AOC: "We don't have a left party in US - The Democratic Party is not a left party"

[kpete]

“We don’t have a left party in the United States. The Democratic Party is not a left party. The Democratic Party is a center, or a center-conservative party”

“There are left members inside the Democratic Party working to make that shift happen.” -@AOC

(Xlnt comments by AOC mho):

Link to tweet

[Blue_Tires]

1. ugh...

Someone needs to remind her that she hurts us as much as she helps sometimes...

[Zolorp]

2. For while there I thought she was learning.

Fortunately she is facing a primary opponent.

[Iliyah]

3. Please stop it . . .

I'm a proud member of the Democratic Party and a proud Liberal/Progressive.

[Watchfoxheadexplodes]

4. I honestly do not understand what's she's trying to do

Sadly I don't think she does either.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

5. She could always join the Green party, or some other non-mainstream party.

She seems to like to support primary challenges to established Democratic representatives.

[dware]

6. AOC,

you've got to know when to hold them,
know when to fold them,
know when to walk away,
know when to run.

[PatSeg]

40. Yes

And that is why experience counts. If she can hold on to her seat, maybe someday she'll learn that. Meanwhile, she is not an asset to the Democratic party.

[OnDoutside]

7. Excellent ! Thanks AOC for giving the Democratic Party a great rebuttal video, when Repugs come

attacking the "Socialist" Dems

Compared to parties in Europe, she is actually right, but of course everything is relative. Within a US context, she is hugely wrong. The Democratic Party is a big tent party from right of center Joe Manchins to far left people like, well, AOC. However, ultimately, with a US context, it is a highly progressive party, when you look at the US political timeline. But of course, for AOC and her fellow travellers, it's all or nothing, and that's just not how to be successful in politics.

[DetlefK]

8. Compared to parties in other countries, the Democrats are centrist, not left.

If the US had a healthy election-system that allowed for more than 2 parties to exist, then
- the Republicans would split up into a capitalist-libertarian wing, a centrist conservative wing and an evangelical socially-conservative wing
- the Democrats would split up into a social-democratic wing, a capitalist centrist wing and a liberal socially-progressive wing.

[democrank]

27. Truth, thanks.

[Skidmore]

32. This isn't

"other countries" and how many of these "other countries" with such fabulous left wings are having similar problems with autocratic leaders or parties as we do? How does splintering over nitpicky academic distinctions help this nation now? We are in dire straits and Cortez creating a sliver of a faction to lob spitballs does not help any more than Steiners did. These distinctions ignore the fact that there are many more similarities on the left than differences.

[DetlefK]

48. You Americans don't even realize how much your bad election-system is hurting you.

There are left-wing parties all over europe and none of them have problems with autocrats.

The whole toxic partisanship in the US results from an electoral system where one party can rule alone.

In other countries, it's next to impossible for a party to get 50+%. This means, that any party will always have to negotiate with other parties to form a coalition that gets above 50% of seats in parliament. If you are toxic in THAT kind of electoral system, you can rile up your voters all you want, you will not get anywhere near government:
1. There are too many parties to choose from for the voters. It's extremely hard for a single party to get above 50%.
2. No other party will want to make a coalition with you to lift you above those 50% of seats in parliament.

[Skidmore]

49. Our laws are different.

Each state sets its own laws for elections and the parties set their rules for candidate selection. We have only one truly national election every four years. We have an additional layer of the Electoral College, which was established in the original Constitution, and which elects our president after the popular vote has been taken. Sometimes those two votes match up partywise and sometimes not, like last election. We do not have a bunch of parties because we essentially are forced to find common cause. What we have now the result of malicious manipulation to drive a wedge where there used to be more willingness for compromise. I don't see how forcing more splinter groups solves anything. The UK still ended up with just shifting around two poles.

[LakeArenal]

9. So she is saying the party is moderate?

So if the majority is moderate and the Party is moderate then she is the outlier.

I feel very liberal. But I want to beat trump and that’s with Joe Biden.

Labels only work if they work.

[BlueTsunami2018]

10. Well, this is good in a way.

Republicans want to make her the face of the party, if she says shit like this, it makes the party in general harder to define as radical left. It may help moderate Republicans and Independents vote against Тяцмр.

Where it does hurt is with the young people and lefty left types who won’t vote for our nominee because they’re too “corporate” or whatever.

I don’t know if she’s dumb like a fox or just dumb.

[rainy]

11. She is right

Our party is forced to play the money power game and it can’t be a true left party due to the narrative of the powerful. We are so far right right now we are practically a dictatorship and most of the country supports democratic policies but our democratic leaders can’t push our best and true Democratic policies because the press convinces them and us that that’s a tooooo far left idea to pass. Thus the people become deflated and feel like no one is really fighting for them. Poverty, subsidies for rich energy corporations, dying planet, EXCESSIVE money in politics, foreign money buying elections, NRA power by purse, gun violence, poor medical care. So many issues that can’t be fixed and we the people don’t feel like anyone is fighting for us.

Crumbling infrastructure. No work life balance. USA is now designated a not safe for travel country. Dying bees. We suck and the Democratic Party majority is being jerked around bu the minority and does nothing to fix it because the powerful will not allow it.

[Greybnk48]

13. True n/t

[Doremus]

42. Correct. That some refuse to see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist or isn't true. It is and it does

[LonePirate]

12. Go AOC! Repubs pull the Overton Window to the right more than Dems pull it to the left.

So the center keeps moving to the right over time. Centrists don’t like to acknowledge that however.

[Greybnk48]

15. Again, absolutely true!

We are now further right wing than the Nixon Republicans! We are not the party of FDR or JFK. But fixing it will take finesse due to years of conditioning the public via media against liberal views.

We need to remember that propaganda has made many people afraid of "liberals," "socialism," and "DemocRATS," largely thanks to the rise of FOX, or State Republican T.V., despite the empirical fact that we are a socialist hybrid democracy.

So I understand some people's consternation over AOC, but on one level I fucking love her, and think it's about time someone said what she says out loud.

The other reason I love her is my ex-husband, a podunk-style Magat who parrots Fox, despises AOC. I recently asked how the hell he even knew who she was, and he said from FOX cable news.

I'm married to a liberal now, and have been for almost 39 years! Whew!

[TheBlackAdder]

14. In my Political Science Honors course that researched Liberal and Conservative origins...

Mandatory readings for Democrats are:


Daniel Rodgers, "Atlantic Crossings."

Eldon Eisenach, "The Social and Political Thought of American Progressivism"

Theodore Roosevelt, "Confession of Faith," Acceptance Speech at the 1912 Progressive Party Convention

Jurgen Habermas, "Knowledge and Human Interest" & "The Tasks of Critical Theory"


and the


"Port Huron Statement"


That should be good for a primer before I add more.

.

[rampartc]

31. it is too bad that we don'y have a roosevelt today

usually that would be a franklin, and I certainly have issues with teddy the jingo, but teddy the bull moose progressive may have been our finest politician.

https://ehistory.osu.edu/exhibitions/1912/1912documents/a_confession_of_faith

I wish I could find this speech on video or audio. wm Jennings bryan's "cross of gold" was 4 elections earlier and there are some good audio recordings. oh well.

[Doremus]

44. It was the people who made FDR a progressive

We need to hit the streets and do it again.

[maxsolomon]

33. Didn't Jeffrey Lebowski write the Port Huron Statement?

"I was one of the authors of the Port Huron Statement. The original Port Huron Statement, not the compromised second draft."

[TheBlackAdder]

36. It was based off of a draft by Tom Hayden, who became a CA State Senator--very politically active.

[maxsolomon]

37. I was funnin'

https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/26831/dude-port-huron-statement-and-seattle-seven

[TheBlackAdder]

38. Dang! I thought that Lebowski name sounded familiar.

.

Ya got me!

.

[George II]

16. The Democratic Party is precisely what the loyal members of the Party want it to be.

[H2O Man]

17. Recommended.

Thank goodness for AOC.

[Happy Hoosier]

18. I like her, but damn....

.... sometimes she comes off as so naive. We don't have a parliamentary system. And a "left" party is just gonna get crushed for now. Does she think moderate independents are going to go along with her plan?

[leftstreet]

21. She's right n/t

[Proud Liberal Dem]

20. One person can't define an entire political party

Her opinions are, of course, her opinions, but litmus tests are simply not very helpful when we are going to need unite quickly once the primaries are over and stick together HARD to win against Trump. We should have learned from 2016 that, given the imminent threat we were (and are) knowingly facing with Trump, we need to have the biggest tent possible to win against him in 2020. This is true whether Sanders is the nominee and it's true whether Biden is the nominee. And if you don't like the eventual nominee, keep it to yourself and vote for them like your life depends on it (because it does). Whatever you think of Sanders, Warren, Buttegieg, or Biden, all of them are eminently qualified to run this country and treat governance of this crazy country extremely seriously, unlike Trump. I respect AOC and her opinions but she needs to be ready and willing to hold the tent door open in November to create a winning coalition needed to beat Trump. We couldn't afford 4 years of Trump, we definitely can't afford 8. Eyes on the prize.

[Malmsy]

22. She speaks for a lot of people. Her influence goes far beyond her district. (eom)

[DeminPennswoods]

23. She's correct even if you personally disagree

nt

[MyNameGoesHere]

24. 709000 constituents in her district

She received about 78% around 100000 votes. Are we sure that all 100000 are no good asshole democrats as she believes? She needs to do a purity check next time before accepting a miserable Democrat vote maybe. Let's see how she does with a purity vote of maybe 10%

[MineralMan]

25. You are correct, AOC. Thanks for acknowledging that.

You are part of a small minority within the Democratic Party.

[beachbumbob]

26. democratic party will NEVER be a "left" party, we leave that the extremist like the Green Party

[Hortensis]

28. Lol, I HOPE her Democratic constituents are listening

to these repeated slurs and rejections of them and their beliefs.

[nini]

29. She's a piece of work

She is free to not associate with we horrible Democrats and leave to start her own party. No one is forcing her to associate with us low lifes.

[maxsolomon]

35. She said she's working from within the party to move it left,

which is certainly her right. What about that insults you?

Do YOU want us to be more Joe Manchin-esque?

[nini]

41. What insults me is she spends more time attacking Democrats than Republicans

Last edited Wed Jan 22, 2020, 05:02 PM - Edit history (1)

On edit: removed the rest of it due to my mistake. and I'm done

[maxsolomon]

43. Manchin is a DEMOCRAT, not a "Right Wing Asshole".

If it wasn't for him, we'd be even further in the hole in the Senate. He voted for every one of the Amendments yesterday.

You're the one with the purity test; I'm advocating for a big tent that has both AOC and Manchin and has a majority in both houses.

Let AOC be young and idealist.

[nini]

46. I stand corrected on that one

other than that.. bye

[democrank]

30. Recommended

[maxsolomon]

34. We were discussing exactly this at the dinner table last night.

Democrats are not "Leftists" as that is typically constituted. We are not "Socialists", or even Democratic Socialists.

"Leftists" are the SWP or the John Zeran Anarchists. They're not in our party.

My (31 year old) daughter's take: Democrats are "The Competent Party".

[PasadenaTrudy]

39. Well, she's right...n/t

[Blue_Tires]

45. I'm seriously starting to wonder which side she's on...

[RealityChik]

47. I'm a bleeding heart liberal progressive but...

...altho I agree with most of her platform and I love her spunk, her methodology for achieving her goals is short-sighted and divisive.

I too hate that the corporate DCCC will spend boatloads of cash on sabotaging the campaigns of progressives who run against their underwhelming corporate "Yes-men" candidates. Or support weak incumbent candidates at risk against republic candidates.

But what I EQUALLY hate is that she leads a group of progressives hell-bent on defeating democrats that aren't as progressive as they are. Case in point is the district I recently moved to in retirement. The demographic is about 55% democrat, 45% republican. With a split like that, progressives can't just cram their policies down the throats of a sizable conservative constituency!

Our congressman, who is progressive in most areas, is super smart, an economist by profession, (Princeton grad), PhD from Oxford in London, is well-liked by both libs and repubs, balances the needs of ALL constituents and is very active in the community.

But the progressives see him a corporate shill who sometimes hangs with Chambers of Commerce (the district needs business to create jobs and needs banks to loan money to home builders and small businesses!).

The weak progressive they want to primary Kilmer with, has a platform that reads like a wishlist for Santa, contains not a word about she would finance any of it, much less how she would convince the 45% of conservative demographic that doesn't agree with her, that her policies are what's best for them. Prior to Derek Kilmer, our district has a long history of being red.

What extreme progressives don't seem to understand is that they have to represent ALL your constituents, not just the ones who agree with you. Forcing progressive policy on them is not the way to win votes. Progressives like AOC, who are aligned with a scorched earth, my-way-or-the-highway style of governing are not the way to unite polar opposite beliefs in this country. Moreover, that's not what freedom for all is about.