# Why do conservatives hate AOC?



## User.45

Seriously, I've heard and read a lot of crap about Ocasio-Cortez, but usually it boils down to how stupid she is, which really blows my mind. I can see so many reasons a conservative could hate her but she's being dumb? WTF. She cuts like a razor blade:


----------



## Scepticalscribe

PearsonX said:


> Seriously, I've heard and read a lot of crap about Ocasio-Cortez, but usually it boils down to how stupid she is, which really blows my mind. I can see so many reasons a conservative could hate her but she's being dumb? WTF. She cuts like a razor blade:
> 
> 
> View attachment 1022



They hate her - firstly - because she is a woman, secondly, because she is a woman of colour, and thirdly, above all, because she is a fiercely intelligent, accomplished and articulate woman of colour.


----------



## JayMysteri0

AOC also reminds many of them how out of step they are.  Her Twitter game is usually on fire.  Her appearance on Twitch for the heck of it ( she's a bit of a casual gamer ) with Hasan Abi ( if you can't tell by the name, would make conservative heads explode ) pulled impressive numbers.  She's the future, she motivates younger voters, which many of those haters would rather dismiss until they reach middle age.

Lastly, I still insist it's a monster they created ( via Faux News ) to mock, and it grew successful despite their intentions.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1321918043900006401/


----------



## User.45

Scepticalscribe said:


> They hate her - firstly - because she is a woman, secondly, because she is a woman of colour, and thirdly, above all, because she is a fiercely intelligent, accomplished and articulate woman of colour.



The irony is that we had a babysitter who was a hardcore libertarian and she hated AOC too, and kept on telling me how stupid she was; before that I only thought this hate is a culmination of male misogyny. 

But it's objectively amazing. People insult her education? She went to Boston University FFS! 
People insult her intelligence? She murders these old men with words as a pastime. 
On a scale she counts as stupid, where would those stand who are outwitted and humiliated by her?



JayMysteri0 said:


> AOC also reminds many of them how out of step they are.  Her Twitter game is usually on fire.  Her appearance on Twitch for the heck of it ( she's a bit of a casual gamer ) with Hasan Abi ( if you can't tell by the name, would make conservative heads explode ) pulled impressive numbers.  She's the future, she motivates younger voters, which many of those haters would rather dismiss until they reach middle age.
> 
> Lastly, I still insist it's a monster they created ( via Faux News ) to mock, and it grew successful despite their intentions.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1321918043900006401/



I know nothing of Twitch and gaming in the 21st century, but my wife (then girlfriend) used to join our LAN parties. Anytime she delivered a kill on one of my hypermasculine-only-by-my-own-perception buddies in CounterStrike, the guy would throw a fit and we would have to pause the game because all of us are rolling on the floor (except for him).


----------



## JayMysteri0

It's stuff like this, where the concern isn't about enriching any one person, that seems to set some off.  Or to quote an obsessively repetitive individual elsewhere, "radical leftists/liberals",  which boggles the mind because improving things for others, helps others.  Including businesses.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1322163888314556416/

Because what do these obsessively selfish individuals screaming "radical" thinks happens when an area improves?  Clue, ask anyone who's improved their neighborhood what 'gentrify' means.  You improve areas with better housing & infrastructure, you attract small business, you create employment, which is a thing I thought cons wanted.  Evidently though, it seems to always depend on WHO is helped & improved, that determines where improvement is allowed & desired.

I can never understand how some people who worship the image of this country being about individualism, so eagerly embrace wanting monolithic business entities to get all the tax breaks & not want more opportunities for small businesses.  Small businesses that will thrive in more successful neighborhoods & counties.  Hoping to improve people's lives with better housing & resources, tossed in with being more effective with the environment should not be 'radical'.



PearsonX said:


> I know nothing of Twitch and gaming in the 21st century, but my wife (then girlfriend) used to join our LAN parties. Anytime she delivered a kill on one of my hypermasculine-only-by-my-own-perception buddies in CounterStrike, the guy would throw a fit and we would have to pause the game because all of us are rolling on the floor (except for him).



For clarification I said casual gamer for easier understanding, but I believe she played League of Legends which isn't completely for casuals.  I say it that way as she obsessively wasn't playing 4 - 8 hours a day that "l33t gamers" demand of anyone to have any cred, let alone female gamers.

It's the fact that she knows Twitch & it's reach that sets her apart from her critics who would likely look at it derisively unless they saw a personal profit incentive.  Like imagine if a certain mewling congressional critter in SC had a clue about anyone but himself...

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1321281118935670786/


----------



## Huntn

PearsonX said:


> Seriously, I've heard and read a lot of crap about Ocasio-Cortez, but usually it boils down to how stupid she is, which really blows my mind. I can see so many reasons a conservative could hate her but she's being dumb? WTF. She cuts like a razor blade:
> 
> 
> View attachment 1022



This has been the Republican game since Slimey Newt when it was no longer good enough to say you disagree with the opposition’s position, they were mistaken. Now it is character assassination and _you are the spawn of the Devil._

The problem for them is it can be very transparent if you are not a Koolaid drinker. The real issue is how this tactic was/is perceived as effective but has turned politics in the US into divisive, destructive idealogical combat frequently, primarily relying on lies. That is the overall crux of the issue for the GOP, when they like Donny, (GOP not quite as bat shit crazy, but still lies) decided that lieing was their path to victory. Think of the boy who cried wolf as a code to live by.

Everytime I listen to her at a Congressional hearing, she is slicing and dicing, and most importantly it’s based on intelligence and not hypocritical, partisan lies.


----------



## Alli

Huntn said:


> This has been the Republican game since Slimey Newt when it was no longer good enough to say you disagree with the opposition’s position, they were mistaken. Now it is character assassination and _you are the spawn of the Devil._



When my son was little, somewhere around 2-3 grade, he came home from school one day acting very upset. We asked him what was wrong and he said “they called me a bad name at school.” We pressed him to tell us what it was. No answer. Finally we started guessing. Bastard? No. Sonofabitch? No. Motherfucker? No. Couldn’t take it any longer. Please, David, tell us what they said! At this point he started to grin a little and barely kept from laughing he said “they called me Newt Gingrich.” I love my son.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

PearsonX said:


> The irony is that we had a babysitter who was a hardcore libertarian and she hated AOC too, and kept on telling me how stupid she was; before that I only thought this hate is a culmination of male misogyny.
> 
> But it's objectively amazing. People insult her education? She went to Boston University FFS!
> People insult her intelligence? She murders these old men with words as a pastime.
> On a scale she counts as stupid, where would those stand who are outwitted and humiliated by her?
> 
> 
> I know nothing of Twitch and gaming in the 21st century, but my wife (then girlfriend) used to join our LAN parties. Anytime she delivered a kill on one of my hypermasculine-only-by-my-own-perception buddies in CounterStrike, the guy would throw a fit and we would have to pause the game because all of us are rolling on the floor (except for him).




Re your babysitter, I'd argue a case of internalised misogyny, plus a discommoded sense of unsettled unease (who can a white woman who has already internalised misogyny look down on - in a way that certain sections of her society will readily recognise and applaud, -  but a black woman?)

 And, if she was a woman of colour, well, there is a lot to unpack, but teaching those who have been historically oppressed, to take on - and internalise - the shame and self-hatred of institutional and societal disapproval and dislike and discrimination, is an excellent way of enforcing and perpetuating such cycles of pain, and endless petty humiliation on those already doubly discriminated against, and oppressed.

As for racist (and sexist) white men, I suspect that she - by her very existence (female, fearless, formidable, fiercely intelligent, accomplished, ambitious, articulate - and worse, a woman of colour, someone who by definition is supposed to be lesser by every measurable criterion) - threatens them to their very core, in ways they can barely begin to adumbrate, let alone recognise, or acknowledge.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

She loudly demands radical change to the status quo and if there’s one thing Republicans can’t stand its change to the status quo. Just the mention of it ignites a rage.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Another reason for them to hate her
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1322941013808340993/

Socialist!!!


----------



## User.45

JayMysteri0 said:


> Another reason for them to hate her
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1322941013808340993/
> 
> Socialist!!!



This year I seriously consider getting up a Christmas tree this time around (an abomination to do it before Dec 24 where I grew up...).


----------



## Alli

PearsonX said:


> This year I seriously consider getting up a Christmas tree this time around (an abomination to do it before Dec 24 where I grew up...).



Heck, I’m considering putting up a Christmas tree and I don’t even celebrate Christmas! I think if Biden pulls it off, I’ll do it.


----------



## JayMysteri0

We missed our chance to ask them while they were blocking the Whitestone Bridge and NOT getting arrested like voters & BLM do.
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1323020722286010369/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1323061421907668993/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1326686503192432640/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1326739894950096896/


----------



## Yoused

I think part of it is that she is mestizo. The RW likes white people, and they like the right kind of black people, but when they look at her, she is a mutt, and that makes them uncomfortable because, eww, impure blood, racial mixing. They do not want to think about what has already happened, that race has gradually blurred into, hey, goddammit, how do we divide these people out when there are so many of them now?

She is literally the face of the next century, and they are not ready for that. And her words make them face the failures of RW ideals, make them realize that their ways will not carry forward. That people will look back on the RW and say, "dumbshits".


----------



## Zoidberg

She's a threat to the GOP because they count on the democrats being boring people unable to relate to voters, widely seen –and thus disliked– as politicians. Someone young, who actually comes from the working class, intelligent, and above all, social media-savvy is a menace to their dominance of the internet politics.


----------



## dogslobber

JayMysteri0 said:


> Another reason for them to hate her
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1322941013808340993/
> 
> Socialist!!!



When they accused Biden (how does that even hold water?) of being a socialist, I didn't quite grasp why that's insulting. What's wrong with being a socialist? Countries like France and England are socialist and do very well. I think they equate it to being a Castro clone to rub the Cuban American vote the wrong way. It's pitiful but being a socialist isn't anything like Fidel.


----------



## User.45

This lady has serious Twitter game:


----------



## Edd

I’m sure conservatives won’t have much to say about her being the VF cover story.


----------



## iMi

She's threatening. She's bright, tough and appeals to young people. To make matters worse, she's a woman and she embraces Socialist ideology which they automatically equate with communism. Spoiler alert, Germany is a socialist republic, for example. 

She is everything they hate. 

I find it particularly laughable when they attack her for things like dancing or wearing an expensive outfit. It always backfires on them spectacularly. The dance they paraded to make her look "urban" (insert a dog whistle here) turned out to be some kind of fund raising video for her university. Most of them couldn't pull off the chicken dance drunk if they tried. Then the expensive outfit criticism... from privileged, wealthy white Senators. I guess being rich is only for old white man, so how dare is she. Oh, wait... those were borrowed for a photoshoot? Well, shit. #FakeNews and #LameStreamMedia then...


----------



## iMi

Yoused said:


> I think part of it is that she is mestizo. The RW likes white people, and they like the right kind of black people, but when they look at her, she is a mutt, and that makes them uncomfortable because, eww, impure blood, racial mixing. They do not want to think about what has already happened, that race has gradually blurred into, hey, goddammit, how do we divide these people out when there are so many of them now?
> 
> She is literally the face of the next century, and they are not ready for that. And her words make them face the failures of RW ideals, make them realize that their ways will not carry forward. That people will look back on the RW and say, "dumbshits".




Lot's of truth to what you said. I believe we, as a nation, squandered eight years of having Barack Obama as president. Is it a coincidence we now have Trump? That the far right racists and "traditionalists" turned into a nationalist Tour de France? We've come to a heartbeat away from becoming a fascist nation. The same forces are at play here.


----------



## Huntn

PearsonX said:


> This year I seriously consider getting up a Christmas tree this time around (an abomination to do it before Dec 24 where I grew up...).



When I was a child living in SE Washington DC, timeframe early 1960s, we’d put up a tree and decor 1 week before Christmas. As an adult and as we all know, the season morphed to Christmas starting post Thanksgiving. However I am still riled when I see Christmas decorations in the store at Halloween, even Sept.

We used to see these at places like Macy’s at the Mall, but now it‘s at Lowe’s, a home supply and hardware chain.  It almost seems like the malls are dead, but I assume after the vaccine, we will go back to one on occasion. The damage of online shopping done to retail brick and mortar establishments, the malls, I predict is significant.


----------



## Huntn

Edd said:


> I’m sure conservatives won’t have much to say about her being the VF cover story.
> View attachment 1630



Too late, they already did, questioning the hypocrisy of a “socialist” and expense of her borrowed outfit, not that they realized it was borrowed for the photo shoot, as if socialists are sworn to poverty, a little too much Country Club attitudes revealing themselves.


----------



## Eric

Huntn said:


> Too late, they already did, questioning the hypocracy as a “socialist” and expense of her borrowed outfit, not that they realized it was borrowed for the photo shoot, as if socialists are sworn to poverty, a little too much Country Club attitudes revealing themselves.



They're bashing her out of one side of their mouth and hitting on out of the other. In any case she get's their panties in a bunch that's for sure.


----------



## Yoused

Sounds like an entrepreneurial adventure that could yield the big bucks: right-wing panties, ready for bunching.


----------



## JayMysteri0

It's also because she happily embraces & epitomizes everything they feel they have to hate
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1334543240742260737/


----------



## lizkat

JayMysteri0 said:


> It's stuff like this, where the concern isn't about enriching any one person, that seems to set some off.  Or to quote an obsessively repetitive individual elsewhere, "radical leftists/liberals",  which boggles the mind because improving things for others, helps others.  Including businesses.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1322163888314556416/
> 
> Because what do these obsessively selfish individuals screaming "radical" thinks happens when an area improves?  Clue, ask anyone who's improved their neighborhood what 'gentrify' means.  You improve areas with better housing & infrastructure, you attract small business, you create employment, which is a thing I thought cons wanted.  Evidently though, it seems to always depend on WHO is helped & improved, that determines where improvement is allowed & desired.
> 
> I can never understand how some people who worship the image of this country being about individualism, so eagerly embrace wanting monolithic business entities to get all the tax breaks & not want more opportunities for small businesses.  Small businesses that will thrive in more successful neighborhoods & counties.  Hoping to improve people's lives with better housing & resources, tossed in with being more effective with the environment should not be 'radical'.
> 
> 
> For clarification I said casual gamer for easier understanding, but I believe she played League of Legends which isn't completely for casuals.  I say it that way as she obsessively wasn't playing 4 - 8 hours a day that "l33t gamers" demand of anyone to have any cred, let alone female gamers.
> 
> It's the fact that she knows Twitch & it's reach that sets her apart from her critics who would likely look at it derisively unless they saw a personal profit incentive.  Like imagine if a certain mewling congressional critter in SC had a clue about anyone but himself...
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1321281118935670786/




What I cannot understand is how righties will go off on AOC and Rashida Tlaib over the public banks proposal and yet have zero objection to (and maybe even zero awareness of) the American Banking Association dumping a last-minute-blitz-fund of around a million dollars of the banking lobby's dough into the GOP candidates' attempts to retain their Senate seats in the Georgia runoff elections in January. 

 Is it fine for private monies to attempt to buy a Senate seat in expectation of favorable treatment of for-profit banks by federal bank regulators?    But not fine for the taxpayer to facilitate development of nonprofit banks that are public-facing and meant to invest in projects and businesses to the public's (and national economy's) benefit. rather than to making a buck directly for taxpayers, the financial stakeholders of those banks?   

Since when and why not?   Since public banks might compete robustly with corporate banks and disrupt the center of gravity in American banking, aside from stimulating small businesses and infrastructure rebuilding?    I thought Republicans were into competition and small biz support.  

Oh i forgot, the righties are into cutting taxes, reducing government investment and making ever larger profit margins in the private sector.  And selective encouragment of certain small(ish), maybe, businesses.​​OK.  I get it. AOC and Tlaib are coming for Jamie Dimon's profit margins.​​Hoooo boy.  Buckle up.  It was never really about Hillary coming for our guns in America,  was it.  Was always gonna be some socialist foreigners coming for our money?​
I'd like to think it's just boomers and whoever's left of my own older generation are responsible for this bullshit because that means in another 20 years or so the AOCs and Tlaibs of those times won't catch so much flak for having good ideas.  But sometimes I wonder.   The younger generations today have experienced dashed expectations, and sometimes that can still lead to a lot of scapegoating as well as xenophobia.  I'd rather hoped we'd moved on past that in the USA but it's clear from the last 12 years --and especially the last four--  that that is not the case.


----------



## leekohler2

JayMysteri0 said:


> We missed our chance to ask them while they were blocking the Whitestone Bridge and NOT getting arrested like voters & BLM do.
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1323020722286010369/
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1323061421907668993/



They better be real careful. New Yorkers in general are not Trump fans.


----------



## JayMysteri0

leekohler2 said:


> They better be real careful. New Yorkers in general are not Trump fans.



Those were New Yorkers.

My brief time hanging with Fire Fighters in NY & some of the guys I got to know during that time, says otherwise about 45 fans.  It may not be in general, but there is a considerable amount.


----------



## leekohler2

JayMysteri0 said:


> Those were New Yorkers.
> 
> My brief time hanging with Fire Fighters in NY & some of the guys I got to know during that time, says otherwise about 45 fans.  It may not be in general, but there is a considerable amount.



I'm sure that's true. The ones I know hate Trump with a passion, and they've ALWAYS hate Rudy, even during 9/11.


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> Those were New Yorkers.
> 
> My brief time hanging with Fire Fighters in NY & some of the guys I got to know during that time, says otherwise about 45 fans.  It may not be in general, but there is a considerable amount.



New York City is overwhelmingly liberal, but it’s a big place and there are many Trump fans there too.


----------



## Yoused

If you go to the cnn map, click on New York and zoom in to the city, you can check all the boroughs for how they voted. Bronx, New York, Kings and Queens were all in the 70~80% range, but if you look to the left, you see Richmond (Staten Island) is comfortably red.

My county (other side of the country) came in blue, but only by about 11 percentage points. I have seen no shortage of MAGAtry around here, but, fortunately, they were not in the majority.

In fact, I challenge someone who can spare the time to pore over that map and try to find even one county that voted 100% either way. Everywhere you go, there are people of the other stripe. I mean, just ask *Alli*.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1337453175071109121/


----------



## rdrr

AOC annoys me, I don't hate her, but I don't have a lot of tolerance for her either.  I find her to be a bit of a spot light grabber and her ideas are just way to abrasive to get anything done in congress.  I know, I know that we need to at least have these progressive conversations, but...  There is so much broken with the country right now, and we are so divided that she is making the whole side double down in their posturing.   Get them to listen by watering down the rhetoric, then once you have some on your side start to change their views.   

I don't know, maybe I am just to old and cantankerous.  Just realized how true that statement is, as I just signed up for virtual trivia and my team name is "get off my lawn".


----------



## JayMysteri0

rdrr said:


> AOC annoys me, I don't hate her, but I don't have a lot of tolerance for her either.  I find her to be a bit of a spot light grabber and her ideas are just way to abrasive to get anything done in congress.  I know, I know that we need to at least have these progressive conversations, but...  There is so much broken with the country right now, and we are so divided that she is making the whole side double down in their posturing.   Get them to listen by watering down the rhetoric, then once you have some on your side start to change their views.
> 
> I don't know, maybe I am just to old and cantankerous.  Just realized how true that statement is, as I just signed up for virtual trivia and my team name is "get off my lawn".



In fairness one has to realize she didn't just get a spotlight because of who she is.  She isn't from some political dynasty or celebrity, she was a nobody that Faux New & the conservative press decided to make as some kind of albatross to hang around the neck of democrats.  That spotlight was given to her, which helped her to win, and pushed her to prominence.  It'd be silly NOT to use that spotlight when so many never get it, also as the saying goes "you leave with who brought you to the dance".  It's her progressive ideals that weren't the conservative democrat norm that got her elected, and it would be a disservice to those who elected her 2X NOT to stay that course.

I think for some conservatives though, what seems to rile them is she puts a spotlight on their very own hypocrisies they have no issue with.  With all the controversies they've had, to make one of her dancing in college or wearing clothes provided temporarily for a photo shoot, just reeks of being mad because one can.


----------



## lizkat

Squeaky wheel gets the grease.  If AOC and the rest of "the squad" and other Dems (the ones with progressive lean piped in from their constituents)  just sat back and waited for all the middle-roaders and all us oldies to retire or die with boots on,  we'd not see any progressive nominations for high level slots from Biden. 

Pelosi's good at herding cats but part of the reason is that when she "puts some stick about"  --to borrow a phrase from the original House of Cards--   then there's at least an IOU for a carrot in there somewhere...  and this bunch of progressives are not misplacing the IOUs or expecting Biden to be unaware of Pelosi's promises to Dems in the House who said OK OK to Pelosi on key votes she managed to get through the House before she had the gavel.

Biden does know all that.... but he's on balance still most comfortable with his coterie of longtime like minded Dem guys and they ARE middle of road, no doubt about it.  Some of his picks are more progressive than others.   He is a pol and he will have to work with an obstructionist Senate, probably.  In theory enough R Senators have opined that Biden is entitled to is cabinet picks as long as they're "mainstream", which has long been a norm, so he shouold be able to get his picks confirmed as long as all the Dems also go along.    Problem with that is that "mainstream" has kept moving right during times when the Senate has been led by the Rs.  Other problem is that not all the Dem Senators are particularly progressive.

That said, Biden is prez-elect right now because of a lot of elbow grease applied by people of color, women and young activists in registration and vote turnout efforts.  Those are largely "progressive" at least in the sense of not thinking the social contract aspect of government should be drowned in the bathtub the way the Rs act. 

The progs voted for Biden because he's not a Republican and not Trump.   And they don't want Biden acting like a 1980s Republican.   Maybe blue collar Dems see Biden as a first-term Morning in America Reagan redux (before the anti-labor part got amped up), but what progressives see at this very moment is this at the top of the Democratic Party's goals:   "first, ditch Trump... check" and after that for progs then it's time to nudge Biden left at least a little in his public-facing agency leadership,  so he and America don't forget where some margin for Presidency actually came from.


----------



## Eraserhead

rdrr said:


> AOC annoys me, I don't hate her, but I don't have a lot of tolerance for her either.  I find her to be a bit of a spot light grabber and her ideas are just way to abrasive to get anything done in congress.  I know, I know that we need to at least have these progressive conversations, but...  There is so much broken with the country right now, and we are so divided that she is making the whole side double down in their posturing.   Get them to listen by watering down the rhetoric, then once you have some on your side start to change their views.
> 
> I don't know, maybe I am just to old and cantankerous.  Just realized how true that statement is, as I just signed up for virtual trivia and my team name is "get off my lawn".




AOC is much, much less abrasive and is much, much more reasonable than most far left people.

That doesn’t make what you’re saying untrue - but that’s where we are


----------



## SuperMatt

rdrr said:


> AOC annoys me, I don't hate her, but I don't have a lot of tolerance for her either.  I find her to be a bit of a spot light grabber and her ideas are just way to abrasive to get anything done in congress.  I know, I know that we need to at least have these progressive conversations, but...  There is so much broken with the country right now, and we are so divided that she is making the whole side double down in their posturing.   Get them to listen by watering down the rhetoric, then once you have some on your side start to change their views.
> 
> I don't know, maybe I am just to old and cantankerous.  Just realized how true that statement is, as I just signed up for virtual trivia and my team name is "get off my lawn".



If you appease the right and aren’t abrasive, the GOP lawmakers will see the light and compromise? How did that work out for Obama 2011-2016? Only time he got any legislation through was 2009-10 with full control. The GOP blocked literally everything he wanted to do after that. I say, stick it to them HARD if Dems win both Georgia seats. They will not compromise, and the only thing they respect is power. Show them the Dems aren’t wimps; they will force their agenda through if you don’t work with them, and then maybe, just maybe, they will realize they need to compromise themselves if they want ANYTHING.

I’d rather have somebody be abrasive than be a wimp.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Also, that dang woman keeps appealing to the wrong dang people!
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1337624776534319104/

Blasphemy I tell you!  Blasphemy!

Next people will remember that Obama & McCain respected each other!


----------



## JayMysteri0

AOC is also hated, because she simply gets it...  _Also the NYPost is trash_
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1338336656953368579/


----------



## JayMysteri0

Followup and another reminder why conservatives would hate her

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1339265844606611458/

Yes,  That is the medic who's life the NY Post tried to trash.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1340361950031736836/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1340708342088544258/


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1340708342088544258/



Pat Toomey is disgusting. Using this moment to get leverage against Biden instead of doing something for the good of America.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1341856641143156741/


----------



## Joe

I've probably said this before, but they don't like her because she fights back. She doesn't take their shit. Conservatives are so used to running over wimpy dems that they are afraid of someone like AOC who tells them back.


----------



## SuperMatt

JagRunner said:


> I've probably said this before, but they don't like her because she fights back. She doesn't take their shit. Conservatives are so used to running over wimpy dems that they are afraid of someone like AOC who tells them back.



I think she will be 35 in 2024. I hope she runs for president just so I can watch the right-wing heads explode when she wins.


----------



## Eraserhead

SuperMatt said:


> I think she will be 35 in 2024. I hope she runs for president just so I can watch the right-wing heads explode when she wins.



She won’t. ”She’s not ready” Was her line about speaker.


----------



## lizkat

Why do conservatives hate AOC?   Because she's a handy distraction from data like this.









						Biden-voting counties equal 70% of America’s economy. What does this mean for the nation’s political-economic divide?
					

This economic rift that persists in dividing the nation is a problem because it underscores the near-certainty of both continued clashes between the political parties and continued alienation and misunderstandings.




					www.brookings.edu
				




Graphics like this one could, you know, embarrass the GOP.   So AOC to the rescue with every tweet she rolls out....


----------



## Yoused

That is annoying. Nobody "won" any county.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> That is annoying. Nobody "won" any county.



I think the graphic is a counterpoint to the “stop the steal” crowd crying that Trump won so many counties, and Biden won so few, which somehow “proves” that the election was stolen. Never mind that some counties have over 4 million people in them while others have 100 people.

You are right, we do not count votes by county for the presidential election, so the whole thing is moot. You win or lose states for purposes of the presidential election.


----------



## User.45

lizkat said:


> Why do conservatives hate AOC?   Because she's a handy distraction from data like this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden-voting counties equal 70% of America’s economy. What does this mean for the nation’s political-economic divide?
> 
> 
> This economic rift that persists in dividing the nation is a problem because it underscores the near-certainty of both continued clashes between the political parties and continued alienation and misunderstandings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.brookings.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Graphics like this one could, you know, embarrass the GOP.   So AOC to the rescue with every tweet she rolls out....
> 
> View attachment 2126​



A value of a human (a voter) should not be measured by economic output, but it sure is embarrassing for those trying to run on a platform on economy.


----------



## SuperMatt

PearsonX said:


> A value of a human (a voter) should not be measured by economic output, but it sure is embarrassing for those trying to run on a platform of economy.



A common trope from the right also is that Democrats just want free stuff from the government, and this throws quite a lot of cold water on that assertion as well.


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> A common trope from the right also is that Democrats just want free stuff from the government, and this throws quite a lot of cold water on that assertion as well.



The irony is that traditionally, economy runs better under a Democratic presidency. 














			http://www.princeton.edu/~mwatson/papers/DemRep_BlinderWatson_July2015.pdf


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> That is annoying. Nobody "won" any county.




The sense of the graphic in context of the article is not focused on election results per se but about the GDP and poliltical lean in the counties colored blue or red according to how the majority of residents in those counties voted.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1343700958107246592/


----------



## lizkat

^^^ Plus the whole idea of *STIMULUS* checks is to give the* consumer-based economy* a shot in the arm.  People who now have no job and half (if any) unemployment comp will *SPEND *the money thus boosting the economy, even if they'd rather pay down debt

I don't know where  GOP Congresscritters acquire the food they must eat from time to time,  but the rest of us have to shell out money for it.  So we support restaurants and supermarkets and convenience stores and the fossil fuel industry just getting to and from home to spend that money.   Plus if we pay down debt we're helping the bottom line of banks (which both parties' pols do love) since they can lend it out again at a fat rate.

So are these suddenly prudent GOP conservators of our Treasury suggesting it's a sin if a recipient of a stimulus check does something with the money other than buying food or doing a debt paydown? 

Let's have a look at how that went the first time around.



			https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/coronavirus/article246558898.html
		




> The [NY Fed] survey found people who had an income of $40,000 or less used a larger portion of their checks to repay their debts, and *those who had an income of $75,000 or more used more of their stimulus money for their savings.*
> 
> Around 40% of stimulus money went toward debt repayment for those making $40,000 or less, compared to people who make $75,000 or more annually, who used around 30% of their stimulus money for repaying debts.
> 
> People between the ages of 41 and 60 also used a greater portion of their check to repay debts compared with ages 40 and below and ages 60 and above.




So the banks made out great because poor and working class people bought groceries and paid off debt with anything left... and rich people stuck their whole stimulus payment in the bank. 

Sounds to me like 2nd round should hand out much more to the broke and less to the human squirrels who already have a mink coat and just bank a stimulus check the same way real squirrels bank acorns they find during a mild winter.


----------



## SuperMatt

lizkat said:


> ^^^ Plus the whole idea of *STIMULUS* checks is to give the* consumer-based economy* a shot in the arm.  People who now have no job and half (if any) unemployment comp will *SPEND *the money thus boosting the economy, even if they'd rather pay down debt
> 
> I don't know where  GOP Congresscritters acquire the food they must eat from time to time,  but the rest of us have to shell out money for it.  So we support restaurants and supermarkets and convenience stores and the fossil fuel industry just getting to and from home to spend that money.   Plus if we pay down debt we're helping the bottom line of banks (which both parties' pols do love) since they can lend it out again at a fat rate.
> 
> So are these suddenly prudent GOP conservators of our Treasury suggesting it's a sin if a recipient of a stimulus check does something with the money other than buying food or doing a debt paydown?
> 
> Let's have a look at how that went the first time around.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/coronavirus/article246558898.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the banks made out great because poor and working class people bought groceries and paid off debt with anything left... and rich people stuck their whole stimulus payment in the bank.
> 
> Sounds to me like 2nd round should hand out much more to the broke and less to the human squirrels who already have a mink coat and just bank a stimulus check the same way real squirrels bank acorns they find during a mild winter.



Exactly! Nothing could be better for the economy right now than people in need spending a bunch of money in exactly the way the Congress-critter was railing against. As I recall from high school, it wasn’t always the sharpest students who got elected to student government... Just the most popular. Seems like this theme runs into actual government as well.


----------



## Eraserhead

lizkat said:


> ^^^ Plus the whole idea of *STIMULUS* checks is to give the* consumer-based economy* a shot in the arm.  People who now have no job and half (if any) unemployment comp will *SPEND *the money thus boosting the economy, even if they'd rather pay down debt
> 
> I don't know where  GOP Congresscritters acquire the food they must eat from time to time,  but the rest of us have to shell out money for it.  So we support restaurants and supermarkets and convenience stores and the fossil fuel industry just getting to and from home to spend that money.   Plus if we pay down debt we're helping the bottom line of banks (which both parties' pols do love) since they can lend it out again at a fat rate.
> 
> So are these suddenly prudent GOP conservators of our Treasury suggesting it's a sin if a recipient of a stimulus check does something with the money other than buying food or doing a debt paydown?
> 
> Let's have a look at how that went the first time around.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/coronavirus/article246558898.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the banks made out great because poor and working class people bought groceries and paid off debt with anything left... and rich people stuck their whole stimulus payment in the bank.
> 
> Sounds to me like 2nd round should hand out much more to the broke and less to the human squirrels who already have a mink coat and just bank a stimulus check the same way real squirrels bank acorns they find during a mild winter.



My impression of conservative legislators is that most of them are quite stupid. I think that might _help_ with marketing as simple is better.


----------



## Huntn

Eraserhead said:


> My impression of conservative legislators is that most of them are quite stupid. I think that might _help_ with marketing as simple is better.



In the US it’s a mixture of stupid, elected by stupid, but it is also sinister, agenda driven, racist, religious pandering, and don’t forget hypocritical as in _we are deficit hawks when it comes to helping poor people but won’t say a peep if it‘s to help a corrupt  shyster steal the US Govt blind_.


----------



## Yoused

lizkat said:


> … if we pay down debt we're helping the bottom line of banks …



Not really, though. To a bank, a debt is a working asset. As long as you are in debt, a bank can collect service interest on the outstanding balance (and, in the case of credit cards, a surcharge for being over the limit, which used to be a charge-stop-line). Once you retire a debt, the bank no longer has a revenue stream on the loan, just the static capital.


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> Not really, though. To a bank, a debt is a working asset. As long as you are in debt, a bank can collect service interest on the outstanding balance (and, in the case of credit cards, a surcharge for being over the limit, which used to be a charge-stop-line). Once you retire a debt, the bank no longer has a revenue stream on the loan, just the static capital.




... which static capital they promptly lend out at 15% to someone else who will max it out and repay at the "minimum due" pace and so reboot the value to the bank of that asset...


----------



## JayMysteri0

Because for some koffmuscomitchkoff the only time something like this would happen is after several months of vetting qanon membership verified, and voted for 45 2X this year.  As opposed to people not realizing it's her

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1344101671023087617/


----------



## User.45

Ted Cruz getting his ass handed to him below:


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1348283514907734017/

We all know if this was the previous president or even Maxine Waters who suggested that the most aggressive members of BLM should show up in force and they stormed the capitol republicans would be apoplectic.  They'd be screaming about law & order, sanctity, and the president needs to charged with treason yesterday.  But no, what's the big deal?  So a few misunderstood frightened certain people rushed the capitol to get at congress to stop them from doing their elected duties.  Maybe even hang a VP as bonus.

 WTF?!!


----------



## dogslobber

AOC's tweets is recent days really hammer home the impotence of the Republicans to act. She is utterly relentless and completely correct.


----------



## Yoused

She has this habit of relentlessly pummeling Rafael (the Senator whom, if he was murdered, there would be 99 suspects). He shits all over the place enough as it is, without her tearing him a new asshole at every turn.


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> She has this habit of relentlessly pummeling Rafael (the Senator whom, if he was murdered, there would be 99 suspects). He shits all over the place enough as it is, without her tearing him a new asshole at every turn.




Cruz is like the guy down the end of the bar becomes more brilliant behind every successive beer.  And if you've ever worked as a bartender then you know how to keep the conversation moving along until everyone realizes it's time to 86 the guy.     People mock AOC on account of where she came from.  She came from having an honest job and she brought the habit with her.   Heh, for once she and Mme. Speaker are on the same side regarding a key issue....  and there's a combo Trump probably never thought he'd see, even back when he kinda sorta flirted with idea of liking Pelosi long enough to cut an infrastructure deal with her, until the House brought his first impeachment.

There are 215 votes lined up for impeachment #2 now the last time I checked...  they only need 217 because of a vacancy in the House.


----------



## JayMysteri0

YOU GO!!!
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1349396854543327232/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1351236031065038848/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1351209329140125697/

Think we'll get anything this in depth from anyone in the outgoing administration?

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1351226384471961609/


----------



## JayMysteri0

I realize this is low hanging fruit, because when you are dealing with Ted Cruz almost anyone instantly looks better & smarter...

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1352128118035722240/

Seriously, how are people voting in the likes of Cruz, Paul, Nunes, & Hawley?


----------



## User.45

JayMysteri0 said:


> I realize this is low hanging fruit, because when you are dealing with Ted Cruz almost anyone instantly looks better & smarter...
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1352128118035722240/
> 
> Seriously, how are people voting in the likes of Cruz, Paul, Nunes, & Hawley?



This is the stupidest post I've seen from TC. I'm starting to suspect an S&M aspect to him looking to be obliterated by AOC...


----------



## Pumbaa

P_X said:


> This is the stupidest post I've seen from TC. I'm starting to suspect an S&M aspect to him looking to be obliterated by AOC...




No wonder it was stupid considering the probable source...

Statement by President Trump on the Paris Climate Accord, June, 2017: “I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris.”

The White House link gives me a 404 now so I’ll throw in this Twitter goodie instead:
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/870370288344674304/

Edit:
As for AOC, they hate her because what she says makes sense. Misogyny and racism are just convenient tools to keep people from listening.


----------



## User.45

Pumbaa said:


> No wonder it was stupid considering the probable source...
> 
> Statement by President Trump on the Paris Climate Accord, June, 2017: “I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris.”
> 
> The White House link gives me a 404 now so I’ll throw in this Twitter goodie instead:
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/870370288344674304/



Trump was really working on making the USA just the Evil Empire. This is like a string of shitty attitudes and statements. 

Kudos to Bill Peduto, however.


----------



## SuperMatt

Pumbaa said:


> No wonder it was stupid considering the probable source...
> 
> Statement by President Trump on the Paris Climate Accord, June, 2017: “I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris.”
> 
> The White House link gives me a 404 now so I’ll throw in this Twitter goodie instead:
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/870370288344674304/
> 
> Edit:
> As for AOC, they hate her because what she says makes sense. Misogyny and racism are just convenient tools to keep people from listening.



Trump lost Pennsylvania, due to huge margins against him in large cities such as PITTSBURGH! OMG, the right-wing trolls on PRSI could probably win an election; some of them are smarter than certain Senators....


----------



## Joe

JayMysteri0 said:


> I realize this is low hanging fruit, because when you are dealing with Ted Cruz almost anyone instantly looks better & smarter...
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1352128118035722240/
> 
> Seriously, how are people voting in the likes of Cruz, Paul, Nunes, & Hawley?




People in Texas vote for him just because he’s a Republican.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1352461595419488259/

Some background?
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1352435057840029696/


> ‘We feel incredibly betrayed’: Thousands of Guardsmen forced to vacate Capitol
> 
> 
> Guardsmen were later let back into facilities after an outcry from lawmakers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com





> Thousands of National Guardsmen were allowed back into the Capitol Thursday night, hours after U.S. Capitol Police officials ordered them to vacate the facilities, sending them outdoors or to nearby parking garages after two weeks pulling security duty after the deadly riot on Jan. 6.
> 
> One unit, which had been resting in the Dirksen Senate Office building, was abruptly told to vacate the facility on Thursday, according to one Guardsman. The group was forced to rest in a nearby parking garage without internet reception, with just one electrical outlet, and one bathroom with two stalls for 5,000 troops, the person said. Temperatures in Washington were in the low 40s by nightfall.3
> 
> “Yesterday dozens of senators and congressmen walked down our lines taking photos, shaking our hands and thanking us for our service. Within 24 hours, they had no further use for us and banished us to the corner of a parking garage. We feel incredibly betrayed,” the Guardsman said.
> 
> POLITICO obtained photos showing the Guard members packed together in the parking garage, sleeping on the ground.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Even Greta's got jokes
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1352212061552586756/


----------



## JayMysteri0

Can anyone from the previous administration even claim this was a consideration on their parts?
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1352926710040244226/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1353062335477288960/


----------



## shadow puppet

Not directly AOC related but due to @JayMysteri0 's post above I must confess I have a full-on visceral hate for Hawley.  I want to see him go down.  HARD.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1353748725118758913/



shadow puppet said:


> Not directly AOC related but due to @JayMysteri0 's post above I must confess I have a full-on visceral hate for Hawley.  I want to see him go down.  HARD.



It's a justified hate.


----------



## JayMysteri0

So if you've been following things with Gamestop, reddit, and hedge funds you know where this is going

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1354833603943931905/



> Politics · Trending
> Ted Cruz and AOC
> Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Republican Senator Ted Cruz agree that users need to know more about Robinhood’s decision to place investor restrictions on stocks while hedge funds are able to trade freely




https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1354848253729234944/


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> So if you've been following things with Gamestop, reddit, and hedge funds you know where this is going
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1354833603943931905/
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1354848253729234944/



Holy cow she doesn’t pull punches, does she?


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> Holy cow she doesn’t pull punches, does she?



She has heard what they say: if Rafael were found murdered, there would instantly be 99 suspects.


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> She has heard what they say: if Rafael were found murdered, there would instantly be 99 suspects.




Cruz has been more or less dead to most of his peers ever since he called McConnell a liar on the floor of the Senate in 2015.

McConnell was not present but that didn't matter.  A Senate rule says "No Senator in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator."

For all their up-yours behavior in the past few years, most of those GOP guys in the Senate, just like most of their peers across the aisle, are still sticklers for their rules and perks and matters of protocol.

And Cruz has been dead to McConnell since he started thinking it was part of his path to future glory to wander over to the House and incite the House Freedom Caucus to new heights of foolishness now and then, usually when a government shutdown over a budget bill was on the horizon.

So there might be 99 suspects if something happened to Cruz, and then again maybe there'd really only be one "person of interest".

When it comes to possible expulsion from the Senate over the insurrection though, even some House members (yeah, Dems) from Texas think that Cruz should be booted from the Senate, and they wrote a letter to Schumer to say so!


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1355920218338582530/
Amen.

These hypocritical MFers caught Lindsey G style vapors along with Faux talking heads babbling incessantly about AOC's intelligence, lack of international knowledge, or political know how.  Suddenly when it comes to someone talking about Jewish space lasers they suddenly feel it doesn't fall on them to weigh in on the competency of another elected official.

STFU


----------



## JayMysteri0

Keep thinking she's playing 'r's...
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1357121021187416065/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1357796544028753920/

I'm still having a hard time grasping how one can want to stake their place in history as being known for saying I think we're giving Americans too much of their money.  After having given the wealthiest, banks, & corporations the keys to the American Bank.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1355920218338582530/
> Amen.
> 
> These hypocritical MFers caught Lindsey G style vapors along with Faux talking heads babbling incessantly about AOC's intelligence, lack of international knowledge, or political know how.  Suddenly when it comes to someone talking about Jewish space lasers they suddenly feel it doesn't fall on them to weigh in on the competency of another elected official.
> 
> STFU




Also I seem to recall the establishment Democrats not exactly being warm to AOC and her ideas when she got elected, smugly marginalizing her at every opportunity.  I'm surprised they didn't set up a kids' table for her to sit at by herself.

I think the GOP knows their days are numbered as a viable unified national party and they refuse to definitively condemn or punish their own because they can't afford to lose a R on votes.  If that representative and their constituents are completely insane then so be it.      

By comparison when the Bernie Progressives started getting elected I fully believe the establishment Democrats would have actually preferred a Republican take that seat then have to deal with the Progressives.


----------



## Yoused

Republicans Accuse Ocasio-Cortez Of Not Being Anywhere Near Place They Told Capitol Mob She Would Be
					

WASHINGTON—Pointing out the inconsistency in her personal account of the Jan. 6 insurrection, republicans accused New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thursday of not being anywhere near the place they told the Capitol mob she would be. “She was supposed to be in a room just off the Capitol...




					www.theonion.com


----------



## JayMysteri0

Yoused said:


> Republicans Accuse Ocasio-Cortez Of Not Being Anywhere Near Place They Told Capitol Mob She Would Be
> 
> 
> WASHINGTON—Pointing out the inconsistency in her personal account of the Jan. 6 insurrection, republicans accused New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thursday of not being anywhere near the place they told the Capitol mob she would be. “She was supposed to be in a room just off the Capitol...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theonion.com



While that is an article from the Onion, if you follow AOC on Twitter, you know it's NOT a joke.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1358828530776367112/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1361902402568355841/


----------



## Eraserhead

She is good at This.


----------



## User.45

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1361902402568355841/



Dunno, but maybe...just maybe, if Scandinavia is able to operate wind farms in their weather, cold shouldn’t be an excuse for Texas. It’s also ridic to blame the failure of a 90% fossil grid on renewables.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## SuperMatt

theSeb said:


> I realise that I am late to this thread, mostly because I am exhausted of following politics, but man, this was a beautiful response.



And another good thing about AOC is that a lot of Republicans hate-follow her twitter. When she calls out lies like this, it might actually sink in with a few of them.


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> And another good thing about AOC is that a lot of Republicans hate-follow her twitter. When she calls out lies like this, it might actually sink in with a few of them.



Nah. That's the fucked up thing about politics: this is a mutually beneficial relationship. They are not in the same district so it isn't zero sum game for them. They have very little to lose, but they both can keep their constituents fired up. Like for Raphael Cruz, who vent to Princeton and Harvard, saying shit like the Paris Accords serve Parisians more than Pittsburghers is just pure demagoguery to give a wink to Trump supporters suggesting "Hey I'm the closes you guys have to Trump, support me". So even if he gets obliterated by AOC, he will have a net political gain from shit like this. That said, the most fucked up thing about Republicans is that they whine about the left treating GOP's voters like cattle, but nobody's better at this sort of condescension towards GOP voters than Cruz and the alike.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1362067937553768450/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1362154790118162436/


----------



## User.45

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1362154790118162436/



She's spot on... The Party of Personal Responsibility...for Others.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1362439233437392905/


----------



## User.45

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1362439233437392905/



Perfect!


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1362595095489429505/

Meanwhile the likes of Ben Shapiro & friends are defending Cruz by wondering what he could have done if he stayed in Texas.


----------



## Eraserhead

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1362595095489429505/
> 
> Meanwhile the likes of Ben Shapiro & friends are defending Cruz by wondering what he could have done if he stayed in Texas.




To be fair if we market it properly we should be able to obliterate the Republicans.


----------



## JayMysteri0

If I were Cruz, I'd just go into witness protection at this point
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1362809024480243714/


----------



## User.45

JayMysteri0 said:


> If I were Cruz, I'd just go into witness protection at this point
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1362809024480243714/



I think "performatively" she's out performing Cruz. But that just me.


----------



## JayMysteri0

P_X said:


> I think "performatively" she's out performing Cruz. But that just me.



I think if you are stuck with Cruz and you are in need, you don't care.

At this point _out performing_ Cruz just involves wanting to do your job.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1362532972885405706/

But, ...windmills!!!

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1363169579250384899/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1364301601486364678/

It really does feel like at times that a group of very privileged & wealthy older White men want a class system in this country, and don't mind anyone seeing them advocate for it in broad daylight.


----------



## Yoused

JayMysteri0 said:


> If I were Cruz, I'd just go into witness protection at this point



I think you misspelled "witless" there.

I looked at the comments on a N***M*x story on Alexandria's Texas relief efforts, and boy-howdy is she an evil, stupid person who is only helping people for the sake of political gain.


----------



## shadow puppet

Yoused said:


> I think you misspelled "witless" there.



*high five*


Yoused said:


> I looked at the comments on a N***M*x story on Alexandria's Texas relief efforts, and boy-howdy is she an evil, stupid person who is only helping people for the sake of political gain.



Those folks can be the first to go without any necessary water and supplies from the almost $5 million she raised.  Stupid asshats.


----------



## Joe

It's sad to say, but conservatives in this state will not learn from Ted Cruz's/Texas GOP failures and AOC's help during the winter storm. They don't see it that way. Republicans have lied and scared them so much with "socialism" that they would freeze to death to own the libs. 

I saw so many people defending Ted Cruz on social media, and demonizing AOC even as she was at the Houston Food Bank volunteering her time. They made comments that she was only doing it for political gain and a photo op. Like I said, they are so used to Republican leaders in this state doing NOTHING for them that someone actually helping and volunteering their time looks like a photo op for political gain. They would rather vote for Ted Cruz who does NOTHING as long as he is against "socialism" and allowing them to keep their guns.  

I really don't know how these people will ever be convinced that the GOP doesn't care about them. They literally let all of us freeze for days and they blame AOC and the Green New Deal. It's a no win situation because these people have been lied to for so long and brainwashed for so long by right wing conspiracies. It's pretty much a lost cause at this point.


----------



## Yoused

JagRunner said:


> Republicans have lied and scared them so much with "socialism" that they would freeze to death to own the libs.



Let me be the first to say that I fully support their attempts to accomplish this.



JagRunner said:


> … Like I said, they are so used to Republican leaders in this state doing NOTHING for them that someone actually helping and volunteering their time looks like a photo op for political gain. …




Perhaps the feeling is “_Look at these people _helping_ us – what if something bad happens somewhere else and they expect us to help others some time, and what if it is people we don't like?_”


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

JagRunner said:


> Republicans have lied and scared them so much with "socialism"




I think the media has conflated Trump's supposed popularity with how terrified the right is of socialism while not even knowing what they are talking about when using that word.  Personally, I think a good percentage of the 77 million votes that went to Trump should instead be given to the fear of the socialist/communist/marxist left that their news media talks about nonstop.


----------



## SuperMatt

JagRunner said:


> It's sad to say, but conservatives in this state will not learn from Ted Cruz's/Texas GOP failures and AOC's help during the winter storm. They don't see it that way. Republicans have lied and scared them so much with "socialism" that they would freeze to death to own the libs.
> 
> I saw so many people defending Ted Cruz on social media, and demonizing AOC even as she was at the Houston Food Bank volunteering her time. They made comments that she was only doing it for political gain and a photo op. Like I said, they are so used to Republican leaders in this state doing NOTHING for them that someone actually helping and volunteering their time looks like a photo op for political gain. They would rather vote for Ted Cruz who does NOTHING as long as he is against "socialism" and allowing them to keep their guns.
> 
> I really don't know how these people will ever be convinced that the GOP doesn't care about them. They literally let all of us freeze for days and they blame AOC and the Green New Deal. It's a no win situation because these people have been lied to for so long and brainwashed for so long by right wing conspiracies. It's pretty much a lost cause at this point.



They don’t seem to realize that it’s the authoritarian aspect of communism that is the problem. They vote for a wannabe dictator like Trump. Have we not realized that the “red scare” in the 1950s was just fear-mongering? That the 80s arms race is over with the USSR?


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> They don’t seem to realize that it’s the authoritarian aspect of communism that is the problem. They vote for a wannabe dictator like Trump. Have we not realized that the “red scare” in the 1950s was just fear-mongering? That the 80s arms race is over with the USSR?



Communism falls apart due to the rampant corruption. Now,the sort of capitalism we are building may just as well fall apart for similar reasons.


Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I think the media has conflated Trump's supposed popularity with how terrified the right is of socialism while not even knowing what they are talking about when using that word.  Personally, I think a good percentage of the 77 million votes that went to Trump should instead be given to the fear of the socialist/communist/marxist left that their news media talks about nonstop.




He def won FL on this fear of socialism. The Texas mayor's letter equating a governmental response with a hand out is the insane mindset some people adopted. In my view, anarcho capitalism loses its charm the moment you realize your own mortality.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1364650658004148228/



THAT would be ONE big reason why she will NEVER be a conservative favorite.


----------



## JayMysteri0

People don't want to grasp how big the NYC Police Dept is and WHY their budget is so huge
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1365021717144420354/


----------



## thekev

P_X said:


> In my view, anarcho capitalism loses its charm the moment you realize your own mortality.




It's probably worsened by the issue that corruption can pretty much exist in any system.


----------



## Eraserhead

JagRunner said:


> It's sad to say, but conservatives in this state will not learn from Ted Cruz's/Texas GOP failures and AOC's help during the winter storm. They don't see it that way. Republicans have lied and scared them so much with "socialism" that they would freeze to death to own the libs.
> 
> I saw so many people defending Ted Cruz on social media, and demonizing AOC even as she was at the Houston Food Bank volunteering her time. They made comments that she was only doing it for political gain and a photo op. Like I said, they are so used to Republican leaders in this state doing NOTHING for them that someone actually helping and volunteering their time looks like a photo op for political gain. They would rather vote for Ted Cruz who does NOTHING as long as he is against "socialism" and allowing them to keep their guns.
> 
> I really don't know how these people will ever be convinced that the GOP doesn't care about them. They literally let all of us freeze for days and they blame AOC and the Green New Deal. It's a no win situation because these people have been lied to for so long and brainwashed for so long by right wing conspiracies. It's pretty much a lost cause at this point.



We aren’t great at reaching rural voters to be fair. We are all setup for the big cities. But we have nothing to say for the countryside.

We may be good at understanding the problems. And some of our solutions are good. But we can also be poor at understanding other people’s points of view and that other solutions can be valid too.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Ilhan Omar leads calls to fire Senate official who scuppered $15 wage rise
					

Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough ruled provision in $1.9tn Covid stimulus bill did not qualify for budget reconciliation




					www.theguardian.com
				






> The progressive Democrat Ilhan Omar has called for the firing of the government official who effectively blocked the party’s plans to raise the minimum wage.





> Democratic plans to include a gradual raise to $15 in Joe Biden’s $1.9tn coronavirus stimulus bill were effectively ended on Thursday when the Senate parliamentarian ruled it should not be part of the package.





> The decision by Elizabeth MacDonough, who has held the non-partisan position since 2012, dashed hopes of including the raise in the bill – the first increase in over a decade.




Uh...no. Disappointed as I am, we don’t fire people who follow rules, just because we don’t like their decisions. That’s the Republicans’ _shtick_.

AOC is wrong on this one.


----------



## SuperMatt

What we really need is to end the filibuster. It’s a racist relic. I guess you need 60 votes to do that though? Heck, I don’t know. The Senate rules are like CalvinBall.









						Calvinball
					

Calvinball is a game invented by Calvin and Hobbes. Calvinball has no rules; the players make up their own rules as they go along, so that no Calvinball game is like another. Rules cannot be used twice (except for the rule that rules cannot be used twice), and any plays made in one game may not...




					calvinandhobbes.fandom.com


----------



## Pumbaa

Thomas Veil said:


> AOC is wrong on this one.



And _this_ is what is so important!

Don’t worship politicians. Just because someone usually makes a lot of sense doesn’t mean they are always right, neither do their party affiliations. If they are wrong they should be called out for it.

I guess the opposite applies as well. Just because someone usually makes no sense doesn’t mean they are always wrong, neither do their party affiliations.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1366159893674283010/


----------



## JayMysteri0

Still yup


----------



## User.45

__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/mj8v9w
Bumped into this gem...

Conservatives really need to make up their minds... So is she now a WEAK lawmaker or someone dictating Democratic policy?

To add, the NYPost (toilet paper's more informative) fixates on how bad AOC is, yet they forget to mention how Dems outperform Reps on these measures even when lacking majority. This report looks bad on republicans, yet for NYP it's about the Squad and AOC, LOL.








						The ‘Do-Something’ Members of 116th Congress: Legislative effectiveness study from Vanderbilt, UVA identifies member success in advancing bills
					

Legislative effectiveness scores are at the core of the research conducted at the Center for Effective Lawmaking, co-directed by Vanderbilt‘s Alan Wiseman. Sens. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and Gary Peters, D-Mich., along with Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, and retired Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y., were the...




					news.vanderbilt.edu


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

I think this is a great analysis of that report from another Progressive, and it's not what most would think.  He acknowledges the "She's got extreme ideas.  So of course the establishment is going to keep her down!" defending deflection as somewhat true, but also says she should either reach across the isle on common ground issues like Bernie has successfully done in the past or go full on Tea Party and block all legislation until her demands are met, or at least that's what they attempted to do.  Sending great Tweets but refusing to work with the deplorables on anything ever isn't going to increase her effectiveness.

But I think she has a great foundation that most other politicians lack.  My biggest concern is she'll give too much weight to the "you sell out!" fair weather supporters and lose some winning opportunities as a result.  Is she there to make real changes or she she there just to throw a spotlight on how broken and corrupt our government is?  You can't do both on a purity level.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Does anyone really think this would really be a debate,

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1382689096787759109/

...and not Greene doing this?


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

JayMysteri0 said:


> Does anyone really think this would really be a debate,
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1382689096787759109/
> 
> ...and not Greene doing this?




There’s a small percentage of people in Congress even just entertaining the possibility of passing anything close to the Green New Deal incrementally. Comparably on Congressional approval numbers a better debate to be had would be on the validation of white supremacy. There’s a lot more members in Congress on board with that than the Green New Deal.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1385032955991576582/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1385022592126308353/


----------



## User.45

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1385032955991576582/
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1385022592126308353/



This is so absurd.... I bet it will take a week for her to schedule it.


----------



## thekev

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1385032955991576582/
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1385022592126308353/




AOC is a huge source of entertainment for me. Her responses are extremely funny, as are the responses of people sticking up for her or just trolling weirdos like Green.

I noted the original post again, and criticizing her over a $200 something dollar dress for a television appearance is completely ridiculous, considering the typical cost of women's dresses. Below that price territory, with much of what is available, they would have criticized her instead for her appearance rather than spending habits.


----------



## JayMysteri0

thekev said:


> AOC is a huge source of entertainment for me. Her responses are extremely funny, as are the responses of people sticking up for her or just trolling weirdos like Green.
> 
> I noted the original post again, and criticizing her over a $200 something dollar dress for a television appearance is completely ridiculous, considering the typical cost of women's dresses. Below that price territory, with much of what is available, they would have criticized her instead for her appearance rather than spending habits.



I think my favorite thing is that conservatives basically made her the star she is, because Faux News thought it would be funny.  Now she's their monster they helped create, so it's their monster to profit off of & whine about.  I always think about that, that she was just some lucky candidate, they gave a platform.  Every time conservatives whine about her, I'm sitting there going...


----------



## JayMysteri0

What really happened

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1385044140035960832/


----------



## thekev

JayMysteri0 said:


> I think my favorite thing is that conservatives basically made her the star she is, because Faux News thought it would be funny.  Now she's their monster they helped create, so it's their monster to profit off of & whine about.  I always think about that, that she was just some lucky candidate, they gave a platform.  Every time conservatives whine about her, I'm sitting there going...




It's a decent hypothesis, and that is one of the greatest gifs ever created.


----------



## JayMysteri0

thekev said:


> It's a decent hypothesis, and that is one of the greatest gifs ever created.



It's a hypothesis based on recent history.  Who do conservatives like raising money on of late?

Women, then Women of color.  From the biggest monster ever to walk these shores.  The American word for Kaiju according to republicans?  Hilary.  Then Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, name calling Elizabeth Warren, then AOC & the squad.

While AOC isn't drinking the blood of small children in the back of some pizza shop ( yet ), she somehow ( according to republicans ) manages to possess this great power over the country that most of us don't see.   There's money in them there three letters.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Remember conservatives don't like AOC, but like MTG

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1385348435679850496/

I'm guessing it's the reading thing that's a deal breaker for some conservatives


----------



## Yoused

JayMysteri0 said:


> it's the reading thing that's a deal breaker for some conservatives



No, I think the problem is that Alexandria does not speak Wharrgarbl.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1390426409785507848/


----------



## Scepticalscribe

And AOC herself has just re-tweeted this tweet by Kate Riga:

"Wow. AOC just backed ex-acting SecDef Miller into admitting that he didn't approve plan for the Nat Guard to deploy on 1/6 until 4:32, a difference from his claim that he ordered deployment at 3. That 4:32 order came after he talked to Pence (after calls from many panicked Dems)".


----------



## Yoused

Scepticalscribe said:


> And AOC herself has just re-tweeted this tweet by Kate Riga:
> 
> "Wow. AOC just backed ex-acting SecDef Miller into admitting that he didn't approve plan for the Nat Guard to deploy on 1/6 until 4:32, a difference from his claim that he ordered deployment at 3. That 4:32 order came after he talked to Pence (after calls from many panicked Dems)".



According to Miller's testimony, Trump asked_ … whether the District of Columbia's mayor had requested National Guard troops for Jan. 6, the day Congress was to ratify Joe Biden's presidential election victory. Trump told Miller to "fill" the request, the former defense secretary testified. Miller said Trump told him: "Do whatever is necessary *to protect demonstrators* that were executing their constitutionally protected rights."_​
which perhaps might explain the hesitancy.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Wait.  Did MTG already step up & have that Green New Deal debate she was going to schedule in the future?

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1392852169292804102/



> Ocasio-Cortez expresses security concerns after Greene reportedly asks why she supports ‘terrorists’
> 
> 
> Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-N.Y.) office is calling on top lawmakers to ensure that Congress remains “a safe, civil place” for members and staff after Rep. Marjorie Taylor Gr…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thehill.com





> Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-N.Y.) office is calling on top lawmakers to ensure that Congress remains “a safe, civil place" for members and staff after Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) reportedly accosted her on Wednesday and accused her of supporting “terrorists.”
> 
> The incident was witnessed by two Washington Post reporters, according to the newspaper, which reported that Ocasio-Cortez exited the House chamber before Greene shouted “Hey Alexandria” multiple times to get her attention.
> 
> Ocasio-Cortez did not stop to address Greene, and the Georgia lawmaker continued shouting while asking her why she supports antifa and Black Lives Matter, claiming they are “terrorist” groups, according to the Post.
> 
> Greene also reportedly accused the New York lawmaker of not defending her “radical socialist” beliefs by not publicly debating her after the Republican challenged her on social media last month.
> 
> “You don’t care about the American people,” Greene shouted, according to the Post. “Why do you support terrorists and antifa?”
> 
> The Georgia lawmaker reportedly told reporters after Ocasio-Cortez left that the Democrat is a "chicken" who "doesn’t want to debate the Green New Deal.”
> 
> “These members are cowards," Green added. "They need to defend their legislation to the people. That’s pathetic.”
> 
> Ocasio-Cortez spokesperson Lauren Hitt told the Post that Greene "tried to begin an argument with Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez and when Rep. Ocasio-Cortez tried to walk away, Congresswoman Greene began screaming and called Rep. Ocasio-Cortez a terrorist sympathizer.”
> 
> “We hope leadership and the Sergeant at Arms will take real steps to make Congress a safe, civil place for all Members and staff — especially as many offices are discussing reopening. One Member has already been forced to relocate her office due to Congresswoman Greene’s attacks,” Hitt added.





> Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) announced earlier this year that she was moving her House office away from Greene’s due to safety concerns. The progressive lawmaker accused Greene and her staff of berating her in a hallway, adding that the Georgia Republican targeted her on social media.
> 
> “A maskless Marjorie Taylor Greene & her staff berated me in a hallway. She targeted me & others on social media,” Bush tweeted at the time. “I'm moving my office away from hers for my team's safety.”
> 
> Greene on social media challenged Ocasio-Cortez earlier this year to debate the progressive lawmaker's signature legislation, known as the Green New Deal. The Georgia lawmaker later approached Ocasio-Cortez on the House floor and tweeted a photo of the encounter.
> 
> “I’m glad I ran into you today @AOC to plan our debate about the Green New Deal,” she wrote in the post.


----------



## shadow puppet

One of them acts like a child and it isn't AOC.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1392943303478349824/


----------



## User.45

shadow puppet said:


> One of them acts like a child and it isn't AOC.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1392943303478349824/
> 
> View attachment 5112



She meant to write: "Trust the Signs".

The science even on our sexual dimorphism is quite complicated.

BTW, MTG is everything the GOP wants to think AOC is.


----------



## thekev

shadow puppet said:


> One of them acts like a child and it isn't AOC.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1392943303478349824/
> 
> View attachment 5112




Greene filed articles of impeachment on Biden as a publicity stunt on day 1, yet she's complaining about lack of bipartisanship. I imagine if Greene ever turned this into a physical fight, it would still favor AOC,  who is younger and clearly in better shape.


----------



## shadow puppet

I just can't with MTG.  She's right up there with Cruz and Hawley.  More like past them.


----------



## Yoused

Why do people refuse to use her proper name? How hard is "Marjorie Wharrgarbl"?


----------



## User.45

shadow puppet said:


> I just can't with MTG.  She's right up there with Cruz and Hawley.  More like past them.



But I'm certain that it's a grift for Cruz. He does this theatrical BS not because he needs to stay in the Senate (he's in texas after all), he does it to keep himself in the game for a presidential candidacy... He's smart. Green on the other hand is really really really dumb. Did she manage to read all 14 pages of the GND by now?


----------



## JayMysteri0

shadow puppet said:


> I just can't with MTG.  She's right up there with Cruz and Hawley.  More like past them.




Greene is the textbook person who believes owning firearms makes them tough & is often the source of their _courage_.  So they aren't shy about starting an encounter, only to turn to "I was in fear for my life", when shit doesn't go their way.  As pointed out, Greene is very likely to learn the hard way the difference between her fantasies & real life.  Either AOC reminding her that she was bartender that dealt with belligerent drinkers, or that security is provided to members of congress for a reason.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1392980259356565505/


----------



## JayMysteri0

FFS!

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1393230641693609984/

Greene will not be satisfied until she catches an ass whipping legally or physically, then will be crying about it like she didn't deserve it.



> Since-deleted video shows Marjorie Taylor Greene harassing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's office during 2019 Capitol Hill visit
> 
> 
> Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene confronted Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez outside the House chamber on Wednesday afternoon. The incident, first reported by The Washington Post, was just the latest of several hostile confrontations the Georgia congresswoman has had with her...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com


----------



## shadow puppet

WTH is wrong with this woman?  Why isn't she embarrassed at herself and behavior?  Is she on drugs?

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1393245809521696769/


----------



## User.45

shadow puppet said:


> WTH is wrong with this woman?  Why isn't she embarrassed at herself and behavior?  Is she on drugs?
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1393245809521696769/



 Just imagine the nice example this mother of three children sets


----------



## shadow puppet

P_X said:


> Just imagine the nice example this mother of three children sets



That is horrifying!

I will never understand why she was elected in the first place.  The woman is both manic and emotionally handicapped!


----------



## User.45

shadow puppet said:


> That is horrifying!
> 
> I will never understand why she was elected in the first place.  The woman is both manic and emotionally handicapped!



Running unopposed helps...


----------



## shadow puppet

P_X said:


> Running unopposed helps...



Seriously?  I had no idea!


----------



## thekev

shadow puppet said:


> Seriously?  I had no idea!




There were rumors of intimidation. This link suggests Ausdal's wife followed for divorce right before the election. Weird name, and I'm not sure whether that's credible. Either way yeah she lacked an opponent. I would very much like to see her banned from holding public office for life, based on conduct. It's harder to have a functioning government with people like that in it.


----------



## JayMysteri0

shadow puppet said:


> Seriously?  I had no idea!






> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Marjorie Taylor Greene
> 
> 
> Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ballotpedia.org






> Why Marjorie Taylor Greene’s opponent quit the House race
> 
> 
> Democrati Kevin Van Ausdal’s uphill campaign for a U.S. House seat against Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene ended with a knock on his door late Wednesday while he was cooking dinner. It was a deputy sheriff, there to serve him divorce papers from his wife. He was running against Greene, who won...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ajc.com





> Kevin Van Ausdal’s uphill campaign for a U.S. House seat ended with a knock on his door late Wednesday while he was cooking dinner.
> 
> It was a deputy sheriff, there to serve him divorce papers from his wife. As part of the proceedings, he would have to vacate the home they shared.
> 
> After flirting with renting a nearby place, the Democrat decided to move in with family in Indiana – and abruptly abandon his congressional bid for an open seat against Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene.
> 
> Van Ausdal didn’t initially want to share those details, which were provided with his approval Friday by his campaign aide, Michael McGraw. But rumors of threats and coercion had surfaced on social media after he cited “personal and family reasons” for his surprise decision to drop out.




Even though he withdrew, his name was still on the ballot, and still got a 1/4 of the votes.


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> Even though he withdrew, his name was still on the ballot, and still got a 1/4 of the votes.



How did she win the primary? Has the GOP become so full of nuts that only the crazies can win a primary now? Or were there no primary challengers either?


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> How did she win the primary? Has the GOP become so full of nuts that only the crazies can win a primary now? Or were there no primary challengers either?



I think his primary opponent was an antitrumper


----------



## shadow puppet

I love this guy.  He's always good for a laugh.    

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1393269937246986240/


----------



## JayMysteri0

SuperMatt said:


> How did she win the primary? Has the GOP become so full of nuts that only the crazies can win a primary now? Or were there no primary challengers either?



Honestly?  Because every part of Georgia is NOT like ( _which is shame because I swear to goodness the majority of women there are all uncannily beautiful _) Atlanta.  Georgia is THE south, along with some other states.



> How Marjorie Taylor Greene Won, And Why Someone Like Her Can Win Again
> 
> 
> Before Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene set off a metal detector outside the House chamber, lost her committee assignments, or hung a transphobic sign in the halls o…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fivethirtyeight.com





> Ever since, she has been a source of controversy. Some of Greene’s most egregious social media posts, in which she endorsed QAnon, “liked” posts calling for the execution of prominent Democrats and questioned whether the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon ever happened, have pushed even some Republicans to denounce her. But those comments were public while she was running in that primary. So, why weren’t they an issue then? Or, to put a finer point on it, how did Greene get elected in the first place?
> 
> It wasn’t something special about her district. Instead, she got elected because of all the things that are special about American politics: the influence of money, polarization and kingmakers. And Greene wasn’t special in being able to harness those forces — the same could be done in many places around the country. A Marjorie Taylor Greene could be coming to a congressional district near you.




I remember doing a con in Atlanta ( _Atlanta used to be the top my list, especially when I was a strip club fan_ ), and a guy that wanted to do business with myself and a few others invited us to a party.  We passed because the parties in the hotel were always good, we got in free, and you didn't have to travel far when you got drunk.  One of the persons with us is / was gay and proudly so.  We ended up finding out the guy was basically trying to take us to an all white biker party.  I won't bother explaining what happened after we found out what the guy intended for us.


----------



## thekev

shadow puppet said:


> I love this guy.  He's always good for a laugh.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1393269937246986240/




She's worried the Death Star of David might actually exist?


----------



## User.45

JayMysteri0 said:


> Honestly?  Because every part of Georgia is NOT like ( _which is shame because I swear to goodness the majority of women there are all uncannily beautiful _) Atlanta.  Georgia is THE south, along with some other states.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I remember doing a con in Atlanta ( _Atlanta used to be the top my list, especially when I was a strip club fan_ ), and a guy that wanted to do business with myself and a few others invited us to a party.  We passed because the parties in the hotel were always good, we got in free, and you didn't have to travel far when you got drunk.  One of the persons with us is / was gay and proudly so.  We ended up finding out the guy was basically trying to take us to an all white biker party.  I won't bother explaining what happened after we found out what the guy intended for us.



I had an interview in Atlanta recently. I liked it a lot. Funny thing is one of the pitches were the proximity of the airport, hinting that you don't have to deal with deep Georgia if you wanna travel, just fly over it, LOL.


----------



## shadow puppet

I'm not even going to pretend to be shocked.



> ATLANTA — A *Channel 2 Action News* investigation has found that Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and her husband have two active homestead exemptions, which is against Georgia law.
> 
> A homestead exemption is a big tax break any Georgia homeowner is entitled to for their primary residence. It is against the law to file for more than one.












						Investigation: Marjorie Taylor Greene filed homestead exemptions on 2 homes, violating state law
					

A homestead exemption is a big tax break any Georgia homeowner is entitled to for their primary residence. It is against the law to file for more than one.




					www.wsbtv.com


----------



## JayMysteri0

So right.
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1393356245634109444/
And THIS woman knocked on a door.


----------



## JayMysteri0

I KNEW I heard this story before
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1393232366982860802/


----------



## thekev

JayMysteri0 said:


> So right.
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1393356245634109444/
> And THIS woman knocked on a door.




Assume I'm dumb and remind me where this is from? Also why did they have to put Greene's face on the body of a woman wearing semi-transparent clothing ?


----------



## JayMysteri0

thekev said:


> Assume I'm dumb and remind me where this is from? Also why did they have to put Greene's face on the body of a woman wearing semi-transparent clothing ?



1.  The woman who got arrested knocking on the door while Gov Kemp live streamed his signing of Georgia's new voting bill in front of a painting of a plantation and a room full of White men.


> Georgia Lawmaker Arrested As Governor Signs Law Overhauling Elections
> 
> 
> Democratic state Rep. Park Cannon, a Black woman, is facing charges after refusing to stop knocking on Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp's office door.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.npr.org




2.


----------



## thekev

JayMysteri0 said:


> 1.  The woman who got arrested knocking on the door while Gov Kemp live streamed his signing of Georgia's new voting bill in front of a painting of a plantation and a room full of White men.
> 
> 
> 2.




Yeah I recognized 1. (which was ridiculous), just not 2. I'm not sure I ever watched that movie. Personally I think the only acceptable solution for Greene is Article 1, Section 5.


----------



## JayMysteri0

thekev said:


> Yeah I recognized 1. (which was ridiculous), just not 2. I'm not sure I ever watched that movie. Personally I think the only acceptable solution for Greene is Article 1, Section 5.



https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1393594194762031108/

To me the interesting thing, MTG was aware she looked like she's off her rocker, that she deleted the video.

She maybe disturbed, but when she wants, she suddenly gets a grip to take advantage.


----------



## thekev

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1393594194762031108/
> 
> To me the interesting thing, MTG was aware she looked like she's off her rocker, that she deleted the video.
> 
> She maybe disturbed, but when she wants, she suddenly gets a grip to take advantage.




She may know exactly what she's doing, or she may have just gotten advice from other Republicans in private that she did a really stupid thing. I'm not really sure. Having people like her there doesn't produce a more functional Congress though.


----------



## Huntn

The GOP will voraciously object too this notion, but they have a death wish for our country as conceived of by the founding fathers. There is no standard, no rule they won’t undermine to stay in power even when they have the clear message that the majority do not support them. Currently they are energetically busy passing laws in the States they control to undermine the 2022 elections In their favor. M-Asshat-G is a symptom of the disease.

For sometime now, they have abandoned trying to enlarge their tent, their views are too hostile to recruit anything but losers to their self righteous cause of _Me Me Me, Fuck You_. And they will pick at the foundations as long as enough citizens support them to keep them in office.

This is the crux of the issue, a substantial number of citizens who have trouble dealing with reality, are ****ing racists, are twisted sudo-Christians, have decided that democracy sucks, _when I don’t get my way, _and have broken bad. GOP morality in a nutshell, _Break whatever rules you have to, to win._

We are no longer a coherent team. The sea of red is bleeding us. And the sea of red is being led by people who do not want to live in a democracy, who will cheat to win and convince themselves and their losers, that dishonesty was required to win, for the best outcome, and that’s ok.. Up is down, left is right, _it’s whatever we tell you it is. A round of Koolaid on the house! _

​


----------



## JayMysteri0

Not AOC, but I'm curious how often this happens with other pols?

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1399713566224261121/


----------



## Huntn

Second answer to thread question: If you are of minority status, in elected office, and are a Democrat, young, liberal, intelligent, savvy, and articulate, you are a dire threat to GOP/COT because you may inspire the down trodden to rise up and throw your worthless ass out of the Capitol, legally with a ballot.

Those ballots are a problem too, have to keep as many citizens away from them as possible.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Why do conservatives hate AOC?  Because it gives them something in common with establishment democrats.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1401629935320580104/


----------



## User.45

JayMysteri0 said:


> Why do conservatives hate AOC?  Because it gives them something in common with establishment democrats.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1401629935320580104/



She's absolutely correct about this not making anybody feel or actually be safer. 



> National debates over heavy-handed police tactics, including so-called “militarized” policing, are often framed as a trade-off between civil liberties and public safety, but the costs and benefits of controversial police practices remain unclear due to data limitations. Using an array of administrative data sources and original experiments I show that militarized “special weapons and tactics” (SWAT) teams are more often deployed in communities of color, and—contrary to claims by police administrators—provide no detectable benefits in terms of officer safety or violent crime reduction, on average. However, survey experiments suggest that seeing militarized police in news reports erodes opinion toward law enforcement. *Taken together, these findings suggest that curtailing militarized policing may be in the interest of both police and citizens.*











						Militarization fails to enhance police safety or reduce crime but may harm police reputation
					

National debates over heavy-handed police tactics, including so-called “militarized” policing, are often framed as a trade-off between civil liberties and public safety, but the costs and benefits of controversial police practices remain unclear due to data limitations. Using an array of...




					www.pnas.org


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1408938900651970560/


----------



## thekev

JayMysteri0 said:


> Why do conservatives hate AOC?  Because it gives them something in common with establishment democrats.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1401629935320580104/




I definitely don't identify with conservative values. Personally, I like that she doesn't play word games. AOC's comments are pretty plainly spoken most of the time, whereas her critics often rely on insinuation.


----------



## User.45

thekev said:


> I definitely don't identify with conservative values. Personally, I like that she doesn't play word games. AOC's comments are pretty plainly spoken most of the time, whereas her critics often rely on insinuation.



good point. you always know where she stands...that's an unusual virtue in politics.


----------



## Huntn

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1408938900651970560/



This kind of shit is no laughing matter, unless everyone laughs her right out of office. These Trump sycophants are inherently evil. This is the kind of poison they dope themselves up with. Declaring that anyone who does not agree with you deserves to be locked up  is right out of the Head Tyrant’s  playbook. I’m trying to figure out what is worse, being dangerously delusional or being a Nazi. It might be a fine line between  the two. Based on their rhetoric, I have no trouble imagining Despicable Donnie, or Malignant Marjorie sending people off to death camps if they were in a position to do so…


----------



## JayMysteri0




----------



## Yoused

Huntn said:


> This kind of shit is no laughing matter, unless everyone laughs her right out of office. These Trump sycophants are inherently evil.



Some "news" site posted this image in a story about the "feud" between the two





which highlights to me how stunningly attractive the woman on the right is when compared to the empty-headed twit on the left. I am not quite sure what they were intending to convey/instill here, but it puts _me_ even more firmly in the camp of the "little communist". I am full aware that one should not base opinions on what people look like, but …


----------



## Pumbaa

Yoused said:


> Some "news" site posted this image in a story about the "feud" between the two
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> which highlights to me how stunningly attractive the woman on the right is when compared to the empty-headed twit on the left. I am not quite sure what they were intending to convey/instill here, but it puts _me_ even more firmly in the camp of the "little communist". I am full aware that one should not base opinions on what people look like, but …



Also, “little communist” makes me think of a cute Disney character or something. I’m sure “little” was intended to be demeaning but I find it endearing.

The “communist” part on the other hand doesn’t really make me feel anything when uttered in a US context. Just like “socialism”, simply a word for something an American wants you to fear when they lack convincing arguments as to why.


----------



## Huntn

JayMysteri0 said:


>



What a pathetic, insecure wants to be loved for raping you POS (on the left if I have to clarify for anyone )


----------



## Huntn

Yoused said:


> Some "news" site posted this image in a story about the "feud" between the two
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> which highlights to me how stunningly attractive the woman on the right is when compared to the empty-headed twit on the left. I am not quite sure what they were intending to convey/instill here, but it puts _me_ even more firmly in the camp of the "little communist". I am full aware that one should not base opinions on what people look like, but …



I picture Donelda charging with her AK screaming like a banshee and AOC pulling out her pistol and one shoting her between the eyes…


----------



## SuperMatt

Huntn said:


> I picture Donelda charging with her AK screaming like a banshee and AOC pulling out her pistol and one shoting her between the eyes…


----------



## SuperMatt

And another reason for conservatives to hate her:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1411088090832252933/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1413596888700530688/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1414014730843344896/

Screams a woman at CPAC who is collecting a check & getting a great rate on health insurance & other bennies ... from the gov't.


----------



## Herdfan

Scepticalscribe said:


> They hate her - firstly - because she is a woman, secondly, because she is a woman of colour, and thirdly, above all, because she is a fiercely intelligent, accomplished and articulate woman of colour.




Or it could be that she says incredibly stupid stuff.


----------



## Eric

I guess


Herdfan said:


> Or it could be that she says incredibly stupid stuff.



 I guess they can't all be rocket scientists like Marjorie Taylor Greene.


----------



## User.45

Herdfan said:


> Or it could be that she says incredibly stupid stuff.



Nice. Let's see specific examples!
I've heard her saying stuff that are very unpopular with the GOP, but I have yet to see an outright stupid thing from her, especially when the bar is on the level of climate change denial and antivaxxerism.


----------



## Eric

P_X said:


> Nice. Let's see specific examples!
> I've heard her saying stuff that are very unpopular with the GOP, but I have yet to see an outright stupid thing from her, especially when the bar is on the level of climate change denial and antivaxxerism.



Yep, any variation of:

Healthcare for all
Everyone should eat
Equality for black people, LGBTQ or Women
Rich paying their fair share
Will be deemed as "stupid" by Republicans.


----------



## DT

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1414014730843344896/
> 
> Screams a woman at CPAC who is collecting a check & getting a great rate on health insurance & other bennies ... from the gov't.




Boebert's raging stupidity is off the charts, but still slightly overshadowed by her laughable "tough" postering and stomping around in high heels like she's plowing a field.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Or it could be that she says incredibly stupid stuff.



People generally laugh at the folks who say stupid stuff. The anger at her seems to be due to the strong possibility that she will accomplish some of her progressive goals.


----------



## JayMysteri0

DT said:


> Boebert's raging stupidity is off the charts, but still slightly overshadowed by her laughable "tough" postering and stomping around in high heels like she's plowing a field.



I think what's fascinating is what AOC is seen stupid by some or even unreasonable, but "factual" counterpoints often involve talking about farting cows, snowballs in congress, and not much truth.

Meanwhile the things the likes of Boebert & Greene say are regularly & roundly debunked & rebuked, but those critics of AOC remain conspicuously &  deafeningly silent when it comes to them.


----------



## DT

Side note: hahaha, @ the new avatar


----------



## DT

Charlie: They said you was hung.
Bart: And they was right.


----------



## Ulenspiegel

We used to have long conversations with Jay about AOC in MR PRSI.

I am not conservative nor am I a Republican. 

I am not fond of her. 

She might be a colour shade on the US political palette but nothing more in my eyes.


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> Yep, any variation of:
> 
> Healthcare for all
> Everyone should eat
> Equality for black people, LGBTQ or Women
> Rich paying their fair share
> Will be deemed as "stupid" by Republicans.



This has been a thing I noticed. Some people think that these things are stupid, therefore she is stupid.


----------



## SuperMatt

Ulenspiegel said:


> We used to have long conversations with Jay about AOC in MR PRSI.
> 
> I am not conservative nor am I a Republican.
> 
> I am not fond of her.
> 
> She might be a colour shade on the US political palette but nothing more in my eyes.



I know a few other people that feel the same way as you. She can be a polarizing figure.

However, like her or not. she is far from stupid.


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> I know a few other people that feel the same way as you. She can be a polarizing figure.
> 
> However, like her or not. she is far from stupid.



She's a little too left for my taste and not very diplomatic for a politician, but that's kind of a virtue and I like her straight shooting.


----------



## Ulenspiegel

She is far from being stupid if she was able to rise to a position she is in atm.

None of us here was able to complete this task.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> I know a few other people that feel the same way as you. She can be a polarizing figure.
> 
> However, like her or not. *she is far from stupid.*




Would you agree though she can say some really stupid things?


----------



## User.45

Herdfan said:


> Would you agree though she can say some really stupid things?



Still awaiting concrete examples instead of hyperbole.


----------



## Herdfan

Ulenspiegel said:


> She is far from being stupid if she was able to rise to a position she is in atm.
> 
> None of us here was able to complete this task.



I have to give her credit for being able to use SM to promote herself during her primary with Crowley.  Plus she hit the streets and put in the face time with the voters.  Can't deny that.

Reminds me of a guy I went to college with.  When he said he was going to run for Mayor, no one believed him.  When he registered to run and said he was going to win, no one believed him.  No one knew who he was until the votes came in.  He did the same thing AOC did, he knocked on doors and talked to people.  Completely under the radar and it worked.


----------



## DT

Herdfan said:


> Reminds me of a guy I went to college with.




Well, that just invalidated your whole argument, umm, I guess unless you mean this:


----------



## Herdfan

P_X said:


> Still awaiting concrete examples instead of hyperbole.




1) It's more important to be morally right than factually correct.
2) We could save $21T a year by keeping a tighter control on the pentagon budget
3)Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs

Here is a start with links to verify each one and not a single Fox, Breitbart, NewMax or OAN source.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Herdfan said:


> Would you agree though she can say some really stupid things?



I think what some are asking of you though, is the specific instances you are referring to as her saying "stupid things".  In many cases she can back up what she's said with some facts & stats.  Meanwhile her counterparts on the right often say "stupid things", but get called out by everyone but those who line up politically with them.

Case in point
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1414316638242054148/

Classy.  Great way to minimize the death of over a half million lost American lives & use it as a stump bit at CPAC.    

Boebert like Greene tend to trend on Twitter for actually saying "stupid things", but that is their intention.  They say those things for attention, to grab headlines, and in Greene's case for fund raising.  The "stupid things" you imagine AOC says, at least come from a place she believes will help people.  It maybe naive, but I personally prefer where AOC is coming from when she says the things she does.  Those "stupid things" she says aren't things that will infuriate or annoy most, but those who need or want to be critical of her.


----------



## thekev

Herdfan said:


> Would you agree though she can say some really stupid things?




Take a look at her general tone. She tends to give normal responses in plain English, that do not tend to leverage shared sentiment. Even if you can find a small number of wacky examples (and I don't think that's a given), it would not change the general demeanor she sets forth.



Ulenspiegel said:


> She is far from being stupid if she was able to rise to a position she is in atm.
> 
> None of us here was able to complete this task.




It's entirely possible that none of us have run for office.

(Note: I just wanted to reference The Office.)


----------



## DT

thekev said:


> Take a look at her general tone. She tends to give normal responses in plain English, that do not tend to leverage shared sentiment. Even if you can find a small number of wacky examples (and I don't think that's a given), it would not change the general demeanor she sets forth.




This is a pretty brilliant assessment of some her communications.  They're not "stupid", as that suggests poor intuitiveness, introspection, I think they're a touch inexperienced (in the context of "the game") because some of her HERF DERF SHE SAID, comments, when distilled down to the core concept are still pretty fucking smart, and several orders-of-magnitude beyond anything Greene or Boebert have managed to crap out of their face orifice (they are spectacularly stupid).


----------



## User.45

Herdfan said:


> 1) It's more important to be morally right than factually correct.
> 2) We could save $21T a year by keeping a tighter control on the pentagon budget
> 3)Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs
> 
> Here is a start with links to verify each one and not a single Fox, Breitbart, NewMax or OAN source.



Thanks, now we have _actual _stuff to talk about. 
1) She is absolutely correct about the moral issues of increasing military spending while early educational spending is remains subpar (which is a much better investment than most anything else). This is actually a national security issue, see how vulnerable Americans are to blatant disinformation. 
2) She's definitely wrong on the scale but not the issue: there are ginormous sums of unaccounted tax-payer money poured into the military industrial complex
3) The analysis seems fair here, it's a stupid statement, but again the basic premise is major growth in inequalities and trumped up economical numbers. Just remember what happened in the first few weeks of the COVID lockdown...Companies that were bailed out and ended up spending billions on stock buybacks that benefited CEOs and shareholders disproportionately while these companies remained vulnerable and needed another bail out. This isn't how capitalism supposed to work...

Now let's do two things:
1) Let's take into context that she has 12.7K tweets on Twitter, so even if we are generous, these fact-checked tweets cover <0.5% of her activity. 
2) Let's define _stupid_ in your books and then let's apply that scale to AOC's peers.


----------



## User.45

DT said:


> This is a pretty brilliant assessment of some her communications.  They're not "stupid", as that suggests poor intuitiveness, introspection, I think they're a touch inexperienced (in the context of "the game") because some of her HERF DERF SHE SAID, comments, when distilled down to the core concept are still pretty fucking smart, and several orders-of-magnitude beyond anything Greene or Boebert have managed to crap out of their face orifice (they are spectacularly stupid).



But Boebert or Greene or even Trump are very very very low bars. I'd put Rand Paul there whom for some reason isn't called the idiot he actually is on a regular basis.


----------



## lizkat

Beauty is at least partly in the eye of the beholder and often in the eye of the (partisan, sure) Tweet producer. 

But  I'll take no-context partisan clips of AOC saying "stupid things" any day over equivalent (also partisan) clips of the prattlings of the likes of Ronny Jackson, former WH physician (now a member of the House from Texas),  and assiduously touting the messages du jour of the Trump wing of the GOP.   His stuff is riddled with stereotypes and bumperstick "ideas".  The producers of such clips are usually partisans, yep, but the subjects are in fact saying what they're saying.   Not gonna catch AOC saying stuff like THIS though:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1413496773767749634/


----------



## Herdfan

P_X said:


> 3) The analysis seems fair here, it's a stupid statement, but again the basic premise is major growth in inequalities and trumped up economical numbers. Just remember what happened in the first few weeks of the COVID lockdown...Companies that were bailed out and ended up spending billions on stock buybacks that benefited CEOs and shareholders disproportionately while these companies remained vulnerable and needed another bail out. This isn't how capitalism supposed to work...




This is probably a topic for a separate thread, but should you blame companies from using the law to their advantage or the pols that passed it for not putting more controls in it?


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> This is probably a topic for a separate thread, but should you blame companies from using the law to their advantage or the pols that passed it for not putting more controls in it?



Yes.

It’s not an either/or proposition… perhaps you’ve heard of this thing they like to call lobbying?


----------



## User.45

Herdfan said:


> This is probably a topic for a separate thread, but should you blame companies from using the law to their advantage or the pols that passed it for not putting more controls in it?



Ummmm....you just made AOC's point you listed as #1 above.

To elaborate:
1. Corporations' goal is to socialize cost but privatize profits. Just look at Coca-Cola a premier polluter, premier contributor to obesity, diabetes (i.e. healthcare costs).
2. They get their interests prioritized over the voters' through lobbying
3. AOC is antilobby. Hell, even Trump claimed to be antilobby until he started reaping the benefits of that influence.


----------



## Yoused

Herdfan said:


> This is probably a topic for a separate thread, but should you blame companies from using the law to their advantage or the pols that passed it for not putting more controls in it?



It is literally theft. If I can take your money for no justifiable reason, giving you nothing in return, and get away with it, is it your position that I ought to just do that simply because I can? Does the law define what is ethical?


----------



## Ulenspiegel

thekev said:


> It's entirely possible that none of us have run for office.
> 
> (Note: I just wanted to reference The Office.)



It is entirely possible that there is a reason why you haven't or couldn't run for office (or The Office as you wish).

I better not react to the posts here.

For me, it is upsetting.

Our views differ and I have already expressed my opinion in a long-long thread over there.


----------



## SuperMatt

Ulenspiegel said:


> It is entirely possible that there is a reason why you haven't or couldn't run for office (or The Office as you wish).
> 
> I better not react to the posts here.
> 
> For me, it is upsetting.
> 
> Our views differ and I have already expressed my opinion in a long-long thread over there.



No problem - I hope there are other threads with areas of discussion you’re more into - if not, feel free to start any. We can’t talk about politics ALL the time...


----------



## User.45

Yoused said:


> It is literally theft. If I can take your money for no justifiable reason, giving you nothing in return, and get away with it, is it your position that I ought to just do that simply because I can? Does the law define what is ethical?



More than theft. It's robbery, because the rules are enforced by armed forces. 

I noticed an interesting trend on lawfulness vs ethics on Reddit. I commented on a car crash where a camry cut the a guy with dashcam off on a Virginia highway bridge. The dashcammer anticipated the maneuver by the camry and instead of slowing down to just let the idiot in, he accelerated and when impact was imminent nudged his car slightly towards the camry ending up pitting it. Camry flipped and crashed into a "bystander" SUV which also flipped. 

I pointed out how horrible the behavior of the dashcam guy was who clearly had 2 opportunities to avoid the crash but decided to escalate, and a vocal minority of redditors told me to fuck off because what the guy did was legal (not even sure about that). Some people have no grasp of how bad a society is where people do all the legal bad stuff to one another.


----------



## thekev

Herdfan said:


> This is probably a topic for a separate thread, but should you blame companies from using the law to their advantage or the pols that passed it for not putting more controls in it?




Rather than concern yourself with blame, you can highlight this every time it happens without directly applying judgement to it. This spotlights such behavior without projecting partisan views on it.



Ulenspiegel said:


> It is entirely possible that there is a reason why you haven't or couldn't run for office (or The Office as you wish).
> 
> I better not react to the posts here.
> 
> For me, it is upsetting.
> 
> Our views differ and I have already expressed my opinion in a long-long thread over there.




My previous comment wasn't meant as a jab. As for me, it's unlikely I would be elected. Among other things, I often respond with very long, detailed answers to questions.


----------



## Ulenspiegel

thekev said:


> Rather than concern yourself with blame, you can highlight this every time it happens without directly applying judgement to it. This spotlights such behavior without projecting partisan views on it.
> 
> 
> 
> My previous comment wasn't meant as a jab. As for me, it's unlikely I would be elected. Among other things, I often respond with very long, detailed answers to questions.




My bed, most probably I suffer from post-MR-PRSI-Syndrome.

In this very case I expressed my views in long discussions over there. I don't see any sense repeating my arguments here. And to be honest, I am not in a mood to do so.

Where there are more than two people, there are more than two opinions. And that should be respected.


----------



## User.45

Ulenspiegel said:


> My bed, most probably I suffer from post-MR-PRSI-Syndrome.
> 
> In this very case I expressed my views in long discussions over there. I don't see any sense repeating my arguments here. And to be honest, I am not in a mood to do so.
> 
> Where there are more than two people, there are more than two opinions. And that should be respected.



The difference between MR and here is that the vast majority of people are willing to reason, discuss in a truly interactive fashion and trolling is practically absent because unlike MR it comes with no reward (i.e. getting the responder suspended or confirmation bias if the troll post gets moderated).


----------



## Ulenspiegel

I hear you.

That is why I am here.

In my case this topic is an old hat.


----------



## User.45

I'll just leave it here to signal where the current bar resides.


----------



## JayMysteri0

P_X said:


> View attachment 7033
> 
> I'll just leave it here to signal where the current bar resides.



As with all things Boebert, take with large amounts of salt



> Boebert's Democratic upbringing questioned
> 
> 
> Lauren Boebert, the Republican candidate for the 3rd Congressional District, may not have grown up in the downtrodden Democratic household that she’s so often been claiming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gjsentinel.com


----------



## lizkat

"How soon we forget" whoever may have helped lift us from poverty or shown us a way to better ourselves.

At least the damn cheese was there at the end of the queue Boebert claims she was waiting on. 

Guess she didn't live someplace like NYC when Giuliani was mayor with his get-off-the-dole gimmicks like scheduling benefits recipients for simultaneous required meetings in two different boroughs,   one for drug-testing and one for "a benefits review". 

No cheese at the end of lines from which those folks might otherwise have scored enough stuff off to grow up and be able finally to look down their noses at what had kept them from starvation, eh? 

Right. Bootstrapping time, folks!   Oh well.  Maybe a bunch of them just started selling crack cocaine to get by. But hey, Rudy was ready to back up the cops and fill the prisons with whoever went down the crack-vending path to get food on the table.

Meanwhile if your preferred variety of cocaine was the powdery kind favored by certain investment bankers, celebrity entertainers, etc.,  somehow all those lines in the criminal code about that level of scheduled drugs often enough got misplaced.  It took _decades_ for Congress even to begin to address that disparity in our justice system, and even so the ensuing adjustments still essentially overlook how children can get driven to the illicit drugs trade in the first place: simple hunger as a result of rules meant to keep people off "the dole". The same rules often result in evictions from public housing that private landlords can learn of and so can mean semi-permanent homelessness. And if you're homeless, staying in school to graduation becomes a monumental challenge.​

So Ms. Boebert is far luckier than she seems to recall, cheese or no cheese handouts along the way,  which of course might be down to her inability to recall circumstances that were possibly other than she claims to remember.


----------



## User.45

JayMysteri0 said:


> As with all things Boebert, take with large amounts of salt



The veracity of her statement is irrelevant. It's the absurdity of a statement of how she used ""soCiAliSm"" to grow to be the person we should vote for so she can prevent others to receive similar benefits.


----------



## B S Magnet

P_X said:


> The veracity of her statement is irrelevant. It's the absurdity of a statement of how she used ""soCiAliSm"" to grow to be the person we should vote for so she can prevent others to receive similar benefits.




Or how socialism built that interstate, that state highway, that municipal water system, those fire services, I mean…


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> Yes.
> 
> It’s not an either/or proposition… perhaps you’ve heard of this thing they like to call lobbying?




Yes, loopholes are written in the laws pushed by lobbyists.  But once they are there, shouldn't the companies be allowed to use them?


----------



## Herdfan

B S Magnet said:


> Or how socialism built that interstate, that state highway, that municipal water system, those fire services, I mean…



That capitalism paid for.


----------



## User.45

Herdfan said:


> That capitalism paid for.



Are you suggesting that "socialism" is OK as long as capitalism pays for it?



Herdfan said:


> Yes, loopholes are written in the laws pushed by lobbyists.  But once they are there, shouldn't the companies be allowed to use them?



Do you think that closing loopholes is like a prime responsibility of a lawmaker? 
(You used the term loophole, suggesting it's not intended to be there).


----------



## Herdfan

P_X said:


> Are you suggesting that "socialism" is OK as long as capitalism pays for it?
> 
> 
> Do you think that closing loopholes is like a prime responsibility of a lawmaker?
> (You used the term loophole, suggesting it's not intended to be there).




You need elements of both.  It is a sliding scale and I would prefer we remain a bit more on the Capitalism side.


Yes.  They are the only ones who can.  Sometimes loopholes are put in on purpose and sometimes they are just a result of everything not being considered.  They all need to be closed.


----------



## B S Magnet

Herdfan said:


> That capitalism paid for.




That _taxes_ paid for.


----------



## B S Magnet

Herdfan said:


> Yes, loopholes are written in the laws pushed by lobbyists.  But once they are there, shouldn't the companies be allowed to use them?




Only once companies are deprived of any right to be classified as legal “persons”.

A company, _ipso facto_, cannot bear conscience.


----------



## User.45

Herdfan said:


> You need elements of both.  It is a sliding scale and I would prefer we remain a bit more on the Capitalism side.
> 
> 
> Yes.  They are the only ones who can.  Sometimes loopholes are put in on purpose and sometimes they are just a result of everything not being considered.  They all need to be closed.



I'm glad, we agree on both.

I'll add that I consider Capitalism an amplifier, which...if we manage to destroy the ecosystem we still depend on, then it will have been the very downfall of humanity. Our responsibility is to keep the "good" things amplified by capitalism, and concurrently dampen the "bad" stuff. I'll also say one of the most baffling things for me in the USA is the comfort level with trade cartels (like ISPs). They are one of the most anticapitalistic things you can image,.

Also, if a lawmaker's duty is to close loopholes, we should elect the ones who have no financial conflict of interest to keep old ones open or open new ones. Which is a prime issue in politics in general.


----------



## Herdfan

B S Magnet said:


> That _taxes_ paid for.




Taxes on capitalistic output.  Yes.


----------



## B S Magnet

Herdfan said:


> Taxes on capitalistic output.  Yes.




And what is “capitalistic output”?

Big hint: it isn’t money.


----------



## SuperMatt

B S Magnet said:


> And what is “capitalistic output”?
> 
> Big hint: it isn’t money.



 maybe?


----------



## B S Magnet

SuperMatt said:


> maybe?




His phrasing may be, but we’re here to get to the root, not stop with the stems.


----------



## Yoused

B S Magnet said:


> His phrasing may be, but we’re here to get to the root, not stop with the stems.



When you look at it, the current economic system is set up to maximize the rate of flow of raw materials (resources) into landfills (shitpiles). Economic growth is about how much faster we can turn stuff into garbage.


----------



## B S Magnet

Yoused said:


> When you look at it, the current economic system is set up to maximize the rate of flow of raw materials (resources) into landfills (shitpiles). Economic growth is about how much faster we can turn stuff into garbage.




That’s the _culture of overcomsumption_, supercharged by capitalists, killing the planet.

Meanwhile, Herdfan is all pondering what “capitalistic output” actually is:





[UPDATE, ONE WHOLE DAY LATER: Still waiting to hear from you, @Herdfan, on what you_ think_ “capitalistic output” actually is.  ]


----------



## User.45

B S Magnet said:


> That’s the _culture of overcomsumption_, supercharged by capitalists, killing the planet.
> 
> Meanwhile, Herdfan is all pondering what “capitalistic output” actually is:
> 
> View attachment 7059



The main issue is the markets ignoring the long-term ecologic impact of production.
The big question is whether markets and human intelligence are able to to integrate such not-so-straightforward long-term aspects or whether we need governmental intervention with these. Before COVID I used to think (hope) that markets can self-correct, but COVID was a major stress test on how economic superpowers deal with a global calamity and most failed miserably. Coordinated, international governmental intervention cannot be circumvented here. The worst we can do is to leave problem solving to a bunch of libertarian-type politicians.


----------



## Eraserhead

Yoused said:


> When you look at it, the current economic system is set up to maximize the rate of flow of raw materials (resources) into landfills (shitpiles). Economic growth is about how much faster we can turn stuff into garbage.



In the UK carbon emissions per capita were flat between ~1875 and 1990 and have dropped since then, and I believe US emissions were roughly flat per capita through the 20th century. So it’s difficult to judge whether reducing growth will help fix emissions or make little difference. I suspect it will make little difference to be honest.

Tackling climate change may need us to make compromises in our lives such as travelling by (high speed) train rather than flying for example.


----------



## Eraserhead

P_X said:


> but COVID was a major stress test on how economic superpowers deal with a global calamity and most failed miserably.



A big part of that is that the US was governed by a clown, China and India have no Interest in global leadership, Russia has no moral authority and the EU has weird politics where it’s isnt able to have stronger leaders than it’s big countries and for historical reasons it’s hard for any one member state to take the lead.


----------



## User.45

Eraserhead said:


> In the UK carbon emissions per capita were flat between ~1875 and 1990 and have dropped since then, and I believe US emissions were roughly flat per capita through the 20th century. So it’s difficult to judge whether reducing growth will help fix emissions or make little difference. I suspect it will make little difference to be honest.
> 
> Tackling climate change may need us to make compromises in our lives such as travelling by (high speed) train rather than flying for example.



Hold on hold on. Per capita numbers are not helpful here because the output continued to grow With the population. I’ll add, that I have doubts the charts actually take into account outsourced carbon emissions, which means China’s numbers are more likely to be precipitation of the western world demand.


----------



## User.45

Eraserhead said:


> A big part of that is that the US was governed by a clown, China and India have no Interest in global leadership, Russia has no moral authority and the EU has weird politics where it’s isnt able to have stronger leaders than it’s big countries and for historical reasons it’s hard for any one member state to take the lead.



Sure, under no other president I can name would have the USA flopped like under Trump. What happened is exactly what concerned _most_ of us about his severe personality disorders: he's so addicted to attention, he sacrificed his re-election in exchange for instant gratification. Declaring COVID precautions patriotic would have been a checkmate, because the medical community (including me) would have stood behind him on that because safety over politics. 

Now from a global leadership, umm. It really depends on how you define it. China's definitely striving for major global influence through infrastructure loans/contracts. Agree about Russia or the EU. EU has major issues, from Brexit to Orbán.


----------



## GermanSuplex

AOC is a conglomerate of a lot of things the Republican Party and conservatives in general hate - Latina, female, democrat/liberal/progressive, smart, a NY east-coast person from a big democrat city/state…

They can pick on a half-dozen things at once when they pick on her. The funny thing is, Trump is also a grab-bag of things conservatives, Americans and people in general claim to hate: Uber-wealthy, a tax-dodger, a bragger with a massive ego, a flip-flopper and astounding liar. But because he validates racist beliefs, he’s a cult leader. If AOC started espousing conservative tropes, they’d claim they “always liked her”. See: Candace Owens.

I don’t think merely pissing the other side off means you’re doing a good job - I hate when people claim that, even though I’ve done it myself. But in her case, I think it’s an apt thing to say.


----------



## JayMysteri0

I already said my version of this in the CRT thread

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1415061724261228545/


----------



## User.45

JayMysteri0 said:


> I already said my version of this in the CRT thread
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1415061724261228545/



It's interesting. If I had to do and say shit for a living that McCarthy does, I couldn't look myself or my family in the eye. He's an intelligent person, so he knows every bit of how much bullshit he managed to pack in that 10 seconds. He follows the principles along which MLK was murdered and now he's trying to use MLK to promote those very principles. Yuk.


----------



## JayMysteri0

P_X said:


> It's interesting. If I had to do and say shit for a living that McCarthy does, I couldn't look myself or my family in the eye. He's an intelligent person, so he knows every bit of how much bullshit he managed to pack in that 10 seconds. He follows the principles along which MLK was murdered and now he's trying to use MLK to promote those very principles. Yuk.



It's been said for years that there is two versions of MLK.

The MLK that was assassinated, and the MLK SOME people created that they are more comfortable with.


----------



## Yoused

I guess our charge shoulld be to comb through all the shit that came out of Saint Ronnie's mouth and start screwing up and distorting his inane pronouncements.


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> It's been said for years that there is two versions of MLK.
> 
> The MLK that was assassinated, and the MLK SOME people created that they are more comfortable with.



If you want to see Republicans scream, mention giving even one penny to only black people that white people also don’t get. But they love MLK so much? What do they think of MLK asking the government to give $50 billion in 1967 dollars to black people? See, there is a reason they assassinated him. White people were somewhat upset that black people could now eat at the same restaurants and such, but when it came to financial repercussions, they got violent.



> While still involved in the Scripto affair, King sat for a_ Playboy_ interview with Alex Haley, in which he endorsed a massive federal aid program for blacks. Its whopping $50 billion price tag was, he pointed out, less than annual U.S. spending for defense. Such an expenditure, he argued, would be more than justified in “a spectacular decline” in “school dropouts, family breakups, crime rates, illegitimacy, swollen relief rolls, rioting, and other social evils.” Many poor whites were “in the very same boat with the Negro,” he added, and if they could be persuaded to join forces with blacks, they could form “a grand alliance” and “exert massive pressure on the Government to get jobs for all.”



I think this article from the Smithsonian is a great read for anybody who is anti-BLM but says they like MLK. Sorry to tell you, but you can’t have it both ways. They should make Kevin McCarthy read this, and maybe read some of MLK‘s later speeches out-loud on the House floor. 









						Even Though He Is Revered Today, MLK Was Widely Disliked by the American Public When He Was Killed
					

Seventy-five percent of Americans disapproved of the civil rights leader as he spoke out against the Vietnam War and economic disparity




					www.smithsonianmag.com


----------



## B S Magnet

P_X said:


> The main issue is the markets ignoring the long-term ecologic impact of production.
> The big question is whether markets and human intelligence are able to to integrate such not-so-straightforward long-term aspects or whether we need governmental intervention with these. Before COVID I used to think (hope) that markets can self-correct, but COVID was a major stress test on how economic superpowers deal with a global calamity and most failed miserably. Coordinated, international governmental intervention cannot be circumvented here. The worst we can do is to leave problem solving to a bunch of libertarian-type politicians.




Markets are producing what consumers will consume. Again, a _culture of overconsumption_.



Eraserhead said:


> In the UK carbon emissions per capita were flat between ~1875 and 1990 and have dropped since then, and I believe US emissions were roughly flat per capita through the 20th century. So it’s difficult to judge whether reducing growth will help fix emissions or make little difference. I suspect it will make little difference to be honest.
> 
> Tackling climate change may need us to make compromises in our lives such as travelling by (high speed) train rather than flying for example.




In both cited nation-states’ circumstances, a truer picture of those emissions per capita comes from factoring in how much emissions were off-loaded to — and generated by — their aggregate imperial holdings, off-shore.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Taxes on capitalistic output.  Yes.



Taxes paid by the serfs in the system. As we know, the lords of capitalism pay nothing.









						It's that hound who gets to pay no taxes… Lucky Dog! | Boing Boing
					

Visit the post for more.




					boingboing.net


----------



## ouimetnick

With out reading through every response, they hate her because 

1. She’s a woman
2. She’s not white
3. She’s popular (with extreme liberals and even regular Democrats seem to admire her)
4. She outsmarts the republicans at almost every opportunity. Ted “Cancun” Cruz is regularly used as a mop by AOC for the men’s bathroom.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

P_X said:


> Sure, under no other president I can name would have the USA flopped like under Trump. What happened is exactly what concerned _most_ of us about his severe personality disorders: he's so addicted to attention, he sacrificed his re-election in exchange for instant gratification. Declaring COVID precautions patriotic would have been a checkmate, because the medical community (including me) would have stood behind him on that because safety over politics.
> 
> Now from a global leadership, umm. It really depends on how you define it. China's definitely striving for major global influence through infrastructure loans/contracts. Agree about Russia or the EU. EU has major issues, from Brexit to Orbán.




Trump and now the Republican party are driven by being contrarians.  When ignorant of any situation just declare the opposite of experts and say you know better.


----------



## Yoused

ouimetnick said:


> Ted “Cancun” Cruz is regularly used as a mop by AOC for the men’s bathroom



Rafael is not a mop, he is a little white disc about 4" in diameter and about two inches thick. Remember that next time you take aim.


----------



## Huntn

P_X said:


> Sure, under no other president I can name would have the USA flopped like under Trump. What happened is exactly what concerned _most_ of us about his severe personality disorders: he's so addicted to attention, he sacrificed his re-election in exchange for instant gratification. Declaring COVID precautions patriotic would have been a checkmate, because the medical community (including me) would have stood behind him on that because safety over politics.
> 
> Now from a global leadership, umm. It really depends on how you define it. China's definitely striving for major global influence through infrastructure loans/contracts. Agree about Russia or the EU. EU has major issues, from Brexit to Orbán.



Most disturbing is the support Mr Shithead got from all the little free floating turds who need someone to guide them down the shearing shoot.


----------



## Eraserhead

Huntn said:


> Most disturbing is the support Mr Shithead got from all the little free floating turds who need someone to guide them down the shearing shoot.



America is very polarised and bad at mixing.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Trump and now the Republican party are driven by being contrarians.  When ignorant of any situation just declare the opposite of experts and say you know better.




Yeah they've made it a badge of honor.   Being rude (in vulgar fashion) is part of the badge, too, and sometimes seems to be part of what separates Trump Republicans from the old line conservatives.   A guy like Wm. F. Buckley Jr. could be quite rude without even raising his voice... and his arguments ran to logic at least occasionally premised in facts that both "sides" of American politics used to acknowledge.

 But what's going on now is the extreme edge of an undercurrent of anti-intellectualism back in the 1950s,  when it was fashionable to attack the likes of Adlai Stevenson as  an "ivory tower academic" and more succinctly as an "egghead".   And thanks to Trump seizing on a potential enlargement of the traditional GOP base during a highly populist time in 2016,  there's a big component of just "owning the liberals" now, and so the contrarianism isn't really policy based at all, it's just knee-jerk "oh yeah? sez who" and fueled by free floating hyper-partisan rage at so much not-winning.

What those Trump admirers wanted back in 2016, they got:   a guy who during his campaign flipped a bird at the establishment.  Then his incompetence threw his administration into chaotic struggles with the previous Republican establishment's idea of appropriate policy.   Trump's contrarians were never about policy, they were fans of the Tea Party style of The Party of NO. 

Meanwhile though it was the old GOP's policies that made it through legislation. That and the ongoing discontent of the "f^ck you!" contingent of the party brought in by Trump could only have been a prelude to what the GOP ended up with, which in 2020 was a national convention that avoided fatal divisions over a policy platform and stuck itself instead with a demo of its conversion to a cult of personality. 

And there's the ongoing problem, because not all Republicans are authoritarian followers (which is what the so-called populists actually are who ended up the die-hard fans of Donald Trump).   He used those followers while in office  to get past some of the milestones along a fascist's path to permanent power:  weaken the influence of mainstream media,  encourage disregard for facts,  focus on him as sole arbiter of the way forward.   But those are not the ways of the majority of the potential R-leaning electorate.   And that is why he's now dwindling away in Florida, embittered and still fantasizing about the re-election victory that eluded him.

Since Biden's not by nature a flaming liberal partisan, it has become harder for Trump's "authoritarian followers"  to find something to latch onto as a followup to the barn-burning days, when the lack of actual policy behind their contrarianism was drowned out by all the bird-throwing.   They're out there on social media of their choice, waiting for Trump or some other authoritarian to gather them up again.   And of course they are thinking about what happened on January 6th.   Trump said he'd be right there with him.   And of course he was not.   And of course some of them are going to the slam for the violence they committed during the insurrection.

Meanwhile out in Iowa, as prelude to 2024,  the GOP offers a parade of lackluster Trump has-beens --guys like Pence and Pompeo-- to the evangelical Republicans.  They now wonder if it's time to move on, having had to confront what they stooped to in support of a man who was all along the antithesis of their own supposed moral compass.   Some of them are still fans,  not so much of Trump, rather of his court appointments or tax cuts, and they do think it's time to move on.   But what they see are some of Trump's most abject lackeys.

The lack of concerted enthusiasm is palpable, even given that the 2024 nomination itself is far into the future.   The opportunity there for a fresh figure to step in is palpable.  The question is whether the GOP will advance its exploration of authoritarianism as a way to retain power in the face of a shrinking if very vocal electorate.   So far the plethora of vote-suppressive state legislation since 2020 suggests that's likely.  After all, the head of the RNC said for the record during winter session after Trump's defeat,  "We're not having an election like that again."   Doubled down contrarianism.


----------



## Eraserhead

lizkat said:


> Yeah they've made it a badge of honor.   Being rude (in vulgar fashion) is part of the badge, too, and sometimes seems to be part of what separates Trump Republicans from the old line conservatives.   A guy like Wm. F. Buckley Jr. could be quite rude without even raising his voice... and his arguments ran to logic at least occasionally premised in facts that both "sides" of American politics used to acknowledge.
> 
> But what's going on now is the extreme edge of an undercurrent of anti-intellectualism back in the 1950s,  when it was fashionable to attack the likes of Adlai Stevenson as  an "ivory tower academic" and more succinctly as an "egghead".   And thanks to Trump seizing on a potential enlargement of the traditional GOP base during a highly populist time in 2016,  there's a big component of just "owning the liberals" now, and so the contrarianism isn't really policy based at all, it's just knee-jerk "oh yeah? sez who" and fueled by free floating hyper-partisan rage at so much not-winning.
> 
> What those Trump admirers wanted back in 2016, they got:   a guy who during his campaign flipped a bird at the establishment.  Then his incompetence threw his administration into chaotic struggles with the previous Republican establishment's idea of appropriate policy.   Trump's contrarians were never about policy, they were fans of the Tea Party style of The Party of NO.
> 
> Meanwhile though it was the old GOP's policies that made it through legislation. That and the ongoing discontent of the "f^ck you!" contingent of the party brought in by Trump could only have been a prelude to what the GOP ended up with, which in 2020 was a national convention that avoided fatal divisions over a policy platform and stuck itself instead with a demo of its conversion to a cult of personality.
> 
> And there's the ongoing problem, because not all Republicans are authoritarian followers (which is what the so-called populists actually are who ended up the die-hard fans of Donald Trump).   He used those followers while in office  to get past some of the milestones along a fascist's path to permanent power:  weaken the influence of mainstream media,  encourage disregard for facts,  focus on him as sole arbiter of the way forward.   But those are not the ways of the majority of the potential R-leaning electorate.   And that is why he's now dwindling away in Florida, embittered and still fantasizing about the re-election victory that eluded him.
> 
> Since Biden's not by nature a flaming liberal partisan, it has become harder for Trump's "authoritarian followers"  to find something to latch onto as a followup to the barn-burning days, when the lack of actual policy behind their contrarianism was drowned out by all the bird-throwing.   They're out there on social media of their choice, waiting for Trump or some other authoritarian to gather them up again.   And of course they are thinking about what happened on January 6th.   Trump said he'd be right there with him.   And of course he was not.   And of course some of them are going to the slam for the violence they committed during the insurrection.
> 
> Meanwhile out in Iowa, as prelude to 2024,  the GOP offers a parade of lackluster Trump has-beens --guys like Pence and Pompeo-- to the evangelical Republicans.  They now wonder if it's time to move on, having had to confront what they stooped to in support of a man who was all along the antithesis of their own supposed moral compass.   Some of them are still fans,  not so much of Trump, rather of his court appointments or tax cuts, and they do think it's time to move on.   But what they see are some of Trump's most abject lackeys.
> 
> The lack of concerted enthusiasm is palpable, even given that the 2024 nomination itself is far into the future.   The opportunity there for a fresh figure to step in is palpable.  The question is whether the GOP will advance its exploration of authoritarianism as a way to retain power in the face of a shrinking if very vocal electorate.   So far the plethora of vote-suppressive state legislation since 2020 suggests that's likely.  After all, the head of the RNC said for the record during winter session after Trump's defeat,  "We're not having an election like that again."   Doubled down contrarianism.



What Trump did very successfully was to get low propensity voters to the polls *when he was on the ballot *(don’t forget the polls in 2018 were spot on) Given in 2022 he won’t be on the ballot and isn’t even president anymore I’m not sure those voters will turn out.

Plus the voters the left has been winning are the people likely to turn out in every election and they’ve been losing their irregular voters that should benefit them generally in mid terms going forward as in 2018.


----------



## lizkat

Eraserhead said:


> What Trump did very successfully was to get low propensity voters to the polls *when he was on the ballot *(don’t forget the polls in 2018 were spot on) Given in 2022 he won’t be on the ballot and isn’t even president anymore I’m not sure those voters will turn out.
> 
> Plus the voters the left has been winning are the people likely to turn out in every election and they’ve been losing their irregular voters that should benefit them generally in mid terms going forward as in 2018.




It's true that the new voters drawn in by Trump were not focused on congressional races...  and a lot of them didn't turn out in 2018, which exacerbated the blue drift seen even in districts that didn't flip from red to blue that year.   I'll never forget looking at the map of congressional elections nationwide in the NYT's interactive menu for election results in 2018.   A nationwide swathe of little blue arrows indicating direction of change CD by CD.

It's also true that progressive have made a lot of headway in state and local elections since 2016, and they're building towards effectiveness in 2022 race primaries even now. 

On the other hand the Rs have singled out a few 2022 Senate races they will focus money on by the truckload.   The House races are harder to figure.  Trump is problematic for the Rs there,  because no one knows how he'll interfere with candidates' district-tuned stump speeches if he shows up and puts on his ever more narcissistic "endorsement" rallies. 

But so far Trump still lacks a new rallying home on social media that can lend him a larger megaphone, so for the moment he remains a has-been and the Rs can focus on trying to get big donors to fund their Senate race war chests.

Of course 2022 is probably set to be as anomalous --in its own ways-- for House and Senate outcomes as 2016 was in presidential elections when populism was peaking and the established parties were both rattled by the appearance of anti-establishmentarian candidates.    In 2022 there will also be a lot of seeming one-off factors to consider,  most of them related to the coronavirus and some probably hard to categorize responses to it.


----------



## Eraserhead

lizkat said:


> On the other hand the Rs have singled out a few 2022 Senate races they will focus money on by the truckload.



Money isn’t everything. It didn’t win Kentucky or South Carolina for the Democratic Party.


----------



## lizkat

Eraserhead said:


> Money isn’t everything. It didn’t win Kentucky or South Carolina for the Democratic Party.




It might cut the mustard for the GOP in Pennsylvania and Ohio though.  I'd like to think not.   

It's different, a US Senate race compared to one for a House seat in some really gerrymandered congressional district.  It's still all about turnout in the end though, and both those states have some big blue cities in their maps.


----------



## Huntn

lizkat said:


> It's true that the new voters drawn in by Trump were not focused on congressional races...  and a lot of them didn't turn out in 2018, which exacerbated the blue drift seen even in districts that didn't flip from red to blue that year.   I'll never forget looking at the map of congressional elections nationwide in the NYT's interactive menu for election results in 2018.   A nationwide swathe of little blue arrows indicating direction of change CD by CD.
> 
> It's also true that progressive have made a lot of headway in state and local elections since 2016, and they're building towards effectiveness in 2022 race primaries even now.
> 
> On the other hand the Rs have singled out a few 2022 Senate races they will focus money on by the truckload.   The House races are harder to figure.  Trump is problematic for the Rs there,  because no one knows how he'll interfere with candidates' district-tuned stump speeches if he shows up and puts on his ever more narcissistic "endorsement" rallies.
> 
> But so far Trump still lacks a new rallying home on social media that can lend him a larger megaphone, so for the moment he remains a has-been and the Rs can focus on trying to get big donors to fund their Senate race war chests.
> 
> Of course 2022 is probably set to be as anomalous --in its own ways-- for House and Senate outcomes as 2016 was in presidential elections when populism was peaking and the established parties were both rattled by the appearance of anti-establishmentarian candidates.    In 2022 there will also be a lot of seeming one-off factors to consider,  most of them related to the coronavirus and some probably hard to categorize responses to it.



Give him a toilet paper cardboard roll to shout in and let him stand on the corner of 5th Avenue trying to solicit suckers, with zero news coverage…


----------



## lizkat

Huntn said:


> Give him a toilet paper cardboard roll to shout in and let him stand on the corner of 5th Avenue trying to solicit suckers, with zero news coverage…




Hah..  but maybe his long touted ability to do anything he wants on Fifth Avenue with a free pass may have expired...


----------



## Huntn

lizkat said:


> Hah..  but maybe his long touted ability to do anything he wants on Fifth Avenue with a free pass may have expired...



Hopefully his appeal is lessening from coast to coast, and although he gets most love from the South I can only hope he is waining there too.


----------



## Eraserhead

Huntn said:


> Hopefully his appeal is lessening come coast to coast, and although he gets most love from the South I can only hope he is waining there too.




i suspect his voters will stop voting.


----------



## lizkat

Eraserhead said:


> i suspect his voters will stop voting.




Maybe...  which (for now anyway) probably just feeds the kiss-Trump's-ring attitude of potential contenders for the 2024 nomination if and when Trump for whatever reason may decide to remove himself from the arena.    The desire is apparently to keep that base as a biddable cohort,  energized enough towards Trump to accept his endorsement of some other candidate if he is talked into indicating a preference later on.

 It's too bad  though for the party (and the whole country) in the meantime.   All this treading water and maintenance on social media of what becomes more fictional every day, the idea that Trump remains the nominal head of a thoroughly fractured Republican Party.     They're making a mistake at top of the RNC letting this happen.   It's not just the stock market doesn't like uncertainty.   These days, it's also the GOP's 50 state chairs plus every campaign manager of a wannabe House representative on that side of the aisle. 

So long as Trump is capable of wading into some race and disrupting the focus of a given House member's re-electon campaign (or worse mess up a GOP effort to dislodge a blue Senator), the Rs are throwing shade on their own plans.    

Sigh.   A lot of people tried to tell the RNC of 2016 that it was going to be past tricky to try to dismount the tiger safely.


----------



## Eraserhead

lizkat said:


> Maybe...  which (for now anyway) probably just feeds the kiss-Trump's-ring attitude of potential contenders for the 2024 nomination if and when Trump for whatever reason may decide to remove himself from the arena.    The desire is apparently to keep that base as a biddable cohort,  energized enough towards Trump to accept his endorsement of some other candidate if he is talked into indicating a preference later on.
> 
> It's too bad  though for the party (and the whole country) in the meantime.   All this treading water and maintenance on social media of what becomes more fictional every day, the idea that Trump remains the nominal head of a thoroughly fractured Republican Party.     They're making a mistake at top of the RNC letting this happen.   It's not just the stock market doesn't like uncertainty.   These days, it's also the GOP's 50 state chairs plus every campaign manager of a wannabe House representative on that side of the aisle.
> 
> So long as Trump is capable of wading into some race and disrupting the focus of a given House member's re-electon campaign (or worse mess up a GOP effort to dislodge a blue Senator), the Rs are throwing shade on their own plans.
> 
> Sigh.   A lot of people tried to tell the RNC of 2016 that it was going to be past tricky to try to dismount the tiger safely.



Yeah but that didn’t even work in 2018 for the GOP when he was president


----------



## JayMysteri0

You would think this was pretty obvious by now, with workers in some places working mandatory 12 hour shifts all week, to airlines over reaction to letting too many people go.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1417515082863554561/

We already had a fragile system that let companies portray themselves as wildly successful because of the stock market, who were the first to ask for a handout before the American people because of the pandemic.  We needed meat packing plant workers to keep working during a Covid outbreaks, and the previous administration rubber stamping & using their power to keep them going even at the expense of the workers.

Annnnnnnddd... then there's...


https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1417539221326336002/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1417589112421462021/


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> You would think this was pretty obvious by now, with workers in some places working mandatory 12 hour shifts all week, to airlines over reaction to letting too many people go.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1417515082863554561/
> 
> We already had a fragile system that let companies portray themselves as wildly successful because of the stock market, who were the first to ask for a handout before the American people because of the pandemic.  We needed meat packing plant workers to keep working during a Covid outbreaks, and the previous administration rubber stamping & using their power to keep them going even at the expense of the workers.
> 
> Annnnnnnddd... then there's...
> 
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1417539221326336002/



I have been boycotting Amazon for years.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> I have been boycotting Amazon for years.




I wish I could.  They just carry too much stuff I need and make it too easy to pay.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1421041123980726273/


----------



## Huntn

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1421041123980726273/



Texas: ”Conservative” white men desperately trying to hold onto power. It’s up to the rest of us to put a stake  though the heart of this dysfunctional blood sucking political abomination.


----------



## thekev

SuperMatt said:


> I have been boycotting Amazon for years.




The idea that these things are temporary is unfounded. I mean they probably arose due to temporary supply chain imbalances, yet it doesn't perfectly predict what will happen later. Manufacturers may very well try this out as the new normal. Toyota actually cut its orders less than its competitors, yet it still took advantage of pricing surges.









						How Toyota thrives when the chips are down
					

Toyota may have pioneered the just-in-time manufacturing strategy but when it comes to chips, its decision to stockpile what have become key components in cars goes back a decade to the Fukushima disaster.




					www.reuters.com
				




I don't agree with AOC regarding causality. You can't always sufficiently prove such a thing, particularly with something as dynamic as the economy (also one reason I call laffer curve arguments garbage). What she names are likely to contribute, but I wouldn't attribute causality to confounding variables in this way, particularly not for the purpose of forecasting.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Because she gets invited to the parties they don't...



> AOC caused a stir with her statement-making Met Gala gown
> 
> 
> Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez took to the Met Gala red carpet with a message for Americans: "Tax the Rich."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com



https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1437638740009160705/


----------



## DT

Hahaha, I love her preemptive strike against the halfwits ...


----------



## Huntn

JayMysteri0 said:


> Because she gets invited to the parties they don't...
> 
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1437638740009160705/



I worry about her being assassinated. I hope she takes precautions.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Because she doesn't go to the _right_  parties



> AOC Challenger Tina Forte Promoted and Attended Jan. 6 Capitol Riot
> 
> 
> In this special investigation, Snopes found that the apparent QAnon believer livestreamed to Facebook Live the day of the attack on the U.S. Capitol.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.snopes.com





> Republican Tina Forte is running in 2022 to claim the New York seat in Congress currently held by U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
> 
> Ocasio-Cortez, better known as AOC, is a Democrat. During a recent investigation into QAnon activity on Facebook, our research led us to social media accounts managed by Forte, which included heavy promotion of the deadly Jan. 6 “Save America” rally, the event that resulted in the Capitol riot that left law enforcement officers bloodied. Five people died just before, during, or after the riot, and dozens were injured.
> 
> We found Forte repeatedly used hashtags related to QAnon conspiracy theories. The QAnon mentions even included cries of “Save the Children,” referring to the debunked conspiracy theory that makes claims of mass pedophilia and “Satanic blood-drinking” by Democrats. She took multiple photographs in October, November, and December 2020 with far-right Proud Boys leader Henry “Enrique” Tarrio. Further, we uncovered evidence that Forte pushed false election conspiracy theories, including the phrase “Stop the Steal.”
> 
> Forte’s accounts that pushed potentially dangerous content were still active months later on Facebook, Instagram (which is owned by Facebook), Twitter, and YouTube. Even more striking was the fact that Forte herself attended the Capitol riot, where she livestreamed on Facebook. She took selfies with a number of attendees who considered her a “superstar.” In a live video, she urged people at then-U.S. President Donald Trump’s rally on the Ellipse to make their way to the Capitol. We even found that she entered a restricted area after the crowd knocked down barriers that law enforcement installed. All of her posts promoting the date in the weeks before Jan. 6 appeared to reach at least tens of thousands of people, but likely many more.
> 
> Her live videos from the Capitol riot were still available on Facebook more than seven months after the deadly insurrection. Forte also used Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s platform to promote T-shirts, hoodies, and other “patriot gear” merchandise.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Because she answers their questions, when they don't want someone to.


----------



## User.45

JayMysteri0 said:


> Because she answers their questions, when they don't want someone to.



I bet Twitter's Engagement Algorithm climaxed from this interaction. It has racism, colonialism and negatively charged AF, BTW all it lacks is curse words.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1443712181174951936/


----------



## Yoused

Oh, she cribbed that from the _eeevvvvviiillllll_ Clintonian dude Robert Reich. Not quite word-for-word, but pretty close.

(Or maybe he cribbed it from her. It is the dreaded _*Liberal Hive Mind!*_)


----------



## JayMysteri0

Because she helps some press get their job right.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1444157802285518849/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1446195877937356807/

I said it in another thread, you won't be able to satisfy Manchin, no matter how many concessions you offer.

There will always be another concession needed, and it will always be something he knows full well progressives & most of his state won't be willing to give up.

He's the dems "Susan Collins", only he will play everyone to remain the center of attention with no 'F's given.


----------



## Eraserhead

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1446195877937356807/
> 
> I said it in another thread, you won't be able to satisfy Manchin, no matter how many concessions you offer.
> 
> There will always be another concession needed, and it will always be something he knows full well progressives & most of his state won't be willing to give up.
> 
> He's the dems "Susan Collins", only he will play everyone to remain the center of attention with no 'F's given.



Manchin needs this stuff to pass if he wants to win re-election. Plus being super unpopular with the Democratic base isn’t wise in terms of future job prospects. And Biden could always sack his wife.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Eraserhead said:


> Manchin needs this stuff to pass if he wants to win re-election. Plus being super unpopular with the Democratic base isn’t wise in terms of future job prospects. And Biden could always sack his wife.



As I've said elsewhere, I don't think Manchin or Sinema are too concerned about being re elected.  They've either decided their done with political life, or that it will be awhile before they have to run, and by their actions 'r's will be back in some position of power.  Thus making them too valuable for dems to want out, and reluctantly hold their noses & keep them in place.

For now they can be the center of the political spotlight ( even pushing out muscomitch who can't be too happy ), satisfy some lobbyists, and make some bank during this time.


----------



## Eraserhead

JayMysteri0 said:


> As I've said elsewhere, I don't think Manchin or Sinema are too concerned about being re elected.  They've either decided their done with political life, or that it will be awhile before they have to run, and by their actions 'r's will be back in some position of power.  Thus making them too valuable for dems to want out, and reluctantly hold their noses & keep them in place.
> 
> For now they can be the center of the political spotlight ( even pushing out muscomitch who can't be too happy ), satisfy some lobbyists, and make some bank during this time.



Sinema can be primaried easily and both can have Anyone they try and work for after boycotted.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Eraserhead said:


> Sinema can be primaried easily and both can have Anyone they try and work for after boycotted.



Yes, she can.  When though?  Before the bill has to pass if it ever will?  Then there's the whole primary process.  Sinema is already down 40% in AZ just this year, and she could seemingly care less.  I think Sinema is counting on her being a 'd' at at time when some 'r's are so far out there, she will be seen as the less of any evils. Boycotting who she or Manchin eventually go on to collect a paycheck from is only retribution for damage already done on a possibly once in lifetime opportunity.

It doesn't solve the very real issue that we have only 3 months to possibly address.

Manchin is making sure that any requests he has this week are so odious, that if progressives & the WH capitulate will only demonstrate the self importance he so craves.  Sinema can't even be bothered to do that much, instead claiming she told the president at some time in the past, and she seemingly doesn't need to explain a thing to those who elected her.

Reminding everyone that the needs & will of the many in America are outweighed by desires of the better off few.


----------



## Yoused

Eraserhead said:


> Sinema can be primaried easily and both can have Anyone they try and work for after boycotted.



Problem is, for someone like Sinema, after she leaves the Senate, she will go through the revolving door to become a lobbyist for Nyarlathotep Inc., and we will not only not be aware of the fact that she is being paid by them, or even that she is lobbying congresscritters on their behalf, but Nyarlathotep Inc. is so vast and diversified that we cannot be sure who all their subsidiaries are that we should boycott.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Because she keeps pointing out the obvious flaws in what passes for logic with fake "conservatives".

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1448858669148483591/



Unless things have changed since I was last laid off, you DON'T collect if you QUIT.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1448865941056638977/

If you don't have money to eat out, guess what gets affected?  It's a frikkin' cycle.  Yet these fake ass conservatives are more about the cruelty, then the domino effect of suffering they want to help cause in the name of corporate profit.  Then lose their crap when workers decide the suffering thing is NOT working out for them.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Another reason to dislike?  She will call out anyone trying to slide some shade out of the side of their mouths, and you know it's something they know nothing of...

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1457387573089820677/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1457513865709764608/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1457526879867506696/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1457531703891800069/


----------



## JayMysteri0

When you're so hated that a grown man who probably has no idea of the term 'waifu' posts an altered video of anime of them killing you



> Paul Gosar posts anime video showing him killing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
> 
> 
> The video used clips taken from the popular anime "Attack on Titan" and spliced them with images of migrants at the southern border,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com





> Paul Gosar (R-AZ) has shared a photoshopped anti-immigrant anime video that shows him killing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).
> 
> On Sunday, Gosar shared the video on Twitter that used clips from popular Japanese anime _Attack on Titan_, alongside the caption: "Any anime fans out there?"
> 
> The clip opens with Gosar's name under Japanese text, which reads "attack of immigrants" before it continues to show real clips of Gosar and Border Patrol agents spliced alongside scenes from the anime show's opening credits.
> 
> It then shows a collection of clips of migrants walking and wading through water, along with blood splatter effects on the screen before it cuts to an MS13 gang member and the words "drugs, crime, poverty, money, gangs, violence" and "trafficking" appear.
> 
> As the clip continues, controversial representative Gosar can be seen darting across a European-style city alongside House lawmakers Lauren Boebert (R-CO) and Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA).
> 
> Gosar—in the place of main character Eren Yaeger—circles around a giant with Ocasio-Cortez's face photoshopped on before the anime character launches into the air and comes down, slicing the back of the giant's neck, killing it.
> 
> Seconds later, Gosar runs across a rooftop and, with blades drawn, jumps toward a giant with President Joe Biden's face photoshopped onto it.






https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1457886208563032066/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1457889142621282305/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1457888129919111170/


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> Another reason to dislike?  She will call out anyone trying to slide some shade out of the side of their mouths, and you know it's something they know nothing of...
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1457387573089820677/
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1457513865709764608/
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1457526879867506696/
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1457531703891800069/



I agree with her on this. I watched meet the press on Sunday and a conservative commenter kept repeating the idea that Youngkin won because Joe Biden campaigned as a moderate but is governing as an extreme progressive.

Donna Edwards was there and called it out, saying he’s only trying to pass things that he ran on. She’s right. And the commenter never provided a single piece of evidence that Biden has turned into Bernie Sanders… it’s one of those Fox news talking points that all right-wingers accept as gospel no matter what. No need for evidence.

Neither touched on what I think is the most clear and obvious explanation. Biden has NOT been able to get his agenda passed yet. Most things in his agenda had 60% or more of voters‘ support. Is it his fault that Manchin and Sinema are blocking it all? Probably not, just like it’s not his fault that millions of right-wingers refuse to get a vaccine, meaning COVID is still a huge problem. But those things are FAR more likely causes of his unpopularity. The narrative of “‘Biden is an extreme progressive” is nonsense, and manufactured by the right in the hopes that Dems will be scared to pass a highly popular agenda.


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> When you're so hated that a grown man who probably has no idea of the term 'waifu' posts an altered video of anime of them killing you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1457886208563032066/
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1457889142621282305/
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1457888129919111170/



Didn’t they “cancel” Kathy Griffin for a photoshopped pic of her holding Trump’s severed head? And she’s just a comedian. But the right is all about “F*** Joe Biden” and fantasy videos of murdering their political opponents now. The same things they were supposedly so outraged about, they take it 10 levels farther and don’t seem ashamed at all.


----------



## Roller

Gosar should be expelled from Congress, but his Republican colleagues either support what he did or are too fearful of backlash from "the base" if they criticize him. And I like the way he calls attention to his degree, as he did when he claimed that he could read body language because he's a dentist.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> Didn’t they “cancel” Kathy Griffin for a photoshopped pic of her holding Trump’s severed head? And she’s just a comedian. But the right is all about “F*** Joe Biden” and fantasy videos of murdering their political opponents now. The same things they were supposedly so outraged about, they take it 10 levels farther and don’t seem ashamed at all.



It was not a photoshopped image, it was part of a video she did. Then she apologized for it, saying that it was over the line. Which is something no RWer ever does. Their over-the-line behavior is celebrated by other RWers. They are trying to drown us in rivers of sewage, trying to acclimate us to the stench so that we start to view it as normal.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1458160992307712001/

Which brings to mind, if some high school posted this same video with pictures of another student & a teacher / principal, that the authorities wouldn't have stopped by the kid's house for a chat, got a psych recommendation, and bounced from the same hight school?


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1458160992307712001/
> 
> Which brings to mind, if some high school posted this same video with pictures of another student & a teacher / principal, that the authorities wouldn't have stopped by the kid's house for a chat, got a psych recommendation, and bounced from the same hight school?



House minority leader McCarthy refused to give a comment, even to Fox News.

The GOP embraced white supremacists to get votes, so can they expel Gosar for his abhorrent behavior? If they do, the white power crowd will turn on them.

When they go after people of color in the name of “CRT” they can pretend (and yes it absolutely pretending) that it’s not about excluding all except whites. But when Gosar posts something like this, it shows what it’s really all about. The fact that they haven’t come out strongly condemning him already tells you how overrun the party has been by white supremacists.

Source for the claim about McCarthy not making a comment: last sentence of this article. I wouldn’t recommend reading the comments.









						AOC, Pelosi rip into Republican Rep. Gosar for tweeting violent anime video
					

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is calling for an investigation into an animated video tweeted by Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., that depicted violence against President Biden and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## JayMysteri0

Evidently because she went to Scotland and enjoys a soda from there.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1458855553917235200/


----------



## lizkat

JayMysteri0 said:


> Evidently because she went to Scotland and enjoys a soda from there.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1458855553917235200/




Nah, it's because she still finds joy in life even while working hard to educate people about climate change.  




SuperMatt said:


> House minority leader McCarthy refused to give a comment, even to Fox News.
> 
> The GOP embraced white supremacists to get votes, so can they expel Gosar for his abhorrent behavior? If they do, the white power crowd will turn on them.




I completely agree w/ the problem as highlighted by Cori Bush.   We are already so jaded by hatefulness and by casual references to the idea of committing violence, that now we apparently tolerate allusions by Congressmen to committing it upon other elected officials?  Where's the limit of such tolerance?  

  If Gosar is not to be expelled then censure is certainly appropriate. An elected American official should not be demonstrating efforts to test the limits of free speech.  That is not leadership.   What is "incitement"?   What is "imminent threat of violence?"    What is the intent of some members of Congress walking around security checks at entrance to the House chamber?  Cori Bush is right, all this stuff is boundary testing and the people doing the testing figure themselves immune from consequence.  They are not, and should not be seen as such, and Kevin McCarthy's silence regarding Paul Gosar's posts has gone beyond time for all due consideration and strayed into shrug territory.  Same with tolerating ongoing anti-security behavior by some in the GOP House membership.



> "Every day these white supremacists push the limits further and further to see how far they can go without consequences," Cori Bush, D-Mo., tweeted. "This puts lives in danger. Enough with the violent bigotry. Expel this white supremacist clown."




I'd only say he's not a clown, rather a purposeful if thoughtless abuser of the power of free speech,  and someone who panders to white supremacists.   The message is dangerous.  The message is that there are no consequences for speech depicting violence against elected officials.  That message bleeds into suggesting the actions are acceptable. The consequence of McCarthy's silence is already a problem for ordinary Americans, not just Gosar's targets or other elected officials.


----------



## SuperMatt

Lauren Boebert spews forth lies and anti-Muslim bigotry as she attempts to defend Gosar on the House floor.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1461116327582748685/

Here’s an interview with a Republican who voted to keep Gosar around. She compares Gosar’s actions to other things that Democrats did that she didn’t like. When the interviewer pressed her on “do you think those are *equivalent* to the video posted by Rep. Gosar?” she totally avoids the question.









						Gosar censure shows Dem. 'double standard,' Rep. Malliotakis says
					

For more on the House censure of Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar and how it reflects on the political environment in Congress, Judy Woodruff is joined by Rep. Nicole Malliotakis of New York. She's one of the 13 Republicans who voted to pass the infrastructure bill.




					www.pbs.org
				






> Judy Woodruff:
> And I do want to ask you about that.
> But let me just ask you another two questions about the vote today. Are you saying that this kind of animated video that Congressman Gosar put forward is a good — representative of what the Republican Party stands for?
> He talked about using it to reach younger voters?
> Rep. Nicole Malliotakis:
> Absolutely not. The content of the video was inappropriate, again. <--- DODGE ATTEMPT #1
> But we're tired of Nancy Pelosi playing politics and not going after her own members when they do inappropriate things. I think you should be asking Nancy Pelosi, why is she only picking on Republicans? Why is she not going after those members with her own party who have done very bad things as well, in terms of inciting civil unrest, in terms of potentially sharing information that is secret information as a member of the Intel Committee with someone who may be a Chinese spy?
> None of these things have ever been brought up. And I think the double standard is what this vote was about more than anything, just as Leader McCarthy indicated earlier today.
> Judy Woodruff:
> So, you're saying by the things that you have just listed that Democrats have done, that that's equivalent to portraying the killing by one member of Congress of another one?
> Rep. Nicole Malliotakis:
> The animation was inappropriate, as I have said. <--- YOU ALREADY USED THAT DODGE A COUPLE SECONDS AGO



And the GOP definitely distributed talking points to back Gosar, because I’m hearing the same nonsense from all the Republicans. Blaming somebody for sleeping with a Chinese spy, inciting civil unrest, etc. Unproven and exaggerated allegations that are offensive enough to begin with, but then to be compared with this disgusting violent video of which there is no doubt who made and distributed the video..... They are really acting in bad faith here.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1466058094304239618/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1466062587414597638/


----------



## SuperMatt

Merry Christmas from AOC…?


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1492388080556417024/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1494845773984452612/


----------



## thekev

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1494845773984452612/




I do enjoy her sense of humor.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1509951659035828235/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1520108070151536641/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1520405945628692481/


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1520405945628692481/



Now that is a next-level burn


----------



## JayMysteri0




----------



## Alli

I’m beginning to understand why they hate her. Being Latina wasn’t good enough for her, now she has to be a Native American Jew?


----------



## JayMysteri0

The party of deflection always accuses & hates someone of doing what they actually did.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1540435047785824257/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1540426336925360130/



> US national news
> ·
> LIVE
> Protests break out across the US after Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade
> In the wake of the US Supreme Court's decision to overturn 1973's landmark abortion decision Roe v. Wade, people have taken to the streets in protest across the US. Keep it here for the latest from the ground.




https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1540435796972421121/


----------



## SuperMatt

They hate her because she tells the truth:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1541191344093282304/


----------



## JayMysteri0

This is why they hate her, she don't give an 'F' about their hate

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1541538645399769089/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1541538921020112904/


----------



## JayMysteri0

Dunkin' on doochey & pointing out the hypocrisy!
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1545500599235608578/

Context
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1545506683799093248/


----------



## Yoused

Did he have to leave an unfinished beer behind?


----------



## JayMysteri0

The hand wringing & horror that would be over flowing if something like this was done to a female republican official

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1547397629260226560/


----------



## Yoused

She will not give Daniel quarter









						AOC doesn't let gun CEO play stupid about white supremacy tattoos in ads (video) | Boing Boing
					

Gun manufacturers are denying that they market AR-15s to white supremacists (or Christian Nationalists, if you’re in Marjorie Taylor Greene’s clan). But Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez di…




					boingboing.net
				




just because management "is unaware that" the ads for their assault rifle (as used in Uvalde) feature shooters with White Power type tattoos.


----------

