Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Excuse me, but I never said we can't comment. It's fine to snicker at her. My point was that it's strange, and perhaps ignorant, when people cite her as if she were a major respected leading light among Democrats.
Low-information conservatives love going for the low hanging fruit. There are some real insightful and legitimate critiques of various Democratic political figures coming from astute and informed conservative politicos, but those types are thin on the ground here on city-data.
"Dumbocrats have TDS!" and "Liberalism is a mental disease!" is the tone around here. And don't get me wrong, most of the comments coming from the left aren't much better what with ad hominems about Trump's appearance and nicknames like 'President Cheeto'.
She’s a newbie. She has no clout. If she can stay in the game for The next ten years maybe.
But the question was, who else is challenging her for future leadership of the progressive wing of the democratic party? She is a regular mouthpiece of the far left, and does seem to have more clout that you want to give her credit for having. She is a big enough name in DC that she has effectively pushed and even bullied Nancy Pelosi. The moderates want to shut her up often times, but they don't know how. She will just call anyone who challenges her a racist, and most of the time, it works.
But the question was, who else is challenging her for future leadership of the progressive wing of the democratic party? She is a regular mouthpiece of the far left, and does seem to have more clout that you want to give her credit for having. She is a big enough name in DC that she has effectively pushed and even bullied Nancy Pelosi. The moderates want to shut her up often times, but they don't know how. She will just call anyone who challenges her a racist, and most of the time, it works.
Yep, they are coddling and grooming her because she has millions of Twitter followers
But the question was, who else is challenging her for future leadership of the progressive wing of the democratic party? She is a regular mouthpiece of the far left, and does seem to have more clout that you want to give her credit for having. She is a big enough name in DC that she has effectively pushed and even bullied Nancy Pelosi. The moderates want to shut her up often times, but they don't know how. She will just call anyone who challenges her a racist, and most of the time, it works.
I suspect there are a few “leaders”. She’s active as I expect she should be. Again when she’s been around awhile the dems will take her more seriously. It seems the only people she gets worked up are the conservatives.
But the question was, who else is challenging her for future leadership of the progressive wing of the democratic party? She is a regular mouthpiece of the far left, and does seem to have more clout that you want to give her credit for having. She is a big enough name in DC that she has effectively pushed and even bullied Nancy Pelosi. The moderates want to shut her up often times, but they don't know how. She will just call anyone who challenges her a racist, and most of the time, it works.
It's funny, there was a thread here last week about AOC endorsing the Democratic nominee even if it's not Sanders and the right wingers comments were, "Who cares what some rep from some district thinks?" "She's nobody." "She's on her way out in November." "An endorsement by AOC is virtually a death sentence."
It's funny, there was a thread here last week about AOC endorsing the Democratic nominee even if it's not Sanders and the right wingers comments were, "Who cares what some rep from some district thinks?" "She's nobody." "She's on her way out in November." "An endorsement by AOC is virtually a death sentence."
And now suddenly she's back to being important again. Basically she's as important as she needs to be to fit your narrative at the moment.
Not all conservatives think the same
She is quite obviously influential, based on the number of people who actually know who she is. She is very vocal because she commands a huge audience of willing listeners. Everyone loves to hear what she has to say, on both sides. How many political figures can say that?
You know perfectly well that that's not what she means. She means that she considers the current aversion to Chinese to be racist, and one example is avoiding Chinese restaurants.
I don't know why people keep thumping on AOC, as if she's some authority for Dems in general. She's just a newbie who spouts off too much, and most Dems don't pay her much heed.
It might be paranoid to avoid Chinese restaurants, but it isn't "racist."
Progressives throw that term around so much it's become meaningless.
It might be paranoid to avoid Chinese restaurants, but it isn't "racist."
Progressives throw that term around so much it's become meaningless.
They throw that around all the time because it works in many situations. AOC successfully shut Nancy Pelosi down and broke her by crying racism. It's meaningless when used against the right though, for the reason you mentioned.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
