General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Let's talk about AOC. [View all]BainsBane
(53,153 posts)which I do not consider a source of information. It's her CASE for why she should be reelected. I don't believe her to be any more or less truthful than any other member of the Democratic caucus, though she does stand out in her eagerness to claim sole responsibility for acts that require the votes of a majority of the House. I can't recall other politicians saying "I' when talking about passing legislation, but I could be wrong about that. The pronoun is certainly inaccurate.
I suggest you look at Melman's post in which he links to a news spot on the tutoring program that AOC initiated in her district. That is far more compelling evidence than a stump speech.
I never said she didn't do any work. I said she falls into the category of a show horse rather than a work horse. Work horses keep their heads down. Show horses seek the limelight. Over a career, show horses tend to accomplish far less. Sites like this rank the effectiveness of lawmakers by the criteria shown--bills introduced, out of committee, laws passed, most missed votes, etc. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/report-cards/2019 People aren't posting about Eleanor Holmes Norton or Nita Lowey, but they rank highly under one or more of those criteria. This page filters for just freshman House members: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/report-cards/2019/house-freshmen
If AOC weren't a show horse, or a firebrand, people wouldn't be such hard core fans. It's precisely why you like her, not because she cast the same votes as most of the rest of the Democratic caucus.
As for research, I have no responsibility to do any. Being a fan of AOC or any other politician isn't a requirement for citizenship. And since I don't live in her district, I'm not in a position to decide whether I should vote for her. If you don't care enough to make an argument, that's on you.