Sanders surrogate AOC claims the Democratic Party "is a center or center-conservative party"

[highplainsdem]

Video at the link:


https://www.mediaite.com/politics/aoc-democratic-party-is-not-a-left-party-its-a-center-conservative-party/

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) claimed the Democratic Party is a “center or center-conservative party,” and “not a left party,” during a discussion at MLK Now 2020, Monday, to commemorate Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

“I wanted to go back to what you said about our ‘left party’. We don’t have a left party in the United States,” declared Ocasio-Cortez. “The Democratic Party is not a left party. The Democratic Party is a center or center-conservative party.”

“We can’t even get a floor vote on Medicare For All. Not even a floor vote that gets voted down. We can’t even get a vote on it. So this is not a left party,” she continued, adding, “There are left members inside the Democratic Party that are working to try to make that shift happen.”

“But you’re right, it does convey a certain sentiment about true believers, and there are a lot of true believers in that we can capitalism our way out of poverty in the Democratic Party,” Ocasio-Cortez proclaimed. “If anything, that’s probably the majority.”

-snip-

[TwilightZone]

1. Well, when one believes that everyone to the right of Bernie is "right-leaning" or worse...

it might lead to assertions like this, however ridiculous.

[squirecam]

6. Now

I want AOC to lose her seat in the next primary. Her claims are pure nonsense.

[Blue_true]

42. The problem in the primary is that there are like four other democrats running against her.

I am afraid that they will split the not AOC vote and AOC will coast on to crush the republican in the General. What should happen is that the one clearheaded primary candidate that is running against her should match up 1:1 against her and the other three should clear out. But egos being what they are, the three weaker AOC opponents will stay in, insuring that AOC wins the primary.

[brush]

72. The door is there. Don't let it hit you in the you know what.

The only way she got elected is through the Democratic Party.

Let her try running as a socialist in 2020 and see where that gets her.

[Quackers]

110. Oh she knows she doesn't have support to run as a Socialist.

That’s why she leaches off of the Democratic Party. It seems I’ve heard of others doing this before...

[Cha]

2. Who does she think WON the BLUE WAVE MIDTERM?..isn't she the one who

Last edited Mon Jan 20, 2020, 11:06 PM - Edit history (2)

said she wanted a "smaller tent"?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=409217

[Thekaspervote]

12. This!!

[Cha]

13. Who does she think Won the BLUE WAVE Midterm?!

[PatSeg]

18. Yep, that would be her

I remember when she was first in the public eye and a lot of people were raving about her, I withheld my opinion as it seemed like too much attention, too quickly. The way she went after old school progressives, who had been fighting liberal causes for years was reckless and impulsive. I figured she had to earn respect, but instead she did more talking than listening, and never missed an opportunity to be in front of a camera.

I think she has a lot of talent and some admirable ideas, but I think her bright flame could burn out too quickly, if she doesn't learn a little self control and respect for those who came before her. If she had her way, the Democratic party would be a minority party for years to come.

[emmaverybo]

37. She could do some good when she gets over herself. The diva thing distracts. Immature and

Last edited Tue Jan 21, 2020, 12:51 AM - Edit history (1)

impulsive in her speech and conduct, but extremely bright and full of conviction. What you said, PatSeg is what she needs to learn: “a little self control and respect for those who came before her.” The latter is terribly important. She is standing on the shoulders of giants.

[PatSeg]

46. Oh yes

and if she can just learn that "she is standing on the shoulders of giants". She would not be where she is today if not for those who came before her.

I can see how all that attention at such a young age could go to someone's head, but that is when a more self-aware person would push back on the excessive media attention to focus on her new job. She could take a lesson from Al Franken who went out of his way to keep a low profile the first few years, keeping his mouth shut and his ears open. He knew he had to earn the right to be taken seriously as a senator. In the beginning, he avoided national television and addressed his attention to his constituents and his job.

Incidentally, I never refer to her as AOC. Being referred to by your initials like FDR, JFK, MLK, or LBJ is something that is earned. Right now, she is more of a media celebrity than an icon, though with some experience and humility, she could become one.

[emmaverybo]

66. You are so right! I know you made that comment once, about not referring to her as AOC. Wondered

why that bit of biz puts me off. Well, pop politics. And I think so pretentious.

PS didn’t mean to put your name in quotation marks. Meant only for my quoting you.

[PatSeg]

69. Yeah, pop politics

is a good description and it is pretentious. An old Cat Stevens song plays in my head when I see these congressional newbies storming the castle and playing for the cameras - "Oh very young, what will you leave us this time". We'll see.

That's okay, I really wasn't sure what the quotation marks were for!

[Blue_true]

47. I doubt that she gets defeated in the democratic primary or the General.

There are like four candidates running against her and one is a religious zealot. There is one opponent that is a fine candidate, but it is unlikely that the other three opponents drop out in favor of that person.

My hope for AOC is that she moderates with age and see that some of what she believes is impractical. But I can't say that I have ever saw anyone that call themselves a socialist (democratic socialist) moderate, their game seems to be in believing that they are never truly wrong.

[squirecam]

3. AOC doesn't understand politics.

Pelosi does.

Medicare4all (removing private insurance) is not supported by a majority of voters.

Even if it was, it has NO CHANCE of passing the senate with Mitch in charge. 2018 was won in moderate districts (ones Trump won) and there is ZERO benefit by making these members take a vote on something that won’t pass. Because we need a house majority.

Contrast that with 2008, when Pelosi KNEW that members would lose seats by passing the ACA, yet she and they thought passing the ACA was more important.

In short, this is why AOC has no idea how congress actually works. Pelosi does.

[ehrnst]

4. Binary thinking:

Binary thinking is always putting things in terms of two options that are usually mutually exclusive. That is all the possibilities are either option A or option B and not both. Sometimes this is valid, but often it is a mistaken simplification.

Thinking that anything even 1/4" to the right of oneself is "CENTRIST" or Republican lite is an example.

[squirecam]

7. A common refrain this season

Unfortunately

[Hortensis]

122. Typical delusion. But, Ocasio's smearing her OWN constituents

as hanging in the empty center rift abandoned by both parties OR just flat with the Republicans.

Binary thinking would explain the disappearance in her mind of America's 150 million liberals, presumably including the few who voted for her. They just don't exist.

Don't bother asking how far-left Ocasio explains getting elected in 2018 by centrists/conservatives, though. Binary thinking resolves all conflicts but can be hard for others to follow.

(Reality: A tiny fraction of her district's registered Democrats voted in that whacked-up election. A large majority instead woke up to a Wednesday morning surprise instead of the Democratic caucus leader they just assumed others would reelect for them.)

[squirecam]

137. Yes

She got a small pool. Likely won’t happen again, so she will need her voters next time.

[UniteFightBack]

5. Another person who will have a full career of NOT getting things done. That is of course

if she doesn't get redrawn out of existence.

[msongs]

8. is there such a career as finding every available live TV camera lol nt

[ehrnst]

11. Well, one can always blame the "establishment" being 'afraid'

of one when one doesn't get enough voters to select them for office.

[Blue_true]

50. The don't get stuff done, but they kick up a dust storm of words and

happy images of an "ideal" state. They can't accept even rock solid progress that falls short of their ideal state.

[PandoraAwakened]

82. "Out of existence"? Scary language in today's world.

[NYMinute]

9. If I rolled my eyes even a little after AOC said something

I'd have a perfect rear vision and will have to walk backwards.

[highplainsdem]

15. LOL!

[George II]

10. Another lost opportunity to spend an important holiday with her constituents. Even so....

....the Democratic Party is what the MEMBERS of the Democratic Party want it to be. Right of center, center, left of center, or far right, it will reflect what our members want.

[Blue_true]

51. The Democratic Party is a Center-Left party.

Even Joe Manchin's voting record is solidly centrist. I am a tad to the left of the party, so I call myself Left-Center to reflect my leftward bias.

AOC is just hoey in her claim, the party in not center to conservative, if it was all the groundbreaking legistlation that it has won would not be a factor in our daily lives.

[zentrum]

14. She knows her history.

She's the future of the party.

[squirecam]

17. Not of this party

Nt

[highplainsdem]

20. +1,000,000

[Butterflylady]

30. I agree

[emmaverybo]

39. +++++++++++++++++++

[The Valley Below]

80. +1

[Demsrule86]

34. She is not the future...I don't think she will last...hubs came from that area...and there is

grumbling about her lack of constituent service, and where does she go from here? She could not win a Senate race in New York...or a governor's race...so where does she go...and her anti-party stuff is annoying to many Democrats. I agree she is talented so I hope she settles down and listens a bit.

[George II]

54. Which party?

[Wawannabe]

61. Wait! What????

[janterry]

102. I think so, too

I don't agree with everything she - well, or anyone says .

But healthcare for ALL as a human right? Yup, yup, yup. The party is drifting more and more left with our young. That gives me hope for the future.

[zentrum]

118. Yes, and they are fighters.

[JoeOtterbein]

16. AOC is still smarter than 99% of the men in DC and...

...100% of the Repubs!

Also, our future SOTH who will help lead the fight to save our future!

[highplainsdem]

19. Not a chance.

[boomer_wv]

21. Literally

nothing you said is true.

[NYMinute]

23. ...

[TwilightZone]

29. It's difficult to become Speaker of the House...

if one spends much of one's time alienating the people from whom one would need to receive votes.

She is smart and talented, no doubt. But I don't know how she's going to rise to leadership if she continues to make ridiculous assertions like this one (and the "we need a smaller tent" one) and seemingly strives to intentionally alienate those whom she supposedly wants to lead someday.

[squirecam]

32. Short answer

Is she won’t.

[Blue_true]

56. She is basically a Senator Sanders clone. Her influence won't extend far

and she will eventually find herself occupying a tiny nitch if she doesn't change and if she can hold her seat against other democrats. She has alienated politicians in Washington and in New York. She really needs to think about where that leads her.

[Wawannabe]

64. Maybe ya'll should start a socialist party and see

How that goes. I mean come on already! This is crazy shit that Bernie and AOC can be Democrats and say the awful shit they do about the party.

[questionseverything]

91. no one should ever try and split the blue vote

period

[mcar]

101. ...

[Eko]

22. Ok,

Dont let the door hit you on your behind.

[oasis]

24. It wouldn't surprise me if AOC "leans to the Green" if Bernie fails

to get the Democratic nomination. Independent maybe? If she goes, don't expect her to go quietly.

[squirecam]

25. Anyone going green

Should lose their seat in the next primary.

[highplainsdem]

26. I think she expects to pick up Sanders' supporters in future races. Some of them are already

suggesting she should run for president in 2024, if Bernie doesn't somehow get the nomination and win.

[squirecam]

27. Nope...just no....

I’d vote for tulsi or one of the billionaires, or even Yang over AOC in 2024.

[oasis]

28. This is a helluva time for Maverick Dems to start flexing their muscles.

If AOC doesn't get 100% behind our eventual nominee, she'll be regarded as a bargain basement version of Susan Sarandon.

And rightly so.

[Demsrule86]

35. Would she be old enough? And she will not win a primary.

[highplainsdem]

36. Just barely old enough. 35 in October of 2024.

And I agree she won't win the primary. But I don't think she realizes that.

[squirecam]

38. Winning

Wouldn’t be the goal. But more name recognition and fundraising for future runs.

[Demsrule86]

45. I don't know of any president who ever came from the house in modern times...I don't see her winning

a presidential primary ever. Unless the country moves left, and God I hope it does, she has no future other than being a great house member and working from that...I doubt she could be speaker as she has already alienated members and doesn't seem to understand politics.

[Blue_true]

58. Gerald Ford did, but he became Pres after Nixon resigned and lost re-election. nt

[Demsrule86]

41. Hubs is from New York...I think he would be in AOC's district if he lived there now...I went to High

School and college in Connecticut...UCONN...hubs of course went to an effete private college Manhattan (a running joke in our marriage) Some here think of New York as this really liberal place, but it is not...there are conservatives in New York state...we just got the legislature recently. AOC will not win a statewide race in New York nor will she win a national race. She may or may not suit her district...I hear rumblings of discontent...time will tell. She is smart and talented but where can she go? she needs to sit down and listen for a bit.

[greatauntoftriplets]

112. NY has a lot in common with Illinois.

NYC, like Chicago, is Democratic, but a high percentage of the rest of the state is Republican. Fortunately, we currently have a Democratic governor and legislature.

[Demsrule86]

121. New York does at the moment also. I was born at Great Lakes...Mom and Dad were Navy...

I lived during my childhood in Chicago, Maywood ( My Grandma lived there) and Oak Park. I live pretty much everywhere and married an auto gypsy so each of my four kids was born in a different state.

[greatauntoftriplets]

129. A friend was born at Great Lakes.

It was several years after the war, but her father had stayed in the Marines. I currently live in the Oak Park area. What a small world!

We just replace a Republican governor a year ago. With luck, we'll hold onto this one for a while.

[Hoyt]

31. I'm OK with the Congresswoman. But, Christ, keeping Democrats a minority

party in the branches of government is not what we need right now.

[PatrickforO]

55. Nah, I do not believe historically correct.

Many factors 'brought us' Hitler. It wasn't the far left.

After Kaiser Wilhelm abdicated his throne, a new constitution was developed that gave many of the Kaiser's powers to a president whose term was seven years. A coalition government was formed between centrists and social democrats.

Unfortunately, the Treaty of Versailles was imposed on Germany. It forced massive 'reparations payments' that a country reeling from four years of war could not afford even in the best of times. All through the twenties, Germany tried to make these payments while running a Republic.

However, disaffected and demobilized German soldiers hit the streets in the form of paramilitary Freikorps groups such as the Stahlhelm. They faced off against the Communists, often battling in the streets.

Anyway, I do recommend you read some history - Shirer's Rise and Fall of the Third Reich is good. Toland's Hitler. Ian Kershaw has also written some good books. Of course, there's Albert Speer's Inside the Third Reich. Joachim Fest's 1973 volume on Hitler is also worth reading.

Bottom line, anytime in Wiemar Germany the far left did anything, they were brutally and bloodily suppressed. The German courts, on the other hand, simply winked at guys like Hitler, who, after the 1923 Beer Hall Putsch was put in a luxury 'prison' for long enough to dictate Mein Kampf. When he got out, the great Depression struck and Germany experienced hyperinflation and starvation.

The great Depression was started by oligarchs whose greed had created massive imbalances of wealth. Wall Street was behind the Depression, not the far left, and it is the Depression that caused hyperinflation in Germany, starvation and the growing inability to pay the reparations payments. THAT opened the way for Hitler.

It wasn't the far left.

But enough of that. Let's talk about your basic premise in logic: the far left brought Germany Hitler, and so the far left brought America Trump.

That doesn't wash. Obama was a centrist. Yes, he passed a giant stimulus, and yes, he did give us a national healthcare package - the first ever. He was better-than-good, possibly great.

But he wasn't far left. Not by any stretch.

What he was was African American, and the racists in this country couldn't stand it. You know what brought us Trump? Right wing corporate-funded propaganda. What Rachel Maddow calls the 'right wing noise machine.' AM talk radio, including the Storm Front AM show. Fox 'news.' Breitbart. And let's not forget the massive and sophisticated psy-ops campaign waged against us by Russia.

But it wasn't the far left. Not here, not in Wiemar Germany.

[Zolorp]

65. The far left in Germany refused to form a coalition with the moderate left leaving a power vacuum.

That allowed the Nazis to form a coalition with the moderate right, gain enough power, then seize absolute power after gaining power in the first place.

[The Valley Below]

86. That's right.

The German Communists under Ernst Thälmann adopted the strategy called "Nach Hitler kommen Wir," translated variously as After Hitler, Our Turn or Hitler First, Then Us.

Susan Sarandon explicitly endorsed the same "Hitler First, Then Us" strategy in certain recent election, with catastrophic results.

Some people never learn.

[Zolorp]

97. The same type of thought lead directly to the rise of Boris Johnson in the UK.

[ArcticFox]

115. We already got our Hitler

We got him while trying to elect Hilary Clinton

[brush]

74. Wrong. Reverse that. Nazism/fascism is far right. Socialism is far left.

[Zolorp]

96. Yes, you are correct. And that has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.

[brush]

99. Pls explain what you mean then. It's not clear.

Last edited Tue Jan 21, 2020, 10:28 AM - Edit history (1)

[Zolorp]

106. Read the posts. it's very clear

The far left in Germany demanded purity and refused to form a coalition with the moderate left. This allowed the Nazis to form a coalition to take power and the rest is history.

[betsuni]

40. Why is one particular health care plan the only one that is Left?

One plan can't get the votes "So this is not a left party." WHY.

[squirecam]

44. It's a theme

If you aren’t 100% on board, then you are too moderate.

[betsuni]

48. I thought Congress passed all sorts of progressive things since the blue wave.

Including the $15 minimum wage that was in the last Democratic Party platform.

I guess that doesn't exist because it doesn't match the anti-Democratic slogans.

[PatrickforO]

43. Well, if you're meaning this to be taken in a pejorative sense,

I don't.

I agree with AOC. Over the last few decades, the Republicans have moved to the right extreme of the Bell curve. They are now outliers.

Which leaves the Democrats. We have the Bidens and the Klobuchars, who are ideologically what used to be called "Eisenhower Republicans, and then we have people like AOC, the Squad, Katie Porter, and Warren, who are being painted as being 'too far left' to win because they 'scare' people.

Sorry, but these are what used to be called New Deal Democrats.

Right now, as Biden says, we are in a battle for the soul of America.

And he's right. We'll either wake up on November 4 to a country that will slide down that slippery slope to become a white supremacist oligarchy, or we will wake up knowing the Republican party is no longer viable, to be swept into history's dust bin, and we as a people will have to somehow repair all the damage Trump and his neo-nazi followers have done.

That, people, is when the debates will begin. I'm an unapologetic New Deal Democrat. A social Democrat. A liberal Democrat. I know many reading this thread will be on the more conservative side of the party.

If we are really, really fortunate as a people, and we get another chance (by defeating Trump, flipping the Senate and keeping the House), we may be able to kill the American empire and rebuild the American republic.

Will we, I wonder, be wise enough and courageous enough to get rid of Citizens United? Will we be wise enough to aggressively move forward on climate change, taking a world leadership role?

Will we be able to patch together our alliances, and renegotiate trade agreements that are labor friendly?

Will we be able to stand up to the health insurance and big pharma lobbies and reform our healthcare system?

Will we be smart enough and courageous enough to revise the tax codes so billionaires and corporations pay their fair share, Social Security and Medicare are solid, and we actually have enough money to run the government? This will mean repealing the giant 2017 tax cut for billionaire parasites and corporations, reversing most of the Bush and Reagan tax cuts still standing, and even imposing some new taxes, like Warren's wealth tax, and Bernie's per-trade tax to be imposed on Wall Street to slow down the arbitrage 'bots. Did you know? It will.

Because there is one thing of which I'm utterly convinced: we cannot go back to 'business as usual' because that hasn't worked in decades. We've got real problems and we cannot afford to 'kick the can' down the street again, especially on carbon emissions.

So for all you who dislike AOC, she really is the face of the future. She, the Squad, Katie Porter, Warren.

It is said the Arc of History moves slowly, but bends toward justice. In the end, we will absolutely be forced, if we want to survive as a species, to reorganize ourselves around human need rather than human greed. Every single bad thing that has happened in the last decades can be traced in some way back to greed and selfishness. We have to begin thinking about each other and planning for the welfare of all.

Or, you can simply roll your eyes at what I've written here. And in the end, our own greed will sink us in the quicksand. We're already hip deep and the branch is rapidly getting out of reach.

[Demsrule86]

49. Roosevelt was almost 100 years ago..don't you think our times need a different sort of policy?

Yes, he saved the economy and won the last 'good' war. But he did imprison Japanese Americans, and the new deal did not cover AA citizens. Roosevelt wouldn't even integrate the army...he was not a civil rights kind of president. No president is perfect. He was a good one. We have social security thanks to him. Time to move into the future...we need to keep the good parts and find solutions to our problems in the present. We don't need a 100 year old 'new deal' which was great for its time but doesn't come close to solving our modern problems

And Biden is not an Eisenhower Republican nor is Amy. Neither of them are Republicans in any form ...sick of this shit. Seriously, you should not call Democrats you don't agree with Republicans...it is not right IMHO. You do understand that this sort of thing is a form of arrogance and elitism and a cancer within our party...the agree with me or you are not a 'real' Democrat meme is what I call it. It is off-putting and divisive and not true... we are and will always be a big tent party. We can't win any other way.

[PatrickforO]

60. I did not call Biden or Klobuchar Republicans. They are Democrats in good standing.

Absolutely.

I said that IDEOLOGICALLY they are akin to what used to be called Eisenhower Republicans. Check it out and you'll find that I'm more correct on that than not. The problem is that the corporate funded Republicans have cultivated their crazy base to the point that they are far, far right, leaving the center two thirds of the Bell curve to the Democrats.

And yes, we have people who would, in the fifties, have 'liked Ike.'

And, faced off against them many times, we have people who would, in the thirties, have called themselves 'New Dealers.'

I'm not CALLING anyone who is a Democrat a Republican by making that statement.

But at the same time, don't think that I'm saying that a new New Deal would ignore African Americans and women's issues as the old New Deal did. That WAS 100 years ago.

What I AM saying is that the basic tenets of the New Deal are what I believe we need to embrace:

-Strong central government role in projects that support the infrastructure.
-Strong central government role in regulation across the board, from food manufacturing to mining to financial transactions.
-Fiscal and monetary policy more in line with Keynes than with Hayek.
-Higher taxes that discourage excessive accumulation of wealth by the few at the expense of the many.
-Leave things in the public good in the public sector, prisons being the prime example I can cite here.

But we need some new stuff too. A world leadership role in mitigating carbon emissions. Trade agreements that are fairer to American workers. Better healthcare. A revised tax code reversing most of the tax cuts put in place since the 1980s, not to mention the giant 2017 cut for billionaire parasites. Stronger labor unions, with government enforcing impartially the right of workers to organize. Better enforcement of the separation of church and state. And we're going to have to reverse some of the Republican appointments to the appellate courts and possibly the Supreme Court.

So don't tell me I'm being divisive because I'm not. I'm wondering if, once the Republican party dies, which it will because Trump will drag it down the drain with him, this 'big tent' we have will not end up evolving into two or more smaller tents. I don't know the answer to that, and neither do you, but I know that you and I are having this debate. And I know that dozens of people on this site have this debate every day.

Some of us are more liberal, others more centrist. That is the way of things. And that is the way our founders wanted it to be. I know I won't always get my way. But you won't either. Our government was set up to require vigorous debate, be inefficient and slow to progress, and full of checks and balances. And that's good. All I'm saying is what I see.

[Demsrule86]

67. I could go and look up positions...but it is not correct...and since it is ideology that separates

the parties...it is calling both Biden and Klobachar Republicans...and they are no such thing. I did not say you personally are being divisive, I said calling Democrats who don't agree with Warren or Sanders Republicans is divisive within the party...and also untrue of course. I don't know why you think the Republican Party is going down the drain...I don't see it...they have more governorship's, Senators and hold the presidency at this moment. And I sincerely hope we don't ever have more than two parties...ours is not a parliamentary system and we would end up with right wing rule.

The reality of our situation is that we are in desperate circumstances. We have packed courts, and if we don't knock off Trump in 20, he will get at least one more SCOTUS pick maybe more. We have a small house majority which was given to us by moderates and if we run either Sanders or Warren...that majority is endangered. Warren would be better than Sanders which is why she is my second choice. If we get the presidency and not the Senate which is a heavy lift, we don't get any judges. This election is a national emergency. Honestly the progressive movement is finished if we don't win the Senate or the presidency and keep the house. Let's hope we can come together and win in 20...honestly policy really doesn't matter this year.

[Blue_true]

70. I agree on many levels.

Calling good progressives neocons or Dinos because they disagree on how to reach the same goals is counter-productive.

The challenges of FDR's time are markedly different from modern challenges, though bank and securities regulation do have direct parallels. In many ways our modern challenges are larger and our resolve to solve them is more fractured. Voices like AOC that call out for the exclusion of like minded people are not the voices that will lead the way to solving the challenges that we face, in fact, they will be little more that dung tossers that slow progress, making achieving real progress that much harder.

[Demsrule86]

73. Yours is a remarkable post and really should be posted as an OP...

I an too tired to do it justice...so I will answer fully tomorrow...thank you.

[PatrickforO]

88. I did not call anyone a Dino. Sorry but I will thank you not to put words in my mouth.

That was NOT what I was saying at all. Please do re-read my post. I was speaking of the different ideologies, or perhaps nuances in ideology that exist in our party.

THIS is what I'm saying: Some of us are more liberal, others more centrist. That is the way of things. And that is the way our founders wanted it to be. I know I won't always get my way. But you won't either. Our government was set up to require vigorous debate, be inefficient and slow to progress, and full of checks and balances. And that's good. All I'm saying is what I see.

To repeat I AM NOT calling anyone a 'dino' nor am I calling any Democrat in good standing a Republican. PLEASE re-read my post. That was NOT what I was saying at all.

My point stands though. Whether you're more toward the center or more to the left, as I am, we have to get rid of Trump. That's job #1. After that, though, we really will have to have vigorous debate and show good forward progress on a variety of issues - set forth in several of my posts.

[PandoraAwakened]

93. You are clearly the best-spoken person here.

But...

You know how you can write something out in the clearest of terms to try to get your tRump-supporting grandmother to understand something? (Well, maybe you don't know; I unfortunately, have dealt with that situation).

Then she writes back saying you said something that you didn't. So, you write it out for her again explaining it to her in a slightly different way and telling her in no uncertain terms that you didn't say what she said you said.

Then she writes back to you and says the exact same thing and doesn't acknowledge at all that you've already pointed out how you didn't say that.

So, you try one more time...rinse, wash, repeat...and then she writes back and deflects to something else, still not acknowledging that she was wrong to accuse you of saying something you didn't.

Next thing you know, it's late, and all this non-acknowledgment is so exhaustive. Night-night, honey.

It's kind of like that. Deal with it all the time with tRump-humpers, but it's not a mutually exclusive behaviorism with his base alone.

[PatrickforO]

109. Yes, I know. Sometimes I do stick my foot in it.

By the way, compliments on the avatar. Always did like Wonder Woman.

[dansolo]

95. They disagree on how to reach the same goals

That is the most important distinction. Republicans, even from Eisenhower's day, never had the same goals as Democrats today. Biden and Klobachar and Buttigeg are all liberals, even if they choose a more moderate approach to achieve their liberal goals.

[squirecam]

114. Agreed

Nt

[UniteFightBack]

52. The pukes will not be swept into the dustbin of history next election. Maybe you need to recheck

just how many people still vote for them. Whatever face of the future is they need to build coalitions...and this ain't doing that.

[dflprincess]

63. Thank you nt

[Blue_true]

68. I am somewhat to the right of you, I am Left-Center, I am open

to some concepts that underpin social democracy, but others not so much.

But one thing that should be first on our list once we regain all power is rolling back republican tax policy through to Nixon, NONE of it should be left standing, it has been a cancer in our societal body.

We need to address affordable healthcare, but we need to also hold people accountable for making wise health choices. I believe a large part of healthcare cost expenses is due to people making unwise health choices early in life. We have a big heart center being built in my city, literally a mini-hospital, should we see stuff like that if people took better care of themselves?

Our tax code needs to in the end, be truly progressive, the highest income earners should pay up to a 50% marginal tax on net profits, BUT as a businessperson I believe the tax level must allow for reinvestment in businesses, but the tax allowances must not be abused. We need to heavily fund the IRS and hire more auditors, I believe every dollar spent there brings in multiples of hundreds or thousands of dollars.

[ArcticFox]

84. I appreciate your post

Good points, all of them. Too few really get it.

[Zenlitened]

53. She's not wrong. -n/t

[Cha]

62. IT's A BIG TENT.. The Country is NOT all like her District.

Last edited Tue Jan 21, 2020, 04:07 AM - Edit history (1)

[Skidmore]

94. Yes, she is. nt

[mcar]

104. Yes, she is

The Democratic Party is not a "my way or the highway" group.

[TDale313]

57. It is.

It’s a sign of just how far to the right the political discourse has taken us that this is even controversial. The policies the Democratic Party- even Warren and Sanders- advocate for are not far left by most standards.

[Wawannabe]

59. I am not at all impressed by her shenanigans

She has loose lips that are going to land her in hot water sooner or later. She should not be bashing the party she chose to join of (I assume) her own free will.

Start your own party lady if you don’t like where the party is “centered”. This goading of the Democratic party is getting real fuckin old!

[ZZenith]

76. I am curious -

When conservatives say, “If you don’t like this country, leave it!” - what is your gut reaction to that?

[Wawannabe]

78. I have been contemplating leaving the country since 2016

So. I guess that is the freedom we enjoy to choose.

I contemplated starting a new party at one time, and even looked into it with political scholars. At that time Lawrence Tribe answered an email from me.

I did not make my statement lightly. I own what I do and say. So she should own her attitude about the centering of the party and I should be able to tell her to go try it alone.

Working with people in the party will get her views and agendas and most importantly her constituents goals further than this divisive tone she has taken.- maybe more divisive since endorsing Bernie Sanders. Why would I not respond with sayin she should look elsewhere.

[ZZenith]

92. Hmmm...

I’ve been a member of the Democratic Party my entire adult life and I don’t disagree with a single thing she’s said here. Does that mean I have to leave as well?

[Wawannabe]

116. Hmmmm

Stir the pot much? I don’t know who you are. I never said you should look elsewhere. She is the one that I was addressing. If you feel so strongly about her you will make your choices.

[David__77]

71. She may make a great president some day.

In the future, there will still be a big tent, with a shirt in gravity.

[Cha]

75. two words...

BLUE WAVE!

I'm going with our Dems who Flipped red seats to BLUE.

[zipplewrath]

79. It is

You can't be the "big tent "party with a GOP that is so far right and call yerself a "progressive " party other than a bunch of folks who want to achieve progressive goals through conservative means.

[ArcticFox]

81. She is correct

The Democratic Party has shifted steadily towards the right over the past few decades. So has the Republican Party.

Republicans started it, with pushing for business interests in exchange for campaign money. Democrats followed suit, thinking they had to.

Now we're at the point where Democrats have to make legislative concessions, to be sure they only propose "what we can accomplish," before the first round of negotiations with Republicans.

And Republicans refuse to consider anything that's not 100% of what they want, and then some.

I'm afraid that's the perfect recipe for a continuing rightward slide. I see only three ways it might stop: Democrats give up big donation in return for favor politics and push policies for working and poor people instead; war; or revolution.

I'd prefer to see the first option play out. The first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem. I appreciate people like AOC identifying the problem.

[Aussie105]

83. Sticking a label on a politician

and then assuming the worst implications of that label applies to that person, is not acceptable.

And often, the person posting will point out the worst of that label in case you don't understand.

AOC is a high energy politician, with a few things to learn, but she is a fast learner.

She has a bright future in US politics, keep an eye on her - and do so without criticism or labeling her.

Besides, I like her.

[PandoraAwakened]

85. Thank you for being the adult in the room.

Am pretty sure furious fingers would be flying to hit the alert button on a lot of the "bashing of a Democratic political figure" that I see going on here---if the same insults were hurled at a certain candidate "who shall not be named" except in the most sycophantic terms.

Hypocrisy reigns supreme.

[ArcticFox]

87. Seriously

I've been a victim of those furious fingers flying over minor constructive criticisms a few times myself.

[TwilightZone]

98. She appears to be the one labeling others.

In this case, the entire party, with a label that isn't accurate. The purity nonsense is simply that, nonsense.

I agree that she's bright and brings a lot of energy, but comments like this aren't going to win her any fans. If she truly wants to be a leader in the party someday, alienating as much of it as possible is unlikely to accomplish that.

[demosincebirth]

89. She should leave it, then.

[Cha]

90. So? We're A BIG TENT THAT WON the BLUE WAVE HOUSE VICTORY..

IT's A BIG ******* COUNTRY.. FLIPPING red seats to BLUE!


We Won ON HEATH CARE!

[mcar]

100. What is she trying to accomplish here?

This is not helpful.

[redstatebluegirl]

103. If you hate our party, change to another one, or start your own.

She has been given a bully pulpit by the media that she has not earned. There are only two places you start at the top, digging a post hole and painting a barn. She thought her election in a strong blue district somehow put her on top. It did not. Between she and BS they will hand the election in 2020 to the orange menace along with the House and Senate if we don't do something soon. Of course she doesn't care her seat is safe.

[Mariana]

113. "...if we don't do something soon."

What do you propose we do?

[Docreed2003]

105. And just like that

FOX News is using her quote to bash Democrats this morning...SMDH. (FYI...I don't watch that crap but it's frequently on in my patient's rooms)

[rainy]

107. AOC is right

Our party is forced to play the money power game and it can’t be a true left party due to the narrative of the powerful. We are so far right right now we are practically a dictatorship and most of the country supports democratic policies but our democratic leaders can’t push our best and true Democratic policies because the press convinces them and us that that’s a tooooo far left idea to pass. Thus the people become deflated and feel like no one is really fighting for them. Poverty, subsidies for rich energy corporations, dying planet, EXCESSIVE money in politics, foreign money buying elections, NRA power by purse, gun violence, poor medical care. So many issues that can’t be fixed and we the people don’t feel like anyone is fighting for us.

Crumbling infrastructure. No work life balance. USA is now designated a not safe for travel country. Dying bees. We suck and the Democratic Party majority is being jerked around bu the minority and does nothing to fix it because the powerful will not allow it.

[beachbumbob]

108. so naive, America has NEVER been a "leftist" country and why the left element keep

missing the mark. We are and have been center-left.

What may work in liberal strongholds only works in liberal strongholds and not in the rest of the country. We as democrats MUST pride ourselves on being and maintaining the "Big Tent", otherwise we will lose and lose big

[Act_of_Reparation]

111. It's a big tent, indeed.

And all are welcome inside this big tent, as long as they shut the fuck up and toe the line, right?

[bluedye33139]

117. I've always believed that the party represents a wide range of views

And I've never trusted people who want a party that enforces rigid ideological positions.

The Medicare for all versus Obamacare debate, for instance, is a debate on which there are reasonable perspectives on both sides. So many of our political issues are complex, and declaring that the party must consist of only one point of view is a mistake.

AOC has broad support within the Democratic party. If she believes that this is because it is a conservative party, she's not thinking it through.

[RandiFan1290]

119. This post has NOTHING to do with the Primary. nt

[Hortensis]

120. We've entered the desperation-lying season. Didn't work before,

Last edited Tue Jan 21, 2020, 02:42 PM - Edit history (2)

except to elect Republicans of course.

It's all about, and revealing of, what's really important to each involved. Ocasio's not a kid any more. No excuses for what her DISinformation about Democrats is revealing. And it is an attempt to deceive. She's inside congress and can't claim ignorance about the ideologies of all those around her, or the massive ideological and practical divide between liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans.

This graph is a couple years old, but it reveals how ideology predicts size of Facebook following,which is a different, kind of fun slant. After all, Ocasio's attempt to deceive aside, we ALL really know Democrats average solidly liberal, ranging from left of center to hard, even far left, as illustrated by those we send to congress.

On both the liberal and conservative sides, on average those who hang on FB prefer those who adopt more dramatic, controversial positions, which results in more press coverage. No one expected anything else, right? Also, mainstream liberals AND mainstream conservatives tend to focus on local issues for their constituents, which don't of course draw national attention.

Note that Ocasio's smearing her OWN Democratic constituents in this claim that they belong in those empty centers of these graphs or with the red right.

[Kentonio]

123. She's absolutely correct

As anyone can easily see by the large numbers of posters here who can’t even support basic principles like everyone having a right to healthcare, or people getting paid a decent living wage.

[brooklynite]

124. Point to any poster who says people shouldn't have a right to healthcare...

...which is not the same thing as saying that campaigning on a MfA policy will result in losing the election.

[Kentonio]

125. What earthly use is saying something would be nice but opposing it as policy?

That’s EXACTLY why it’s a centre party not a left wing one. For people on the left this stuff is a matter of life and death, not a theoretical moral problem.

[brooklynite]

126. How about...winning the election?

Given a second term, what do you imagine Trump will do on health care?

Also, still waiting for your cited examples.

[Kentonio]

128. Winning the election? How did that centrist platform work out last time around?

[brooklynite]

130. Well it got more Democratic votes in the Primary

(fun fact: Sanders has HALF his 2016 support today for his progressive campaign, in comparison to 2016)

...and got more votes in the General Election. Now, recognizing that we need the votes in MI, PA and WI, what is there you can point to about Sanders' campaign that will win back Independents and suburban Republicans in those battleground States.

And still waiting for your example of posters here opposing healthcare for everyone.

[Kentonio]

131. You missed the part where Bernie won the primaries in 2 of those 3 states then?

[ehrnst]

134. You missed the part where Hillary won the Democratic primary by a *wide* margin.

[brooklynite]

127. Here's an idea: NYS will lose a Congressional seat in 2022...

AOC could volunteer to give up her seat and run against the "center-conservative" Democrat in the adjacent district.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

132. If NY loses a seat, won't the district boundaries be redrawn?

For the whole state? Her district could be split or expanded, depending on who's drawing the lines.

MI will probably lose a seat. Hopefully, we'll lose a Tea Party right-winger.

[squirecam]

138. You then

Take a +30 district and split it into 2 +15 districts. That way a repub loses.

[Wabbajack_]

140. NY is expected to lose 2 seats

Presuming we maintain control of the State Senate one would presume it will be 2 GOP seats.

[Wabbajack_]

135. Internationally speaking

Most of the party would be center compared to say, Europe. And people like Manchin clearly Center-Right.

UK Tories accept the NHS but we don't have a majority of Democrats in Congress supporting Medicare for All.

Bernie Sanders would be Center-Left in Europe, someone like Jerry Corbyn is well to his left.

[redqueen]

136. Exactly. This country is so fucked in part because of our willingness to assuage the right

While excoriating the left. The third way movement - those pushing for Dems to act like kinder, gentler republicans that Wellstone warned is about - has all but ruined this party.

The right wing all but made 'liberal' a dirty word in the 90's, so now we've just seemingly redefined it to fit the distorted political landscape here.

[BuffaloJackalope]

139. .

[babblingbrook]

141. I agree with her