Trump, Pelosi, and AOC

This twitter-based scandal has gotten hilariously ridiculous.
Fans of Trump, fans of Pelosi, and even detractors of AOC have now been put in very awkward positions.

First of all you had Trump jumping to Pelosi's defense.

“When will the Radical Left Congresswomen apologize to our Country, the people of Israel and even to the Office of the President, for the foul language they have used, and the terrible things they have said,” Trump wrote Monday morning on Twitter. “So many people are angry at them & their horrible & disgusting actions!”

In a second tweet less than an hour later, Trump warned: "If Democrats want to unite around the foul language & racist hatred spewed from the mouths and actions of these very unpopular & unrepresentative Congresswomen, it will be interesting to see how it plays out. I can tell you that they have made Israel feel abandoned by the U.S."

We need to pause on this for a moment.
Trump called Pelosi a “nasty, vindictive, horrible person" just a few months ago.
From a partisan viewpoint, Trump should be delighted with the spat.
So why would he care about AOC hurting Pelosi's feelings if he didn't recognize that Pelosi is part of the establishment like Trump is?
Then Trump takes it too far.

The posts represent the president’s latest broadside against Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), the women of color whom Trump tweeted Sunday morning should "go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came."

Trump also wrote that the four congresswomen "originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe," even though three of the lawmakers were born in the United States. “These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements,” Trump tweeted.

Ocasio-Cortez was born in the Bronx borough of New York City, Pressley was born in Cincinnati and Tlaib was born in Detroit. Omar, a Somalian refugee, immigrated to the U.S. with her family in the early 1990s, and became a citizen in 2000 when she was 17 years old.

Trump, addressing reporters outside the White House on Monday afternoon, said his tweets were "not at all racist," and doubled down on his line of attack against the congresswomen.

"If somebody has a problem with our country, if somebody doesn't want to be in our country, they should leave," the president said.

So they should "go back" to New York City, Cincinnati, and Detroit?
Too late. They already have. Obviously this comes from a viewpoint of who "looks American".
Even fellow Republicans have stayed silent.
And then the "Love it or leave it" line is a topper.

So now Pelosi has found herself forced to defend the same congresswomen that she was trying to slap down just a few days ago, while at the same time condemning the President who is defending her.

The president, asked by reporters at the White House whether he was concerned that white nationalists are backing his remarks, said, “It doesn’t concern me because many people agree with me.”

Pelosi said the House resolution will be offered by a group of Democrats who were born abroad, and she called for Democrats and Republicans alike to support it.

“I reject the president’s xenophobic comments meant to divide our nation,” Pelosi said in a letter to colleagues.

Just on the surface this is comedy gold.
On a deeper level, this feud makes it more difficult to rationalize the line that AOC is just an establishment tool (unless you believe in 11th dimensional chess).
It looks a lot more like a power struggle in the Democratic Party, and the presidential man-child butted-in and exposed this game for what it is.

What is interesting is that "the Squad", just four freshmen in Congress, who didn't get bribed on their way into office, can cause so much disruption.

It tells me two things are likely true:
1) TPTB cannot tolerate any dissent of any kind, and
2) TPTB's control is very fragile (see #1)

Share
up
22 users have voted.

Comments

The Aspie Corner's picture

And their continued propping up of liberal bourgeois "democracy" shows this.

up
6 users have voted.

Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.

Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.

@The Aspie Corner

What is your opinion of the comical situation that gjohnsit is pointng to?

up
4 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

The Aspie Corner's picture

@Fishtroller 02 @Fishtroller 02 And no matter how ridiculous this gets, they're still fluffing the capitalists at the end of the day. And yes, that goes for the current crop of so-called "Social Democrats", or "Democratic Socialists", if you prefer, hence why I'm not impressed with any of them.

up
2 users have voted.

Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.

Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.

@The Aspie Corner
no one other than yourself, creating a social movement is quite a challenge.
Can you give examples of people who have succeeded in getting elected who meet your standards?

up
4 users have voted.
Shahryar's picture

@The Aspie Corner

like the Weathermen? the SLA? Anything short of that would be not radical enough?

up
5 users have voted.
The Aspie Corner's picture

@Shahryar This is America. And here in America we literally have to bow and curtsy to the capitalists and imperialists before we can even BEG for any damned thing from them.

up
2 users have voted.

Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.

Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.

Not Henry Kissinger's picture

On a deeper level, this feud makes it more difficult to rationalize the line that AOC is just an establishment tool (unless you believe in 11th dimensional chess).

AOC is part of the Obama network, who are trying to replace Clinton network at the top of the party.

And yes, her staunch advocacy on immigration is laudable and surprisingly effective, but let's not pretend she's acting without direction.

up
7 users have voted.

Peace Sells

@Not Henry Kissinger

What is AOC's connection to Obama?

up
3 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

Not Henry Kissinger's picture

@Fishtroller 02

The people who wrote AOC's GND legislation just happen to be long time Obama hands.

up
6 users have voted.

Peace Sells

@Not Henry Kissinger

legislation both had ties to Barack and Michelle Obama. However, the New Concensus group they started makes this statement on their webpage.

"The obstacles to getting there are political, not technical. Entrenched, backward-looking political elites fight to keep the world as it is. An equally-powerful blocker is their reigning consensus—called neoliberalism or “the Washington Consensus”—that drives their thinking on economics, government, technology, labor and business. Over a period when multiple existential threats to life as we know it have emerged into plain view, the Washington Consensus has deliberately sought to paralyze societies to prevent them from acting collectively."

Doesn't sound like they are too fond of the Obama POV at this point.

up
5 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

Not Henry Kissinger's picture

@Fishtroller 02 @Fishtroller 02

Sounds just like Obama's POV.

up
2 users have voted.

Peace Sells

@Not Henry Kissinger

information provided on the New Concensus website is hardly "Platitudes and buzzwords with no substance".

up
1 user has voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@Not Henry Kissinger

check out the suggested reading list for New Concensus...

https://newconsensus.com/reading-list/

up
2 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@Not Henry Kissinger

AOC is part of the Obama network, who are trying to replace Clinton network at the top of the party.

Obama and Clinton were both part of the same neoliberal network. So this statement makes no sense to me.

Where AOC differs is in a very basic and easy to understand way - she didn't get bribed on her way into office.

up
7 users have voted.
Not Henry Kissinger's picture

@gjohnsit @gjohnsit @gjohnsit @gjohnsit

Obama and Clinton were both part of the same neoliberal network. So this statement makes no sense to me.

Because your assumption that they are one and the same network is false.

Anyone who watched the 2008 primary should know that.

You think its a coincidence Obama chose to run AOC at Joe Crowley - the staunch Clintonite and powerful NYC machine pol Congressman who held out for Her long after Obama's 2008 primary victory was no longer in doubt?

If there was ever a way to strike at Hillary's power bases in both Congress and Gotham, Crowley's defeat was it.

I could go on, but if you're not prepared to at least acknowledge that there are fairly clear fault lines between the Obama and Clinton camps, what's the point?

up
5 users have voted.

Peace Sells

@Not Henry Kissinger
get up to speed, and I must have missed something. What does this refer to?

up
5 users have voted.
Not Henry Kissinger's picture

@entrepreneur @entrepreneur

for New York's 14th Congressional District seat located in the Bronx and Queens.

up
2 users have voted.

Peace Sells

@Not Henry Kissinger

You think its a coincidence Obama chose to run AOC at Joe Crowley

Obama decided this?!?
I find that hard to believe.
No, I take that back. I find it impossible to believe.

Do you honestly think that the Obama camp, in 2018, was actively looking to undermine the Clinton camp by using the Justice Democrats to do it?
That's an 11th-dimensional chess move.

I could go on, but if you're not prepared to at least acknowledge that there are fairly clear fault lines between the Obama and Clinton camps, what's the point?

In your mind, what ideological differences are there between the Obama camp and the Clinton camp?

up
4 users have voted.
Not Henry Kissinger's picture

@gjohnsit

Do you honestly think that the Obama camp, in 2018, was actively looking to undermine the Clinton camp by using the Justice Democrats to do it?

And if you can overcome your confirmation bias that summarily dismisses theories that don't jibe with your erroneous assumptions, you might just find that the paradigm of an internecine power struggle among the neo-lib establishment informs a lot of the current political climate.

up
5 users have voted.

Peace Sells

@Not Henry Kissinger
You could try to prove your extraordinary claim.
And it is extraordinary because it requires a deep level of petty Machiavellianism

I promise to go through the effort of reading it.

Otherwise, well, we're going to agree to disagree.

up
3 users have voted.
Not Henry Kissinger's picture

@gjohnsit

Justice Democrats targeted an entrenched "corporate Democrat" in Joe Crowley. Hearing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's dynamic speaking ability sealed the deal to make her the challenger the group would support.[14]

Chakrabarti started JD and then handpicked AOC to run against Crowley.

(FYI: He also embezzled $1M from JD who then delisted AOC.)

So yeah, they were "actively looking to undermine the Clinton camp by using the Justice Democrats to do it."

up
3 users have voted.

Peace Sells

@Not Henry Kissinger

In 2015, Chakrabarti "dropped everything" to join the early stages of U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders' presidential bid.

Does this sound like an Obama neoliberal to you?
Do you recall what Obama had to say about Sanders in 2016?

Also, at best this is a guilt by association argument, and this is only if you can tie Chakrabarti to Obama, which this article doesn't.

You seem to have lost your point. Maybe you should try explaining this connection again.

up
5 users have voted.

@gjohnsit all the facts on the embezzlement charge, but it sounds like a wild overcharge. And if true, the JD did what -- sat there and did nothing to recover the money? Then AOC decides to keep on as her CoS an embezzler.

It makes no sense. Not that these people running campaigns in corrupt districts are saints (as others noted above). It just seems like another way of going after AOC.

I'm not buying the link to ... was it AOC as the puppet of BHO? A little too jump-the-shark conspiratorial a CT for me.

As for Obama and Clinton camps -- yes, like one boy scout camp who have set up separate tents near to each other. Both are taking the same, well-trodden easy trail up the gentle hillside, and both have the same goal of reaching the same top, and not the summit of that much higher mountain across the valley with the difficult climb.

up
4 users have voted.
Not Henry Kissinger's picture

@gjohnsit

CHakr.. handpicked old Obama hands (with no real environmental experience BTW), to write AOC's signature legislation.

If you can't see a connection, you're not looking hard enough.

Also, plenty of Obama people worked for Bernie in 2016. That's hardly a disqualifier.

up
2 users have voted.

Peace Sells

@Not Henry Kissinger

CHakr.. handpicked old Obama hands (with no real environmental experience BTW), to write AOC's signature legislation.

You mean the non-binding proposal that got like 6 votes?

If you can't see a connection, you're not looking hard enough.

You've still failed to draw the connection between her Chief of Staff and Obama.

Also, plenty of Obama people worked for Bernie in 2016. That's hardly a disqualifier.

But you won't find any high-level Obama people who worked for Bernie.
You would think that if she was a Obama puppet that she'd have more allies in the Dems.

up
5 users have voted.

@gjohnsit

AOC was the first to play the race card, and she played it against Pelosi. She put it in a tweet, which I don't have handy, but this is a link to one of the articles covering it. Google it if you don't like the source.

AOC: Pelosi ‘Singling Out’ Progressive Women of Color ‘Disrespectful’

Next thing you know, Democrats from the black and progressive caucus are accusing AOC of playing the race card and defending Pelosi.

Then Trump steps in and defends Pelosi against those mouthy and ungrateful freshmen. He follows it up with a racist tweet that diverts all attention away from racist loser Pelosi to racist loser Trump so fast that DC, the media and Twitter all got whiplash. By attacking Trump instead of Pelosi, the fab 4 deliver party unity to Pelosi as ordered; and the headline goes from shitty Pelosi giving Trump money to lock up brown babies without getting anything in return to shitty Trump and his racist Tweets.

Couldn't have worked better for Pelosi and centrist Democrats if Trump and Pelosi planned it.

What's my bitch? These four women took on the Queen and then blinked. By playing the race card, AOC gave away the moral high ground and her political power. She turned a principled fight into a name-calling brawl. As much coverage as this food fight is getting, is anyone talking about the kids, concentration camps, Pelosi getting swindled by the GOP again? NO. It is all about that racist Trump. Do you think he cares? Hell no, bring it on. He could murder someone in the streets and his supporters wouldn't care. How many times does he have to say that before people believe him?

up
7 users have voted.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

@dkmich

AOC was the first to play the race card, and she played it against Pelosi.

I never said otherwise.
Maybe you misunderstood my point.
However, this was only after Pelosi attacked them for months.
Eventually AOC had to kick back at Pelosi or become a punching bag.

Couldn't have worked better for Pelosi and centrist Democrats if Trump and Pelosi planned it.

So you are saying that Trump allowed himself to look like a complete ass in order to save the corporate Dems?
I think it is more likely that Trump stumbled into this because he is a "stable genius".

What's my bitch? These four women took on the Queen and then blinked. By playing the race card, AOC gave away the moral high ground and her political power. She turned a principled fight into a name-calling brawl.

I'm not sure I agree 100%, but I see your point.

up
7 users have voted.

@gjohnsit

Do I think Trump did it on purpose? Hmmm, I don't know, but it certainly worked out well for Pelosi. Probably pulled AOC's chestnuts out of the fire too. Add in the immediate fundraising that it kicked off and the opportunity for endless platitudes and grandstanding by endless politicians, and it is suspicious. Proof? Not an ounce.

up
2 users have voted.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

k9disc's picture

AOC is a plant, IMO. She's the new and improved™ Washington General.

I smell establishment all over her and I can't quite shake it.

The idea that Drumpf would love to stoke the embers of the impending Democratic Civil War is not at all out of the realm of political reality. It's not even particularly Machiavellian.

That the Democrats would set up a sheep dog, to traffic in the modern political slang, is not at all out of the realm of possibility. It certainly rhymes with Hope & Change.

I was one of the VERY few that saw through Obama from the get go. I remember the same kind of pushback against the idea that he was corporate sponsored talent... I mean, he's a "community organizer".

@gjohnsit

up
8 users have voted.

“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu

@k9disc

AOC is a plant, IMO. She's the new and improved™ Washington General.
I smell establishment all over her and I can't quite shake it.

Maybe the evidence of this will be there one day, but there is none of there today.

The idea that Drumpf would love to stoke the embers of the impending Democratic Civil War is not at all out of the realm of political reality. It's not even particularly Machiavellian.

No doubt that is true.
But he tried in the most stupid way possible and it ended up backfiring.

That the Democrats would set up a sheep dog, to traffic in the modern political slang, is not at all out of the realm of possibility.

Yeh, except that AOC and the other women in the Squad are saying things that the establishment doesn't want to hear.
Criticize our wars? Criticize Wall Street? Criticize Israel?
If this is sheepdogging, this is a LOT more advanced psyops than the Dems have ever done before.

I was one of the VERY few that saw through Obama from the get go.

I was too. i never trusted him from the start, and I took a great deal of flak on TOP when I posted diaries slamming his cabinet picks BEFORE he took office.
And I don't see how AOC is doing anything like that.

up
7 users have voted.
Not Henry Kissinger's picture

@gjohnsit

If the only difference is strategy, then I fail to see any motivation for an inter-party war that involves undermining entrenched incumbents years after Obama left public office.

Power, money and influence.

You need to stop viewing political parties as philanthropic organizations and see them for what they really are: syndicates fighting over territory to control patronage.

The Clinton syndicate still controls the bulk of Dem party patronage, but after Her 2016 faceplant that influence has faded and the Clinton's are vulnerable. Obama is looking to force his way into that power vaccuum.

That would require a self-defeating level of pettiness.

Well, these ARE establishment Dems we're talking about here.

OTOH, accepting that AOC is simply unbought insurgent and is fighting for something because she believes in, is easier to prove and understand.

I don't doubt AOC believes in the things she says about immigration, and I applaud and wholeheartedly support her for speaking out so forcefully and effectively.

All I'm saying is that there is a bigger plan afoot.

up
6 users have voted.

Peace Sells

Shahryar's picture

@Not Henry Kissinger

You need to stop viewing political parties as philanthropic organizations and see them for what they really are: syndicates fighting over territory to control patronage.

I would be shocked if anyone here thinks otherwise.

We have the two umbrella groups, Repubs and Dems, who are fighting for money, then we have the sub-groups who fight within those two. But since we saw so many Clintonites in the Obama administration, including Hillary herself (!), it's likely that there's little difference between them.

up
4 users have voted.
Not Henry Kissinger's picture

@Shahryar

by stating the obvious, but I don't see how you can agree with my statement about power syndicates and then pretend like factionalism within the Dem establishment doesn't exist.

up
3 users have voted.

Peace Sells

k9disc's picture

Ukraine to secede from Russia.

Tony Podesta was running Manafort's company for the Russians (IIRC) for crying out loud. Hillary seemed to be FAR more activist in Foreign Policy than Obama wanted, but he's such a media chameleon that it's hard to tell on that front. It seems to me that they are competing factions with different Deep State and supra-state sponsors.

I'm having the same problem you are, @Not Henry Kissinger , I can't see how the people on this thread whose judgement I trust for the most part are so compartmentalized on this split.

AOC's Green New Deal is a public private partnership - It's a neoliberal approach - I don't think she knows about a Lefty approach to anything. Why would anyone want to set up a binary choice between 2 neoliberal "solutions" to climate change? I mean, what could be the possible payoff of owning "both" sides of the Democratic Divide?

That AOC is the FAR LEFT of the political spectrum can hardly be denied at this point, I think there's a long way to go from her to "Far Left", but here she sits manning the Left pane of the Overton Window.

I think there is GREAT power for manipulating the masses there.

up
7 users have voted.

“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu

snoopydawg's picture

@Not Henry Kissinger

in the DP. The Clinton one and the Obama one. This was back during the election time period when there was a fight for over the DNC leadership. Obama got Perez installed as head over Ellison behind everyone's back and it ticked people off. But yeah Obama is trying to wrestle control of the DP from the Clintons. Not sure what good it'll do for us lowly peons, but the powerful interests probably do.

I read this morning that the oligarchs started their coup over the government when Reagan got elected and by the time he was booted out it was completed and hence the Clintons slithered into DC and the rest is history.

up
7 users have voted.

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

@snoopydawg
what ideological difference exists between neoliberal Clinton and neoliberal Obama?

Or are we just talking about teams? Which is harder to prove because so many members of the Obama cabinet served under Clinton.

up
5 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@gjohnsit

Like I said it was a few years ago and I don't remember where I read it. Give me some time, k? But it did have something to do with the DNC and who would rule it.

up
4 users have voted.

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

Not Henry Kissinger's picture

@gjohnsit
(They're both hard core corporatists.)

It's a question of strategy.

As we saw in 2016, Hillary doesn't even try to throw a bone to Progressives. She is a staunch corporatist and the Clinton messaging reflects her uncompromising attitude.

Obama on the other hand, is all about co opting Progressive messaging in order to stifle any real change (see Obamacare).

AOC's theatrics fit nicely within Obama's strategy.

up
7 users have voted.

Peace Sells

@Not Henry Kissinger
I'm not sure that their strategy is all that different, but I'll accept it for the sake of argument.

If the only difference is strategy, then I fail to see any motivation for an inter-party war that involves undermining entrenched incumbents years after Obama left public office.
That would require a self-defeating level of pettiness.

OTOH, accepting that AOC is simply unbought insurgent and is fighting for something because she believes in, is easier to prove and understand.

up
5 users have voted.

@gjohnsit @gjohnsit @gjohnsit

You got it right, actually:

That would require a self-defeating level of pettiness.

The Democrats (not counting Bernie, of course) are all about snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory.

For what it's worth, I think there most definitely are Obama and Clinton factions in the party. I'd say Clinton folks wanted Harris at the beginning but are now flirting with Warren but Harris may be making a bit of a comeback with many of them. Obama folks are mostly with Biden. Both factions hate and fear Bernie and will bring out all their knives to stab him in the back at every opportunity.

And the possibility envisioned by Alligator Ed, that HerHeinous might ride in on her white pony at the convention, may not be as wild as many people seem convinced. It may well be that the Clintonoids want to keep the "women's vote" divided between Harris and Warren (which also takes away votes from Bernie and Biden), so nobody gets nominated on the first ballot.

Meanwhile, some folks will vent their rage at capitalism by shopping at the mall next door.

up
1 user has voted.
k9disc's picture

Corporate Colonialism vs corporate feudalism?

There certainly is a difference in the backers, but like all American politics - you gotta hedge your bets. So it's a majority share split.

@gjohnsit

up
2 users have voted.

“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu

@k9disc
that's the difference between neoliberal Dems and neoliberal Repubs. Not Clinton v Obama.

At least that is what I see. Maybe you could explain this to me.

up
2 users have voted.
k9disc's picture

While Obama was drawing down tensions with Russia and meeting with Putin, Hillary and her crew were moving on Ukraine.

Manafort's company was being run BY Tony Podesta to support the soon-to-be-couped government, (IIRC - Think the Democrat was "helpin' Putin...").

It seemed tense between the two Democratic camps. Lots of pressure on Obama coming from the actions of State and card carrying supporters of Clinton AND the Republican Party.

It could all be kabuki, kayfabe, and whatnot, and it probably is, but there does seem to be an ideological or psychological split, politically between Obama and Hillary. The pace and place of military intervention seems different. Obama's crew seems to want more of a neofeudal corporate future, and Hillary's people are cool with corporate colonialism.
@gjohnsit

up
5 users have voted.

“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu

Not Henry Kissinger's picture

@gjohnsit

While there is a lot of overlap, one big difference is that northern urban Dems prefer Obama while rural Southern Dems prefer Clinton.

Hence the current spat over immigration, which Obama is using to undermine support in Clinton-run cities like NYC. (Pelosi knows this, which is why she took such offense to Chakrabarti's Dixiecrat comment).

up
2 users have voted.

Peace Sells

@Not Henry Kissinger

Hence the current spat over immigration, which Obama is using to undermine support in Clinton-run cities like NYC.

I don't recall Obama saying anything significant. Did I miss something?

up
1 user has voted.
Not Henry Kissinger's picture

@gjohnsit

I explained how Obama syndicate ran AOC against Crowley and yet you interrobang me as if none of that matters unless Obama comes out and personally declares war on Hillary.

Politics is never that literal. You of all people should know that.

up
3 users have voted.

Peace Sells

Shahryar's picture

@Not Henry Kissinger

it's more like you stated it.

Meanwhile those who don't like AOC use every bit of evidence that she's not what you say, as evidence that she is, that it's a trick!!!

Rahm Emanuel calls Chakrabarti a "snot-nosed punk" and the reaction among some is "well acted!"

up
7 users have voted.

@Shahryar
with the AOC is an Obama puppet konspiracy is the lack of any monetary incentive.

It's easy to see the monetary incentive for there to be factional fighting between Dems and Repubs. And for fighting between JD's and mainstream Dems.

But where is the payoff for neoliberal Obamabots undermining neoliberal Clintonbots?
If your konspiracy theory requires people to act irrationally, then chances are there is something wrong with your theory.

up
0 users have voted.
WoodsDweller's picture

@gjohnsit
The big problem is the idea that everything that every event is orchestrated by a Saturday morning cartoon villain. The idea that paid campaign staff are pawns on an 11 dimensional chessboard moved by a master, not people looking for short term employment in a field with limited opportunities.
AOC beat an incumbent who relied on 90s style machine politics by running a low budget, modern campaign (since she had no other options) which brought new voters into the system.
Whether she stays in that seat depends on whether she can keep those voters in the system.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Sometimes behind the curtain you'll find an old, worn out politician with old, worn out ideas that just don't work any more, and Oz the Great and Powerful is just a propaganda construct to make the doddering old coots seem formidable.

up
6 users have voted.

The truth is never as interesting as wild speculation.

@Not Henry Kissinger

I explained how Obama syndicate ran AOC against Crowley

You claimed that, but that is all.

up
3 users have voted.
Not Henry Kissinger's picture

@gjohnsit
and cited a lot of evidence that you either didn't read, chose to ignore, or pretended you couldn't follow on your own thread.

If you don't agree fine, but you could at least try to acknowledge the possibility that the political world is a bit more complicated and subtle than you realize, instead of continually acting all pissy and semantic that I even suggest it.

And that goes for Shahryar too.

up
4 users have voted.

Peace Sells

@Not Henry Kissinger
how you've failed to prove your point in multiple ways, but then I realized that this would only piss you off. And I don't want to do that.

So instead i will simply thank you for teaching me something about C99P.

up
1 user has voted.
TheOtherMaven's picture

@snoopydawg

Sounds like you mean Nixon, not Reagan. It was Nixon who was "booted out" (forced to resign so he wouldn't be impeached), and that back in the mid-1970s.

Reagan was not only NOT "booted out", his Vice-President (George HW CIA Bush) succeeded him, first time that had happened since Martin Van Buren succeeded Andrew Jackson. In both cases it meant that obnoxious policies would continue in effect unaltered by one iota.

up
1 user has voted.

There is no justice. There can be no peace.

snoopydawg's picture

@TheOtherMaven

not that he was removed from office.

But a lot of the legislation that was passed during Clinton's tenure were republican ideas in the first place that democrats wouldn't vote for. Then along came Bill who did get er done.

up
0 users have voted.

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

getting their revenge licks in on Trump over his comments.

It looks like the Dems are doing what they do best... implode. I liked Bernie's comments about how Nancy needs to learn to be more supportive of these four women because they represent the millennial future of the Party. However, I think the millennial future in terms of our country is moving more to a third party every day, and Nancy is contributing to this movement.

up
10 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@Fishtroller 02

How fortuitous this whole dust-up has been for so many politicians. They're all out there tweeting and making statements, professing their loves and respect for people - except for Republicans that it.

up
4 users have voted.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

WoodsDweller's picture

so you've probably already seen this, but I thought it was interesting.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/nancy-pelosi-has-lost-control_n_5d2cb605e...

Nancy Pelosi Has Lost Control

One of Pelosi’s top lieutenants, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), the caucus chair, effectively declared war on Ocasio-Cortez and her chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti on Friday night.
...
The divide between Ocasio-Cortez and Pelosi represents just about every split in the modern Democratic coalition ― generational, ideological, race, class, strategy, values, all of it.
...
New York is a political patronage system designed to insulate corrupt elites from public accountability ... Ocasio-Cortez represents a greater threat to this machine than Trump, which is why Democratic leadership in Congress is now diverting time, attention and resources to defend the machine’s turf, instead of focusing on the president. Her primary defeat of then-Rep. Joe Crowley (D-N.Y.) in 2018 challenged this system ...
House Democrats selected Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) as caucus chair ... he’s a dedicated machine man ... Jeffries controls the @HouseDemocrats Twitter handle that attacked Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff over the weekend. ...
Threatened by Ocasio-Cortez’s national rise within the party, her opponents in the New York machine are trying to take her down

up
10 users have voted.

The truth is never as interesting as wild speculation.

ggersh's picture

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-07-15/aoc-and-snot-nosed-punk-chief-...

AOC And 'Snot-Nosed Punk' Chief-Of-Staff Alienating Moderate Democrats, Helping Trump: Rahm Emanuel

up
6 users have voted.

trump will be amerika's last president

What if the impeachment of tRumpolini is meant
to destroy the D party, makes sense doesn't it?

elections = tptb excuse for sayin ameriKa is a
democracy

Bollox Ref's picture

@ggersh

Formerly known as Rockefeller Republicans.

Also, too, 'Snot-Nosed Punk'??

Rahm doing his Dirty Harry Callahan routine? Talk about living in the past.

(Edited)

up
5 users have voted.

Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.

Shahryar's picture

https://www.axios.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-poll-democrats-2020-aeaa3...

An anonymous poll quoting anonymous dems, asked of white people who didn't graduate from college who voted for trump, used to scare dems away from AOC, tlaib et al.

So basically it's a poll of fox watchers. It's fascinating reading, wildly biased.

Edit: my phone changed AOC to six. Who created auto correct, anyway?

up
1 user has voted.

@Shahryar

The Axios survey found that "Socialism was viewed favorably by 18% of the voters and unfavorably by 69%."

According to the more scientific Public Opinion Strategies poll earlier this year. Democrats agreed that the country would be better off if our political and economic systems were more socialist by a 77 percent to 19 percent margin. Republicans (14 percent to 83 percent) and Independents (37 percent to 56 percent) disagreed.

The problem of regaining Obama-to-Trump voters should not be framed in terms of socialist advocacy but I don't think "the Squad" is helping matters by focusing on Identity Politics, either.

up
0 users have voted.

@Wally
That's why the numbers look screwy.

up
0 users have voted.

@gjohnsit

... still, I don't think it's the supposed bugaboo of socialism that turned people away from Obama to Trump, especially not in the rust belt states. More so NAFTA, Trump's anti-war rhetoric, and HRC in and of herself turning off so many people.

The Axios survey is being used by certain Dems to try to instill and intensify the fear of socialism in the Dem electorate. Gee, who is that designed to screw over? Probably the guy who kept sitting while Warren et al stood up to clap and cheer on Trump saying there will never be socialism in America at his state of the union address.

up
0 users have voted.