General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAOC: "...concerted effort from the Democratic side to unseat me..."
..."I feel like everybody treated me like a one-term member of Congress, and they worked to make me a one-term member of Congress," Ocasio-Cortez said in the interview. "There was a very concerted effort from the Democratic side to unseat me. And I felt a shift after my primary election, and it felt like after that election was the first time that more broadly the party started treating me like a member of Congress and not an accident."While she's noted a shift in how Democrats treat her, AOC told GQ that she still feels "despised."
"Others may see a person who is admired, but my everyday lived experience here is as a person who is despised," she told the outlet. "Imagine working a job and your bosses don't like you and folks on your team are suspicious of you. And then the competing company is trying to kill you."...
https://people.com/politics/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-recounts-congressman-telling-her-its-shame-she-won/
That is disturbing, imo.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
in2herbs
(4,154 posts)
Magoo48
(6,687 posts)
Samrob
(4,298 posts)AntivaxHunters
(3,234 posts)No safe space for misogynists
onecaliberal
(36,594 posts)
Phoenix61
(18,681 posts)Imagine the same team member blasting the current leadership their first month on the job.
https://theintercept.com/2020/12/16/aoc-nancy-pelosi-needs-to-go-but-theres-nobody-to-replace-her-yet/
Mad_Machine76
(24,930 posts)However, IMHO sometimes she unfairly villifies other Democrats as well when she goes out and supports primary challenges to other Democrats.
Indykatie
(3,866 posts)AOC could learn a few things from Lauren Underwood. AOC and Underwood will probably have long careers in the House. I think that Underwood will continue to be effective and productive with legislation she works on. I don't think that will be the case with AOC. Unfortunately the Media will give AOC all their attention because they love drama and she's always good for giving them something they can use for their "Dems are in disarray" stories.
yorkster
(3,642 posts)Both very impressive.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)impressive lists of legislative achievements, real things they were instrumental in making happen.
The house caucuses are teams. Every two years leadership carefully examines the incoming members for new talent to bring along, and some like Underwood -- and Ocasio-Cortez -- were quickly identified as especially promising. OC was considered especially valuable for her ability to reach unengaged young people and turn wishful thinking into Democratic progressive action they helped empower.
But...that hasn't worked out. And by her own words she's "despised" and "disliked" by "suspicious" colleagues who don't see their own high progressive ideals benefiting from her actions.
This ball's always been in Ocasio-Cortez's court.
dalton99a
(91,784 posts)
Wingus Dingus
(9,173 posts)Retrograde
(11,369 posts)when she accepted an invitation to a Met Gala and posed in that expensive gown. Yeah, it had "tax the rich" written on it, and was lent to her for the occasion, but IMHO it's bad optics for someone who markets herself as a progressive.
I'm impressed by Pressley and especially Underwood, though: they do the unglamorous work that benefits the country as a whole and don't get anywhere near the publicity for it.
walkingman
(10,254 posts)a debt of gratitude for pushing them into the 21st century. If not for the progressive movement the Democratic Party would still be stuck in the 1990's or maybe even further back. So sometimes it takes a person like AOC to speak for the millions of people that want to move on......like myself.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)...when we held a lot more elected offices than we do today.
walkingman
(10,254 posts)of the moderate Dems of the 1990's do not interest me. Sorry.
you're ok with R-majorities everywhere. Got it. I mean hell, fix it, weather it's broke or not.
walkingman
(10,254 posts)of people in this nation are Democrats. What so you think would improve our ability to turn more States into a Democratic majorities. Gerrymandering, voter suppression seem to be obstacles.
Do you think that Progressive policies are a hindrance for our party?
Demsrule86
(71,465 posts)The 'but her email crowd' has much to answer for. As for AOC, I am disappointed. She thinks this is useful before the most important midterm of my life. It is not.
Gore1FL
(22,810 posts)in2herbs
(4,154 posts)progressive ideas --- which is to take care of the middle class. I like them both.
As for consensus building, what has Schumer done? Made a silent agreement with Manchin for his vote to pass the IRA and now wants to pay back Manchin for his IRA vote by passing, via CR, a piece of Manchin legislation that will essentially hamstring the environmental protections in the IRA.
Demsrule86
(71,465 posts)right in may ways...and because of the 'but her email crowd', we have courts that will attempt to destroy every bit of good legislation we pass.
Gore1FL
(22,810 posts)Just A Box Of Rain
(5,104 posts)
comradebillyboy
(10,935 posts)Democrats wasn't it?
walkingman
(10,254 posts)reallocating them to non-policing forms of public safety and community support, such as social services, youth services, housing, education, healthcare and other community resources.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)Minneapolis advocates put a DTP referendum on the ballot. Cori Bush (MO-2) still stands by it.
walkingman
(10,254 posts)"So suck it up and defunding the police has to happen. We need to defund the police and put that money into social safety nets because we're trying to save lives."
That is far different than the GOP translation of getting rid of the police - a GOP talking point. But regardless you cannot judge the entire Democratic Party based upon 1 or 2 people. That would be the equiv of saying that Manchin and Sinema represent the Party. Maybe we are not all in lockstep but we can resolve our difference without pulling the GOP method-of-procedure of exiling the members that do not follow the dear leaders rules.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Last edited Fri Sep 9, 2022, 01:35 PM - Edit history (1)
legislative achievement if only I could. Her colleagues would if they could.
The only progressivism that's real is action that advances society's wellbeing. It's not just a label chosen by a faction.
I've been liberal and progressive all my life. The many millions like me are what we are; we don't wobble around ideologically, and we would never throw progressive goals under the bus and betray the people who need them for personal political gain. That's key to identifying the real thing.
And who WERE all these liberal progressive Democrats who really did make America great in the last century but are portrayed has having to be dragged left after the 1990s by people, including some kid (literally), who obviously didn't know who they were and what they believed in?
I remember the bad 1990s well, btw, when mass manipulation shifted a majority of voters to the right.
Those included a minority but critical percentage who'd been voting Democratic but just decided they were tired of the Democrats' liberal progressive products. All of a sudden we were losing hundreds of seats across the nation. The party had to adjust to what a majority of voters demanded, but the party's liberal progressive ideals haven't changed in a century. And people who despise us for what we are have nothing to do with who we are. Those are their Big Lies.
Btw, democracy and representative government are core Democratic values that have never shifted. Nationally at least, real liberal progressives don't do election theft and we don't deceive voters to trick them into supporting what they don't want. We're unique that way, and consistent.
Farther to the left and right, unfortunately, there quickly be dragons.
walkingman
(10,254 posts)I am speaking for myself and only myself - it is my opinion.
I am almost 72 and have also been progressive all of my life and have never wobbled at all.
"And who WERE all these liberal progressive Democrats who really did make America great in the last century"
Who were they? They were people like you and I and in reality many people that no longer belong to the Democratic Party.
Our society changed dramatically in the 70's and does not even resemble the party prior to then. The same thing applies to the GOP. There are no longer Rockefeller or Eisenhower Republicans. From 1972 to 1988 the Democrats lost four of five presidential elections. Carter in '76 being the only Democrat elected during that period and the last Dem to win the South. Then we got the Reagan era which began the demise of our Representative Democracy. Then Clinton was elected in '92 (a moderate at best) and with his approval of NAFTA we lost many of the "Progressives" and many supporters in organized labor. In '94 we lost both houses....Contract with America and the rise of the right-wing religious/political movement....then the impeachment of Clinton led to the family values crap till just a few years ago.
The 2000 judicial loss by Gore is maybe our greatest tragedy of the modern era - it result was the election of maybe the worst POTUS in modern political history resulting in the destabilization of the Middle East, a banking crisis that almost brought us into another depression. The result being our first African American President, Barack Obama. A great president (Carter and Obama my favorites) who would more than likely would have never been elected without the terrible "W" Presidency. And then we got Trump - how and why I will never understand. I was not a Hillary fan, mainly because I thought her foreign policy was terrible as has been the US policy since at least WWII. But I have always voted for the Democratic candidate since 1968 in every election. I understand it is a binary choice.
I like AOC. She has charisma, is outspoken, and I think represents her constituency well. I don't think she represents all Democrats nor does she claim to but she does have some good ideas and has the conviction and courage to speak out for them.
There is no doubt in my mind that we have only one legitimate political party these days and it is not hard to see that. For us to win it requires UNITY which means that we allow our members to voice their opinions and ideas and then unite for the common good. I worry about so many people just don't vote if they don't get their way - that's dumb. I personally ready for our first woman POTUS and she needs to be a Democrat.
Peace and Love ☮
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)While the situations we have to operate in change dramatically, we haven't. Liberals (virtually all progressive, but not a synonym for) have been remarkably ideologically stable. Our biggest difference from conservatives is belief in equality of all people and individual rights.
I agree with virtually everything in your history, but to add some of the things I believe are important and political and ideological opponents do their best to obscure: Liberals came to dominate the party even before the sifting out of most conservatives to the Republican Party. We had to contend with a large minority conservative faction with different, only somewhat overlapping ideology, and especially to keep the more extreme, hostile Southern conservative bloc controlled, but we did it by making deals -- we didn't become them. We held to liberal principles.
It's telling that the culture of the pro-slavery Southern conservative bloc who remained in the party after losing the Civil War, and who loathed liberalism and egalitarianism, was not able to degrade the liberal majority that had taken the Democratic Party back from them. We had to deal with them and keep them contained -- our ideologies were far too incompatible and we were far too committed to liberal principles (equality #1, rights #2) and progressive goals. But -- once they fled to the conservative-dominated Republican Party, Southern conservative culture took that over and corrupted it along with Big-Money conservatives. They purged traditional conservatism, moderate conservatism and conservative progressivism -- and became uncontrolled. The pubs did become them.
Meanwhile, liberals carried on. Overall we always remained liberal and progressive, as we are now. The situations and social standards within which we work change, sometimes dramatically, and have to be dealt with. Social mores advance, and us with them (we're virtually always a force among those advancing them), and sometimes society backslides in spite of us, like now.
BUT, through it all, liberal Democrats have remained very ideologically stable and are a major structural reason our nation has survived the various upheavals that took down so many others.
Another reason for the stability that allowed America to prosper and advance is that, as long as the Republican Party still had a lot of moderate conservatives, they and liberal Dems were able to unite to control more radical elements from farther left and right when they threatened stability. But, we stayed ourselves -- cooperation did not make us more conservative.
As I said somewhere else, that stability of underlying ideology means that America's giant liberal organization of Democrats don't get dragged by minority factions. Nor do we lack the most advanced ideas -- our liberalism and sheer numbers mean we normally lead in ideas also. New ideas virtually always originate from and are accepted among the mainstream. What "radicals" typically bring to the pot is cherry picking something we're not doing and claiming it can be done when it's not time or, often, should be done when they're the only ones who want them. (VERY anti- small-D democratic, and that's very typical.)
But all this means the notion that Democrats are so weak of character and principle that we need far left guidance to keep us from slipping right, or to do right, is ridiculous, a conceit they need for themselves and that claims a place in history that's not real and they haven't earned.
Yes, Ocasio-Cortez is talented and charming. I'm still waiting for her to decide if she actually wants a future as a legislator or to work in a movement from outside.
What we don't like is past associations with the people whose big "good idea" when a Democrat won the Democratic nomination was to throw the 2016 election to tRump and the Republicans and are still working to take out the Democratic Party that blocks their ambitions. Massive conceit, but they might possibly be able to throw the nation under the bus again if more people don't get smarter fast enough. Their major tool is the same as the Republicans' -- constant deceit narratives and character assassination of our party. There's something really wrong with those behaviors, from the days of their predecessors' passionate attempts to defeat our New Deal reforms up to today, in the background trying to make everything we do fail and up up front varying between vicious criticism to pretend approval. It's the same general kind of wrong that last century managed to fool many people into helping extreme populist revolutions get control of and bring down many nations.
Itm, getting to what set me off: That they routinely oppose and then claim credit for our choices and achievements as theirs, with the constant Big Lie that they "moved" us their direction. Given the nature of anti-Democratic/anti-democratic populism and authoritarian extremism, very fortunately for our nation that's not possible.
We've lost control of RW extremism, but we will at least block the far smaller but also aggressive LW extremists attempts to get power. Because we are far, far larger and more able than them, incredibly more responsible and principled, and because we have to. And of course we don't like or trust these people, whom OC is known to have once associated with and hopefully no longer does, because that would be stupid, and we're not stupid either.
walkingman
(10,254 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)brooklynite
(96,882 posts)She's had no consequential opposition in her two Primaries, and certainly no effort by "corporate Dems" to fund her opponents.
Response to brooklynite (Reply #10)
brooklynite This message was self-deleted by its author.
PatSeg
(51,941 posts)But I wasn't paying close attention to her primary race. It is possible she is being overly sensitive, because she has been criticized by some Democrats, but that comes with the territory and is part of the job.
Meanwhile, it seems like we have more important issues to address right now.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)PatSeg
(51,941 posts)That puts her comments in an interesting perspective.
Dorian Gray
(13,845 posts)Last edited Sat Sep 10, 2022, 07:40 AM - Edit history (1)
People don't like her bc she's agitating against her own team. It's frustrating for them. And she does it so publicly that she goes to people magazine for it.
I think AOC could be a super star. She has the personality for it. But this type of engagement will limit her ability to work with people well, and it'll damage her long term record.
comradebillyboy
(10,935 posts)or working with other Democrats to achieve her goals. I recall she had to get rid of her first chief of staff because he spent all his time slandering Democratic representatives as a bunch of racists.
Ocasio-Cortez denied that Chakrabarti’s recent resignation was related to his June 27 tweet comparing moderate Democrats to the southern segregationists of the early 20th century, but acknowledged that the rhetoric was unhelpful.
https://news.yahoo.com/aoc-criticizes-former-chief-staff-164627095.html
MrsCoffee
(5,825 posts)Except for the misogyny. I feel for all the women in Congress who have to deal with that shit.
But she literally decided to be part of a group who's whole purpose was to unseat Democrats. She sat on the board of the Justice Democrats PAC while they supported her campaign and while they promised to primary incumbent Democrats.
I just can't imagine why she thought there would be no consequences or hard feelings over her actions.
But yeah, let's pretend she just walked in like everyone else who was respectful of the job and the party.
walkingman
(10,254 posts)MrsCoffee
(5,825 posts)Not a fan of the unity task force brand of unity.
Demsrule86
(71,465 posts)empedocles
(15,751 posts)Beastly Boy
(13,283 posts)Much of AOC's style and ideology had been incompatible with building consensus, which is a fundamental part of governing in a representative democracy, It is only in her second term that she came to appreciate the value of compromise and matured as a politician, thus earning the respect of her colleagues (and my own, BTW). Hence the noted shift in how Democrats treat her.
Midnight Writer
(25,117 posts)She is young, smart, idealistic, and passionate. She will learn to be more effective as part of a deliberative body as she gains experience.
Just A Box Of Rain
(5,104 posts)Asked for a profile by New York Magazine about what role she might play as a member of Congress should Biden capture the White House, the freshman House Democrat from New York responded with a groan.
“Oh God,” she said. “In any other country, Joe Biden and I would not be in the same party, but in America, we are.”
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/06/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-joe-biden-not-same-party-094642
betsuni
(28,637 posts)ripcord
(5,553 posts)I find this to be a ridiculous exercise in self pity.
empedocles
(15,751 posts)We still desperately need manchin, et al.
Hope we don't have any 'Defund' type stunts before the Election
PatSeg
(51,941 posts)Republicans take stunts like that and use them for years. I still run across republicans who claim that Democrats want to "defund the police". Just heard it yesterday as a matter of fact, "Democrats want open borders and to defund the police". Setting the record straight gets redundant and exhausting, plus once the idea is fixed in voters' heads, it is hard to change it.
Good effective politics is an art and not for the careless and impulsive. Their words will linger in the atmosphere and be recycled for years to come. Some bells can't be unrung.
48656c6c6f20
(7,638 posts)I thought bashing democrats wasn't a thing?
Except those annoited ones?
Fiendish Thingy
(21,864 posts)Good for her, and ultimately, good for the Democratic Party.
I hope she remains in Congress, or other public service, for a long, long time.
question everything
(51,610 posts)cbabe
(6,109 posts)Demsrule86
(71,465 posts)PatSeg
(51,941 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)UNTIL the anti-Democratic left of various types begins, including anti-democracy, IL-liberal, authoritarian, extremist, etc. elements. (Even then, our broad party also includes some anti-Democrats for whom we're where it's at.)
If she feels distrusted by her colleagues who believe in the party's liberalism and progressivism, it's past time for her to wonder if she could be causing it. If she continues associations with anti-Democratic groups that her colleagues have very good reason to disrespect and distrust, she needs to accept that they will of course wish for a colleague committed to creating and passing progressive legislation with them in her place.
Her colleagues are mostly serious people who really believe in what they're managing to accomplish in spite of constant opposition. And of course they don't like those who fundraise by criticizing their efforts as inadequate and wrong to people who want to hear that.
What I hoped to see was that once she came to congress she would lose a lot of her early notions and find both that she admired what her Democratic colleagues were doing and that for legislators progressivism is all about ACHIEVING legislative advances to benefit the people.
PatSeg
(51,941 posts)Just A Box Of Rain
(5,104 posts)betsuni
(28,637 posts)
Nixie
(17,935 posts)
ProfessorGAC
(75,670 posts)Sympthsical
(10,829 posts)That'll rustle all the jimmies.
Kingofalldems
(40,012 posts)Sympthsical
(10,829 posts)Falling gently and inevitably to the grass.
Quite beautiful and poignant.
I've always enjoyed days growing shorter.
Nixie
(17,935 posts)Apparently we’re not to inject reality.
Arazi
(8,678 posts)Sympthsical
(10,829 posts)And lawns were vigorously checked.
Arazi
(8,678 posts)When I moved onto an old estate in transition after the owners died and legal wrangling ensued.
He was abandoned in the extensive kennels and fed by a sympathetic gardener until I moved there and freed him.
A loyal loving dog except when the meter reader showed up and he lost his shit. There was no re-training, nothing I could do to keep him from losing his mind once he saw that car pull in and the guy got out to check the meter. He better sprint back to his car and hope the dog didn’t catch him first.
Some attack dog behaviors just can’t be overcome.
RIP Shadow
betsuni
(28,637 posts)Sympthsical
(10,829 posts)Particularly when the progressive ones have something to say.
It seems some -ahem- are rather conditional in this sentiment.
Ahem.
Kingofalldems
(40,012 posts)Novara
(6,115 posts)It does you and the Democratic party NO GOOD.
Nixie
(17,935 posts)Her main accomplishment was unseating a Democrat in her district.
Then she’s part of the crowd openly trying to unseat Democrats in primaries across the country.
Oh. The irony.
Response to 867-5309. (Original post)
Post removed
Kingofalldems
(40,012 posts)honest.abe
(9,238 posts)Any Democrat can run against you and any Democrat can support that person.
Furthermore there doesn't appear to be anyone attempting to unseat her. She ran unopposed in the last primary. What's even more ridiculous is that she is one who has been trying to unseat Democrats in many parts of the country.
Her comments make no sense whatsoever.
AntivaxHunters
(3,234 posts)
Celerity
(53,524 posts)Wrestlefire769
(84 posts)But I do believe there has been significant right-wing infiltration of the Democratic Party -- far more than the other way around.
mvd
(65,825 posts)The party is mostly good on social issues but on economic issues sometimes needs pushback.
Wrestlefire769
(84 posts)LudwigPastorius
(14,036 posts)And, if she doesn't want to be considered with suspicion, maybe she shouldn't vote "no" on stuff like the president's infrastructure bill.