General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMSM: "AOC is just a left wing kook we can't take seriously, while
Erika Kirk is the voice of a generation."
Makes you want to scream!
SocialDemocrat61
(7,187 posts)
anciano
(2,221 posts)Intractable
(1,753 posts)Really fine.
I think that's one of the reasons republican men hate her so much. They can't have her!
SocialDemocrat61
(7,187 posts)They fear strong intelligent women who they can't control and dominate.
llmart
(17,460 posts)Trump especially is terrified of strong, intelligent dark-skinned women.
Men with low self-esteem can't stand it if a woman is not intimidated by them.
BidenRocks
(2,944 posts)why do so many strive for that dark tan?
They should look like Geishas. Cloud Dancer would work.
(Remember the 'color of the year?')
InAbLuEsTaTe
(25,516 posts)Oneironaut
(6,245 posts)And, I totally agree! We can only hope she will pick up where Bernie left off and continue to bring wonderful things in the future.
mvd
(65,865 posts)AOC is smart, progressive, and strong. Those traits add a whole lot to her good looks.
"Beautiful" is always a package deal.
HappyH
(192 posts)Mister Ed
(6,871 posts)She's the real deal. I wish we could clone her.
Wanderlust988
(753 posts)There is nothing about AOC that shows she can control the whole Democratic Party. She has support on the coasts and urban areas, but that's it. She wouldn't come close to winning a South Carolina primary.
MadameButterfly
(3,865 posts)She could become Speaker of the House, or a Leader of the Senate.
I could see her as the next generation's Nancy Pelosi.
But she is young, who knows where the country will be 20 years from now. After the pendulum swings back from Trump.
After 20 more years of strong women in politics. Did we foresee Barack Obama 20 years before he became president?
Frankly, she will have to be a little less beautiful and much more experienced to overcome the mysogeny, before she will be taken seriously enough to have a shot at the presidency.
As for South Carolina: that was put there to make sure no Progressive gets though a primary run. Enfranchising Black people was just an excuse to make it hard to undo. That needs to be fixed, or the Democratic Party is toast. Our candidates can't be chosen by one of the most conservative states in the country (nor should they be chosen by the most Progressive states either). We need to go back to starting with moderate states, small enough to really meet the candidates, then move on to states with prominant Black populations that are also swing states like Michigan, Virginia, Georgia, and North Carolina.
I was fine with Iowa. A one time technology glitch is irrelevant. Yes it's mostly White, but it gave us Obama. It also gave us a tie between Bernie and Buttigieg, which is the real reason Iowa was removed.
Wanderlust988
(753 posts)He just wasn't a flame thrower, which is what you want. The black voters need to be there early cause they're not dreamers. They are clear-eyed and want someone that can win. All you folks clamoring for an AOC/Buttigieg ticket are so ridiculous. Although lovely people, they would only win a handful of states, if that. That's why we need South Carolina.
MadameButterfly
(3,865 posts)based on race.
I want the nominee chosen by moderate states, not states on either extreme of the spectrum. People of color should be included, but we have done this by giving arguably our most conservative state veto power before the primaries ever get going. South Carolina Democrats identify as Conservative. That is not typical of the Democratic Party as a whole. If you want Black voters, they can be found in moderate states. Virginia, North Carolina, Michigan, Georgia.
I'm happy to have moderate candidates, I'm interested in winning the general election too. But said moderate candidates should have the campaigning skills to win a moderate state like Iowa. Iowa is not full of wild-eyed radicals but they do show up at town halls and find out first hand the candidates' ability to deliver their message. This vetting has served us in the general election for years. Our candidates should be able to handle the close examination in person that voters give them in Iowa and New Hampshire. i'm not suggesting we make Massachussetts or California our litmus test.
Response to MadameButterfly (Reply #70)
Post removed
betsuni
(28,891 posts)MadameButterfly
(3,865 posts)Georgia, North Carolina, and Virginia. The only non-Southern state I suggested considering was Michigan.
While you specifically cite Georgia's role in recent elections, you choose not to notice that I specifically mentioned Georgia as a better early state than South Carolina. I come from Virginia and was very involved in the Democratic party while it was a red state most of my life. Can we have this discussion without you calling me elite, anti-Southern, and disgusting?
We can consider race and region without skewing the results toward one or the other political extreme within the party.
First you tell me I'm excluding Blacks. Then you tell me I'm excluding Southerners. These are the kinds of arguments that keep us from debating the real issue: how to have the best candidates that truly represent the majority of the party.
reACTIONary
(7,057 posts).... not the Democratic majority. The underground is a bit more enthusiastic than the majority.
SocialDemocrat61
(7,187 posts)As Harry Truman said, If it's a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat, and I don't want any phony Democratic candidates in this campaign."
DallasNE
(7,984 posts)America wasn't ready for Hillary Clinton or Kamala Harris, and both times went for convicted felon Donald Trump. AOC would face the same hurdle as a woman. The problem isn't policy. It is prejudice. Harris clobbered Trump in the debate, but that test of competency didn't matter.
Buckeyeblue
(6,280 posts)It's ironic that she has three Ks in her name. Because that's really the type of hate she spews.
edhopper
(37,171 posts)SocialDemocrat61
(7,187 posts)
Honestly, I feel bad for Mr. Met here.
Javaman
(65,415 posts)Shes milking the feel sorry for me angle for all its worth.
And shes hitching her cart to the couchfucker.
This wont end well for her
Deuxcents
(26,023 posts)edhopper
(37,171 posts)the Press coverage?
murielm99
(32,822 posts)gab13by13
(31,625 posts)Bondi/Blanche cover up of the Epstein files.
What happened yesterday was a crime, a release of worthless files, heavily redacted files.
Magats fear people like AOC so she must be attacked.
SunImp
(2,654 posts)There's a few snakes on our side that love taking digs at her any chance they can get. If you look closely you'll see some of her haters
Amaryllis
(11,113 posts)edhopper
(37,171 posts)everywhere.
LymphocyteLover
(9,557 posts)what news sources do you take in?
ificandream
(11,763 posts)Links, please. And more than one.
The thread is waiting ....
obamanut2012
(29,246 posts)Trust_Reality
(2,280 posts)ToxMarz
(2,800 posts)Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's net worth is estimated to be approximately $49,000 as of November 2025, with some estimates ranging up to around $125,000 including her retirement savings. She is considered one of the least wealthy members of the U.S. Congress.
Compared to MTG:
Commonly cited figure Multiple media outlets and financial tracking sites initially reported her net worth as approximately $700,000 at the time she took office.
Since joining Congress, her net worth has reportedly increased significantly to an estimated $22 to $25 million as of late 2025. This increase has drawn scrutiny and led to allegations of insider trading, which Greene has denied, attributing the gains to her financial advisor and existing private investments.
According to Yahoo, Erika Kirk has an estimated net worth of about $2 million, which comes from her business, real estate, and podcasting endeavors. Following the passing of Charlie Kirk, whose net worth was close to $12 million, her entire wealth is anticipated to increase to about $14 million.
edhopper
(37,171 posts)to see what I am really saying.
ToxMarz
(2,800 posts)I meant the general you. I should have been clearer and said "Regarless of whether anyone thinks she's a kook". Meaning even those who might should be able to see the glaring contrast
I get you now.
Just that a few replies asked me to cite the actual Media outlet this quote is from. So I was in defense mode.
Cheezoholic
(3,577 posts)ToxMarz
(2,800 posts)I meant the general you. I should have been clearer and said "Regarless of whether anyone thinks she's a kook". Meaning even those who might should be able to see the glaring contrast
milestogo
(22,796 posts)She is the voice of crazy people.
MorbidButterflyTat
(4,297 posts)the voice of a generation of crazy people?
Raven123
(7,651 posts)ificandream
(11,763 posts)Scrivener7
(58,883 posts)Sometimes the message sent by the totality of the news with respect to a specific story sends a very clear message. This is one of those times, and I find the OP to be an accurate description of that message.
edhopper
(37,171 posts)But some people don't get the gist and are literalist.
Scrivener7
(58,883 posts)Really, this kind of OP is posted all the time here. Can't figure why this one has created such bizarre anger.
it is strange. I mean, if they think I am posting a real quote, sure,, ask where it is from.
But I thought it was obviously a opinion about the state of the Media.
LymphocyteLover
(9,557 posts)Scrivener7
(58,883 posts)live love laugh
(16,262 posts)LymphocyteLover
(9,557 posts)TexLaProgressive
(12,703 posts)Response to edhopper (Original post)
Post removed
Cheezoholic
(3,577 posts)Not all of M$M media implies this but a lot of them DO infer or outright say (Faux, Newslaxx etc) that AOC is crazy. Bari Weiss has yet to give a "town hall" to AOC on the "new" CBS. The argument being made by the OP is that much of M$M is trying to elevate Kirk as a leader of the younger MAGAt (splintered and crazy) repuke movement and giving her cred's by implying AOC is the same for the left but that AOC is the one who is "crazy". I see and read the unfair biased that OP speaks of every day. Many times it is very (intentionally) subtle. The intention of the OP was to rant that ANYONE who thinks Kirk is some magnanimous earth moving leader now that her husband is dead is crazy and that anyone who thinks AOC is crazy is even crazier!
The right is milking this Kirk shit for everything they can and its blowing up in their faces.
ificandream
(11,763 posts)But he posted one flimsy "quote" with no sources. Not a one. That's not a quote. It's a figment of someone's imagination.
And one could read the bare sentence easily argue that it was a right-wing troll. Either way it was dumb.
And the MSM is not trying to elevate Kirk as anything. They are giving her news coverage. Unfortunately for all of us, she is a newsmaker at this point in time. I don't think her fame and glory will last more than a short time. Sure, the right-wing clowns at Fox and their friends will continue to speak of her, but you will see far less of her elsewhere than you are now.
Scrivener7
(58,883 posts)of these two women. That kind of thing is posted here all the time.
You keep calling edhopper a troll for no reason. That's really nasty. Why are you doing that?
edhopper
(37,171 posts)Scrivener7
(58,883 posts)edhopper
(37,171 posts)that my OP was not an actual quote, but an editorial comment aimed at the Media.
Traildogbob
(12,726 posts)Hate the fact she is so beautiful in RED. Thats their team color. She is hijacking it, like they did the American flag. And she is so damn smart, another attribute the RED KKKlan have not a shred of. They have made Red the color of stupid.
AOC is showing Red is not Dead.
Their Babe and focal point MTG, has turned sour on them. They still got the theater pole pumper, with squeeze boxes, Boobert and her bright red lip paint with a passion for poles that go boom and kill people. Lots of children.
AOC is a force. And media hate it.
Cha
(317,720 posts)AOC is DEI and Democracy.
So Fuck Off M$M as they have in my world since November 2002.
Evolve Dammit
(21,611 posts)Buddyzbuddy
(2,318 posts)She's willing to shake things up while the old guard doesn't support her for leadership positions. I won't name names but I'm sure you have an idea. It's like the Harper Valley P.T.A.. "Can't" is not part of her vocabulary and that's my kind of politician.
edhopper
(37,171 posts)GiqueCee
(3,622 posts)... that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a "kook" ARE the kooks, who offer nothing of substance or value to ANY conversation. Fuck 'em all. They, and their verbal vomit, disgust me.
Indyfan53
(517 posts)The billionaires who benefited from Orange fuck want to controll the narrative so the dumbfuck masses keep voting Republican
reACTIONary
(7,057 posts).... a bit more specific? Maybe provide at least one quote? Maybe even a large number of such quotes, if you want to impune an entire institution.
edhopper
(37,171 posts)They are doing a good job of that themselves.
reACTIONary
(7,057 posts).... called AOC a left wing kook?
Was this an opinion piece, or an actual news article?
edhopper
(37,171 posts)is saying. It's not a direct quote, it's an editorial comment.
If you read many of the replies, you will see that others understood and explained it.
Hope that helps.
reACTIONary
(7,057 posts)... should be based in factual reality and provide some evidence of that reality.
As an example of the characterization of AOC that I see in the main stream media, here is a WaPo article about her from right after she was elected. It characterizes her, and also explores why "the main stream media" struggles to characterize her. No paywall, but you might have to register your email.
Why the media world cant make sense of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: The congressional newcomer doesnt fit neatly into a preexisting mold.
This article makes so many good points that it is hard to select from them and keep within the four paragraph quote limit. Here is a sample:
Whatever it was that was needed in that crucial moment, they lacked: Spunk. Passion. Vitality. A few minutes later, Ocasio-Cortez made her first appearance with Rachel Maddow on MSNBC, and exhibited precisely those qualities. She practically jumped off the screen into the nations living rooms.
Here is another example covering her personal account of her experiences during the Jan 6 insurrection:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez shared her personal story and revealed our collective trauma.
She began at the end and then she circled back to the beginning as a dramatist might. She recalled seeing the warning signs of what was to come of encountering demonstrators earlier that week when she left the Capitol after a vote and headed for her car. Her heart was pounding when she saw their Trump signs attached to their sharp flagpoles, but she still engaged with them. I like to think Im disarming, she said as she laughed.
I read, and support, the "main stream media." What I see is factual and respectful reporting concerning AOC.
lonely bird
(2,822 posts)The corporatist media seeks one thing: profit.
The easiest path for that was/is kowtowing to the Apricot Appeaser and his simplistic base. As long as they get clicks they do not care. Oh, sure, every once in a while they commit a journalism as Jeff Tiederich says but for the most part they play bothsidesism. In the case of AOC they, imo, intentionally played her up as some wild-eyed bomb-throwing Anarchist.
What actually has happened with AOC, again imo, is that she has grown in her office. She comes across as a formidable politician. Even though her thoughts and ideas were good for her district and resulted in her election she has expanded beyond that in a very real and impressive way.
Mme. Defarge
(8,935 posts)on their team because he recognized her powerful presence and her blue collar appeal as a former bartender?
marble falls
(71,398 posts)JBTaurus83
(996 posts)Of anyone talking about Erika Kirk. What a joke. She reminds me of the protagonist in Handmaids Tale.
marble falls
(71,398 posts)Initech
(107,980 posts)I'm going to throw my TV out of the window!
