What are Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Flaws?

Making people more complacent with the Democrats does not seem more productive to me.

The goal is to pass legislation and improve people's lives.

Whose goal?

Uh, the goal of politicians? The goal of voters when they vote for politicians?

I mean, what's the point if not that?

(an hour's xpost to jaymc bcz I spent ages searching)

some unknown number of them have been seen by someone on twitter at some point; therefore speculation about their beliefs and motivation should drive all political discussion on ilx

good effort Doc

Bernie and AOC are excellent incrementalists. Katie Porter is a joy to watch at hearings; one wishes she were able to run 1,000 anti-corruption investigations at once, all on TV, and achieve justice in results from them. Elizabeth Warren is a machine politician with very good policies, whose focus on finance could have enacted real and beneficial change if she were able to set a governmental agenda. Jay Inslee is a big doofy centrist dad who happens to have an interest in legislating to keep his constituents and grandchildren alive. Bob Ferguson is a nervous pencil wearing his dad's suit, who admirably keeps suing via his office to mitigate abuses of the populace, even when the legal system is absolutely hobbled from achieving results (eg repeated $5000 fines to Facebook for violating electoral law & perverting democracy, which they then don't pay).

As I noted the other day in some other thread I can't find now, it is aggravating and existentially alarming to see that the donor-connected aspect of Democratic Party powerbroking have shown through the primaries, and aggressively ramped up last week, that they will exert their power to suppress "the tactics required to effect change in the current moment," and ostracise the young and old elected Dems that demonstrate these.

It’s self evidently not the goal of ‘politicians’ (see: GOP, Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell).

It’s most likely the goal of AOC - but the evidence is lacking that it’s the primary of motivation of ‘the Democratic Party’ or its leadership. (Again: basing that on 40+ years of history.)

In any case, I don’t know how that’s a relevant response to what we were talking about earlier re:functions.

Bernie, like AOC, seemed motivated by bettering lives. Unlike AOC (so far) he did pass a good deal of legislation. And yet he is/was loathed by a significant percentage of AOC stans... which kind of points to what I said earlier, doesn’t it?

The Democratic convention spent more time (hours and hours) each night saying "Republicans are great, we should all embrace Republican politicians and merge our attitudes with theirs" than advancing the sort of centre-progressive policies that have wide popularity among voters and can actually spark enthusiasm. (two or three seconds, I guess)

The Republican convention opened with "Democrats are literally evil and want to destroy everything you care about," and is liable to ramp up from there.

"Republicans are great, we should all embrace Republican politicians and merge our attitudes with theirs"

I don't agree with the third part. The symbolism I interpreted was: "We all hate Trump together." Then the roll call's visual symbolism spoke to the diversity of a political party that now includes everyone -- from AOC to Colin Powell -- who's not a Republican.

I spent at most 12 minutes watching the thing, though.

Not a Republican, still a war criminal.

The goal is to pass legislation and improve people's lives.

― jaymc,

This is something of a reach. The goal is more likely to be the prevention of the passing of legislation, and efforts to block the path of those with legislation on their minds

It’s self evidently not the goal of ‘politicians’ (see: GOP, Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell).

Fair point, and I almost added a qualification in my own post. But I do believe that it's the primary goal of a vast majority of Democratic politicians, even if they have often been corrupted by other incentives.

My point in bringing it up is that that's what I mean by "productive." If the goal is to pass legislation and improve people's lives (as I think it should be), then building trust and optimism in voters and maintaining diplomatic relationships with colleagues is more productive than making voters feel disillusioned and alienating colleagues.

But then you’re drawing a non-factual distinction between Bernie and AOC, following from the earlier exchange about functions?

AOC can try to pass the Green New Deal unsuccessfully for the next 20 years AND serve as the avatar of why it’s okay to give money to the party that keeps helping to defeat it.

‘Suspicious voters’ is how you get more AOCs.

You were the one who drew the distinction between Bernie and AOC and their "functions." We evidently disagree on which function is more beneficial.

I don't accept that the Green New Deal is doomed from the start. I would rather give money to the Democratic Party in the hopes that it does get passed than not give money to the party and help ensure that it definitely fails.

‘Suspicious voters’ is how you get more AOCs.

We're caught in a trap.

i'm tempted to respond, but seriously, how many times has this conversation occurred

xposts

i'm tempted to respond, but seriously, how many times has this conversation occurred

New board description plz.

xposts

She's working in the system because she sees that as most effective, and speaking out against it has weight when she is inside it; she might run for her seat as, and would probably win as, an independent in the future. It's hyperbolic to condemn her now for something she might never do.

The symbolism I interpreted was: "We all hate Trump together." Then the roll call's visual symbolism spoke to the diversity of a political party that now includes everyone

I believe there was an opening to argue that Trump has hollowed out the Republican party, that its (ostensible, for former adherents) values have been sacrificed on the altar of corruption and venality and ego - to make a case both with, and for, the Republican outreach. This opportunity seemed to be whiffed.

Arguing for old-ways bipartisanship after the changes in the other partisanry over the 12 years since Biden retired, let alone the last four years, is the biggest signal that he is not up to the job of Presidenting imo.

(I watched an hour or so on three of the four nights.)

I don't accept that the Green New Deal is doomed from the start.

that's good, because it MUST happen (or something close to it) or we're fucked, and the route to success within the existing system, in the next 20 years, is a hell of a lot more likely than the route to success under whatever milo and others are advocating for

I'm honestly confused about milo's "route to success."

If it's more productive "to remind people of how awful and useless the Democrats have been for multiple generation," what does that actually accomplish in the long term? Even if I accept that it's true, how does it help change the reality of the situation?

I want to go back to how Howard Dean was never actually popular outside the Internet but everyone acts like a goofy yelp torpedoed his campaign, tbh

xp: milo doesn't have a route to success

I don't accept that the Green New Deal is doomed from the start. I would rather give money to the Democratic Party in the hopes that it does get passed

I didn’t say that it was - I was describing a scenario where she tries to ‘pass legislation and benefit people’ while also serving the function I described earlier.

I’ve never claimed there is a guaranteed route to success? There is a route to continued failure and it’s the one that has been pursued my entire life and gets us a guy talking about shooting people in the leg in the face of national unrest at the murder of innocent black men by police.

History only ever moves in one direction, it is known

No one believes there is a "guaranteed" route to success, but I'd like to hear about a route that you think has some promise.

note to self: come up with a guaranteed route to success, sell it to people for $

If it's more productive "to remind people of how awful and useless the Democrats have been for multiple generation," what does that actually accomplish in the long term?

... I didn’t say one was more productive than the other, you did? I drew a line about why people, including ILXors, who bemoaned the politician closest to AOC ideologically think (for now, with low stakes) that she’s the best thing ever.

Yes, I said that one was more productive than the other, and you disagree and said that it wasn't.

"Making people more complacent with the Democrats does not seem more productive to me."

Anyway, I'm still waiting on your route to success.

... I disagreed with your statement that one was more productive, yeah.

You’ll have to keep waiting on that thing I’ve never claimed to possess I guess?

You should ask if I’ve stopped beating my dog next!

can somebody please beat me over the head with their opinion until i am dead

... I disagreed with your statement that one was more productive, yeah.

― Donald Trump Also Sucks, Of Course (milo z), Tuesday, August 25, 2020 2:22 PM (three minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Fine, maybe I extrapolated too much from that.

You’ll have to keep waiting on that thing I’ve never claimed to possess I guess?

― Donald Trump Also Sucks, Of Course (milo z), Tuesday, August 25, 2020 2:24 PM (one minute ago) bookmarkflaglink

Convenient!

here you go, Brad: Lana Del Rey is terrible

can somebody please beat me over the head with their opinion until i am dead

― mellon collie and the infinite bradness (BradNelson)

"Seven Wonders" rules!

in the spirit of this thread, i feel like the musical opinion that should be beaten on someone's head is probably something about radiohead or the 1975

er wait, no

i think this calls for a straight up beatles v stones discussion

Hail To The Thief really is their best album

nooooooooooo we were so close to solving something

The Blessed Madonna remix of "Levitating" is meh.

How can you say Nickelback is awful if you haven't had a quadruple-platinum album yourself?

Nickelback is better than The Strokes

Historical import aside, The Beatles were too inconsistent to be numbered among the greats and all of their albums are rife with unforgivable flaws.

(Shit, almost forgot.)

Fite me.

xxp

Lol, I see my Twitter challops truly struck a chord of sorts

lol not gonna lie, mentioning The Strokes will always make me mad

Take your anger to the next level:

Noteworthy album covers of 2020

(Sorry.)