What are Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Flaws?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (3762 of them)

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

Emperor Tonetta Ketchup (sleeve), Thursday, 7 March 2019 17:06 (five years ago) link

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

Emperor Tonetta Ketchup (sleeve), Thursday, 7 March 2019 17:07 (five years ago) link

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.

There's more Italy than necessary. (in orbit), Thursday, 7 March 2019 17:13 (five years ago) link

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.

lukas, Thursday, 7 March 2019 17:21 (five years ago) link

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

k3vin k., Thursday, 7 March 2019 17:24 (five years ago) link

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

flopson, Thursday, 7 March 2019 20:15 (five years ago) link

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

Let's have sensible centrist armageddon (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 7 March 2019 20:17 (five years ago) link

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.

A is for (Aimless), Thursday, 7 March 2019 20:40 (five years ago) link

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.

frogbs, Thursday, 7 March 2019 21:04 (five years ago) link

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

theorizing your yells (katherine), Thursday, 7 March 2019 21:08 (five years ago) link

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).

Evans on Hammond (evol j), Friday, 8 March 2019 15:28 (five years ago) link

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

frogbs, Friday, 8 March 2019 15:31 (five years ago) link

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

xyzzzz__, Friday, 8 March 2019 16:26 (five years ago) link

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

flopson, Friday, 8 March 2019 21:49 (five years ago) link

that’s great!

k3vin k., Friday, 8 March 2019 23:37 (five years ago) link

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.

contains pieces the size of a child's esophagus (Sanpaku), Friday, 8 March 2019 23:41 (five years ago) link

uh I'm not giving up negronis

Let's have sensible centrist armageddon (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 8 March 2019 23:43 (five years ago) link

orange peels, that's recycling

j., Friday, 8 March 2019 23:46 (five years ago) link

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

Meantime:

pic.twitter.com/D1U7GQdnDg

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

xyzzzz__, Saturday, 9 March 2019 13:30 (five years ago) link

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.

Van Horn Street, Sunday, 10 March 2019 00:29 (five years ago) link

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

Simon H., Sunday, 10 March 2019 01:10 (five years ago) link

xp You're really bad at reading.

Greta Van Show Feets BB (milo z), Sunday, 10 March 2019 02:11 (five years ago) link

I think one can disagree without insulting reading skills.

Van Horn Street, Sunday, 10 March 2019 02:36 (five years ago) link

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

|Restore| |Restart| |Quit| (Doctor Casino), Sunday, 10 March 2019 02:43 (five years ago) link

'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.

Van Horn Street, Sunday, 10 March 2019 02:56 (five years ago) link

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

Greta Van Show Feets BB (milo z), Sunday, 10 March 2019 03:32 (five years ago) link

Well explain then.

Van Horn Street, Sunday, 10 March 2019 04:38 (five years ago) link

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.

Greta Van Show Feets BB (milo z), Sunday, 10 March 2019 04:47 (five years ago) link

Anyway thanks Simon.

Van Horn Street, Sunday, 10 March 2019 05:20 (five years ago) link

VHS you're putting words in her mouth. She said "many of the people who came before him also had really bad policies." You have rewritten this as either "Obama's policies were basically the same as Trump's" or as "centrists and GOP are too similar," both of which are substantive tweaks to what she said, filling in an argument she COULD have been leading to, but was not unambiguously making.

I could just as easily say that in context, and common-sensically, the argument she was actually leading to was: "Trump's immigration and drone-war policy are awful, but focusing on this one guy misses that Obama got away with horrible (if in some ways different) shit in both areas, and so if we just focus on the one bad guy we're not going to arrive at a more moral policy." It doesn't require a "basically the same" construction, which imho is being flung around the Internet now as essentially a straw-quote: "she said they're basically the same, which is obviously wrong, therefore she'd a tendentious dummy." Why not just say "I don't brook any comparison of Obama and Trump's immigration and drone policies, in my view the two are so fundamentally different as to make this absurd," and then try to defend that position?

|Restore| |Restart| |Quit| (Doctor Casino), Monday, 11 March 2019 18:51 (five years ago) link

She horrified centrists on morning shows today with her remarks about FDR and racism, but, uh, the skewing of the New Deal toward Southern Democrats who needed the federal beneficence but not liberty for the black men whose votes and civil liberties they'd quashed is standard history at this point.

Let's have sensible centrist armageddon (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 11 March 2019 18:56 (five years ago) link

she seemed kinda skittish about the DSA endorsement so I figured she'd be backpedaling on this sort of talk. but I guess not so much

"Capitalism is an ideology of capital — the most important thing is the concentration of capital and to seek and maximize profit," she said during an interview at the South by Southwest conference in Austin, Texas, according to Bloomberg News.

"To me, capitalism is irredeemable," she added, arguing that capitalism's goals come at a cost to people and the environment, Bloomberg reported.

The congresswoman, who has described herself as a democratic socialist, added during her interview that "we should be scared."

"Just as there’s all this fearmongering that government is going to take over every corporation and government is going to take over every business or every form of production, we should be scared right now because corporations have taken over our government," she said.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/433394-ocasio-cortez-capitalism-is-irredeemable

Simon H., Monday, 11 March 2019 19:09 (five years ago) link

oh YES

Ok great, now talk about Reagan and:
- Iran-Contra +
- The gutting of our mental health system +
- The explosion of homelessness under his watch +
- The crack epidemic

Maybe instead of insinuating I’ve never read a book, be open to the idea that we’ve read different ones. https://t.co/aP96oCCBwm

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) March 11, 2019

Let's have sensible centrist armageddon (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 11 March 2019 19:22 (five years ago) link

Shd have led w HIV stuff bc the second tweet is also v dope

YouTube_-_funy_cats.flv (Jimmy The Mod Awaits The Return Of His Beloved), Monday, 11 March 2019 19:31 (five years ago) link

All else aside, how on earth can 'never read a book on ____/never read a book full stop' possibly function as a criticism of a politician at this point in time, how.

Goody Rickels on the Dime (Old Lunch), Monday, 11 March 2019 19:31 (five years ago) link

She needs to appear on a Killer Mike track stat

fuck the NRA (Neanderthal), Monday, 11 March 2019 19:48 (five years ago) link

i am catching that AOC fever

Fuck the NRA (ulysses), Monday, 11 March 2019 20:00 (five years ago) link

“"To me, capitalism is irredeemable," she added, arguing that capitalism's goals come at a cost to people and the environment, Bloomberg reported.”

Should I read neo-liberalism or libertarianism instead of capitalism? Because these nordic model nations still rely heavily on free market economics to achieve their desired progress.

Van Horn Street, Monday, 11 March 2019 21:48 (five years ago) link

and ethnically homogenous populations

moose; squirrel (silby), Monday, 11 March 2019 21:49 (five years ago) link

and they are also fucking up the environment

you know who deserves sitewide mod privileges? (m bison), Monday, 11 March 2019 21:49 (five years ago) link

tbf, she started that by saying "Capitalism is an ideology of capital — the most important thing is the concentration of capital and to seek and maximize profit." So it could be that she's saying is irredeemable is *that*. Back the capitalism-ism vs. capitalism discussion we were just having on one of these threads... capitalism as gospel/ideology definition, not as economic definition. I think you could think that ideology is irredeemable, and (possibly) still think that markets might be valid mechanisms for various things. But she might be taking a more radical stance than that.

|Restore| |Restart| |Quit| (Doctor Casino), Monday, 11 March 2019 22:26 (five years ago) link

Norway I get. Sweden and Denmark too?

xpost

lukas, Monday, 11 March 2019 22:34 (five years ago) link

Gotcha, and I agree with her if she is talking about the gospel of the invisible hand and profit.

Van Horn Street, Monday, 11 March 2019 22:36 (five years ago) link

That was what I took from it.

Simon H., Monday, 11 March 2019 22:37 (five years ago) link

all economically advanced countries are economically advanced bc of fucking the environment up. swe and den just do it less than most.

xxp

you know who deserves sitewide mod privileges? (m bison), Monday, 11 March 2019 22:38 (five years ago) link

and most developing/poor countries are poor despite of fucking up the environment, too :)

flopson, Tuesday, 12 March 2019 01:48 (five years ago) link

True. It’s been GOP vs. the people of the United States for almost my entire life https://t.co/4veHq1i5hh

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) March 12, 2019

So weird and refreshing to have a Democrat congressperson who actually doesn’t give a shit what the other party thinks of her

frogbs, Tuesday, 12 March 2019 02:19 (five years ago) link

and most developing/poor countries are poor despite of fucking up the environment, too :)

― flopson, Monday, March 11, 2019 8:48 PM (one hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

if we're talking GHG emissions per cap this is mostly not true

you know who deserves sitewide mod privileges? (m bison), Tuesday, 12 March 2019 03:02 (five years ago) link

if we're talking GHG emissions per cap this is mostly not true

Also not true if we're talking about historical gross GHG emissions.

Gaseous Clay (Leee), Tuesday, 12 March 2019 17:44 (five years ago) link

Ilhan Omar on the difference between Obama & Trump: "One is human, the other is not"

starting to think she may actually be better than AOC

frogbs, Tuesday, 12 March 2019 17:49 (five years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.