Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez - Bringing Moral Courage to American Politics

[Hank Reardon]

Why? She's just some Congresswoman from bum**** New York. Take a pill.

And Trump was just a reality TV show star.

Political success seems to come via non-traditional means these days. The Politico piece mentions AOC's 2.2 million Twitter followers and the platform that it provides for her to bully her fellow dems. Whether this power is real or imagined I don't know, but a few quotes from that piece suggest that her fellow dems are wary of crossing her. It's a new ****ing day.

She may end up being put into her place by the leadership. And the press may lose interest. And then she'll truly be just some congresswoman from bum**** New York. Until then I do think her influence is extending beyond her apparent station.

 

[MonroeCity]

And Trump was just a reality TV show star.

Political success seems to come via non-traditional means these days. The Politico piece mentions AOC's 2.2 million Twitter followers and the platform that it provides for her to bully her fellow dems. Whether this power is real or imagined I don't know, but a few quotes from that piece suggest that her fellow dems are wary of crossing her. It's a new ****ing day.

She may end up being put into her place by the leadership. And the press may lose interest. And then she'll truly be just come congresswoman from bum**** New York.

The article you referenced as well as the interview with Lieberman on Fox Businees where he was discussing among other things , AOC and the current construction of the Democrat caucus. I think Lieberman is correct. The Democrats won their House majority on the "OrangeManBad" platform. It remains to be seen whether that can be sustained through 2020. If the Democrats nominate an Elizabeth Warren or Corey Booker, they'll probably see a GOP House majority sworn in along with Donald Trump in January 2021.

 

[anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa]

It's unfortunate that I was lampooning others who I said needed a drink while I was drinking an amaretto Manhattan. Yes, you could call me a philistine for putting Makers Mark into a rocks glass with a huge ice cube and a splash of Lazzaroni amaretto and swishing that around and smiling like a simpleton, but . . . wait, did I say that? Am I posting this? Never mind.

Philistine isn’t the word I’d use for such a travesty...

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

And Trump was just a reality TV show star.

Political success seems to come via non-traditional means these days. The Politico piece mentions AOC's 2.2 million Twitter followers and the platform that it provides for her to bully her fellow dems. Whether this power is real or imagined I don't know, but a few quotes from that piece suggest that her fellow dems are wary of crossing her. It's a new ****ing day.

She may end up being put into her place by the leadership. And the press may lose interest. And then she'll truly be just some congresswoman from bum**** New York. Until then I do think her influence is extending beyond her apparent station.

2.2 million Twitter followers?!? I'm not surprised that she's another tweeting twit like Trump is.

 

[Hank Reardon]

2.2 million Twitter followers?!? I'm not surprised that she's another tweeting twit like Trump is.

In some ways she's seems a lot like Trump, using social media and populist nonsense to bypass the normal process and exert influence that they don't deserve. The upside for AOC is that rather than being a (probably) cognitively impaired old fool with no possibility of redemption, she's a young, intelligent woman who is simply (in my opinion) misguided, uninformed, and naive. She has a chance to learn and grow.

Right now she's enjoying the spotlight and the attention. It remains to be seen if she'll enjoy the work, and (if it comes to it) the scrutiny.

 

[anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa]

In some ways she's seems a lot like Trump, using social media and populist nonsense to bypass the normal process and exert influence that they don't deserve. The upside for AOC is that rather than being a (probably) cognitively impaired old fool with no possibility of redemption, she's a young, intelligent woman who is simply (in my opinion) misguided, uninformed, and naive. She has a chance to learn and grow.

Right now she's enjoying the spotlight and the attention. It remains to be seen if she'll enjoy the work, and (if it comes to it) the scrutiny.

At least we can stop pretending that she’s being solely thrust into the spotlight by the right wing media. She’s bringing a good chunk of it on herself.

 

[iuwclurker]

In some ways she's seems a lot like Trump, using social media and populist nonsense to bypass the normal process and exert influence that they don't deserve. The upside for AOC is that rather than being a (probably) cognitively impaired old fool with no possibility of redemption, she's a young, intelligent woman who is simply (in my opinion) misguided, uninformed, and naive. She has a chance to learn and grow.

Right now she's enjoying the spotlight and the attention. It remains to be seen if she'll enjoy the work, and (if it comes to it) the scrutiny.

Trump is intentionally and self-interestedly dishonest. AOC appears to be honest and with good intention. Whether her goof-ups continue or not will reveal the truth about her.

~~~

What is the normal process? Has there ever been one? People gain face recognition or not one way or another. Trump faced off with umpteen other politicians and only he and Cruz really gained any traction. Why is that? How many politicians don't use social media nowadays? Why did AOC get 2.2 million followers?

Your disdain is probably more appropriately directed at social media users. They're...just plain wrong...

 

[i'vegotwinners]

I once admitted to being a liberal Democrat, but given Bernie and now AOC, I am feeling like a moderate.

so what was it about Bernie that you thought went too far?

 

[hoot1]

so what was it about Bernie that you thought went too far?

Bernie labeling himself a Democratic Socialist goes too far. By doing this he plays into the hands of Republicans who wrongfully refer to Democrats as socialists.I say wrongfully because neither Bernie or any Democrats want to actually nationalize basic industries as called for by socialism.

Bernie talks about taxing the rich, expanding government health care (Medicare for all),and paying people enough to feed their families ($15 per hour minimum wage).These simple prescriptions ignore the fact Medicare has not actually reduced costs and its efficiency is questionable. Medicare needs reforming in my view before we make the mistake of expanding it to everyone. A $15 per hour minimum wage translates to $30,000 per year for an employee. There are tons of jobs which employers simply cannot and should not be forced to pay workers $15 per hour.

Finally watching Bernie orate reminds me of my high school football coach who at half time gave a highly emotional speech without giving us any information which might help win the game. Too make him happy, we yelled and screamed as if inspired.

 

[iuwclurker]

AOC 1
Kraushaar 0

 

[i'vegotwinners]

Bernie labeling himself a Democratic Socialist goes too far. By doing this he plays into the hands of Republicans who wrongfully refer to Democrats as socialists.I say wrongfully because neither Bernie or any Democrats want to actually nationalize basic industries as called for by socialism.

Bernie talks about taxing the rich, expanding government health care (Medicare for all),and paying people enough to feed their families ($15 per hour minimum wage).These simple prescriptions ignore the fact Medicare has not actually reduced costs and its efficiency is questionable. Medicare needs reforming in my view before we make the mistake of expanding it to everyone. A $15 per hour minimum wage translates to $30,000 per year for an employee. There are tons of jobs which employers simply cannot and should not be forced to pay workers $15 per hour.

Finally watching Bernie orate reminds me of my high school football coach who at half time gave a highly emotional speech without giving us any information which might help win the game. Too make him happy, we yelled and screamed as if inspired.

if you don't think Medicare gets healthcare quite a bit cheaper than any private health insurance pays, or those that are uninsured pay, then you're just flat very misinformed.

and if you're opposed to any minimum wage that some employer somewhere can't afford to pay, then you're opposed to any minimum wage at all.

 

[Digressions]

Bernie labeling himself a Democratic Socialist goes too far. By doing this he plays into the hands of Republicans who wrongfully refer to Democrats as socialists.I say wrongfully because neither Bernie or any Democrats want to actually nationalize basic industries as called for by socialism.

Bernie talks about taxing the rich, expanding government health care (Medicare for all),and paying people enough to feed their families ($15 per hour minimum wage).These simple prescriptions ignore the fact Medicare has not actually reduced costs and its efficiency is questionable. Medicare needs reforming in my view before we make the mistake of expanding it to everyone. A $15 per hour minimum wage translates to $30,000 per year for an employee. There are tons of jobs which employers simply cannot and should not be forced to pay workers $15 per hour.

Finally watching Bernie orate reminds me of my high school football coach who at half time gave a highly emotional speech without giving us any information which might help win the game. Too make him happy, we yelled and screamed as if inspired.

Medicare is easy to fix. We've discussed this before. There is a provision in the 1969 bill that allows the RUC to adjust the fee for service schedule every year to CPI +1-2%.

If I take my handy HP 10B II, and plug in N= 50, I/YR=3 (assuming a Fed goal of 2% inflation +1% RUC increase), PV= $200 (potential price of a random procedure in 1969 dollars), PMT= 0, and hit FV, it shows $876.78. What that means, in my quick/simple example, is that the cost of a $200 dollar procedure has gone up 438%, because of this provision. It's basically 1% compounded over 50 years.

To bend the cost curve, you only need to change that provision from CPI + 1%, to CPI, or CPI -1%. I'm sure it doesn't explain all of the problem, but IIRC, it explains a vast majority of it.

 

[hoot1]

if you don't think Medicare gets healthcare quite a bit cheaper than any private health insurance pays, or those that are uninsured pay, then you're just flat very misinformed.

and if you're opposed to any minimum wage that some employer somewhere can't afford to pay, then you're opposed to any minimum wage at all.

Medicare is easy to fix. We've discussed this before. There is a provision in the 1969 bill that allows the RUC to adjust the fee for service schedule every year to CPI +1-2%.

If I take my handy HP 10B II, and plug in N= 50, I/YR=3 (assuming a Fed goal of 2% inflation +1% RUC increase), PV= $200 (potential price of a random procedure in 1969 dollars), PMT= 0, and hit FV, it shows $876.78. What that means, in my quick/simple example, is that the cost of a $200 dollar procedure has gone up 438%, because of this provision. It's basically 1% compounded over 50 years.

To bend the cost curve, you only need to change that provision from CPI + 1%, to CPI, or CPI -1%. I'm sure it doesn't explain all of the problem, but IIRC, it explains a vast majority of it.

IGW and Digressions, for anyone who doesn't think Medicare needs reform or thinks it will be easy, i offer this informative article which suggests some reforms which both parties should be able to accept. These suggestions do sound necessary and easy to at least obtain agreement. Implementing the reforms may not be easy and will take time and effort.

The article in part states,

While Democrats and Republicans remain sharply divided over the future of the Affordable Care Act, the law commonly known as Obamacare, there is bipartisan consensus that health care needs to become more affordable. There also is widespread agreement that Medicare, while crucially important to the country’s seniors, will need to be modernized and improved to be sustainable and successful for generations to come.
​

The reforms required start with...

1. Medicare’s benefit design should be streamlined.

2..Medicare’s enrollment process needs to provide better information.

3. The Medicare Advantage payment system should be reformed and improved to cut costs and increase competition among all Medicare options.

4. Introduce higher premiums for higher-income beneficiaries. To slow the growth of Medicare’s costs, higher income beneficiaries should pay a larger s​

 

[Thyrsis]

View embedded media

AOC 1
Kraushaar 0

For a total dumbass, it's weird that she's able to make basic points and that establishment goobers keep throwing out point-missing conventional wisdom nonsense at her in "response".

 

[Digressions]

IGW and Digressions, for anyone who doesn't think Medicare needs reform or thinks it will be easy, i offer this informative article which suggests some reforms which both parties should be able to accept. These suggestions do sound necessary and easy to at least obtain agreement. Implementing the reforms may not be easy and will take time and effort.

The article in part states,

While Democrats and Republicans remain sharply divided over the future of the Affordable Care Act, the law commonly known as Obamacare, there is bipartisan consensus that health care needs to become more affordable. There also is widespread agreement that Medicare, while crucially important to the country’s seniors, will need to be modernized and improved to be sustainable and successful for generations to come.
​

The reforms required start with...

1. Medicare’s benefit design should be streamlined.

2..Medicare’s enrollment process needs to provide better information.

3. The Medicare Advantage payment system should be reformed and improved to cut costs and increase competition among all Medicare options.

4. Introduce higher premiums for higher-income beneficiaries. To slow the growth of Medicare’s costs, higher income beneficiaries should pay a larger s​

I gave a simple solution to a simple glich/mistake that was made when the Medicare bill was written. A solution that I've never seen written about, or broadcast anywhere. One that has cost our society hundreds of billions of dollars, and if left unchecked, will cost us trillions in the future.

Even if we didn't have the structural problems we do(less workers, making wages that aren't keeping up, while paying for more beneficiaries), this would still be a major problem, and only exacerbates the ones that do exist. I acknowledged it may not be the only reform needed, and am open to your suggestions.

It really is simple, though. If you think procedures haven't increased enough, relative to wages and other prices in our economy, leave it alone. If you're happy with that relationship, as it stands today, change it to CPI. If you think expenses have increased too much relatively, make it CPI -.25%, or whatever you'd like, for a certain length of time.

When I describe it as simple, I'm referring to the amount of time and effort it would take to make the adjustment. You wouldn't have to rewrite an entire bill, or change anything else related to Medicare. If anything is hard about it, your response highlights the difficulty. 1-2% compounded in perpetuity is a big deal.

 

[All4You]

At least we can stop pretending that she’s being solely thrust into the spotlight by the right wing media. She’s bringing a good chunk of it on herself.

Exactly. Of course right wing media will respond to what she is suggesting, but left wing media not only responds, but embraces.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...her-they-like-it-or-not/ar-BBSbkCl?li=BBnb7Kz

 

[Thyrsis]

What he said was totally disingenuous, no? As I understand it....the 70% she was talking about was a marginal rate over $10m?

It's a dumb policy idea that doesn't accomplish anything positive...but it does Scalisce no good to totally distort it.

Bright light Scott Walker pushes the same line as Scalise.

 

[twenty02]

Bright light Scott Walker pushes the same line as Scalise.

View embedded media

https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-ame...ricans-support-raising-the-top-tax-rate-to-70

 

[Digressions]

https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-ame...ricans-support-raising-the-top-tax-rate-to-70

I still say the schedule is more important than the rate, and income taxes are only a small part of the overall solution. I hope we make smaller, more incremental changes throughout our economy/society, that lead us to where we want to be.

 

[Fro]

And owned

 

[Thyrsis]

https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-ame...ricans-support-raising-the-top-tax-rate-to-70

Thanks for pulling that. I think it matters what voters are actually thinking.

That doesn't mean "we" have our marching orders, and it doesn't mean that all the talk around increasing the tax brackets has merit, but we should at least be having an honest, principled, outcome-curious debate around such topics.

 

[Thyrsis]

https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-ame...ricans-support-raising-the-top-tax-rate-to-70

Who knows how reliable the polling is (and again, we don't need to reach firm conclusions about any of it), but it's curious that per this poll most registered voters are further "left" than the elected Democrats, yet those elected Democrats (broad brushstroke here) have been cautiously triangulating and tip-toeing in centristy-left (if that) territory.

 

[twenty02]

I still say the schedule is more important than the rate, and income taxes are only a small part of the overall solution. I hope we make smaller, more incremental changes throughout our economy/society, that lead us to where we want to be.

Yes tax rates shouldn't be set by public polls. Just was surprised to see the results.

 

[iuwclurker]

Who knows how reliable the polling is (and again, we don't need to reach firm conclusions about any of it), but it's curious that per this poll most registered voters are further "left" than the elected Democrats, yet those elected Democrats (broad brushstroke here) have been cautiously triangulating and tip-toeing in centristy-left (if that) territory.

What's so surprising? Money matters to everyone. Money, economics, jobs.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

Who knows how reliable the polling is (and again, we don't need to reach firm conclusions about any of it), but it's curious that per this poll most registered voters are further "left" than the elected Democrats, yet those elected Democrats (broad brushstroke here) have been cautiously triangulating and tip-toeing in centristy-left (if that) territory.

as i've noted numerous times, Dem voters are left of the DNC, thus left of most elected Dem legislators.

the DNC has been captured by the moneyed interests, and while liberal on social policies the moneyed interests don't care about, they are not so liberal to downright very conservative on economic matters.

Hilary was a conservative thinking free trading neocon who finally accepted gay rights stances after her meteorologists detected a change in the wind direction. yet the darling of the DNC. (DNC funders)

the DNC did all they could to sabotage Bernie, (and will try and do so again), because he was liberal on econ matters also.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

Who knows how reliable the polling is (and again, we don't need to reach firm conclusions about any of it), but it's curious that per this poll most registered voters are further "left" than the elected Democrats, yet those elected Democrats (broad brushstroke here) have been cautiously triangulating and tip-toeing in centristy-left (if that) territory.

GOP voters are economically left of the party itself also, (hard not to be economically left of the GOP party).

of course we've all been brainwashed that if we tax the rich, the rich will run out of money.

probably why the rich are struggling so, and the working class is living it up on easy street.

as for taxing the rich, the govt and the working class recirculate income virtually the instant they get it, and that recirculated money always gets distributed disproportionately back to the owner/investor class anyway.

higher tax rates on the rich only puts more money back into circulation, and that benefits all classes.

something that isn't addressed by either side much, is housing costs.

widespread serious rent control, (thus a curb on ownership costs also), is the only thing that can keep future generations from being not only "house poor", but literally house poverty stricken.

 

[iuwclurker]

 

[iuwclurker]

Juan Williams on AOC fever:

“A freshman congresswoman who has held office for less than two weeks is dominating the Democratic conversation on Twitter, generating more interactions — retweets plus likes — than the five most prolific news organizations combined over the last 30 days,” according to Axios.

While Trump loves to tweet directly to his older, white, male base, Ocasio-Cortez tweets and uses Instagram to reach directly to the growing number of young voters, especially energized anti-Trump Democrats, who are describing themselves in record numbers as liberals.​

 

[Fro]

She's even going on Twitch streams.

 

[Hank Reardon]

Juan Williams on AOC fever:

“A freshman congresswoman who has held office for less than two weeks is dominating the Democratic conversation on Twitter, generating more interactions — retweets plus likes — than the five most prolific news organizations combined over the last 30 days,” according to Axios.

While Trump loves to tweet directly to his older, white, male base, Ocasio-Cortez tweets and uses Instagram to reach directly to the growing number of young voters, especially energized anti-Trump Democrats, who are describing themselves in record numbers as liberals.​

Well, yeah. She's the congressional equivalent of a kid running for student body president promising a coke machine (free, or course) in every classroom, a 2 day school week, and A's for everyone. Of course "young liberals" are going to thinks she's the next coming.

 

[IliacCrest]

Well, yeah. She's the congressional equivalent of a kid running for student body president promising a coke machine (free, or course) in every classroom, a 2 day school week, and A's for everyone. Of course "young liberals" are going to thinks she's the next coming.

LOL you forgot to say “and free cars, free houses, free healthcare, and paychecks for nothing” as part of your brilliant illustration.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

If have high hopes for this young leader. Hopefully she doesn't destroy her career in a public flame out prior to gaining maturity and a more holistic understanding of how people and this country work.

 

[iuwclurker]

Well, yeah. She's the congressional equivalent of a kid running for student body president promising a coke machine (free, or course) in every classroom, a 2 day school week, and A's for everyone. Of course "young liberals" are going to thinks she's the next coming.

Mash-up of Bernie and Trump except that unlike Bernie she's a Democrat, young, relates to brown people, and acknowledges that it's important to be pragmatic and unlike Trump she's not the biggest POS to ever walk the planet? All the wise Democrats need from her is to bring in more young votes. Looks like she might deliver.

 

[Hank Reardon]

Mash-up of Bernie and Trump except that unlike Bernie she's a Democrat, young, relates to brown people, and acknowledges that it's important to be pragmatic and unlike Trump she's not the biggest POS to ever walk the planet? All the wise Democrats need from her is to bring in more young votes. Looks like she might deliver.

I'm not sure yet on the pragmatic part. The rest is rather inarguable.

 

[iuwclurker]

I'm not sure yet on the pragmatic part. The rest is rather inarguable.

She said it on the Daily Show interview. All I said was that she acknowledges it.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

Juan Williams on AOC fever:

“A freshman congresswoman who has held office for less than two weeks is dominating the Democratic conversation on Twitter, generating more interactions — retweets plus likes — than the five most prolific news organizations combined over the last 30 days,” according to Axios.

While Trump loves to tweet directly to his older, white, male base, Ocasio-Cortez tweets and uses Instagram to reach directly to the growing number of young voters, especially energized anti-Trump Democrats, who are describing themselves in record numbers as liberals.​

young people will be more of a political force, when voting by Tweet is legalized.

until then, i'm guessing they'll continue to talk the talk, but not walk the walk.

 

[Standard Issue]

young people will be more of a political force, when voting by Tweet is legalized.

until then, i'm guessing they'll continue to talk the talk, but not walk the walk.

Young people will be more of a political force, when voting by Tweet is legalized. Until then i'm guessing they'll continue to talk the talk, but not walk the walk.

 

[iuwclurker]

Young people will be more of a political force, when voting by Tweet is legalized. Until then i'm guessing they'll continue to talk the talk, but not walk the walk.

I don't think it's laziness or the like, I think it's lack of interest, their busy life and they don't think of it. Gun violence, #MeToo, and #KuhDrumpf are increasing their interest and twitter and other social media are being used as reminders. They'll find time if they're reminded and have the interest.

Another difference that's historically unprecedented is that these children are growing up in the Internet Age. All bets are off imo.

 

[iuwclurker]

Young people will be more of a political force, when voting by Tweet is legalized. Until then i'm guessing they'll continue to talk the talk, but not walk the walk.

Witness:



Only takes one reason.

 

[Fro]

You may not agree with AOC's political philosophies, but I don't think any sensible person could watch this discussion with Ta-Nehisi Coates (first ~50 min of the video) and think that this is a stupid person.