We can have different interpretations of these numbers, it’s really messy when the proportion of people that don’t know who she is so large. But for me, the fact that you’re willing to concede that they aren’t horrible just reaffirms my position that they’re actually very good.
It’s pretty clear how the 44% is going to break. The people least likely to have heard her are women, young people, blacks and Hispanics. Those are the people most likely to give her a favorable rating.
I also think the independent numbers are misleading. There was a poll a few weeks ago with similar numbers but it had a political leaning numbers for liberal, moderate and conservative and she did better with moderate there. It wasn’t amazing, iirc it was 30% favorable and 36% unfavorable, but an ok number. I think that’s the middle ground voter you want to find. My hunch is libertarians are fucking up the polling numbers for “independents”.
She's going to have to veer more centrist in the debates or that monumental exposure will destroy her ratings
We can have different interpretations of these numbers, it’s really messy when the proportion of people that don’t know who she is so large. But for me, the fact that you’re willing to concede that they aren’t horrible just reaffirms my position that they’re actually very good.
It’s pretty clear how the 44% is going to break. The people least likely to have heard her are women, young people, blacks and Hispanics. Those are the people most likely to give her a favorable rating.
I also think the independent numbers are misleading. There was a poll a few weeks ago with similar numbers but it had a political leaning numbers for liberal, moderate and conservative and she did better with moderate there. It wasn’t amazing, iirc it was 30% favorable and 36% unfavorable, but an ok number. I think that’s the middle ground voter you want to find. My hunch is libertarians are fucking up the polling numbers for “independents”.
She's going to have to veer more centrist in the debates or that monumental exposure will destroy her ratings
I literally just said her numbers with moderates aren’t bad. I think there is a specific type of “centrist” that doesn’t like her and makes a lot of noise but I’m not convinced that voting block is relevant. Howard Schultz thought he’d be president running against her as a centrist and hows that going?
We can have different interpretations of these numbers, it’s really messy when the proportion of people that don’t know who she is so large. But for me, the fact that you’re willing to concede that they aren’t horrible just reaffirms my position that they’re actually very good.
It’s pretty clear how the 44% is going to break. The people least likely to have heard her are women, young people, blacks and Hispanics. Those are the people most likely to give her a favorable rating.
I also think the independent numbers are misleading. There was a poll a few weeks ago with similar numbers but it had a political leaning numbers for liberal, moderate and conservative and she did better with moderate there. It wasn’t amazing, iirc it was 30% favorable and 36% unfavorable, but an ok number. I think that’s the middle ground voter you want to find. My hunch is libertarians are fucking up the polling numbers for “independents”.
She's going to have to veer more centrist in the debates or that monumental exposure will destroy her ratings
I literally just said her numbers with moderates aren’t bad. I think there is a specific type of “centrist” that doesn’t like her and makes a lot of noise but I’m not convinced that voting block is relevant. Howard Schultz thought he’d be president running against her as a centrist and hows that going?
When it comes to AOC, you get very defensive over a simple opinion
refer back to my post later on if you want and we'll see if I was right
AOC is a disaster for the dems. It's hilarious. She's become the shining star to the super progressives and everyone else is embarrassed of her.
Agree with this. The country is full of well-informed moderate liberal Democrats who know she is the embodiment of Clinton's focus on transgender bathrooms. It's a loser. She's passionate, yes. She's forward-thinking, yes. She's progressive, yes. Hell, is she possibly ahead of her time? Yes. All of that is good for academic discussion. But her policies are too radical and too unrealistic and she's going to scare people away. Mark that down. Just like Hillary did pandering to the left edge of her constituency group .... trying to be too many things to too many people.
The thing about Hillary is that people have it all wrong about her. There is nothing unqualified about Hillary. She just made a error in campaign calculation. She should not have played to the AOC wing of the party. There really aren't enough of them IMO, and I'm convinced they don't vote as big as they talk.
The harder call for Hillary was gay marriage. That alienates a lot of people in the middle and on the right; but as a liberal turning your back on the gay community on their most important issue is quite risky. There are a lot of gay people, and they do fucking vote.
AOC is a disaster for the dems. It's hilarious. She's become the shining star to the super progressives and everyone else is embarrassed of her.
Agree with this. The country is full of well-informed moderate liberal Democrats who know she is the embodiment of Clinton's focus on transgender bathrooms. It's a loser. She's passionate, yes. She's forward-thinking, yes. She's progressive, yes. Hell, is she possibly ahead of her time? Yes. All of that is good for academic discussion. But her policies are too radical and too unrealistic and she's going to scare people away. Mark that down. Just like Hillary did pandering to the left edge of her constituency group .... trying to be too many things to too many people.
The thing about Hillary is that people have it all wrong about her. There is nothing unqualified about Hillary. She just made a error in campaign calculation. She should not have played to the AOC wing of the party. There really aren't enough of them IMO, and I'm convinced they don't vote as big as they talk.
The harder call for Hillary was gay marriage. That alienates a lot of people in the middle and on the right; but as a liberal turning your back on the gay community on their most important issue is quite risky. There are a lot of gay people, and they do fucking vote.
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.
AOC is a disaster for the dems. It's hilarious. She's become the shining star to the super progressives and everyone else is embarrassed of her.
Agree with this. The country is full of well-informed moderate liberal Democrats who know she is the embodiment of Clinton's focus on transgender bathrooms. It's a loser. She's passionate, yes. She's forward-thinking, yes. She's progressive, yes. Hell, is she possibly ahead of her time? Yes. All of that is good for academic discussion. But her policies are too radical and too unrealistic and she's going to scare people away. Mark that down. Just like Hillary did pandering to the left edge of her constituency group .... trying to be too many things to too many people.
The thing about Hillary is that people have it all wrong about her. There is nothing unqualified about Hillary. She just made a error in campaign calculation. She should not have played to the AOC wing of the party. There really aren't enough of them IMO, and I'm convinced they don't vote as big as they talk.
The harder call for Hillary was gay marriage. That alienates a lot of people in the middle and on the right; but as a liberal turning your back on the gay community on their most important issue is quite risky. There are a lot of gay people, and they do fucking vote.
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.
Way to state the obvious Hondbag. Politicians and politics love, almost need, a polarizing foe or issue to campaign against. AOC is a somewhat unusual case in that she's young, pretty, and minority. Everything else fits perfectly, and the aberrations help capture more attention.
AOC is a disaster for the dems. It's hilarious. She's become the shining star to the super progressives and everyone else is embarrassed of her.
Agree with this. The country is full of well-informed moderate liberal Democrats who know she is the embodiment of Clinton's focus on transgender bathrooms. It's a loser. She's passionate, yes. She's forward-thinking, yes. She's progressive, yes. Hell, is she possibly ahead of her time? Yes. All of that is good for academic discussion. But her policies are too radical and too unrealistic and she's going to scare people away. Mark that down. Just like Hillary did pandering to the left edge of her constituency group .... trying to be too many things to too many people.
The thing about Hillary is that people have it all wrong about her. There is nothing unqualified about Hillary. She just made a error in campaign calculation. She should not have played to the AOC wing of the party. There really aren't enough of them IMO, and I'm convinced they don't vote as big as they talk.
The harder call for Hillary was gay marriage. That alienates a lot of people in the middle and on the right; but as a liberal turning your back on the gay community on their most important issue is quite risky. There are a lot of gay people, and they do fucking vote.
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.
Way to state the obvious Hondbag. Politicians and politics love, almost need, a polarizing foe or issue to campaign against. AOC is a somewhat unusual case in that she's young, pretty, and minority. Everything else fits perfectly, and the aberrations help capture more attention.
Well, she's loud. Someone in her party better step up and be that loud. Booker, Harris and the White Squaw aren't doing a good job of distancing themselves from that edge. Where is the moderate Democrat? Seriously? Who is it?
In my view, if you really think the Trump movement is bad for the country, and there's a part of me that does, then the kryptonite to that movement is going to be a reasonable moderate. I think the country would recognize it and embrace it.
AOC is a disaster for the dems. It's hilarious. She's become the shining star to the super progressives and everyone else is embarrassed of her.
Agree with this. The country is full of well-informed moderate liberal Democrats who know she is the embodiment of Clinton's focus on transgender bathrooms. It's a loser. She's passionate, yes. She's forward-thinking, yes. She's progressive, yes. Hell, is she possibly ahead of her time? Yes. All of that is good for academic discussion. But her policies are too radical and too unrealistic and she's going to scare people away. Mark that down. Just like Hillary did pandering to the left edge of her constituency group .... trying to be too many things to too many people.
The thing about Hillary is that people have it all wrong about her. There is nothing unqualified about Hillary. She just made a error in campaign calculation. She should not have played to the AOC wing of the party. There really aren't enough of them IMO, and I'm convinced they don't vote as big as they talk.
The harder call for Hillary was gay marriage. That alienates a lot of people in the middle and on the right; but as a liberal turning your back on the gay community on their most important issue is quite risky. There are a lot of gay people, and they do fucking vote.
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.
@allpurpleallgold and I have been talking about her since before the right wing did. We're not ignorant about politics like some folks here *cough*
To the left wing she is a fighter who doesn't back down and lie about what she thinks like democrat establishment shills do *cough*
All of the 2020 democrat candidates signed off on the GND. Why wouldn't that be an issue fair to discuss?
AOC is a disaster for the dems. It's hilarious. She's become the shining star to the super progressives and everyone else is embarrassed of her.
Agree with this. The country is full of well-informed moderate liberal Democrats who know she is the embodiment of Clinton's focus on transgender bathrooms. It's a loser. She's passionate, yes. She's forward-thinking, yes. She's progressive, yes. Hell, is she possibly ahead of her time? Yes. All of that is good for academic discussion. But her policies are too radical and too unrealistic and she's going to scare people away. Mark that down. Just like Hillary did pandering to the left edge of her constituency group .... trying to be too many things to too many people.
The thing about Hillary is that people have it all wrong about her. There is nothing unqualified about Hillary. She just made a error in campaign calculation. She should not have played to the AOC wing of the party. There really aren't enough of them IMO, and I'm convinced they don't vote as big as they talk.
The harder call for Hillary was gay marriage. That alienates a lot of people in the middle and on the right; but as a liberal turning your back on the gay community on their most important issue is quite risky. There are a lot of gay people, and they do fucking vote.
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.
Way to state the obvious Hondbag. Politicians and politics love, almost need, a polarizing foe or issue to campaign against. AOC is a somewhat unusual case in that she's young, pretty, and minority. Everything else fits perfectly, and the aberrations help capture more attention.
Well, she's loud. Someone in her party better step up and be that loud. Booker, Harris and the White Squaw aren't doing a good job of distancing themselves from that edge. Where is the moderate Democrat? Seriously? Who is it?
In my view, if you really think the Trump movement is bad for the country, and there's a part of me that does, then the kryptonite to that movement is going to be a reasonable moderate. I think the country would recognize it and embrace it.
You want to win? You need a winner.
That was my point about the rest fitting perfectly for the role of a political anti-hero for Republicans, even if I didn't make that point well.
AOC is a disaster for the dems. It's hilarious. She's become the shining star to the super progressives and everyone else is embarrassed of her.
Agree with this. The country is full of well-informed moderate liberal Democrats who know she is the embodiment of Clinton's focus on transgender bathrooms. It's a loser. She's passionate, yes. She's forward-thinking, yes. She's progressive, yes. Hell, is she possibly ahead of her time? Yes. All of that is good for academic discussion. But her policies are too radical and too unrealistic and she's going to scare people away. Mark that down. Just like Hillary did pandering to the left edge of her constituency group .... trying to be too many things to too many people.
The thing about Hillary is that people have it all wrong about her. There is nothing unqualified about Hillary. She just made a error in campaign calculation. She should not have played to the AOC wing of the party. There really aren't enough of them IMO, and I'm convinced they don't vote as big as they talk.
The harder call for Hillary was gay marriage. That alienates a lot of people in the middle and on the right; but as a liberal turning your back on the gay community on their most important issue is quite risky. There are a lot of gay people, and they do fucking vote.
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.
Way to state the obvious Hondbag. Politicians and politics love, almost need, a polarizing foe or issue to campaign against. AOC is a somewhat unusual case in that she's young, pretty, and minority. Everything else fits perfectly, and the aberrations help capture more attention.
Well, she's loud. Someone in her party better step up and be that loud. Booker, Harris and the White Squaw aren't doing a good job of distancing themselves from that edge. Where is the moderate Democrat? Seriously? Who is it?
In my view, if you really think the Trump movement is bad for the country, and there's a part of me that does, then the kryptonite to that movement is going to be a reasonable moderate. I think the country would recognize it and embrace it.
You want to win? You need a winner.
The problem is that because the weak democrat candidates have been moderates, the loudest faction of dem voters have convinced people that they need a far left progressive to win. Which is a major mistake imo.
It's like they forget that Obama wasn't a super progressive.
AOC is a disaster for the dems. It's hilarious. She's become the shining star to the super progressives and everyone else is embarrassed of her.
Agree with this. The country is full of well-informed moderate liberal Democrats who know she is the embodiment of Clinton's focus on transgender bathrooms. It's a loser. She's passionate, yes. She's forward-thinking, yes. She's progressive, yes. Hell, is she possibly ahead of her time? Yes. All of that is good for academic discussion. But her policies are too radical and too unrealistic and she's going to scare people away. Mark that down. Just like Hillary did pandering to the left edge of her constituency group .... trying to be too many things to too many people.
The thing about Hillary is that people have it all wrong about her. There is nothing unqualified about Hillary. She just made a error in campaign calculation. She should not have played to the AOC wing of the party. There really aren't enough of them IMO, and I'm convinced they don't vote as big as they talk.
The harder call for Hillary was gay marriage. That alienates a lot of people in the middle and on the right; but as a liberal turning your back on the gay community on their most important issue is quite risky. There are a lot of gay people, and they do fucking vote.
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.
Except a whole pole of big dems signed onto this BS. Stupid much?
AOC is a disaster for the dems. It's hilarious. She's become the shining star to the super progressives and everyone else is embarrassed of her.
Agree with this. The country is full of well-informed moderate liberal Democrats who know she is the embodiment of Clinton's focus on transgender bathrooms. It's a loser. She's passionate, yes. She's forward-thinking, yes. She's progressive, yes. Hell, is she possibly ahead of her time? Yes. All of that is good for academic discussion. But her policies are too radical and too unrealistic and she's going to scare people away. Mark that down. Just like Hillary did pandering to the left edge of her constituency group .... trying to be too many things to too many people.
The thing about Hillary is that people have it all wrong about her. There is nothing unqualified about Hillary. She just made a error in campaign calculation. She should not have played to the AOC wing of the party. There really aren't enough of them IMO, and I'm convinced they don't vote as big as they talk.
The harder call for Hillary was gay marriage. That alienates a lot of people in the middle and on the right; but as a liberal turning your back on the gay community on their most important issue is quite risky. There are a lot of gay people, and they do fucking vote.
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.
Way to state the obvious Hondbag. Politicians and politics love, almost need, a polarizing foe or issue to campaign against. AOC is a somewhat unusual case in that she's young, pretty, and minority. Everything else fits perfectly, and the aberrations help capture more attention.
Well, she's loud. Someone in her party better step up and be that loud. Booker, Harris and the White Squaw aren't doing a good job of distancing themselves from that edge. Where is the moderate Democrat? Seriously? Who is it?
In my view, if you really think the Trump movement is bad for the country, and there's a part of me that does, then the kryptonite to that movement is going to be a reasonable moderate. I think the country would recognize it and embrace it.
You want to win? You need a winner.
The problem is that because the weak democrat candidates have been moderates, the loudest faction of dem voters have convinced people that they need a far left progressive to win. Which is a major mistake imo.
It's like they forget that Obama wasn't a super progressive.
If the democrats had another Obama it would be hard to argue that candidate shouldn’t get the nomination. They don’t.
Democrats have been getting their asses kicked by republicans, using this moderate schtick, for 20 years. Even under the great Obama they continued to hemorrhage seats of all forms across the country. Moderate democrats have proven the thing they’re best at is losing to republicans.
The progressive movement was bigger and louder in 2018 than any time in the last two decades and it was the best election for dems in that time outside of 2008. And again, they don’t have another Obama.
AOC is a disaster for the dems. It's hilarious. She's become the shining star to the super progressives and everyone else is embarrassed of her.
Agree with this. The country is full of well-informed moderate liberal Democrats who know she is the embodiment of Clinton's focus on transgender bathrooms. It's a loser. She's passionate, yes. She's forward-thinking, yes. She's progressive, yes. Hell, is she possibly ahead of her time? Yes. All of that is good for academic discussion. But her policies are too radical and too unrealistic and she's going to scare people away. Mark that down. Just like Hillary did pandering to the left edge of her constituency group .... trying to be too many things to too many people.
The thing about Hillary is that people have it all wrong about her. There is nothing unqualified about Hillary. She just made a error in campaign calculation. She should not have played to the AOC wing of the party. There really aren't enough of them IMO, and I'm convinced they don't vote as big as they talk.
The harder call for Hillary was gay marriage. That alienates a lot of people in the middle and on the right; but as a liberal turning your back on the gay community on their most important issue is quite risky. There are a lot of gay people, and they do fucking vote.
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.
Way to state the obvious Hondbag. Politicians and politics love, almost need, a polarizing foe or issue to campaign against. AOC is a somewhat unusual case in that she's young, pretty, and minority. Everything else fits perfectly, and the aberrations help capture more attention.
Well, she's loud. Someone in her party better step up and be that loud. Booker, Harris and the White Squaw aren't doing a good job of distancing themselves from that edge. Where is the moderate Democrat? Seriously? Who is it?
In my view, if you really think the Trump movement is bad for the country, and there's a part of me that does, then the kryptonite to that movement is going to be a reasonable moderate. I think the country would recognize it and embrace it.
You want to win? You need a winner.
The problem is that because the weak democrat candidates have been moderates, the loudest faction of dem voters have convinced people that they need a far left progressive to win. Which is a major mistake imo.
It's like they forget that Obama wasn't a super progressive.
If the democrats had another Obama it would be hard to argue that candidate shouldn’t get the nomination. They don’t.
Democrats have been getting their asses kicked by republicans, using this moderate schtick, for 20 years. Even under the great Obama they continued to hemorrhage seats of all forms across the country. Moderate democrats have proven the thing they’re best at is losing to republicans.
The progressive movement was bigger and louder in 2018 than any time in the last two decades and it was the best election for dems in that time outside of 2008. And again, they don’t have another Obama.
I know this is akin to the kiss of death but as I look at the field and had to vote for one it would be Kamala Harris. Who is your man or woman for 2020?
Comments
refer back to my post later on if you want and we'll see if I was right
And you know exactly why more Republicans know who she is..... Cause their news source is afraid of her and trying their best to tear her down.
Take it up with @allpurpleallgold
The thing about Hillary is that people have it all wrong about her. There is nothing unqualified about Hillary. She just made a error in campaign calculation. She should not have played to the AOC wing of the party. There really aren't enough of them IMO, and I'm convinced they don't vote as big as they talk.
The harder call for Hillary was gay marriage. That alienates a lot of people in the middle and on the right; but as a liberal turning your back on the gay community on their most important issue is quite risky. There are a lot of gay people, and they do fucking vote.
In my view, if you really think the Trump movement is bad for the country, and there's a part of me that does, then the kryptonite to that movement is going to be a reasonable moderate. I think the country would recognize it and embrace it.
You want to win? You need a winner.
To the left wing she is a fighter who doesn't back down and lie about what she thinks like democrat establishment shills do *cough*
All of the 2020 democrat candidates signed off on the GND. Why wouldn't that be an issue fair to discuss?
Which is a major mistake imo.
It's like they forget that Obama wasn't a super progressive.
Shame on her for making fun of disabled reporters with all those hand gestures.
#BETO2020
Democrats have been getting their asses kicked by republicans, using this moderate schtick, for 20 years. Even under the great Obama they continued to hemorrhage seats of all forms across the country. Moderate democrats have proven the thing they’re best at is losing to republicans.
The progressive movement was bigger and louder in 2018 than any time in the last two decades and it was the best election for dems in that time outside of 2008. And again, they don’t have another Obama.