AOC: Congressional GOP have made one thing extremely clear

[melman]

Link to tweet

[Blue Owl]

1. This ain't your father's republican party

it's a whole new ballgame where there are no rules that apply to them

[dugog55]

11. AOC is right

It is time to take the gloves off and come out swinging. The Repubs have no problem shoving all their crap ideas and agendas on the American public. In the last 24 years of Republican Administrations they have not done one thing to help working class Americans. Not one thing. They talk a good game and lie about what the Democrats want to do (Socialism) which is also a lie.

They hold office, screw up everything, then a Dem comes in and takes eight years to right the ship and then the morons vote in a Republican again. Wash, rinse and repeat.

I like Obama a lot, a whole lot. But he just could not get it in his head that the GOP was not going to go along with anything he wanted to do, they would fight him every inch of the way. I also think he should have gone after all the corruption in the Bush Administration. Hell, it would have taken a team of lawyers just to sift through everything Darth Cheney was involved with.

We cannot play the good cop role anymore. This is a crucial time in American and World history, we are in the right, but have to get to work on Climate Change, the environment, making headway on renewable energies, and a host of other topics.

[sandensea]

29. +1

[CaptYossarian]

36. Geez. It took me all these years to find a twin?

Paragraph #1) Aren't you about to hurl every time one of us says, "...my friends on the other side of the aisle..."? It's like watching Mondale and Dukakis being ever-so polite when staring down the evil bastards at a debate.

Paragraph #2) Look at the reddest of the Trump states: Not a pot to piss in, yet vote willingly for trickle-down economics.

Paragraph #3) Obama must have read Mitch's wet dream about making him a one-term president. He had great minds like Biden, Reich, and Axelrod on his team--and still didn't see the trouble brewing.

Paragraph #4) This is a dogfight and after we crush them this year, we should use them like a fur-covered hydrant. Left-leaning Americans have always been right about the issues. From Civil Rights to war to the environment and everything in between, it was always the "suits" who effed up our potential Utopia. And poor working-class (non-college) voters bought their BS. Even the much-maligned hippies were right. I'll respect Abbie Hoffman over William F. Buckley any day.

[jaxexpat]

60. And to top it off, the Russians are coming, and no one seems to notice.

That's entertainment.

[CaptYossarian]

74. Their side notices it in their re-election war chests, while

our side will notice it when the voting machines flip our votes before we reach our cars.

[czarjak]

108. The Russians are here! Ask Vlad.

[cynical_idealist]

44. GOP equals FSU

completely agree with your points, especially 3rd paragraph

[lastlib]

32. It's more like my father's NAZI Party--

The one he went to WAR against!

I feel like it is my duty to him to go to war against the Nazi Party of my time--the GOPee.

[CrispyQ]

43. You're exactly right & it's high time the old guard dems realized that.

I hope Biden realizes that if he wins, a GOP congress won't work with him any better than they did with Obama just because Biden has some history with some of them. Republicans have basically spit in our faces with this SCOTUS bullshit.

[bdamomma]

97. Right

choice of words "spit in our faces". We should return the favor.

[biophile]

46. My father was a Goldwater Republican

And as awful as he was, he was at least more consistent than these soulless creatures that are Republican Senators

[certainot]

57. that is why democrats ignoring talk radio for 30 years has been the biggest political mistake

in history

that is where they repeat the lies and rationalizations they all use

[elleng]

2. ABSOLUTELY!

We need some creative and assertive leaders.

repugs have been 'marching' for years, they never miss an opportunity, and CREATE them when they otherwise don't exist.

[no_hypocrisy]

3. The legislative process has seized and stopped.

I don't know how bills will be debated, processed, and voted in the future. I can see more republican shenanigans that don't resemble well considered deliberation, only arbitrary dismissal and invalidation.

I don't know who I respect less: the current cadre of congressional Republicans or those past officeholders who are silent: George W. Bush, Jeb Bush, Bob Dole, etc. I don't count Newt or Dick Cheney as they're likely cheering ecstatically.

[backroadblast]

110. Bob Dole?

I don't disagree at all, but Bob Dole is close to a 100 years old, but your right, the Bush royal family should be going hard against Cheeto Benito.

[Polybius]

114. I think Dole should be left out of this

He rarely makes any statements, he is almost 100 and has served his country well. As for W, well he apparently hates politics. But screw him, I can't stand that idiot.

[Thekaspervote]

4. She is absolutely correct!

[Autumn]

5. That woman always hits the nail with the hammer.

I hope I live long enough to see her as Madame Speaker

[Illumination]

15. Me too!...

[Crunchy Frog]

63. Madam President. nt

[malaise]

6. Sorry Matt - they didn't merely say that you shouldn't confirm a Supreme Court Judge

Matt Fuller
@MEPFuller
It’s not like I thought they’d be consistent, but it really is something to watch a political party say you shouldn’t confirm a Supreme Court Justice nine months before an election now say it’s fine six weeks before an election, as people are actually voting.

Power by any means MoscowMitch refused to hold a hearing.

[DSandra]

7. This is why Democrats have been viewed by many as weak over the past two decades...

Because the party hasn't realized that we are fighting an ugly war.

The Right Wing mobilized in the 70's for War, setting up numerous think tanks like the Heritage foundation, Cato, and Focus on the Family, and the whole economics movement to dethrone Keynesian Economics Theory. The fundamentalist movement exploded. They got Reagan elected. They got Reagan to take off the shackles on big business, and they got the fairness doctrine repealed, and with the FCC telecommunications act of 1996, they got to propagandize the media with Right Wing Radio and Fox News. Newt took the gloves off in Congress, and the Republicans on the Supreme Court got Bush in office and the Republicans from 2002 to 2006 rammed through so many things, and then of course during the Obama years, the Republicans declared war on him and we know the result.

We have to learn to fight an aggressive war or America is lost to a dark, dark, dark ages.

[LizBeth]

18. Would you suggest we break laws, refuse to acknowledge rules and procedures? That is what we are

left with.

[DSandra]

23. Assemble some of the smartest strategists that are on our side, have them be in a war room...

Get marketing strategists, influential psychologists, military theorists, successful entrepreneurs, to be involved...

Get all the well connected people on our side together, including highly influential people in many circles (social media influencers, highly respected people)

Basically make an intricate plan and get everyone to cooperate each other and mobilize as the military in a war. Plan and execute, and have an insane level of persistence (which is why we need entrepreneurs, they are used to pushing through in a crazy like manner when noone else can see them succeeding.)



This is how they fight, and we have to be as smart or smarter than them.

[LizBeth]

27. Doing it, now what? Up against criminal, corrupt, crooked.

[wnylib]

73. .

+1000

[Mariana]

31. No to breaking laws, of course.

Rules and procedures are always subject to be changed - as when McConnell did in 2017, so Supreme Court nominations are no longer subject to filibuster, so as to completely exclude the Democratic Senators from having any say whatsoever in confirmation of Trump's nominees.

When Democrats have the majority, the rules should not allow the Republicans to prevent them from governing. If the rules do allow that, they should be changed.

[wnylib]

72. Agree.

[bpj62]

48. No

However as Democrats we have to accept the fact that the Republican party is at war with us and they will do whatever it takes to win. They have learned from Donald Trump that rules and laws do not apply to the party in power. If we continue to play by the old rules we might as well hang it up because this Republican party will gut us and leave us for dead in the middle of the road. I do not advocate violence but we have to fight back. The time for going high when they go low is over. We have to stand on them when they go low. Cumbyah time is over.

[LizBeth]

50. I think not only do we accept it we are screaming it loud in tribal battle cry. Are you not hearing

the siren, alarms and bullhorns? Cause I am hearing it across the nation from every dem time and time again, over and over.

[wnylib]

71. We have heard this cry before.

18th century - The British are coming.

19th century - The Confederates are coming.

20th century - The Nazis are coming.

21st century - The Russians are HERE.

Nobody in their right mind wants an actual physical war. The very idea is horrible. But that does not mean appeasing the enemy, either. Stand tall, push back HARD. Fight with every political weapon we have and can creatively develop. And be prepared. We might not want an actual war, but that does not mean the other side feels the same

[LizBeth]

83. Lordy I was not implying or suggesting picking up arms and going to war.

[wnylib]

88. Neither was I. If you think I was,

then you need to re-read my post.

I specifically said we should use "political weapons." Not physical war weapons.

But I also know that there are people on the other side of the political divide who would not hesitate to use actual physical weapons. They frequently threaten to and on occasion, they do it. Therefore, I said we should be prepared because as we push back POLITICALLY and do not back down, the gun-toters are likely to escalate their threats and actions.

[LizBeth]

89. You responded to my post about war. Ok, whatever.

[wnylib]

90. Well, bless my soul. I took your comment

about a "battle cry" to mean a cry to do political battle, not a physical battle. I listed other times that our nation has been called upon to defend the values of democracy, but since those times involved actual wars, I added the paragraph about fighting a POLITICAL battle this time because war is too horrible to consider getting into one lightly.

But there are gun-toters who like to use their weapons. There are people who like to throw bricks into the windows of the offices and homes of people they disagree with. The traitor in the WH likes to call up armed personnel to shoot tear gas canisters and disabling rubber bullets into people's faces.

So I warned that, as we take a stand and fight back politically, we need to be aware of those dangers but not back down. I've seen this before, in the 1960's, when civil rights leaders were murdered, when churches and homes were bombed, when hoses were turned on people for daring to claim their rights as citizens.

I have a PBS documentary DVD of the Freedom Riders. It shows actual video clips of the buses being attacked and the people on them being brutally beaten. It shows a young John Lewis among them. It also has interviews of the Freedom Riders later in life, including John Lewis. Those people say they did not anticipate the reaction to be as violent as it was, but they did not back down when it did happen.

We need that kind of determination and courage again today.

[LizBeth]

92. +1, Agree absolutely. I am there. .... High five across the way. bring it. !!! I am so done with

these fugger. Literally. I am talking about family that support Trump as I lose my ACA. yes.

[wnylib]

104. Hi back at ya.

But times are different today, so what specific actions can we or should we take now? Back in the 60's people deliberately disobeyed unjust and unconstitutional laws, e.g. segregation. The federal administration was different. RW extremism was on the fringes, not in the WH.

We face a different kind of battle today. The extremists have taken control of the government, from the WH to the Senate and now the SC. The problem is not just changing unjust laws, but getting the extremists out of power. Needs a different strategy. I am open to whatever non-violent, but firm and effective tactics work. Creative minds coming together can develop them.

Speaking up and massive, continual protests throughout the country are one avenue. I saw a reference on twitter to a group that is organizing those kinds of protests. They have a website called "refusefascism."

I'd like to see us shadow Republican officials at all levels, from state and county representatives to federal ones, with peaceful, factual, non-strident demonstrations, calling out in signs and chants the things people need to know and think about. Being a thorn in their sides that won't go away. Humor makes it even better. People who take themselves too seriously can't handle or fight humor. Plus, it demeans them in the eyes of their followers.

But we need stronger actions at higher levels to effectively displace and stop the fascists. Throw our support fully behind leaders who are fighting back.

Most of all, recognize that this is not government as usual. The time for that is gone. We need a zero tolerance policy for what passes as the Republican Party today. It is a fully fascist party now and a threat to the republic. It has to be crushed.

[Act_of_Reparation]

112. ...

[still_one]

8. The only thing we need to focus on right now is winning the White House, and both Houses

of Congress, or nothing will change

[Autumn]

12. Democrats can easily focus on more than one thing at a time. AOC can focus on many.

[still_one]

14. It is a question of priorities. Nothing that Representative Ocasio-Cortez is saying is new

This election is everything, and getting people registered, and getting out the vote is paramount

That is where MY FOCUS IS, because everything else doesn't mean a thing unless we win

[Autumn]

17. So she should only speak when something is new? LOL. I think that Dems need to keep pounding

this till it soaks in. Any Dem who is going to shut up and sit in a corner in an election year is an idiot. AOC is no idiot.

[Ferrets are Cool]

52. This x 1,000,000

[Cuthbert Allgood]

19. If we don't fight this SCOTUS appointment, even when we will lose it, we risk the young voters.

And don't even with the "they just need to vote."

Having taught the last two generations in high school, they want and need us to scream about how bad this is. They want and need us to point out how horrible it is and do everything we can to stop it. They will not respond well to a party that says "Well, that sucks, but nothing we can do." They want and need to be mobilized and we can do that. AOC understands that. We can't sit back and just let this happen.

[still_one]

26. The only way to fight this it is to overwhelmingly vote the repugs out, and take control of the

of the Senate and House, along with the WH

That is when we will have the POWER to actually shove their draconian policies up their worthless asses, and by eliminating the filibuster, make Washington DC, and perhaps Puerto Rico a state, along with a lot of other things, and make the republican party a minority party for decades to come

We have to register new voters, and get out the vote to do that. The repugs know they are a dying breed, and the writing is on the wall for them

[bronxiteforever]

33. We have to win multiple elections

Including 2022. After election 2020 we must immediately gird our loins for 2022 or else they will do to Joe what they did to Obama and we can’t let that happen.

[still_one]

34. We can improve the odds if we win in 2020 by making Washington DC a state, and

perhaps Puerto Rico a state

[bronxiteforever]

35. +1 I totally agree with both points.

[OldBaldy1701E]

53. No the rethug party needs to go

Forever!

[wnylib]

75. And when we have the power this time,

we need to use it to crush and pulverize the fascist movement.

[NoMoreRepugs]

9. I appreciate her candor and to the point messaging.

She is a force to be reckoned with.

[dalton99a]

10. To Republicans, rules are for losers and suckers.

Same goes for traditions and norms

Conservatives, my ass

[ffr]

42. Same goes for Fiscal Conservatism.

They always run the debt up, putting corporations on welfare on our dime. We're now at almost $27T! They're nothing but spend and spend republicans.

[Statistical]

13. Preach it! I swear the most she talks the more impressed I get.

I am ashamed to admit I kinda wrote her off when she arrived on the scene. That was a mistake. She gets it. She gets all of it.

[Mister Ed]

16. Plain truth.

It needs to be constantly stated and widely understood.

[calimary]

20. She's right.

When only ONE side plays by the rules and the other side doesn't (and WON'T), then the side that plays by the rules will ALWAYS LOSE.

So it comes down to this:

What do we want to do in these fights? What result do we want? A "valiant fight" where we wind up licking our wounds in the losers' bin, and consoling ourselves that we waged a "valiant fight"? Or to beat their fucking asses and WIN?

I'm sorry. I hate this. This is not how it's supposed to work. But the other side has decreed that all bets are off when your agenda is at stake. And we can't change that or do squat about it unless WE win. So why can't WE play that way, too?

I think we don't have a choice anymore. WE have to play that way, too. HAVE TO. If we ever want to win and set the agenda and affect positive change for the greater good, and reverse some (or preferably ALL) of this, there's only one way to do that: secure OUR hands on the steering wheel.

I know there are and will be purists among us who insists our consciences have to remain clear and clean. Well, frankly, I'd rather win and THEN worry about my conscience. Besides, my conscience will get all the wound care imaginable if my side uses our win to make positive change, for the greater good, for all those who've been screwed over by these horrendous policies. Where REAL fairness and justice have been suppressed for the sake of some agenda.

[dalton99a]

25. +1. It is not necessary to wear a clean shirt when wrestling with pigs

although some insist it should be pure 100% certified organic cotton, unblemished and freshly washed with natural spring water

Extraordinary circumstances demand extraordinary response.

Fuck the high road.

Whatever it takes to get things done for the people.

[calimary]

109. I like that, dalton99a! Excellent metaphor!

And indeed, why would one wear a clean shirt when wrestling with pigs?

Why would one even WANT TO wear a clean shirt when wrestling with pigs?

It's a dirty business.

Just like politics

[world wide wally]

21. In the words of Mitch, "We can't physically defeat them, and we certainly can't get more votes...

We will simply use deceit and lies to take over"
To which Lindsey replied, "The boss will be so proud of us"!

[jayschool2013]

22. Gangsters

[Wounded Bear]

24. K & R...for truth...nt

[NCjack]

28. GOP is modelling behavior that they believe is acceptable. So, treat them that way.

That is how Speaker Pelosi made progress in face of their disruptions.

[bronxiteforever]

30. Kick and recommend. Absolutely.

[BlueTsunami2018]

37. It's been like this for damn near forty years.

And people are just now figuring this out? This is what many of us have been ranting about for the longest time. We should have stepped on those motherfuckers in 2009. But no, we played nice, worried about “reaching out” and “bipartisanship” and still got our asses kicked. I’m tired of losing to these fucks. We need someone willing to stick a punch dagger in their own mother’s kidney in order to get our agenda passed. Say what you want about Moscow Mitch, he’s a ruthless crusader willing to do whatever it takes. That’s why he won.

[dalton99a]

39. +1. Democrats have spent far too much time to please Republicans

[Mr. Ected]

38. Unfortunately, we are now also Ruth-less

RIP RBG.

[DFW]

40. More like the party that drafted my wife's father and sent him to war at age 17: the original Nazis

These people are calculating, and see the 99% of their followers that are not in on the joke the same way that Hitler's buddy Hermann Göring saw the people he would be harvesting as cannon fodder:

“Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or fascist dictatorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy."

Though not a follower, my father-in-law, a farmer, was drafted off his farm at age 17 to serve at Stalingrad. Just Göring's "poor slob on a farm." He was not a poor slob, and he did not come home in one piece.

[Sherman A1]

41. KnR

[lark]

45. AOC getting it right yet again.

[progressoid]

47. I hope our nominee is paying attention.

I hope he's abandoned his notion that there are still good republicans out there.

[melman]

49. +1

[George II]

56. I hope you support and vote for our nominee.

[progressoid]

62. I have a seven foot long, hand painted Biden/Harris sign on my property.

I've put literature on over 350 doors so far.

Thanks for you concern.

[Cha]

77. & thanks for yours.

[Trumpocalypse]

107. I support all the nominees of the Democratic Party

including the nominee for the House in New York’s 14th congressional district. Do you?

[melman]

116. I see there was no answer given to this very simple question

Can't say I'm surprised.

[Trumpocalypse]

117. Haters gonna hate

[George II]

120. What "haters" are you referring to here?

[Trumpocalypse]

121. Answer my question first

Do you support all Democratic Party nominees including the nominee for New York's 14th congressional district?

[George II]

122. I have been a loyal Democrat for more than 45 years, supporting and working directly for....

....dozens of candidates, including on the top staff of several campaigns. I've been a delegate for six state Democratic conventions and several Democratic Federal and state candidates.

I've run for local office five times as a Democrat (won three times), have been on three different town Commissions as a Democrat and was an officer of my local Democratic party for 15 years.

The fact that I've been a member in good standing of Democratic Underground answers your question.

So, who are the "haters" that "gonna hate"?

[Trumpocalypse]

123. No it doesn't

Stop being evasive. Do you support the Democratic party nominee for New York's 14th congressional district, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez?

[George II]

131. I guess you're not going to clarify what you meant by "haters gonna hate". Okay.

[Trumpocalypse]

132. I guess you are not going to answer my question.

[George II]

133. I did.

[Trumpocalypse]

134. No you didn't

[melman]

125. "The fact that I've been a member in good standing of Democratic Underground answers your question."

Why doesn't this apply to the member you were questioning? They've been here a long time.

[George II]

126. Why do you care? I didn't ask a question there, did I?

[melman]

127. Why do you feel entitled to lob thinly-veiled accusations?

[George II]

128. What accusation? Read my post that initiated it again, please.

[melman]

129. The one in post #56

No need. I read it and understood it already.

[George II]

130. Again, what accusation? I think you're reading something into it that doesn't exist.....

...and I find that insulting.

[George II]

119. That question has been answered in many forms countless times. I'm sure....

....you have a screen shot or link of them in you library somewhere.

[melman]

124. Then why the reluctance to answer it now?

[George II]

135. As they say in court, "asked and answered." Next?

[melman]

136. Five hours later you resurrect this?

lol

You did not answer the question. And we both know you never will so what's the point?

[George II]

137. ..

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=14122937

[melman]

138. .

[George II]

139. ..

[melman]

140. .

[still_one]

65. Do you think that is a good strategy with less than two months to the election?

[George II]

66. I sure don't, and hope Biden doesn't change his strategy in this campaign.

[still_one]

68. He won't. One would think it would be obvious, and the primaries should have been instructive that

it isn’t wise strategy to marginalize people

[Cha]

76. Ever heard of The Lincoln Project? They've been

Blasting Out the Truth on trump & his magats. We've heard from a lot of "repubs" on how & Why they are voting for JOE BIDEN. They've been all over this board.

OUR DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE has a Broad SPECTRUM in his COALITION.

Of Course he's "Paying ATTENTION". Thank you.

[sheshe2]

80. +1000

[leftstreet]

106. Have they said a single word about the SC appt?

[JI7]

100. Many are supporting him like Cindy Mccain today

[speaknow]

51. AOC knows

The truth. They also show no empathy
and they have no Souls. If they believe
in the Lord as they claim, they should be
scared very scared.

[Pepsidog]

54. Better listen to what she is saying Dems.

[OneBro]

55. F*ck it! Let's just clone AOC.

I'm thinking 3 clones per blue state and a good dozen per red state.

[AllaN01Bear]

58. ive witnessed this felgercarb all my adult life . ugh.

[Crunchy Frog]

59. I really do think that she represents the future of our party...

That is, if this country and its democratic system even has a future, which I'm somewhat dubious about.

[NurseJackie]

61. I don't agree. She represents the voters of her district and that's it.

Her "brand" of politics and "activism" appeals to the people who elected her. What she does and says works well in her district (and among her activist fans) but it's really not the "future" of the entire Democratic party... that's a stretch.

[Crunchy Frog]

64. I know you don't.

[still_one]

67. Until she wins a state or national election, that question remains unanswered

The candidate she supported in the primaries could not move beyond his base, and until either that base extends beyond 30%, or able to attract beyond that base, it remains to be seen

[Crunchy Frog]

69. I was simply expressing my opinion. I thought that was pretty clear from the post.

Maybe not.

I've never had anything good to say about Bernie, at least as a national candidate, and I recognize that AOC is still very young and rough around the edges. Nevertheless, I personally believe that she is going to mature into a major force in our party.

Note that I am only expressing my personal opinion, and that I don't pretend to speak for anyone but myself.

I respect your opinion, and hope that you can find it in your heart to respect mine. Or at least act like you respect it (or me).

[still_one]

70. I am not criticizing anyone, and definitely respect your opinion. If we win the WH, and both Houses

of Congress, I am open to anything that will help people, and undo the damage the repugs have done to the country, and if that involves making Washington DC a state, removing the filibuster, really affordable healthcare, environmental protections, etc, I am on board all the way

We just have to win first

[Crunchy Frog]

113. One question for you. Do you find anything in this tweet of hers to be incorrect?

If so, can you tell me what you think she got wrong?

[still_one]

115. No, I don't find anything incorrect. I just think for most of us here it is pretty obvious.

[SophieJean]

79. AOC's a Democrat that represents the concerns of her constituents,

Not corporate interests. Her progressive ideas and intelligence have earned her an extremely large following all over the country, and not only with younger voters. Yes, she is the future, and one of the reasons my older teenagers will be voting Democratic.

[NurseJackie]

81. I don't know of any Democrats who represent "corporate interests"...

AOC's a Democrat that represents the concerns of her constituents,
Not corporate interests.

I don't know of any Democrats who represent "corporate interests". Did you have a specific Democrat in mind when drawing that comparison?

Yes, she is the future,

Nope. I'm still not seeing it. Not on a nationwide basis, anyway. She does well in "pockets" and selected areas (and in her district) and is popular with the far-left activist wing of our party. It's very easy to see where the majority of Democrats fall on that spectrum. Therefore, suggesting that she's the FUTURE OF THE PARTY is hyperbole ... that's a stretch.

[marble falls]

94. But corporate interests do support Democratic politicians ...

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-intercept/

https://theintercept.com/2019/04/17/democratic-candidates-lobbyist-donations/

There's nothing necessarily wrong with it. I am more likely to spend my money with a corp who supports my interests and candidates. Publicly made donations are better than the dark cash the GOP is awash in.

There's no doubt, some corporate cash is just a bone and pretext to claim "fairness".

[George II]

82. "Corporate interests"? Come on, when are we going to stop bashing our Democrats?

[ehrnst]

95. So, which Democrats are you talking about that "represent corporate interests?" (nt)

[George II]

84. I don't agree with your first sentence entirely. I've spoken to a number of the people....

....in her district (I grew up in Grace Meng's neighboring district). Most have had a difficult time getting in touch with her or her office in Queens.

[NurseJackie]

87. Well, yes. There's that.

[RhodeIslandOne]

91. I guess she's gonna lose then, right?

[melman]

93. .

[George II]

98. Point?

[melman]

99. She's very popular in her district

Despite what some folks on the internet like to claim.

[George II]

102. Who might that be?

[melman]

103. .

[Autumn]

118. It looks like she's pretty popular in her district. She's popular with everyone I know and

none of us are in her district.

[ehrnst]

96. There are many who believe that being louder on social media equals more numerous.

But we've seen how that misapprehension plays out in a national contest.

[Yeehah]

78. She is absolutely correct

All criminal acts by the rogue Trump regime must be investigated, exposed and the perpetrators prosecuted.

Or it will be a short road into the dustbin of history for American democracy.

[warmfeet]

85. I hope she runs for POTUS, at some point.

I hope I am still alive to vote for her when she does.

[dustyscamp]

86. I hate the total shitheads responding to her

[bdamomma]

101. in regards to

monetary funds is AOC advocating for agencies or organizations to send money for this cause?

[Hotler]

105. I agree. Stop playing nice with the repugs, we've been screaming this for years. nt

[Rabrrrrrr]

111. If Biden becomes president and pulls the same "Let's play nice with the GOP" bullshit Obama did,

I'm going to scream my *$*$%& head off.

Biden and the dems have to just assume every current Republican is a piece of shit who isn't worth negotiating with, and just steamroll the fuck out of them.

They're going to be nasty ass pukes in the media no matter what the dems do, so might as well just do the right thing and let them complain about it.

Obama could have achieved so much more his first two years when the Dems had the majority, but he kept dealing in good faith with those he should have been smart enough to know would only stab him in the back no matter what he did.