Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
AOC update from Quinnipiac University poll
Comments
-
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?GrundleStiltzkin said:
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.2001400ex said:
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.creepycoug said:
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.Pitchfork51 said: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.
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. -
@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*2001400ex said:
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.creepycoug said:
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.Pitchfork51 said: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.
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.
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?
-
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.creepycoug said:
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?GrundleStiltzkin said:
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.2001400ex said:
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.creepycoug said:
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.Pitchfork51 said: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.
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. -
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.creepycoug said:
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?GrundleStiltzkin said:
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.2001400ex said:
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.creepycoug said:
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.Pitchfork51 said: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.
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.
Which is a major mistake imo.
It's like they forget that Obama wasn't a super progressive. -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPZkeAXPngM
Shame on her for making fun of disabled reporters with all those hand gestures. -
Looking like hand gestures are going to be a big part of the 2020 campaign
#BETO2020 -
Except a whole pole of big dems signed onto this BS. Stupid much?2001400ex said:
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.creepycoug said:
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.Pitchfork51 said: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.
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. -
If the democrats had another Obama it would be hard to argue that candidate shouldn’t get the nomination. They don’t.Pitchfork51 said:
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.creepycoug said:
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?GrundleStiltzkin said:
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.2001400ex said:
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.creepycoug said:
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.Pitchfork51 said: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.
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.
Which is a major mistake imo.
It's like they forget that Obama wasn't a super progressive.
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?allpurpleallgold said:
If the democrats had another Obama it would be hard to argue that candidate shouldn’t get the nomination. They don’t.Pitchfork51 said:
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.creepycoug said:
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?GrundleStiltzkin said:
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.2001400ex said:
That's exactly all why the right keeps bringing her up. They are trying to use her platform to broadbrush all Democrats.creepycoug said:
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.Pitchfork51 said: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.
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.
Which is a major mistake imo.
It's like they forget that Obama wasn't a super progressive.
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. -
You besides Bernie? Tulsi Gabbard.
