I think I’ll start another thread for this.
Over here: What is a Bernie Bro?
I think you should examine your attitude when merely defending the idea of progressive positions is “narcissism”. The fact that Bernie won primaries in key states that Hillary also lost in the general is something party strategists should really think about and certainly not something you should just roll your eyes at as bomb throwing. Not all progressive planks can sell in the Midwest but some most certainly can.
Huh? What did this article say that supports your assertion?
OK, let’s examine Ocasio-Cortez’s smoke and mirrors in more detail as she combines several different types of states.
-
Michigan. She’s correct here, Bernie did win a squeaker here with 49.68% of the vote compared to Clinton with 48.26%. Bernie got 67 pledged delegate compared to Clinton who got 63. Michigan has an open primary.
-
Minnesota. A caucus state that Sanders won overwhelmingly with 61.69%. Thankfully, Minnesota has decided to ditch the caucus and go to a primary for 2020.
-
Kansas. Go home, Ocasio-Cortez, you’re drunk. No Democrat is winning Kansas, It was last carried by Lyndon Johnson in 1964. Bernie won a low turnout caucus by 67.90%
-
Nebraska Same as above, never going Democratic and even the one electoral vote that Obama picked up in 2008 is further out of reach since that congressional district has been redrawn. Yet another caucus state, Bernie won with 57.14%
-
Wisconsin Bernie did well in this state which is 89% White. Wisconsin held an open primary, Bernie won 56.59% and 48 pledged delegate versus Clinton taking 43.05% and 38 pledged delegates.
-
Indiana, another solid Republican state that Obama won as a fluke in 2008 and the Chicago media market spilling over to part of the state. This was a very late open primary, coming after Sanders getting embarrassed in New York and most candidates would have withdrawn. Sanders won 52.46% and 44 pledged delegates while Clinton won 47.54% and 39 pledged delegates.
Let’s look at Ocasio-Cortez’s New York. Clinton crushed Sanders in the Bronx, winning 68.76% of the vote compared to Sanders’ 30.04%
None of this tells me that the country, or even the Midwest is crying out for a ‘real progressive.’
So you disagree with her on political strategy. That’s fine, there are lots of different reasonable approaches to political strategy for the Democratic party.
But what does this have to do with “narcissism”? Is it possible that your contempt for Bernie Sanders is spilling over and clouding your opinion of a young and energetic progressive election winner who could be very positive for the future of the party, even if you have some strategic disagreements with her on how to achieve progressive policy?
The fact that the general-election electorate is not the same as the minority party’s is also something we should really think about. Mississippi is not winnable by any Dem nominee, for example, so it doesn’t matter who turns out for the Dem primary. But you understand that already, right?
I think a lot of this isn’t accurate. He actually reportedly took her insurgent campaign very seriously. He spent more money on the primary than he had any previous one. He did actively campaign. But he also had to balance actually being part of House leadership with running a campaign, she had an advantage in that she only had to campaign. He isn’t a moderate Democrat, he’s far left by any measure. She’s further left. This wasn’t Bernie Sanders vs Hillary Clinton writ small, it was like Bernie Sanders vs Dennis Kucinich.
I think it’s simply the reality that identity politics is becoming more important, the #MeToo movement has been empowering women politically. Don’t believe me? Vox has been tracking the increased participation of women in politics since Trump was elected, more women are running in primaries than ever before–and winning.
This congressman seems to have been mostly “okay” to progressive eyes, but he was still and old white man. A young Hispanic woman beats that on spec across the board, and to a huge percentage of voters these days in the Democratic party that’s more important.
How much it foretells for the rest of the party is hard to say; Democrats trying to win Statewide offices in more diverse states won’t be able to run her playbook so easily. You need more than just racial affiliation to win election in Florida or Texas. He also had internal polling that showed he was up 36% near the end of the election, so his decision to skip a few days of campaigning at the end aren’t as illogical as it seems.
Also to his credit he’s been pretty gracious about losing.
I’d also point out that criticizing a congressman for living in Virginia/DC is dangerous. Many people believe it’s a major source of congressional gridlock. Because of the realities of travel, historically (meaning up until even the 1990s/2000s because of the cost of air travel), most members of congress maintained a full fledged DC residence and often their kids went to school there. They’d make trips back to their district during recesses. Since so much of the actual work of being a congressman happened at Washington area bars, at formal dinners and etc, it’d have actually been a disservice to the district for a congress person to spend most of their time in their district. They aren’t elected district mayor, they’re elected to represent their district in Washington.
But as air travel has gotten cheaper and as “Washington” has become more and more demonized, a lot more people in Congress now maintain very small studio type housing or even sleep in their congressional offices 3-4 nights a week then go home for long weekends every week. Their families usually don’t come with them. This has gutted the practice of dinners and social gatherings outside of work for congress persons. This may seem like stuff that’s just fluff that doesn’t matter, but if you ever read about how LBJ used to corral Senators real politics got done in these social events, not to mention most people that drink together get along better. Today being in Congress is no longer treated like something that is supposed to be your whole endeavor, instead it’s like Congress is seen as the floor of the arena, you go in as little as possible to fight your battles then go back home where you spend all your time meeting with locals of your own party to help drum up money and support for the next election. Little time is spent forming the sort of personal relationships in Washington that used to be the grease that helped lubricate political compromises.
She hasn’t won anything except a congressional primary in a D+29 district. I understand the media was fawning over her so they can finally run their stories about a progressive beating the establishment, but she should really retain from Twitter battles with a respected Senator and former representative such as Tammy Duckworth, who really does know how things play in Peoria.
The blue wall, dude. Read up on it.
She’s allowed to disagree with senators. It’s not narcissism to disagree. If you want to disagree with her, fine. But why go after her personally simply for a party strategic disagreement? Nothing she did can be fairly criticized as narcissistic.
Ever had a new employee start telling people what they’re doing wrong on day one? She’s not even elected to office yet. Her political experience consists on working on Bernie Sanders’ losing campaign. If she wants to have political influence, then get elected to office and start learning from House and Senate Democrats.
What does this have to do with anything she’s said or done? Disagreement isn’t “telling people what they’re doing wrong on day one”. Especially in politics, unless you’re content to be led by old folks and old ideas. Disagreement should be welcome, and is by most Democrats. Most Democrats are ecstatic to see young, energetic, and diverse candidates like OC. You should be too – folks like her are the future of the party. Speaking out isn’t “narcissism”.
I find it amazing that you can’t back down from the personal insults against her for nothing more than speaking out. All you have to do is say “Okay, narcissism was too far, but I disagree with her about how to win at a national level”.
Wait, so you think new politicians should have to agree with older politicians? Young newly-energized politicians have to “learn” from House and Senate Democrats? Learn what? How to lose the White House, Senate, House of Representatives and a majority of state legislatures and governorships, despite more votes being cast for Dems than Republicans (or very close to it)? Yeah, it sure sounds like older, seasoned Dems really have this shit down. Shut up, ¡Ocasio! Just shut up and pay attention to your elders!
Perhaps our new progressive goddess should understand that ‘Abolish ICE’ might play well in her minority D+29 district but might not play so well in Peoria.
And, of course, she’s such a political mastermind that she managed to get Bernie Sanders nominated?
Look, I have no problem with her providing input behind the scenes and talking with the DCCC. But right now she’s acting like the classroom know it all or the new employee with all the ideas for change but doesn’t know where the bathrooms are located yet.
No, she’s just speaking out, which should be entirely welcomed. It’s okay if you disagree, but silencing (or trying to silence) young progressives is a bad look for Democrats. Young Democrats and progressives should be encouraged to speak out and run for office, and you should help this effort if you want a strong party into the future.
“Goddess”? Really? you want to just throw that kind of over-the-top characterization out there and hope that no one calls bullshit on it? Were you one of the ones who kept baselessly, breathlessly, whining about how “the left thinks Obama is the messiah” back in the day?
Yeah, that’s some rotten verbiage, dalej42. Really fucking rotten.
Old white men taking personal potshots at young brown women, for doing nothing more than speaking out their political opinions, is part of the worst part of America and no Democrat (indeed, no American) should find it acceptable.
Um, no, I voted for Obama and thought the Messiah claims were stupid. Obama, had of course, even before being elected president had accomplished a lot more than Ocasio-Cortez has.
I can understand how success has gone to her head with the insane media coverage she’s received this past week. But, she’s accomplished quite little in her career so far aside from the upset win. As I pointed out above, her Tweet about Sanders’ wins in a few states either shows she’s naive or else using a lot of smoke and mirrors.