# Sanderista primaries out 10-term Dem Congressman **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [June 27, 2018, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850 "2018-06-27T17:45:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/301 "2018-07-24T19:52:21Z")
> [@dalej42](#): > > I wouldn’t expect a member of congress to be fully knowledgeable about all of those topics, I can hope that they would have staff that are. > > However, I do expect a recent economics grad to be knowledgeable about how the job numbers are created. I can’t imagine any decent economics program that doesn’t require at least one class in labor economics. I wouldn’t be surprised if it isn’t also covered in an intermediate macroeconomics class as well, especially given all the lying and moving the goalposts that Trump, Jack Welch, and some of the other conservative clowns used to do during the Obama administration. Maybe her professors were too busy working 70 hours a week at multiple jobs. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/302 "2018-07-24T20:30:40Z")
If they we’re adjuncts or grad students, probably. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/303 "2018-07-24T21:29:44Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Shouldn’t a likely member of Congress already know that? I endorse this response: > [@CarnalK](#): > > How about inflation, GDP, literacy and productivity rates? Shouldn’t a likely candidate know how those numbers are crunched? And surely we all expect them to know basic accounting methods, passing the budget being one of their most important jobs. And of course we should expect a decent grounding in Constitutional law, they’re passing laws after all > > Would you say any of those qualifications are less important than employment level calculations? I’ll add: certainly a voter can plausibly decide he WANTS his Congressional rep to already know any or all these things. But I once watched a [Congressman from Georgia](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/tipping-point/) reveal that he believed islands could tip over if enough unbalanced weight in the form of military equipment and people landed on one side of the island. So, no, I don’t think there’s any rule that a representative MUST know any set of things. ---
**Author:** ![dalej42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@dalej42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dalej42)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/304 "2018-08-08T15:29:56Z")
So, it looks like AOC doesn’t have the magic touch with most of her candidates losing last night. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/305 "2018-08-08T16:40:40Z")
> [@dalej42](#): > > So, it looks like AOC doesn’t have the magic touch with most of her candidates losing last night. Her candidate in MO 1st actually got 37% of the vote against a well-entrenched incumbent, which is probably the best any primary opponent has ever done. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/306 "2018-08-08T16:53:18Z")
> [@kunilou](#): > > Her candidate in MO 1st actually got 37% of the vote against a well-entrenched incumbent, which is probably the best any primary opponent has ever done. Well, no. The subject of this thread beat an entrenched incumbent. One of her other favs lost by only 2000 votes, to a openly LGBTQ Native American woman. That’s probably scary for dalej42. > **[An openly LGBTQ Native American woman just won a Democratic House nomination...](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/8/8/17661442/sharice-davids-brent-welder-democrat-wins-kansas-house-primary)** > > Sharice Davids narrowly beat Bernie Sanders-backed candidate Brent Welder for the nomination in Kansas’s Third Congressional District. ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/307 "2018-08-08T17:44:00Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > “Pants on Fire” > > [PolitiFact | Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wrong on several counts about unemployment](https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jul/18/alexandria-ocasio-cortez/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-wrong-several-counts-abou/) > > Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wrong on several counts about unemployment I used to think politfact was a good source but… did anyone actually read the article? In particular, they rebut her claim that people are working “60, 70, 80 hours per week” by straight up ignoring the “60” entirely, then arbitrarily deciding that the only way someone could work 70 to 80 hours per week is if they have two full time jobs, that is they claim it’s not possible to work that much with one full-time job (they don’t even list it as a possiblity), two part time jobs, or one full-time and one part-time job though they don’t justify the claim, and then conclude that her claim is false. I’ve worked 60 hours a week on one full-time job before, so I really have no idea why they’re asserting that the only way to work 70-80 hours in a week is with two full-time jobs. And I think I strained an eye muscle when the article claimed that working long hours is a good thing for employees. I don’t think I’ll actually trust politifact articles after seeing that, they’re calling her ‘wrong’ because they made a counterfactual declaration and ignored 1/3 of the numbers that she stated. ---
**Author:** ![dalej42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@dalej42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dalej42)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/308 "2018-08-08T18:04:42Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Well, no. The subject of this thread beat an entrenched incumbent. > > One of her other favs lost by only 2000 votes, to a openly LGBTQ Native American woman. That’s probably scary for dalej42. > [Kansas primary: Sharice Davids wins Democratic nomination in 3rd District - Vox](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/8/8/17661442/sharice-davids-brent-welder-democrat-wins-kansas-house-primary) Why would it be scary? I would have voted for Davids if I lived in the district. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/309 "2018-08-08T18:14:31Z")
> [@dalej42](#): > > Why would it be scary? I would have voted for Davids if I lived in the district. Oh? Why? ---
**Author:** ![Ashtura](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ashtura/32/2963_2.png) [@Ashtura](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ashtura)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/310 "2018-08-08T18:23:15Z")
> [@LoneRhino](#): > > She obviously has the right scared. Otherwise they would not be spending so much time trying to take her down. I would love to see more D’s willing to defend their vision. The right is not scared of AOC at all. They talk about her so much because she’s easy to paint as the future of the democratic party. Liberal is not _nearly_ as much of a dirty word as Socialist. The more they talk about her, the more they fire up the base. She’s good for Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/311 "2018-08-08T18:45:18Z")
> [@Ashtura](#): > > Liberal is not _nearly_ as much of a dirty word as Socialist. Especially if it’s combined with female and brown, with a non-Northern-European name. ---
**Author:** ![Ashtura](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ashtura/32/2963_2.png) [@Ashtura](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ashtura)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/312 "2018-08-08T18:54:46Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Especially if it’s combined with female and brown, with a non-Northern-European name. Considering that probably makes her easier to tie into Venezuelan socialism, it probably doesn’t hurt. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/313 "2018-08-08T19:46:55Z")
> [@Pantastic](#): > > I used to think politfact was a good source but… did anyone actually read the article? In particular, they rebut her claim that people are working “60, 70, 80 hours per week” by straight up ignoring the “60” entirely, then arbitrarily deciding that the only way someone could work 70 to 80 hours per week is if they have two full time jobs, that is they claim it’s not possible to work that much with one full-time job (they don’t even list it as a possiblity), two part time jobs, or one full-time and one part-time job though they don’t justify the claim, and then conclude that her claim is false. I’ve worked 60 hours a week on one full-time job before, so I really have no idea why they’re asserting that the only way to work 70-80 hours in a week is with two full-time jobs. And I think I strained an eye muscle when the article claimed that working long hours is a good thing for employees. > > I don’t think I’ll actually trust politifact articles after seeing that, they’re calling her ‘wrong’ because they made a counterfactual declaration and ignored 1/3 of the numbers that she stated. - She’s\* the one who wrote that “everyone has two jobs.” But yes, they could have looked at single-job workers or all workers. AFAIK BLS does not publish these data but Gallup does have polls (I’d prefer BLS ATUS but too bad for me) reporting 60+ at 16%. Regardless, “unemployment is low because” of reasons that have little to do with people working multiple jobs or long hours. Working long hours is “good” in the sense that people who work longer are typically paid more. Of course everyone values their time differently so YMMV. ETA survey link [Work and Workplace | Gallup Historical Trends](https://news.gallup.com/poll/1720/work-work-place.aspx) ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/314 "2018-08-08T20:23:37Z")
Social Democrat Rashida Tlaib, a Muslim, won the MI-13 Democratic primary yesterday. ---
**Author:** ![dalej42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@dalej42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dalej42)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/315 "2018-08-08T20:52:32Z")
What really irks me about AOC’s unemployment claims is that she should really know better. AOC graduated from Boston University in 2011, so her college years would have coincided with the Great Recession and she studied economics. It used to drive me crazy during the Obama years when every time the unemployment rate was reported, conservative commentators would move the goalposts and use smoke and mirrors. What about U6? What about Labor Force Participation rate? They’d cling to anything to try to convince people that the released number wasn’t real. And, of course, others would just invent conspiracy theories and claim Obama is cooling the books. ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/316 "2018-08-08T21:05:02Z")
> [@Ruken](#): > > - She’s\* the one who wrote that “everyone has two jobs.” But yes, they could have looked at single-job workers or all workers. AFAIK BLS does not publish these data but Gallup does have polls (I’d prefer BLS ATUS but too bad for me) reporting 60+ at 16%. I don’t understand this response. The politifacts article says that she’s wrong on multiple counts, but fails to show that she’s wrong on anything but the two jobs claim. Like I pointed out, the article simply drops the 60% from her claim in their discussion, and asserts that her claim is clearly wrong because only people who work two full time jobs could work the number of hours that they adjusted her figure to. If you have to ignore 1/3 of the numbers that a person actually said and assert something that is obviously not true, then you haven’t actually refuted what someone said, regardless of whether what they said is true or not. Using such awful methodology on a statement that should be easy to refute makes me question the integrity of anything they post. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/317 "2018-08-08T21:47:51Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Well, no. The subject of this thread beat an entrenched incumbent. I didn’t express myself clearly. I was referring only to the MO 1st incumbent and his challengers. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/318 "2018-08-08T22:14:56Z")
> [@dalej42](#): > > So, it looks like AOC doesn’t have the magic touch with most of her candidates losing last night. I don’t think anyone here made the claim that she has a magic touch, or any similar claim for that matter. I probably disagree with her on all sorts of things, but I don’t see the value in ridiculing her for taking a principled stand. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2018, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/319 "2018-08-08T22:26:31Z")
> [@Pantastic](#): > > I don’t understand this response. I will not contest the above. > [@Pantastic](#): > > The politifacts article says that she’s wrong on multiple counts, but fails to show that she’s wrong on anything but the two jobs claim. 1. Everyone has two jobs. False. Discussed in the article. 2. Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs. False because (1) is false. But even if (1) were true, (2) would be false because that’s not how unemployment works. This is discussed in the article. 3. People are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week. False, for the most part, as I have shown, but not well supported by the article. Only true in the sense that at least two people are working a lot. 4. Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their family. False, because even if (3) were true, unemployment doesn’t work that way. Not directly addressed. So I count at least two. And that’s only if you _don’t_ interpret her statement as “Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs; they (the multijobholders) are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week.” Which is exactly how I interpreted her statement, and in which case 1, 2, and 3 are covered just fine in the article. As for trusting Politifact, I’d trust them about as much as any secondary analysis of BLS statistics. Which is not at all. Those stats are there for you to crunch yourself. Use them or EPI or AEI or whomever as your starting point. In this case, Politifact explained why they reached their conclusion and that lets you do a better job yourself (or let someone else do it for you since you apparently couldn’t be bothered in this case.) And any slip-up they may have made here doesn’t change the conclusion: “Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs. Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their family” is incorrect on multiple counts. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2018, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850/320 "2018-08-09T00:44:17Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I don’t think anyone here made the claim that she has a magic touch, or any similar claim for that matter. I probably disagree with her on all sorts of things, but I don’t see the value in ridiculing her for taking a principled stand. I think the ridicule is not aimed at any “principled stand” but at hubris and the silliness of some of the pundit class who put forth her win in the Bronx as some bellwether for the Democratic party and the country as wholes. Not sure how much any endorsement really means or how many votes an endorsement and a supportive speech or two deliver in any case … but the theory she has promoted that there is a “movement” afoot about to sweep across the heartland as new voices speak on their version of advocacy for working Americans, that the Duckworths and her ilk who believe that far left positions won’t prevail in the Midwest are very mistaken, did not get great support last night. That may inform some for the next general election. Those who believe that the hard progressive perspective is the way forward for America are a minority of those who vote as Democrats. There will be individual districts for which those candidates fit the voters the best, but across the country, not too many. Which does not mean that her fighting the fight is wrong … argue the case and win hearts and minds over time. Just don’t (intentionally or unintentionally) work to elect the GOP candidate in the process. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sanderista-primaries-out-10-term-dem-congressman/816850.md?page=17)