you” quip. 

I stand by my comments. I believe women bring a somewhat different perspective to life and society than men, and that women should be well represented in government. After all, the majority of Americans are women, and only a relative handful are members of Congress (19%).

I said it was a bonus that she is Latina. Her district is 50% Hispanic. 

I said it was a bonus that she is young. That’s my opinion. If you don’t like it, fuck off. 

You really aren't very good at this reading comprehension thing, are ya? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

You really aren't very good at this reading comprehension thing, are ya? 

Guess not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Sean said:

Guess not.

Seriously - go re-read what was said - I agree with you w/r/t her providing a fresh perspective, but, that's not what you said in your initial response. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Seriously - go re-read what was said - I agree with you w/r/t her providing a fresh perspective, but, that's not what you said in your initial response. 

Hence the “guess not” response. 

I think I was conflating a couple comments. When one is angry and out of patience, bad things can happen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sean said:

Hence the “guess not” response. 

I think I was conflating a couple comments. When one is angry and out of patience, bad things can happen. 

No worries - it's kinda the nature of the beast in here.  I think Milliken and Austin are the only regular contributors I can think of who haven't tweaked on someone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to digress from the food fight, but--

If all the new energy in the Democrats is hard left, and hard right in the Republicans, one would think there would be room for a third party to occupy the middle?   

I never hear it discussed.  Are we just too hooked on the entertainment value of divisive politics, and all the talking heads who make a living exploiting it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, nolatom said:

Sorry to digress from the food fight, but--

If all the new energy in the Democrats is hard left, and hard right in the Republicans, one would think there would be room for a third party to occupy the middle?   

I never hear it discussed.  Are we just too hooked on the entertainment value of divisive politics, and all the talking heads who make a living exploiting it?

I know a few who wish for a third party, but are hesitant to even verbally commit to one, for fear the "opposition" will gain the upper hand.

Scared into inaction.

Yay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, nolatom said:

Sorry to digress from the food fight, but--

If all the new energy in the Democrats is hard left, and hard right in the Republicans, one would think there would be room for a third party to occupy the middle?   

that "3rd party in the middle" is establishment democrats.

I get really tired of this "both partys are extreme the same way" bullshit narrative. The Republican caucus has shifted far more right than the Democrats have shifted left. A perfect example is the extinction of pro-choice Republicans in congress http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/06/pro-choice-republicans-in-congress-are-nearly-extinct.html there are 2 Senators that are prochoice in Congress; 1/3 of Republican voters surveyed are pro-choice. Name one Republican who's for a gun control position the NRA won't endorse. You can  go on listing various issues and how the Republican caucus has embraced strident hard line positions and evicted moderate members from office and eventually the party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Democrats are at most Center Right when compared to the political spectrum of most advanced nations.

The USA HAS no "left"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

that "3rd party in the middle" is establishment democrats.

I get really tired of this "both partys are extreme the same way" bullshit narrative. The Republican caucus has shifted far more right than the Democrats have shifted left. A perfect example is the extinction of pro-choice Republicans in congress http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/06/pro-choice-republicans-in-congress-are-nearly-extinct.html there are 2 Senators that are prochoice in Congress; 1/3 of Republican voters surveyed are pro-choice. Name one Republican who's for a gun control position the NRA won't endorse. You can  go on listing various issues and how the Republican caucus has embraced strident hard line positions and evicted moderate members from office and eventually the party.

The Democratic establishment has moved right over the past 30 years, since the Clintons and Al From formed the DLC and gave up union support for corporate support (primarily Wall St). IOW, both parties have moved far to the right...the GOP further right than the old John Birch Society, and the Dems in the range between Nixon and Reagan. Hillary was a Goldwater supporter, she hasn't evolved much, the landscape shifted beneath her. My current congressman, a Democrat, was formerly a conservative republican..."Chain-gang Charlie". There is a smaller gap between the parties than 50 years ago, even 40, or 30. No room for a third party between them. There is a vast space to the left of the Democratic Party, and many people there clamoring for representation, as evidenced by Bernie Sander's popularity.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In physics the term for measuring galactic movement is appropriately enough - RED shift. :D

Definite red shift in U.S. politics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, nolatom said:

Sorry to digress from the food fight, but--

If all the new energy in the Democrats is hard left, and hard right in the Republicans, one would think there would be room for a third party to occupy the middle?   

I never hear it discussed.  Are we just too hooked on the entertainment value of divisive politics, and all the talking heads who make a living exploiting it?

If we get a third party it will be formed from the center in  congress.  The two established parties have invested a lot of time and effort ensuring that incumbents keep their seats and third parties susppressed. 

We need to expand the number of representatives and move the majority out of DC into their constituencies working in a Virtual Capitol.  Right now our 435 representatives represent about 325 million people.  That's about 750 thousand per representative.  If we multiplied them by 10 (4350 representatives) they would still be representing 75,000 people.  Keep 435 of them in DC and rotate them out every year for another 435 by a non-repeating random draw reset every 6 years.

I think that would make them more responsive to their constituency and weaken the party hold and patronage in DC.  It would also drive lobbyists nuts since they wouldn't know who to deal with when they don't know who shows up in DC every year.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites