What are Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Flaws?

WaPo hyping up Dem discord, or moderates stepping on rakes (or both!)?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/house-democrats-explode-in-recriminations-as-liberals-lash-out-at-moderates/2019/02/28/c3d163fe-3b87-11e9-a06c-3ec8ed509d15_story.html?utm_term=.3fe3d46d9867

this seems like the key bit:

Publicly and privately, Pelosi has urged members to treat the Republican motions as procedural feints that should be routinely ignored. “Vote no — just vote no,” she told reporters Thursday, “because the fact is, a vote yes is to give leverage to the other side.” But Hoyer and Clyburn believe that is untenable when Republicans stand ready to use those votes as political cudgels against vulnerable Democrats.

somehow Hoyer and Clyburn still not understanding that the GOP is NEVER going to give you credit for voting with them. they don't need a cudgel; regardless of which way you vote they're going to smear you as a MS-13 coddling Communist baby-killer when campaign season rolls around.

Republicans buy cudgels by the freight car load, because you can never have too many cudgels. And besides, the Republicans in the House know they have nothing else to do for two years than polish their cudgel collection.

something to keep in mind when pondering AOC's smart questioning etc - not to say she's not talented or smart, but keep in mind she actually has time to confer with staff and do research and stuff since she's not bound to the conventional donor relationships and the schedule that entails

Per the @aoc call time conversation, here is how the DCCC suggests to freshmen that they spend their time as members of Congress. (GOP is no different.) https://t.co/gIVPLErblM pic.twitter.com/DTZFp14Wim

— Ryan Grim (@ryangrim) March 1, 2019

one thing missed in the coverage btw is that she DID do a bit of what could be construed as grandstanding by connecting the dots to something local to her district and vividly meaningful to the people who elected her, talking abt the stupid huge trump golf course in the bronx. but she did it smartly and it didn't crowd out her actually questioning the person who had been called in to be questioned, which yeah she did better than anybody. just bam bam bam who else should we be calling in here to question about x, what do we need to subpoena.

i guess not grandstanding exactly, but, yknow, using a portion of her 5 mins for making a point.

Trump’s tax returns have long been a white whale for Democrats eager to determine if they can prove that the President committed tax fraud or engaged in untoward foreign dealings.

But Michael Cohen’s congressional testimony this week strengthened Democrats’ motivation for requesting them from the IRS, Democratic aides told NBC.

Cohen testified that Congress could find in Trump’s tax returns proof that the President alternately deflated the value of his assets to lower his taxes and inflated their value to insurance companies as it suited his business interests.

“Would it help for the committee to obtain federal and state tax returns from the president and his company to address that discrepancy?” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) asked Cohen at one point during his testimony before the House Oversight Committee.

“I believe so,” Cohen replied.

thanking you, aoc

God I hope she shames a few of these fools into stepping their game up. Lady shouldn’t have to be doing everything around here.

Omar is doing great: https://www.mediaite.com/online/rep-ilhan-omar-defies-democratic-leaders-by-refusing-to-recognize-venezuelas-guaido-absolutely-not/

“Well the constitution of Venezuela says that there needs to be an election called within 30 days and we’re waiting for that to happen. What we should be involved in is having diplomatic conversations and bringing people to the table and being a partner in facilitating that,” Omar said, adding “we are threatening, we are threatening intervention” and “sending humanitarian aid that is in the guise of, you know, eventually invading this country and the people of the country don’t want us there.”

When asked if she recognizes the opposition as the leader, Omar, who sits on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said, “Absolutely not.”

Apparently Bezos is trying to cancel her or something. Sounds very tedious. Hope she can handle the establishment's first concerted effort to derail her

idk if this is a flaw but i do want to know why she put out this broad vague set of aspirational guidelines for the green bill and didn't partner up with a leftist climate group to propose and promote an actual bill. why just throw out these goals and hope for someone else to figure out the legislation?

it seems really half-assed

think the goal was to move the Overton window as quickly as possible rather than come out with a detailed, concrete plan, which could take months to put together

she's only been on the job for like 2 months

there are so many NGOs out there not one of them has legislation prepared that she could back? maybe this is the secret to why the left is so ineffective bc i'm sure Cato or whoever have a stack of legislation for every topic you might want to pursue just waiting for a congressperson to champion

I do not care what the “green new deal” actually is or might be but it sure as heck is a punchy phrase and so I’m in favor of rallying people behind it. The Medicare for all bill is real but who knows what’s actually in it? Not me. Who cares

there are so many NGOs out there not one of them has legislation prepared that she could back? maybe this is the secret to why the left is so ineffective bc i'm sure Cato or whoever have a stack of legislation for every topic you might want to pursue just waiting for a congressperson to champion

― Mordy, Thursday, March 7, 2019

Ya think this version of the GOP cares about policy positions?

I'm perfectly happy with talking points for now.

why? how could it be anything other than a good thing to have actual legislation to propose + promote?

You can do both. Who knows what goes on in the bowels of congressional staff offices?

It wouldn’t not be good but it’s also not bad to not have it.

Tbh if she tied it to a specific bill, she would be expected to have all the answers about the particulars, and her or her partner would have to be "expert" all the time and opponents would be trying to trip her up with statistics & details that they would twist and fake.

Leaving it un-specific allows all kinds of different thoughts and approaches to be proposed and for input from more parties over time--anyone can get in the ring. People who are willing to do the work can make it be what they want = they will be more committed to goals that they took part in shaping. This is basic good organizing.

"she would be expected to have all the answers about the particulars, and her or her partner would have to be "expert" all the time"

this would not be a bad thing to be able to answer particulars and be an expert on the topic she wants to make a difference in

disagree, all that would happen is that she would be nitpicked to death by disingenuous pedants (see also: institutionalized sexism)

much better to have everyone freaking out about their hamburgers being banned imo

I mean we already see this so much in the counter-narrative - picking apart the tiniest details of her life so the "hypocrite" card can be played

Who knows what the answers will be? If the govt really wants to fund and support something, we could very soon be dealing with technology that we don't even know about yet. She's moving the window and also making a point that if America/Americans REALLY WANT something, it can and will happen even if it's not clear how at first. I saw a historical comparison somewhere recently (maybe AOC said it?), about how many planes were being produced per year by American industry when Pearl Harbor was attacked vs how many aircraft were produced in the years afterward--far beyond what experts had thought possible, because the country mobilized resources to do it.

this would not be a bad thing to be able to answer particulars and be an expert on the topic she wants to make a difference in

Can you think of a single politician that was successful because they proved they were an expert in a highly technical topic?

I know the right is trying to paint her as lightweight on policy. So what? Ignore them.

mordy, I found this article helpful re: your question:
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/2/23/18228142/green-new-deal-critics

i'm sure Cato or whoever have a stack of legislation for every topic you might want to pursue just waiting for a congressperson to champion

republicans dgaf about cato policy papers

that's what I said upthread. Only NRO does.

it seems really half-assed

it's a perfectly acceptable form of leadership. the legislative process already ensures that there will be a lot of inputs into the sausage that will make up the final bill. it wasn't necessary for her to replicate that entire process before making her proposal. whatever bill she put in the hopper would have come out much different in the end anyway. instead she provided a rallying point for those who were attracted by the general concept, where their numbers and enthusiasm could become visible, so that her colleagues could see the political will the voters had around this. it activated that will in very visible and persuasive ways.

yeah at this point it's less about specifics (we already know what needs to be done) and more about getting voters to recognize that we have a small window for drastic action. I like when she said something to the effect of "if you don't like the GND, then propose your own solution" - framing this as a problem that must be solved, not something that "the science is still out" on, as the GOP has done for the last 30+ years.

the other, obvious problem with an actual bill is the Senate and the President; there is essentially no chance one could get passed. moving the overton window, however, is both doable and a thing that's been done by the far right without much pushback

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/03/conservative-calls-cookie-boycott-aoc-used-girl-scout/

this (unfortunately) reminded me that apparently there's some new fever dream batshittery spreading through the right about AOC and I think campaign finance violation or something involving financial impropriety, that honestly makes me far too exhausted to even begin to learn more about. which is I guess partly how these people get their narratives to develop a foothold, through sheer spiteful relentlessness. I do know my father-in-law, who like many old conservative men is disturbingly obsessed by this young lady, was accusing her on Facebook yesterday of "making money moves" (I'm sure the Cardi echo was either completely accidental or literally stolen verbatim from some conservative site, either way it's hilarious).

I know what story you're talking about but I think it got debunked the day after

Omar is getting better every day how is this possible:

Ilhan Omar on Barack Obama. Wow:https://t.co/qzeccRujOs pic.twitter.com/dQuXleRwMS

— Blake News (@blakehounshell) March 8, 2019

even as a overton window shifting flex the AOC GND was kinda confused though (both a job Guarantee and security for those ‘not willing to work’, only 1/3 of expenditures on climate, nothing about tech/subsidy to green R&D). i don’t think it was a major fuck up or anything but ‘early draft of a policy can be vague on details of it gets the picture right’ doesn’t preclude any criticism and a lot of the proposals that have come up since improve on it without compromising on ambition

that’s great!

The Left has swallowed this misconception that corporate malfeasance is at the root of climate inaction. In truth, we have done practically nothing in the past three decades while cumulative emissions have doubled because most of us like cheap personal transport, both gasoline powered cars and air travel; like eating high on the food chain, even to the detriment of our health; like the status token of the front lawn and not having to hear our neighbors' music.

A Green New Deal focused on social justice and positive incentives will be as effective as the lavish subsidies for rooftop solar in Germany: emissions have hardly dropped since 2000. A Green New Deal (as I've seen described) might conceivably drive enabling infrastructure like nationwide HVDC transmission and electric rail, but those aren't social justice or jobs programs. To change individual behavior and achieve required emissions reductions, unnecessary fossil-powered travel or eating Western diets will have to hurt.

I favor any flavor of Green New Deal, but recognize that any political palatable to enough Democrats will be a largely symbolic gesture. Symbols are important, if only to offer psychological protection against despair, but I'll continue supporting the crushingly high carbon taxes which are the only way enough action will take place, at all levels of the economy from individual to utility, and for all kinds of emissions reductions from conservation to efficiency to replacement with renewables.

uh I'm not giving up negronis

orange peels, that's recycling

Enjoying flying for another five years, its what I say.

Meantime:

pic.twitter.com/D1U7GQdnDg

— /var/tmp/steckel (@steckel) March 9, 2019

The notion that Obama's policies were basically the same as Trump but only more polished is laughable bullshit. There's plenty to criticize with Obama. However, if your goal is a more keynesian mixed economy or anything to the left of that, the list of complaints with Trump is of clearly of another magnitude.

She's claiming there's common policy ground between them and cautioning against varnishing the past, which is healthy imho

xp You're really bad at reading.

I think one can disagree without insulting reading skills.

"Obama's policies were basically the same as Trump but only more polished" is dubious as a summary of what Omar actually said.

'perpetuating the status quo' 'fundamentally the same framework' 'his policies are bad but many of his predecessors policies also had really bad policies'

This is straight 'centrists and GOP are too similar' argument, which is a legitimate argument, especially for anyone who's political goal is building new voice left of center. It is just not an argument I agree with wrt Obama's presidency.

xxp - no, seriously, it's not a disagreement, you just seem really bad at reading comprehension.

Well explain then.

You're either too dumb to understand Omar's words or you're trolling with a bad faith reading of them. I prefer to think the best of people, so I assume you're just kind of dumb.

Anyway thanks Simon.