He’s not unfit (as far as we know). He is ineligible unless he gains US citizenship.
So I ask again, tell us what you think makes a person “fit for congress”?
Look, BB was making it all personal talking about his business failures and successes, I got drawn into it, snapped at him and drew a warning. You will not find me talking about "fitness for Congress " anywhere else in ths thread because I don’t actually think about it that way. I only think about the job they do or will do. So if you have anything outside of the stuff I just got warned for that you want me to clarify, ask away. I will not be revisiting my conversation with Banquet Bear.
Thanks!
That’s pretty much her take on it, based on her comments in this interview with Lovett from Pod Save America, {along with other interviews I’ve seen of her). * Pod Save America* is the Obama wing of the Democrats.
At the start of the interview, she notes some of the components to that underdog victory. She was outspent 10 to 1 with $300K to Crowley’s $3M. She took no corporate PAC money. She conducted a grassroots campaign speaking directly to the people. She had no connections while Crowley headed a political machine, and she had no significant prior political experience.
There was a time when it was unthinkable to run a political campaign with no money, no prior political experience and no connections, against an incumbent.
Because she pulled it off, it gave hope to others locked out of politics that it was possible to win with limited resources and rattled the cages of the people comfortable with the status quo. That made her a target for a number of reasons. She joked that the conservatives have her on speed search.
Including her, it seems. At minute 23:30 of the interview, she mimics her critics that say that she’s moved the party too far to the left. She says that after her election you would have thought that she took over half the party. She says she’s only 1 seat out of 200. (that was in August 2018).
I will say that she did a better job in this interview with explaining what she means by democratic socialism [at about minute 17] than she has in other interviews that I commented on earlier in this thread. Lovett was concerned about how she might fracture the Democratic party with her label of democratic socialism. Her comments about democratic socialism versus capitalism were in answer to his concerns.
There was this other interview where she sounds fairly rational. What popped out at me was
Interviewer: Senator Tammy Duckworth recently said that your approach won’t work in the heartland — that your strategy is somehow Bronx-specific. I thought your response was excellent. You listed all of the states that Bernie won, many of which were in the Midwest and many of which were then lost in the general election, and you asked, “What’s the plan to prevent a repeat?”
AOC: I was always talking to voters, and we’re saying, “We’ve lost a thousand seats, we’ve lost the House, we’ve lost the Senate. We have lost the presidency in an election that we most certainly should not have lost. Are we going to continue to commit to voting for the same people, the same strategy, and the same plan?” Because we haven’t changed our game plan as a party. There really seems to be almost no change in our plan. What have we learned from 2016? How are we doing things differently?
Which is to say that she dark-horsed a guy who was regarded as a lock, and here she appears to be talking about expanding her strategy in ways that could, conceivably, be damaging or destructive in secure Republican districts. That would, logically, make the Right somewhat anxious.
How she performs in her job as a legislator will probably be subject to scrutiny – getting elected/re-elected is only about half the work a Congresscritter has to handle.
AOC is currently the third largest story on foxnews.com. Number 1 and 2 are about Bush dying and then #3 is 'Ocasio-Cortez compares election victory to moon landing".
Nope, conservative media is definitely NOT obsessed with her.
Thanks for linking that; it was a very good interview. Long enough for her answers to have some depth to them.
I Googled the phrase ‘Ocasio-Cortez compares election victory to moon landing’. To nobody’s surprise, the first two pages of results are all links to right-wing leaning sites.
To be sure, AOC’s comments are a bit over the top. You can see for yourself what she said:
That’s not how I would take that. It sounds like she wants to use her strategy to primary out some Dem incumbents so we don’t have to vote “for the same people”. Something which should make moderate Dems nervous.
AOC Tweeted this about an hour ago…
In about an hour this Tweet was retweeted over 15,000 times and liked by over 50,000 people. This is partially due to the fact that she has over 1.4 million people following her on Twitter. That’s a lot for a member of congress. Especially one that hasn’t even been sworn in yet. For comparison, next session’s minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, has 198,000 followers. Devin Nunes has 330k. I just picked two GOP house names that are in the news a lot. The typical house member has far fewer followers.
This is what makes her a star. When she has a thought, a bunch of people listen, and react, and talk about it the next day or longer. The audience she commands unquestionably makes her a rising star whether you like her or not.
I know people are going to have objections to using Twitter as a metric, but it is undeniably something that at least gives us a vague idea of how well known someone is.
So here’s some more Twitter metrics to compare AOC to other folks that many people consider rising stars.
Tammy Duckworth - 517k
Kamala Harris - 559k
Kirsten Gillibrand - 1.29m
Wait a minute… she’s using her past experience as a waitress to evaluate the economics of our medical & insurance industries and the policies surrounding them, and proposing reforms based on that experience and evaluation?
:eek:
Quick! Somebody ask CarnalK if waitress is a “real” job so we’ll know whether or not to pay any attention to her.
:rolleyes:
I clicked on the link Lance Turbo provided to her Twitter feed and found this a couple entries down:
I thought it was pretty obvious but it’s a quick shut down of naysaying nonsense.
I thought she was a bartender. Now that I know she was a waitress, that changes everything.
Where did I ever say that no one should pay attention to her? She’s a passionate, intelligent, beautiful woman who pulled off a pretty amazing political feat. It would be bizarre for her to not get attention. We’ll see how much she does aside from getting retweeted over the next couple of years, despite Lance’s order we all recognize her rising star status.
I didn’t order sweet fuck all.
She’s a rising star because she has a greater number of enthusiastic supporters than most other politicians and she accomplished that in about a year. That’s just how it is. Your recognition is not required.
She might not rise any higher than right now and she might crash and burn. She may be in over her head. She might not deserve all the attention she’s getting. None of that changes the fact that she built a huge political following in a short time.
:rolleyes:
Aye; that’s about how I figured you’d respond.
Good thing, that.
Says the person with no credentials.
Maybe we can discuss AOC further when she’s sworn in. Because at this point it doesn’t seem like this will be fruitful.
[/moderating]