I break my own rule about AOC

[Rockfish1]

I've made no secret that I think some of us have gone round the bend in their obsession with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez -- who reportedly has a long term ginger boyfriend, which should either calm you down or heat you up. So I try not to post about her, except to make fun of people who post about her. But this is meta-criticism about the criticism about AOC, so I think it's an exception. Anyway, Alexandra Petri kills this:

Enough is enough! Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez needs to stop inserting herself into our every waking moment!

I am sick of hearing about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez from my voice talking about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. I would like to spend just one day without seeking out, looking at and commenting on pictures of her everywhere she goes. It would be nice, just once, not to have to be enraged by clicking on an article that mentions her name, and then another, and then another. Just once I want to spend a day without bringing her up, unprovoked, in the middle of a discussion of an unrelated subject.

I just don’t know why people are so obsessed with her, specifically, myself. Why has she compelled me to type her name so many times that when I type the letter “A,” my phone supplies “OC"? It is a conspiracy, I think.

I don’t see why we — I, specifically — have to be talking about her all the time. She should not have made me build a special tab for my website that is dedicated to documenting her every move and outfit. The other day I was obliged to draw 17 caricatures of her, which I then hung over my dining room table. She is getting out of hand!

Just yesterday, I had to listen to an exhausting, 10-minute lecture from some idiot who would not shut up about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, only to discover that it was myself, talking to myself. This happens every day.

Why is it that when I look into fire, her face emerges and when I gaze at the spots on a cow (She hates the cows! She wants to destroy them!), I see what appears to be her profile? How can it be that this week alone I have read 18 articles about her, two of which I did not write?

Who, I ask, who decided she should be the face of the Democratic Party that I see before my eyes when I close my eyes and also before my eyes when I open my eyes and furthermore in a framed picture hung over the foot of my bed and then again in a gold locket labeled “Nemesis” that I clutch so tightly in my sleep that my fingers lose circulation?

Does it make me happy that I have covered every wall of my living space with images of her getting into and out of cars so that I might evaluate the emissions of said cars? I don’t know what it makes me feel, exactly. It makes me clench my fist with great alarm and knock over the three unflattering busts of her I have placed on my dresser. You would think that even one of my thoughts could be about something else, but they aren’t. That seems like bias, to me! I bet that is bias.

The part of my brain where I used to store useful information such as what breeds of dog should not be given corn products is now a Times Square-style smorgasbord of billboards of her face, name and random snippets of trivia about her. She is going to be in a comic book! Her mother wants her to get married! I used to think about the deficit, I think. I don’t remember.

I blame her.​

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

I've made no secret that I think some of us have gone round the bend in their obsession with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez -- who reportedly has a long term ginger boyfriend, which should either calm you down or heat you up. So I try not to post about her, except to make fun of people who post about her. But this is meta-criticism about the criticism about AOC, so I think it's an exception. Anyway, Alexandra Petri kills this:

Enough is enough! Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez needs to stop inserting herself into our every waking moment!

I am sick of hearing about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez from my voice talking about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. I would like to spend just one day without seeking out, looking at and commenting on pictures of her everywhere she goes. It would be nice, just once, not to have to be enraged by clicking on an article that mentions her name, and then another, and then another. Just once I want to spend a day without bringing her up, unprovoked, in the middle of a discussion of an unrelated subject.

I just don’t know why people are so obsessed with her, specifically, myself. Why has she compelled me to type her name so many times that when I type the letter “A,” my phone supplies “OC"? It is a conspiracy, I think.

I don’t see why we — I, specifically — have to be talking about her all the time. She should not have made me build a special tab for my website that is dedicated to documenting her every move and outfit. The other day I was obliged to draw 17 caricatures of her, which I then hung over my dining room table. She is getting out of hand!

Just yesterday, I had to listen to an exhausting, 10-minute lecture from some idiot who would not shut up about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, only to discover that it was myself, talking to myself. This happens every day.

Why is it that when I look into fire, her face emerges and when I gaze at the spots on a cow (She hates the cows! She wants to destroy them!), I see what appears to be her profile? How can it be that this week alone I have read 18 articles about her, two of which I did not write?

Who, I ask, who decided she should be the face of the Democratic Party that I see before my eyes when I close my eyes and also before my eyes when I open my eyes and furthermore in a framed picture hung over the foot of my bed and then again in a gold locket labeled “Nemesis” that I clutch so tightly in my sleep that my fingers lose circulation?

Does it make me happy that I have covered every wall of my living space with images of her getting into and out of cars so that I might evaluate the emissions of said cars? I don’t know what it makes me feel, exactly. It makes me clench my fist with great alarm and knock over the three unflattering busts of her I have placed on my dresser. You would think that even one of my thoughts could be about something else, but they aren’t. That seems like bias, to me! I bet that is bias.

The part of my brain where I used to store useful information such as what breeds of dog should not be given corn products is now a Times Square-style smorgasbord of billboards of her face, name and random snippets of trivia about her. She is going to be in a comic book! Her mother wants her to get married! I used to think about the deficit, I think. I don’t remember.

I blame her.​

I read this as a McSweeney's.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Repubs won't let the AOC drama die down anytime soon. They see it as the free campaign rhetoric that keeps on giving.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

Repubs won't let the AOC drama die down anytime soon. They see it as the free campaign rhetoric that keeps on giving.

Republicans know it’s easy to keep their base all riled up by constantly talking about AOC. She’s a she...and she’s brown. Just to be clear, I don’t mean all republicans, just that fringe 90%.

 

[MrBing]

Republicans know it’s easy to keep their base all riled up by constantly talking about AOC. She’s a she...and she’s brown. Just to be clear, I don’t mean all republicans, just that fringe 90%.

Let's be honest about her. She wants to be in the spotlight and finds a way to get herself in the news and on camera all the time without any help from the pubs. I've tried to avoid reading about her or seeing her on the news and I can't. I think she should back away from the spotlight for a while. I like her and think she has potential to be helpful to our cause but she's not totally prepared for prime time yet and believe she can be helpful later when she is more prepared.

 

[wiede]

Repubs won't let the AOC drama die down anytime soon. They see it as the free campaign rhetoric that keeps on giving.

She’s the new Hillary. A few years after Hillary left the scene.

Could’ve been Pelosi, but she’s kicked Trump’s @ss several times already and is actually being very restrained.

I’ve never understood the right’s obsession in manufacturing things/distorting things that they use to demonize popular left wing politicians. It’s their fuel to drive their grievances.

Sure, the left is obsessed with Trump, and before that, W. But W got us into two wars and tried to legitimize torture. And Trump is an unfit, imbecile crook, masquerading as a competent president. If you’re going to obsess, those things qualify as good things to obsess about.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

She’s the new Hillary. A few years after Hillary left the scene.

Could’ve been Pelosi, but she’s kicked Trump’s @ss several times already and is actually being very restrained.

I’ve never understood the right’s obsession in manufacturing things/distorting things that they use to demonize popular left wing politicians. It’s their fuel to drive their grievances.

Sure, the left is obsessed with Trump, and before that, W. But W got us into two wars and tried to legitimize torture. And Trump is an unfit, imbecile crook, masquerading as a competent president. If you’re going to obsess, those things qualify as good things to obsess about.

Are you suggesting that the right has a monopoly on manufacturing and distorting things in order to demonize politicians?

 

[twenty02]

I see a lot of correlation to what Trump did to the Republican party to what she is doing to the Democrats. Or maybe Palin is a better corollary, since she's not actually running herself.

She has an incredibly loud voice that dominates social media.... she surgically labels herself an outsider that's taking on the "establishment".... Everyone running or thinking of running is afraid of any conflict with her as she'll blast out a tweet that will make front page across the media spectrum, and put them on the defensive.

The "serious" people will poo poo her far-out ideas, her lack of experience, and her gaffes, but it won't matter.

The volume may well continue to increase - along with her influence - into next year's primaries. Many will be desperate for her endorsement, and to bring her out onto the campaign trail.

 

[hoosboot]

I see a lot of correlation to what Trump did to the Republican party to what she is doing to the Democrats. Or maybe Palin is a better corollary, since she's not actually running herself.

She has an incredibly loud voice that dominates social media.... she surgically labels herself an outsider that's taking on the "establishment".... Everyone running or thinking of running is afraid of any conflict with her as she'll blast out a tweet that will make front page across the media spectrum, and put them on the defensive.

The "serious" people will poo poo her far-out ideas, her lack of experience, and her gaffes, but it won't matter.

The volume may well continue to increase - along with her influence - into next year's primaries. Many will be desperate for her endorsement, and to bring her out onto the campaign trail.

Palin is an interesting comparison. I suspect people would have been annoyed by Palin in the House in a way similar to Steve King or Devin Nunes. It was when she was nominated as VP and was next in line for the Presidency that she became a huge problem. It's a different time now with different media dynamics and AOC can't be in the same position as Palin was for 6 years, but I still can't shake the belief that AOC's "importance" is significantly less than Palin's was. It will be interesting to see if she can grow beyond social media darling. Palin was never able to.

 

[UncleMark]

Everyone running or thinking of running is afraid of any conflict with her as she'll blast out a tweet that will make front page across the media spectrum, and put them on the defensive.

The only people she's "blasted out a tweet" toward that I'm aware of are those who have gone after her. She then replies with a slam dunk. She's good at owning those who try to knock her down.

 

[Fro]

Let's be honest about her. She wants to be in the spotlight and finds a way to get herself in the news and on camera all the time without any help from the pubs. I've tried to avoid reading about her or seeing her on the news and I can't. I think she should back away from the spotlight for a while. I like her and think she has potential to be helpful to our cause but she's not totally prepared for prime time yet and believe she can be helpful later when she is more prepared.

The choice is AOC gets covered or the issue she's talking about doesn't get covered right now. She's using her platform to try to push the policies she wants and move the Overton window.

And if you pay attention you know that nearly anyone in Congress would have the same "gaffes" she does if they got the same amount of coverage.

 

[T.M.P.]

Are you suggesting that the right has a monopoly on manufacturing and distorting things in order to demonize politicians?

Maybe not a monopoly but a huge share.

 

[Standard Issue]

Let's be honest about her. She wants to be in the spotlight and finds a way to get herself in the news and on camera all the time without any help from the pubs. I've tried to avoid reading about her or seeing her on the news and I can't. I think she should back away from the spotlight for a while. I like her and think she has potential to be helpful to our cause but she's not totally prepared for prime time yet and believe she can be helpful later when she is more prepared.

When I moved to Chicago to go to school the last thing my father told me was this: "Keep your head down, your mouth shut and your eyes & ears open until you figure out how things work"

She could use a little of the same.

 

[Hank Reardon]

When I moved to Chicago to go to school the last thing my father told me was this: "Keep your head down, your mouth shut and your eyes & ears open until you figure out how things work"

She could use a little of the same.

That's certainly traditional advice. But isn't her current strategy basically working for her? She's (seemingly) single handedly pulling her party in her direction. Gaffes? Yeah, some whoppers. But it hasn't seemed to hurt her.

It's a new game, and she's playing it as well as anyone.

 

[MrBing]

The choice is AOC gets covered or the issue she's talking about doesn't get covered right now. She's using her platform to try to push the policies she wants and move the Overton window.

And if you pay attention you know that nearly anyone in Congress would have the same "gaffes" she does if they got the same amount of coverage.

I'm big on M4A and I'm grateful that she's done her part to make it a part of the conversation. I just think it's time for her to move out of the spotlight and get smart on details before getting back into the spotlight. She can be a big help if she does that.

 

[wiede]

Are you suggesting that the right has a monopoly on manufacturing and distorting things in order to demonize politicians?

Not exactly.

But they’re a helluva lot better at it. By “it”, I mean manufacturing BS to complain about. And promoting debunked stories.

And the the media on the right tends to have much looser standards, and less safeguards to filter out false into/conspiracy theories.

Sure, the left has their share of crazies- the difference is that the crazies end up putting stuff out that ends up on Fox News- which is now the de facto state media of the white house.

It’s an insanely tight echo chamber, that tends to distort the news vs report the news. This side also tend to create their own reality- see the caravan stories, and after the elections the stories stopped almost entirely. Making it appear as a crisis, when it wasn’t.

I don’t see how any of that is debatable at this point. Unless you’re trapped in the echo chamber. Then you have no frame of reference. I feel bad for those folks.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

I see a lot of correlation to what Trump did to the Republican party to what she is doing to the Democrats. Or maybe Palin is a better corollary, since she's not actually running herself.

She has an incredibly loud voice that dominates social media.... she surgically labels herself an outsider that's taking on the "establishment".... Everyone running or thinking of running is afraid of any conflict with her as she'll blast out a tweet that will make front page across the media spectrum, and put them on the defensive.

The "serious" people will poo poo her far-out ideas, her lack of experience, and her gaffes, but it won't matter.

The volume may well continue to increase - along with her influence - into next year's primaries. Many will be desperate for her endorsement, and to bring her out onto the campaign trail.

Will she ultimately be Sarah Palin 2.0, or can she avoid that?

 

[Hank Reardon]

Will she ultimately be Sarah Palin 2.0, or can she avoid that?

Eh, She's probably in a pretty safe congressional seat so I don't see her going anywhere.There's a lot of crazy in congress. If she shoots higher (governor, senate...white house?) she could get jettisoned.

 

[Thyrsis]

I'm big on M4A and I'm grateful that she's done her part to make it a part of the conversation. I just think it's time for her to move out of the spotlight and get smart on details before getting back into the spotlight. She can be a big help if she does that.

We’ve had center-right federal governance for 40 years due, at least in part, to the party of the left playing it safe and ceding ground to conservatives (including hardliners with far less sense or good faith than AOC).

If center-lefters want real change and some real policy staying power, I’d think they’d be less focused on AOC and more on assessing whether the party establishment has its eyes on the right prize.

The Republicans have certainly not reined in their overexuberant members over the past so many years. On top of that, they’ve unleashed a powerful false propaganda machine over those forty years. They achieved their generational-plus seat of power by doing the opposite of restraining an AOC. Democrats don’t need to follow the Republican script, but they should be mindful of that reality and the need to achieve long-term results.

 

[Ohio Guy]

Eh, She's probably in a pretty safe congressional seat so I don't see her going anywhere.There's a lot of crazy in congress. If she shoots higher (governor, senate...white house?) she could get jettisoned.

Plus, she's only 29. She could pretty much be a fixture in American politics for a long, long time.

If by some chance she leaves the federal government, she'll probably end up with a lucrative TV gig on CNN, MSNBC or even the Today Show.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Plus, she's only 29. She could pretty much be a fixture in American politics for a long, long time.

If by some chance she leaves the federal government, she'll probably end up with a lucrative TV gig on CNN, MSNBC or even the Today Show.

I agree. The MSNBC crowd would eat that act up. Hell, they still trot Al Sharpton out once in a while.

 

[wiede]

I see a lot of correlation to what Trump did to the Republican party to what she is doing to the Democrats. Or maybe Palin is a better corollary, since she's not actually running herself.

She has an incredibly loud voice that dominates social media.... she surgically labels herself an outsider that's taking on the "establishment".... Everyone running or thinking of running is afraid of any conflict with her as she'll blast out a tweet that will make front page across the media spectrum, and put them on the defensive.

The "serious" people will poo poo her far-out ideas, her lack of experience, and her gaffes, but it won't matter.

The volume may well continue to increase - along with her influence - into next year's primaries. Many will be desperate for her endorsement, and to bring her out onto the campaign trail.

She’s 1,000X smarter than Palin. But just as green.
Palin is/was an imbecile.

As far as her influence, the parallel that I see is that she provides a voice to the far out element of their respective parties.

I do think that AOC is very overhyped on the right- she doesn’t have as much influence among those on the left as the folks on the right think she has. Fox News has covered her much more than the “normal” or even left wing media has covered her. She’s an absolute obsession on the right. Not so much on the left.

By contrast, Palin was a rock star on the right. She had huge buzz among those on the right. The left spoke about her also, but more in a “WTF” kind of way.

I personally think AOC does have a bright future, and she’ll learn when to pick her spots and tone things down at times. And, she’s listened to leadership, which Palin explicitly did not do.

And I don’t see AOC getting the VP nod anytime soon, even though she’s too young to get it anyway. I can’t see the dems putting up someone that raw and unqualified, given how many other good candidates there are now and for the foreseeable future.

BTW, anyone know how old you must be to be named a VP candidate? I know the president has rules, and the senate does also, but not sure about VP. If she was somehow selected as VP, and somehow the dem president passed away/resigned, what would happen if she wasn’t technically old enough to become the president?

 

[wiede]

Maybe not a monopoly but a huge share.

Agree. They’ve elevated and perfected the technique of creating and amplifying a message.

And it’s kind of how the right’s news eco system works. It’s very self-contained, and incestuous. And bat chit crazy, quite often. If something is news worthy, Fox News will barely mention it- but only if it’s harmful to their preferred politician’s cause. Other outlets do this as well, but not to the degree that fox “news” does it.

Again, there’s no comparison between the two sides now. Not much of an equivalency.

I do go on right wing media/websites, but usually all it does is make me laugh. It amazes me that people take the info presented as gospel, to the exclusion of all other news outlets.

In short, right wing media often presents a vastly different portrait than what is real.

 

[UncleMark]

BTW, anyone know how old you must be to be named a VP candidate? I know the president has rules, and the senate does also, but not sure about VP. If she was somehow selected as VP, and somehow the dem president passed away/resigned, what would happen if she wasn’t technically old enough to become the president?

For that very reason, the VP age requirement is the same as the President's.

 

[UncleMark]

Will she ultimately be Sarah Palin 2.0, or can she avoid that?

Naw, she won't. For starters, she'd have to quit halfway through her term. I don't see that happening.

 

[DrHoops]

I like AOC. Is she ready for prime time? No. Is she a horrible person? No. She seems like a very good person who is, right now, in a little bit over her head.

Republicans attack her because she's a young, attractive Rep who young voters listen to. AKA, they're scared of her and what she might become. I don't agree a lot of her proposals, just like I don't agree with a lot of politicians...but she seems to represent what her constituents want and she has very little power.

 

[Circlejoe]

I like AOC. Is she ready for prime time? No. Is she a horrible person? No. She seems like a very good person who is, right now, in a little bit over her head.

Republicans attack her because she's a young, attractive Rep who young voters listen to. AKA, they're scared of her and what she might become. I don't agree a lot of her proposals, just like I don't agree with a lot of politicians...but she seems to represent what her constituents want and she has very little power.

Republicans attack her because they can raise $$$ around the attack. They need her more than the Democrats do, but if AOC disappeared tomorrow, the GOP would find someone else to focus on and that someone would likely be a young woman of color. Even better...Muslim. It's all about the money.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Agree. They’ve elevated and perfected the technique of creating and amplifying a message.

And it’s kind of how the right’s news eco system works. It’s very self-contained, and incestuous. And bat chit crazy, quite often. If something is news worthy, Fox News will barely mention it- but only if it’s harmful to their preferred politician’s cause. Other outlets do this as well, but not to the degree that fox “news” does it.

Again, there’s no comparison between the two sides now. Not much of an equivalency.

I do go on right wing media/websites, but usually all it does is make me laugh. It amazes me that people take the info presented as gospel, to the exclusion of all other news outlets.

In short, right wing media often presents a vastly different portrait than what is real.

You could insert left wing media in each slot above and make the same points.

Although the lemmings will say...no way, left wing media is thoughtful and smart.

 

[DrHoops]

That's right.. Exactly. They always need their fake boogeyman.

Republicans attack her because they can raise $$$ around the attack. They need her more than the Democrats do, but if AOC disappeared tomorrow, the GOP would find someone else to focus on and that someone would likely be a young woman of color. Even better...Muslim. It's all about the money.

 

[sglowrider]

That's right.. Exactly. They always need their fake boogeyman.

11,000 miles away, I have yet to hear her utter a single word. If it's a cynical indication of a bogeyman target by the Repubes, then it's time to tune out US TV soon.
She is 28y.o and her adult life is only begining. I think it's fair people cut her some slack regardless plus her intentions are good.

 

[Timmy!]

You could insert left wing media in each slot above and make the same points.

Although the lemmings will say...no way, left wing media is thoughtful and smart.

Look, we get it; everyone and everything sucks. No one, at least not in this thread, is saying the left wing media is perfect. What I have seen though, is acknowledgment that the left wing media is, in fact, NOT perfect. And make no mistake, perfect it most certainly is not. Far from it in fact.

And you know what, no one is refuting the point that you perpetually, and I do mean perpetually, try to hammer home on the cooler; that point being, all of politics - both the politicians themselves as well as the media outlets that cover them, alike - whether driven from the left or right - are flawed to a relatively large degree; and for that reason, we must remain cynical/skeptical of anything and everything having to do with American politics these days. Like I said, we get it (and by "we" I mean all the upstanding folk who frequent these parts: left-leaning, right-leaning, centrists or otherwise). Again, no one, at least not from what I've seen, disagrees with you there.

Now, what I as well as other sensible, good-faith posters do refute, is your notion that within the cesspool of which the American political landscape currently resides, all things are perfectly, diametrically, and unequivocally equal across the entirety of the broad political spectrum.

And for those of us who reject that particular portion of your notion, IMO, quite reasonably, have and continue to cite examples and objectively and coherently express reasons as to -- while the American political landscape may be f**ked up right now, and admittedly both sides bearing responsibility -- all things have not necessarily been created equal in the culpability department.

I think that's a reasonable-take. Or, at least in my opinion, it's a lot more reasonable a take than this cut & dry, black & white, painted with a broad brush havin', all-encompassing and (no offense) lazy perspective you seem to be indoctrinated with, where all things politics = nefarious intent; period, end of story; a perspective which, whether you're aware of this or not, requires one to remove any and all context from the equation in order to support.

Quit being that guy. Do better.

 

[IUCrazy2]

Look, we get it; everyone and everything sucks. No one, at least not in this thread, is saying the left wing media is perfect. What I have seen though, is acknowledgment that the left wing media is, in fact, NOT perfect. And make no mistake, perfect it most certainly is not. Far from it in fact.

And you know what, no one is refuting the point that you perpetually, and I do mean perpetually, try to hammer home on the cooler; that point being, all of politics - both the politicians themselves as well as the media outlets that cover them, alike - whether driven from the left or right - are flawed to a relatively large degree; and for that reason, we must remain cynical/skeptical of anything and everything having to do with American politics these days. Like I said, we get it (and by "we" I mean all the upstanding folk who frequent these parts: left-leaning, right-leaning, centrists or otherwise). Again, no one, at least not from what I've seen, disagrees with you there.

Now, what I as well as other sensible, good-faith posters do refute, is your notion that within the cesspool of which the American political landscape currently resides, all things are perfectly, diametrically, and unequivocally equal across the entirety of the broad political spectrum.

And for those of us who reject that particular portion of your notion, IMO, quite reasonably, have and continue to cite examples and objectively and coherently express reasons as to -- while the American political landscape may be f**ked up right now, and admittedly both sides bearing responsibility -- all things have not necessarily been created equal in the culpability department.

I think that's a reasonable-take. Or, at least in my opinion, it's a lot more reasonable a take than this cut & dry, black & white, painted with a broad brush havin', all-encompassing and (no offense) lazy perspective you seem to be indoctrinated with, where all things politics = nefarious intent; period, end of story; a perspective which, whether you're aware of this or not, requires one to remove any and all context from the equation in order to support.

Quit being that guy. Do better.

Yeah, that is not a reasonable take.

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

Plus, she's only 29. She could pretty much be a fixture in American politics for a long, long time.

If by some chance she leaves the federal government, she'll probably end up with a lucrative TV gig on CNN, MSNBC or even the Today Show.

Does being in politics that long (particularly in Washington) insulate someone from reality?

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

Republicans attack her because they can raise $$$ around the attack. They need her more than the Democrats do, but if AOC disappeared tomorrow, the GOP would find someone else to focus on and that someone would likely be a young woman of color. Even better...Muslim. It's all about the money.

LOL, Omar is an easy target based on her rhetoric alone. No doubt her appearance is only going to compound the obsession for the far right.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Look, we get it; everyone and everything sucks. No one, at least not in this thread, is saying the left wing media is perfect. What I have seen though, is acknowledgment that the left wing media is, in fact, NOT perfect. And make no mistake, perfect it most certainly is not. Far from it in fact.

And you know what, no one is refuting the point that you perpetually, and I do mean perpetually, try to hammer home on the cooler; that point being, all of politics - both the politicians themselves as well as the media outlets that cover them, alike - whether driven from the left or right - are flawed to a relatively large degree; and for that reason, we must remain cynical/skeptical of anything and everything having to do with American politics these days. Like I said, we get it (and by "we" I mean all the upstanding folk who frequent these parts: left-leaning, right-leaning, centrists or otherwise). Again, no one, at least not from what I've seen, disagrees with you there.

Now, what I as well as other sensible, good-faith posters do refute, is your notion that within the cesspool of which the American political landscape currently resides, all things are perfectly, diametrically, and unequivocally equal across the entirety of the broad political spectrum.

And for those of us who reject that particular portion of your notion, IMO, quite reasonably, have and continue to cite examples and objectively and coherently express reasons as to -- while the American political landscape may be f**ked up right now, and admittedly both sides bearing responsibility -- all things have not necessarily been created equal in the culpability department.

I think that's a reasonable-take. Or, at least in my opinion, it's a lot more reasonable a take than this cut & dry, black & white, painted with a broad brush havin', all-encompassing and (no offense) lazy perspective you seem to be indoctrinated with, where all things politics = nefarious intent; period, end of story; a perspective which, whether you're aware of this or not, requires one to remove any and all context from the equation in order to support.

Quit being that guy. Do better.

I agree with 90%of what you post here and thank you for putting in the time and being reasonable. Unfortunately, the 10% I disagree with is the notion that others here react the way you state. The response I get, and I mean almost always, is this ultra biased offended sobbing that "no way" could the left or democrats "ever" act like this. Only Left wing media is "smart" and "right" and only right wing media is "dumb" and "wrong". The only response I see to pointing out flaws and hypocrisy among Dems is "well...TrumpTrumpTrump". Simple and lazy.

It's ok, the right wing boards I have posted on and the conversations I have...I get the same response only dipped in red.

Sucks to be an independent moderate...there are damned few in DC that speak for me.

Peace.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

I've made no secret that I think some of us have gone round the bend in their obsession with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez -- who reportedly has a long term ginger boyfriend, which should either calm you down or heat you up. So I try not to post about her, except to make fun of people who post about her. But this is meta-criticism about the criticism about AOC, so I think it's an exception. Anyway, Alexandra Petri kills this:

Enough is enough! Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez needs to stop inserting herself into our every waking moment!

I am sick of hearing about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez from my voice talking about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. I would like to spend just one day without seeking out, looking at and commenting on pictures of her everywhere she goes. It would be nice, just once, not to have to be enraged by clicking on an article that mentions her name, and then another, and then another. Just once I want to spend a day without bringing her up, unprovoked, in the middle of a discussion of an unrelated subject.

I just don’t know why people are so obsessed with her, specifically, myself. Why has she compelled me to type her name so many times that when I type the letter “A,” my phone supplies “OC"? It is a conspiracy, I think.

I don’t see why we — I, specifically — have to be talking about her all the time. She should not have made me build a special tab for my website that is dedicated to documenting her every move and outfit. The other day I was obliged to draw 17 caricatures of her, which I then hung over my dining room table. She is getting out of hand!

Just yesterday, I had to listen to an exhausting, 10-minute lecture from some idiot who would not shut up about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, only to discover that it was myself, talking to myself. This happens every day.

Why is it that when I look into fire, her face emerges and when I gaze at the spots on a cow (She hates the cows! She wants to destroy them!), I see what appears to be her profile? How can it be that this week alone I have read 18 articles about her, two of which I did not write?

Who, I ask, who decided she should be the face of the Democratic Party that I see before my eyes when I close my eyes and also before my eyes when I open my eyes and furthermore in a framed picture hung over the foot of my bed and then again in a gold locket labeled “Nemesis” that I clutch so tightly in my sleep that my fingers lose circulation?

Does it make me happy that I have covered every wall of my living space with images of her getting into and out of cars so that I might evaluate the emissions of said cars? I don’t know what it makes me feel, exactly. It makes me clench my fist with great alarm and knock over the three unflattering busts of her I have placed on my dresser. You would think that even one of my thoughts could be about something else, but they aren’t. That seems like bias, to me! I bet that is bias.

The part of my brain where I used to store useful information such as what breeds of dog should not be given corn products is now a Times Square-style smorgasbord of billboards of her face, name and random snippets of trivia about her. She is going to be in a comic book! Her mother wants her to get married! I used to think about the deficit, I think. I don’t remember.

I blame her.​

I can't find a better thread for this, so I'm just going to dump this here:

I'm starting to come around to the idea that the Democrats should simply stop pussy-footing around and embrace the far left. We're never going to win the #NeverTrumpers. They don't want moderate Democrats. They want moderate Republicans running with D's next to their names, and when we don't give them that, they will throw a hissy fit, vote Libertarian, and then blame the left for all the Trumpistas that get re-elected.

Screw that.

America is moving left. The country is embracing progressive ideas. So much so, that "socialism" isn't even a dirty word, anymore. I'm just about ready for the party to just accept this reality, and jump on the driver's seat, instead of waiting to see where the bandwagon is going, and then meekly following behind at a safe distance.

Republicans are obsessed with AOC because she scares the shit out of them. Not her personally, of course. They don't care about her. But the fact that her "radical" ideas are gaining traction is what scares the shit out of them. I think it's high time we start instilling even more fear.

 

[Noodle]

I can't find a better thread for this, so I'm just going to dump this here:

I'm starting to come around to the idea that the Democrats should simply stop pussy-footing around and embrace the far left. We're never going to win the #NeverTrumpers. They don't want moderate Democrats. They want moderate Republicans running with D's next to their names, and when we don't give them that, they will throw a hissy fit, vote Libertarian, and then blame the left for all the Trumpistas that get re-elected.

Screw that.

America is moving left. The country is embracing progressive ideas. So much so, that "socialism" isn't even a dirty word, anymore. I'm just about ready for the party to just accept this reality, and jump on the driver's seat, instead of waiting to see where the bandwagon is going, and then meekly following behind at a safe distance.

Republicans are obsessed with AOC because she scares the shit out of them. Not her personally, of course. They don't care about her. But the fact that her "radical" ideas are gaining traction is what scares the shit out of them. I think it's high time we start instilling even more fear.

I despise Trump. But I have my limits when it comes to whom I would vote for as a Democratic candidate. I think you underestimate how many people are like me in that they might be willing to stuff their nostrils full of cotton and vote for Trump over a far left candidate.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

I despise Trump. But I have my limits when it comes to whom I would vote for as a Democratic candidate. I think you underestimate how many people are like me in that they might be willing to stuff their nostrils full of cotton and vote for Trump over a far left candidate.

I don't think my underestimation is my issue. I think you overestimate how many people like you would be willing to vote for a Democratic candidate who is a genuine Democrat.

 

[Hank Reardon]

I can't find a better thread for this, so I'm just going to dump this here:

I'm starting to come around to the idea that the Democrats should simply stop pussy-footing around and embrace the far left. We're never going to win the #NeverTrumpers. They don't want moderate Democrats. They want moderate Republicans running with D's next to their names, and when we don't give them that, they will throw a hissy fit, vote Libertarian, and then blame the left for all the Trumpistas that get re-elected.

Screw that.

America is moving left. The country is embracing progressive ideas. So much so, that "socialism" isn't even a dirty word, anymore. I'm just about ready for the party to just accept this reality, and jump on the driver's seat, instead of waiting to see where the bandwagon is going, and then meekly following behind at a safe distance.

Republicans are obsessed with AOC because she scares the shit out of them. Not her personally, of course. They don't care about her. But the fact that her "radical" ideas are gaining traction is what scares the shit out of them. I think it's high time we start instilling even more fear.

I suppose it depends on why Hillary lost so many of the States that Obama had taken so easily. If she lost because she failed to motivate the Left side of the party to show up in Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc, then you may be correct. If she lost because working class white democrats abandoned the party, then that's a different matter. Bernie and Warren won't bring back the latter. And winning California and New York by even larger margins doesn't help without taking back those Midwestern and Southern States that so many Democrats routinely disparage when they're preaching to their choir. (Pssst. They can hear you.)

So I don't know. You and Rockfish might be dead on. It's hard to imagine anyone not winning against Trump, but there may be a few loose nuts who could blow it. The best thing (IMO) for the Democrats is to narrow that field down to a clear choice early...one progressive vs one moderate...and allow a real choice based on what the Democratic voters want for a platform. Having 5 progressives vs Biden, or 5 moderates vs Sanders is likely to produce the wrong candidate in the end.

 

[Rockfish1]

I despise Trump. But I have my limits when it comes to whom I would vote for as a Democratic candidate. I think you underestimate how many people are like me in that they might be willing to stuff their nostrils full of cotton and vote for Trump over a far left candidate.

You're a conservative. It'd be crazy for Democrats to lift a finger to attract conservatives, who are unlikely ever to actually vote for a Democrat even if they despise Trump.

Also, this is a good place for me to reiterate that it's a terrible idea for Democrats to try to water down their message to attract more centristy centrists. If you break down the electorate on social and economic axes, the most sparsely populated political territory is located where the centristy centrists all live:

That lower-right quadrant where there are very few dots contains voters who are liberal on social issues but conservative on economic issues. That's where you find candidates like Howard Schultz, who'd like to do for America what he did to the Seattle SuperSonics. That upper left quadrant, which includes voters who are liberal on economic issues but conservative on social issues, is Trump territory. Democrats couldn't -- and absolutely shouldn't -- try to out-Trump Trump to attract those voters.

Democrats will have to attract some votes outside that lower-left quadrant, which is where the vast majority of Democratic votes and Democratic energy will come from. But Democrats have to start in the quadrant where their base lives. No conservatives are going to vote for a Democrat that lives solidly in that lower-left quadrant, and Democrats shouldn't kid themselves about this.

[Edit: spelling.]