posted by Dr Winston O'Boogie

"The Squad" are huge winners.  This is yet another meaningless event that has garnered them huge amounts of attention.  Good or bad, attention is what they want.  Attention is exactly what they got.  I know Trump loves to hear his name like no one else, but did he have to created a crisis using these four?  It gives "The Squad" way more relevance than it deserves.  

The squad might be "winners," but that is definitely a quiet loss for Pelosi and the DNC.  If you want to go with a Trump 4D chess theory, he managed to keep the spotlight on "the squad," who are not viewed favorable according to DNC internal polling.  

posted by iclfan2

I still don't understand the point of passing measures to rebuke stuff. The whole anti semetic one or this one, both seem like a waste of time. And instead o focusing on the "atrocities" and "concentration camps" (laughable) on the border, they wasted a few days talking about a tweet. 

Political theater.  Just be happy they are bickering about stupid shit like this and not passing stupid ass laws that will affect us. 
 

posted by iclfan2

I still don't understand the point of passing measures to rebuke stuff. The whole anti semetic one or this one, both seem like a waste of time. And instead o focusing on the "atrocities" and "concentration camps" (laughable) on the border, they wasted a few days talking about a tweet. 

"talking about Tweets"

Trump wins

posted by ptown_trojans_1

What? No. That is all wrong. Go back and read the news again about that. 

Did you catch the whole talk by OTrap and Gut discussing how stupid people only use their preferred sources for information and declare them as fact because they say what they want to hear? In a nutshelll, that's CC on virtually any topic, so take his opinions with a ton or two of salt.

posted by like_that

The squad might be "winners," but that is definitely a quiet loss for Pelosi and the DNC.  If you want to go with a Trump 4D chess theory, he managed to keep the spotlight on "the squad," who are not viewed favorable according to DNC internal polling. 

I'm not sure this is accurate.  The poll everyone keeps referring to was posted here, I think, and it was specifically a survey of 1000 likely voters, white and with less than 2 years of college education.  That might loosely be referred to as a segment of the working class swing vote.

No idea how popular the Squad actually is.  I think AOC has like 3M twitter followers (which means nothing).  But she got a rockstar ovation not long ago on Colbert.  I think she may be very popular with the Democratic base, which is why Pelosi hasn't curb stomped her.

But AOC is very polarizing for the ~70% of the country that isn't the Democratic base.  So it may very well be a win for Trump for The Squad to be the face of the Democrats.  That's why Pelosi is trying to reign her in without really smacking her.  But AOC is a true believer that has no use for moderate Dems and doesn't give a shit about keeping control of the House.

Speaking of AOC she's got a black, immigrant, woman that will be challenging her. Fuck identity politics!
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2019/07/17/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-scherie-murray-campaigning-unseat-aoc/1753824001/

"There’s a crisis in Queens and it’s called AOC," the Republican said, referring to Ocasio-Cortez by her initials. She said the freshman Democrat "seeks celebrity & publicity" and "thinks public service is not about serving the public, but herself."

I'm not sure she has a shot in hell of winning, because republicans are somehow the monster under everybody's bed nowadays, but she's not pulling any punches.

posted by gut

No idea how popular the Squad actually is.  I think AOC has like 3M twitter followers (which means nothing).  But she got a rockstar ovation not long ago on Colbert.  I think she may be very popular with the Democratic base, which is why Pelosi hasn't curb stomped her.

AOC is no doubt the most popular one. Pressley is a nobody and Omar/ Tlaib are terrorist sympathizers. Hopefully, AOC's popularity only goes so far with "moderates" when she wants to spend trillions on a made up Green New Deal. All of them are from districts where they only have to worry about being primaried by their own party. 

posted by CenterBHSFan

I'm not sure she has a shot in hell of winning, because republicans are somehow the monster under everybody's bed nowadays, but she's not pulling any punches.

The district will never vote red.
 

posted by CenterBHSFan

Speaking of AOC she's got a black, immigrant, woman that will be challenging her. Fuck identity politics!
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2019/07/17/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-scherie-murray-campaigning-unseat-aoc/1753824001/

I'm not sure she has a shot in hell of winning, because republicans are somehow the monster under everybody's bed nowadays, but she's not pulling any punches.

I have read a total of one article about her and I'm already on board.  She may be a nut for all I know.  But at least she has acknowledged that AOC is a child looking for attention - nothing more.  

posted by CenterBHSFan

Speaking of AOC she's got a black, immigrant, woman that will be challenging her. Fuck identity politics!
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2019/07/17/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-scherie-murray-campaigning-unseat-aoc/1753824001/

I'm not sure she has a shot in hell of winning, because republicans are somehow the monster under everybody's bed nowadays, but she's not pulling any punches.

Not that I blame you for pointing it out, but how sad is it that we've essentially got the story line where we all want to know which minority is more minority than the other, and whether or not that will give them voter leverage?

posted by Dr Winston O'Boogie

I have read a total of one article about her and I'm already on board.  She may be a nut for all I know.  But at least she has acknowledged that AOC is a child looking for attention - nothing more.  

I suppose the parties have a way of squashing people who don't toe the line, although Rand and Ron Paul have somehow pulled it off.

What I don't get is why more people don't challenge in primaries, and then once in DC find a reason to declare themselves an independent, or even switch parties.  That's pretty much what Trump did in 2016 - he knew he couldn't get the Democratic nomination, couldn't win as an Independent, so he ran as a Republican.

posted by O-Trap

Not that I blame you for pointing it out, but how sad is it that we've essentially got the story line where we all want to know which minority is more minority than the other, and whether or not that will give them voter leverage?

I guess we'll see how 2020 goes, but I feel like we've surpassed peak wokeness.  In the 24-hour news cycle and social media age, it gets harder and harder to get noticed and continue to be noticed.  That's how you get progressively more radical and outrageous, to the point where the movement jumps the shark and actually starts pushing people away.  And then the activists see the loss in support/enthusiasm as a need to be MORE aggressive.

The key is you want people to care enough to vote for you, but not so much that they abandon you when you don't do anything.  And that's the sweet spot, because you can continue to run for re-election on the same issue without ever accomplishing anything.

posted by gut

I suppose the parties have a way of squashing people who don't toe the line, although Rand and Ron Paul have somehow pulled it off.

What I don't get is why more people don't challenge in primaries, and then once in DC find a reason to declare themselves an independent, or even switch parties.  That's pretty much what Trump did in 2016 - he knew he couldn't get the Democratic nomination, couldn't win as an Independent, so he ran as a Republican.

I said it before, but the Libertarian movement would be much better off primarying every republican vs trying to stand up the libertarian party as a third option.  

posted by like_that

I said it before, but the Libertarian movement would be much better off primarying every republican vs trying to stand up the libertarian party as a third option.  

Right.  But they'd have to manage to reach a critical mass before splitting off, which means voting frequently non-Libertarian in order to hold on to their seat.

posted by gut

Right.  But they'd have to manage to reach a critical mass before splitting off, which means voting frequently non-Libertarian in order to hold on to their seat.

Which effectively undermines any reason for seeking office.  If you label yourself a Republican (or Democrat) and vote like a Republican in order to maintain your seat, you're functionally a Republican.

I mean, I suppose you could just be really choosy about what your platform would be, and you could pick whatever party affiliation is most popular in the given region.  In theory, a libertarian could run as a Democrat in the Bronx with a platform of civil rights regarding law enforcement, pro-choice (if that's the side a libertarian is on, since it's one of the more undecided in the party), and anti-corporate welfare.  I'm not saying you'd be immune from some "gotcha" topics, but in theory, it might be at least possible.

posted by gut

Right.  But they'd have to manage to reach a critical mass before splitting off, which means voting frequently non-Libertarian in order to hold on to their seat.

Why do they need to split off?  If they managed to change the Republican party's brand into libertarianism, I wouldn't bitch about the name of the party.  That's just me though. 

posted by like_that

Why do they need to split off?  If they managed to change the Republican party's brand into libertarianism, I wouldn't bitch about the name of the party.  That's just me though. 

That may be, but it does seem like a significant portion of voters are loyal to the name itself.  You could wrap up a moderate or semi-moderate Democrat in the Republican brand, and there would be a relevant subset of voters who would vote for them.

posted by O-Trap

That may be, but it does seem like a significant portion of voters are loyal to the name itself.  You could wrap up a moderate or semi-moderate Democrat in the Republican brand, and there would be a relevant subset of voters who would vote for them.

Blue Dogs already do that. They swing it to the left, they swing it to the right...

I don't know how prevalent this has been, but has anyone else noticed the seeming paranoia over the FaceApp today?  Suddenly, a portion of people are saying not to download it, because it's from a company in Russia.

Apparently, it IS okay to immediately not trust someone based exclusively on where they're from ...

Who knew?

Oh, democrats have been living in fear of the Red Scare for 2-1/2 years now. It's almost... xenophobic ;D

posted by CenterBHSFan

Oh, democrats have been living in fear of the Red Scare for 2-1/2 years now. It's almost... xenophobic ;D

How far we've come from 2012 when they laughed at Romney for calling Russia our greatest threat (but IMO it's still China).

posted by iclfan2

AOC is no doubt the most popular one. Pressley is a nobody and Omar/ Tlaib are terrorist sympathizers. 

Right on cue Omar and Tlaib put forth a pro-BDS bill today, and compared boycotting Israel today like boycotting Nazi Germany. Lol ok.

posted by Dr Winston O'Boogie

"The Squad" are huge winners.  This is yet another meaningless event that has garnered them huge amounts of attention.  Good or bad, attention is what they want.  Attention is exactly what they got.  I know Trump loves to hear his name like no one else, but did he have to created a crisis using these four?  It gives "The Squad" way more relevance than it deserves.  

I'd even go so far as to say that the attention they got was a net positive.  They came out looking like people who had been inaccurately bullied without breaking down.  It was definitely a more positive moment than their actual performances have warranted.
 

posted by like_that

Political theater.  Just be happy they are bickering about stupid shit like this and not passing stupid ass laws that will affect us.

This.  AND the fact that it's all really pretty entertaining.

Politics is like the first reality television that I've been able to truly enjoy.  I think it's because there's actual gravitas to it all.
 

posted by CenterBHSFan

Blue Dogs already do that. They swing it to the left, they swing it to the right...

Sounds like John Holmes running for office.
 

posted by gut

How far we've come from 2012 when they laughed at Romney for calling Russia our greatest threat (but IMO it's still China).

I still think about this all the time.  Everyone mocked him.  Both sides.  Republicans thought it was a bad look.  Democrats knew it was.  Yet here we are, seven years later, and he looks insightful.
 

posted by iclfan2

Right on cue Omar and Tlaib put forth a pro-BDS bill today, and compared boycotting Israel today like boycotting Nazi Germany. Lol ok.

Fuck's sake.  Can we stop treating EVERYTHING we don't like as though it's an adequate parallel to Nazis or Hitler already?  I'm not even "pro-Israel" in the geopolitical sense, but dear lord, this is ridiculous.

posted by O-Trap

I still think about this all the time.  Everyone mocked him.  Both sides.  Republicans thought it was a bad look.  Democrats knew it was.  Yet here we are, seven years later, and he looks insightful.
 

This was the "mic drop" moment of that debate and everyone was jerking off to it. This came off the heels of Romney dominating Obama the previous debate. He was doing well in this particular debate, until this line happened.  We all know that line has not aged well at all.  

I don't really have any of those bat shit crazy liberal friends (some are really left), even living in DC, but I anytime anyone bitches about Russia I bring this up.  It's a classic case of that meme where the guy has to choose between two red buttons.  Either they acknowledge Russia is a huge threat and admit Obama was very wrong or they admit they are full of shit about Russia and only care because of the man in the White House.  

Can anyone make sense of this? I swear some people just blame capitalism for anything and everything. To be clear, capitalism allowed @jhooks to create a website that people want to pay money to use. Capitalism allowed him to create wealth out of an idea and hard work. Capitalism has nothing to do with 50 people sharing an account you dolt.

posted by justincredible

Can anyone make sense of this? I swear some people just blame capitalism for anything and everything. To be clear, capitalism allowed @jhooks to create a website that people want to pay money to use. Capitalism allowed him to create wealth out of an idea and hard work. Capitalism has nothing to do with 50 people sharing an account you dolt.

So wait ... let me get this right ...

It's cool to share with 2-3 people.  Just not 50.

Okay, where's that line?

And where is the line on motives, since obviously "friends help[ing] friends" is acceptable?

"I only killed 2 or 3 people"......"50 is just wrong"

same logic.