Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

[jimmyjazz 45,554]

2 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

I hear you and agree. We should just let them fight.

I'm just lamenting generally I guess, about how we have the most obvious and unifying event since 9/11

Wait, what?  Are we still talking about GME?

[DonkeyCigars 144]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

Wait, what?  Are we still talking about GME?

Robinhood's malfeasance, so yea, tangentially. My point is there hasn't been much that has been overwhelmingly agreed upon or rallied around that crosses so deeply across both aisles and into some fringes of both sides then "my right to try and get rich stonking and don't screw me over for teh big billionaire HF" since 9/11.

Edited January 29, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[henrygandorf 29,174]

6 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

What is the forward pass metaphor you speak of?

I thought the meme above you was pretty encapsulating of the whole tiff. They both agree on something but TC overstepped on social media to someone who isn't okay with him and she said I don't want to hear it from you and attacked with and, while you are here and I am responding to you, "oh by the way "previous political fight not forgotten and brought back up"

Completely her right to not want to look aligned with TC and politically makes even more sense, but that doesn't mean they (and everyone they speak for and represent) are divided on this issue. That's levitation, holmes. That's unity, brother.

this whole conversation obviously belongs in a different thread.  there are about 10 threads better suited than this one, but here we are.

the gop has been running on fear tactics forever, because they understand how the american voter works.  the dems run on ideas, many of which are not only great, but immensely popular, but they lose because they don't understand how the american voter works.

as it's been said multiple times, certain members of the democratic party are showing a spine and fighting back, which has caused some republicans to be like "whoa whoa, we just want unity and stuff."  it's bullshit.  dems are taking a page out of the gop playbook and now the gop is crying foul.  meanwhile, many on the left who are sick of the pelosi and schumer types sitting idly by are rightfully, and finally, excited about it.

the gop overachieved at the ballot box last november because they ran on fear.  the left are socialist communists and they're coming to take your stuff like guns and freedoms and dismantle (defund) the police.  that's why trump was so worried about biden - he knew he was more difficult to paint with that same brush.  bernie, warren, sure, no problem.  but biden is a bland vanilla moderate centrist, and many saw through the bullshit.  still, the gop did very well at the state and local levels because of fear.  same as it ever was.  trump overachieved as well, but he just fucking sucked so bad that it didn't matter.

ted cruz is not a normal gop clown.  he's a gop clown who helped spur on the capitol siege by objecting to the election, and then continuing the process even after they reconvened.  even the nutbag ex-senator loeffler changed her mind after that shit.  he also likes to mix it up on twitter with politics and anyone else (see rogen, seth) and often embarrasses himself in the process.

many people see him and hawley as a stain on the us government and want them removed, not just censured or slapped on the wrist.  like i said, he's not just a run-of-the-mill gop senate troll like cornyn or cotton or a number of others.  he's been part of the problem for a long time, and now it's worse.  so yeah, when he piles on with aoc and rails against billion dollar hedge funds, she's not just gonna turn around and say, "hey bud, too soon."  he deserved a fuck off and that's what he got.

[RomaVicta 29,781]

3 hours ago, Clintonaldo said:

Am I allowed to not like AOC or Trump or Cruz or do I have to pick a side?

One of those is not like the other two. You can dislike whomever you like, but that doesn't make them all the same.

[Dahobbs 17,444]

41 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

I understand the concept of counter attack.  It just isn't relevant unless someone is overly sensitive about discussions about their tribe and wants to haggle.

No one said she wasn't serious about policy. Again, policies and method of politik are not the same. 

Uh... you did that!

5 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

The right will always have their boogeymen.  That isn't AOC's problem.  Her issue is that she has embraced the role of being the attack dog for the left.  Her method is division, confrontation, and twitter clap-backs.  Folks are tired of twitter clap-backs and tribalism.  I'm not saying the left shouldn't have attack dogs.  The right has them in the Gym Jordan's and Tucker Carlson's of the world.  Attack dogs have their purpose and it is possible they have a positive influence on meaningful things.  Folks are just tired of divisive politics. We all lived through Trump.  The worshiping of AOC seems to be a promotion of trumpist style politics by the left - the style of attacking the "others" rather than solving problems, passing legislation, and promotion of policies, ideas, values - the things that we should admire in our elected representatives - not twitter clap-backs.  

Seriously, do you even read the shit you write? I'm pretty sure you have me on ignore for some reason that I can't fathom. You seem incapable of actually engaging this discussion honestly, and instead insist everyone accept your absurd positions as fact. 

[jimmyjazz 45,554]

7 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Robinhood's malfeasance, so yea, tangentially. My point is there hasn't been much that has been overwhelmingly agreed upon or rallied around that crosses so deeply across both aisles and into some fringes of both sides then "my right to try and get rich stonking and don't screw me over for teh big billionaire HF" since 9/11.

Man, I don't know.  MAYBE it's the biggest unity-point since 9/11, but we're kinda ignoring the most OBVIOUS unity-point since 9/11:  the coronavirus.

If we have to define kum bay ya as "whatever bullshit issue the Republicans actually finally give a damn about", well, OK but it doesn't mean much to me.  Robinhood is small potatoes, they fucked up, hopefully they pay by seeing investors flee.  It's not a systemic problem per se.  I mean, funds VS Joe Blow has systemic concerns (high frequency, etc.) but this doesn't seem like anything near the scope of 9/11.

[GW Hayduke 1,952]

Just now, Dahobbs said:

Uh... you did that!

Seriously, do you even read the shit you write? I'm pretty sure you have me on ignore for some reason that I can't fathom. You seem incapable of actually engaging this discussion honestly, and instead insist everyone accept your absurd positions as fact. 

And those two sentences are not in conflict.  

 

[GW Hayduke 1,952]

4 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Uh... you did that!

Seriously, do you even read the shit you write? I'm pretty sure you have me on ignore for some reason that I can't fathom. You seem incapable of actually engaging this discussion honestly, and instead insist everyone accept your absurd positions as fact. 

I mean, you've got brisket on here promoting the use of attack-based politics - since that is what the other side does and (per him) that it is needed in order to win - as long we qualify that those attacks are actually defensive (per him).  You should look closely at what he is saying and then look closely at what I am  saying.

[Dahobbs 17,444]

8 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

And those two sentences are not in conflict.  

 

Of course they are. Let's put them side-by-side:

1. AOC is serious about policy.
2. AOC prefers to attack others rather than solving problems, passing legislation, and promoting policies, ideas, values.

You see no conflict there? Seriously? 

Edited January 29, 2021 by Dahobbs

[RomaVicta 29,781]

3 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

I mean, you've got brisket on here promoting the use of attack-based politics - since that is what the other side does and (per him) that it is needed in order to win - as long we qualify that those attacks are actually defensive (per him).  You should look closely at what he is saying and then look closely at what I am  saying.

AOC is the equivalent of Carlson. Now, you're the equivalent of Brisket whom you misrepresent over and over again.

Your equivalency monitor is really out of whack.

[Dahobbs 17,444]

2 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

I mean, you've got brisket on here promoting the use of attack-based politics - since that is what the other side does and (per him) that it is needed in order to win - as long we qualify that those attacks are actually defensive (per him).  You should look closely at what he is saying and then look closely at what I am  saying.

I think you're intending to say something different than you are actually saying. What you are saying is simply inconsistent nonsense. You're making the broadest generalizations that twist language beyond its natural usage, then getting defensive when people suggest that maybe your generalizations aren't very accurate. 

[GW Hayduke 1,952]

Just now, Dahobbs said:

Of course they are. Let's put them side-by-side:

1. AOC is serious about policy.
2. AOC prefers to attack others rather than solving problems, passing legislation, and promotion of policies, ideas, values.

You see no conflict there? Seriously? 

No need to strawman bro.  We can have an adult discussion.  Policies and method of politik are not the same.  My sentence was "the worshiping of AOC seems to be a promotion of trumpist style of politics by the left...."  The rest of the sentence was an accurate an accurate description of trumpism, IMO.

3 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

AOC is the equivalent of Carlson. Now, you're the equivalent of Brisket whom you misrepresent over and over again.

Your equivalency monitor is really out of whack.

My position is that they are both attack dogs for their side.  That doesn't mean they are equivalent - but equivalent in that role and how they fit in the current game of trumpian attack-style politics. Are they each more than that? Sure. Of course. Some were upset with the use of attack dog and brisket prefers a shepherd with other qualifiers.

 

[Dahobbs 17,444]

1 minute ago, GW Hayduke said:

No need to strawman bro.  We can have an adult discussion.  Policies and method of politik are not the same.  My sentence was "the worshiping of AOC seems to be a promotion of trumpist style of politics by the left...."  The rest of the sentence was an accurate an accurate description of trumpism, IMO.

My position is that they are both attack dogs for their side.  That doesn't mean they are equivalent - but equivalent in that role and how they fit in the current game of trumpian attack-style politics. Are they each more than that? Sure. Of course. Some were upset with the use of attack dog and brisket prefers a shepherd with other qualifiers.

 

Strawman? Seriously, it was the same fucking sentence. The thoughts were connected. And if they weren't supposed to be, that is on you. You said the worship of AOC is because it is like the Trumpian style politics. Now you're telling us that you didn't really mean that AOC engaged in the very thing you described? Also, AOC is an attack dog, but not equivalent to an attack dog? What the fuck does that even mean? Seriously, you either suck at communicating ideas or suck at having them. Maybe both. 

[DonkeyCigars 144]

31 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Man, I don't know.  MAYBE it's the biggest unity-point since 9/11, but we're kinda ignoring the most OBVIOUS unity-point since 9/11:  the coronavirus.

If we have to define kum bay ya as "whatever bullshit issue the Republicans actually finally give a damn about", well, OK but it doesn't mean much to me.  Robinhood is small potatoes, they fucked up, hopefully they pay by seeing investors flee.  It's not a systemic problem per se.  I mean, funds VS Joe Blow has systemic concerns (high frequency, etc.) but this doesn't seem like anything near the scope of 9/11.

I'm defining the unity around the event as black-and-white agree that A should be A and B should do B. Karen Republican and Joe Democrat agree. Qanon nazi weirdo and antifa occupy wall st. agree. BLM and rural GOP agree. Celebrity CEO's, big tech, retail investors, all agree. The only ones who don't agree are the very, very minority R and D coalition known as billionaire money managers.

Coronavirus is so splintered; wearing masks, open schools, let restaurants open, work from home, how much free money we should get, who gets vaccines, etc. etc. etc. that I don't see it as a unifying event at all.

If anything it has divided the country even more even as it's happened to all of us at the same time.

Edited January 29, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[GW Hayduke 1,952]

Just now, Dahobbs said:

Strawman? Seriously, it was the same fucking sentence. The thoughts were connected. And if they weren't supposed to be, that is on you. You said the worship of AOC is because it is like the Trumpian style politics. Now you're telling us that you didn't really mean that AOC engaged in the very thing you described? Also, AOC is an attack dog, but not equivalent to an attack dog? What the fuck does that even mean? Seriously, you either suck at communicating ideas or suck at having them. Maybe both. 

Yes. It is my fault you didn't understand the sentence.  I'll do better next time. 

Quote

You said the worship of AOC is because it is like the Trumpian style politics. Now you're telling us that you didn't really mean that AOC engaged in the very thing you described? Also, AOC is an attack dog, but not equivalent to an attack dog?

I never said any of that.  Reading is hard.

 

 

[jimmyjazz 45,554]

2 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

I'm defining the unity around the event as black-and-white agree that A should be A and B should do B. Karen Republican and Joe Democrat agree. Qanon nazi weirdo and antifa occupy wall st. agree. BLM and rural GOP agree. Celebrity CEO's, big tech, retail investors, all agree. The only ones who don't agree are the very, very minority R and D coalition known as billionaire money managers.

Coronavirus is so splintered; wearing masks, open schools, let restaurants open, work from home, how much free money we should get, who gets vaccines, etc. etc. etc.

I get your point, I just think it shows how utterly shitty the 'pubs have been for awhile now.  I mean, if this is the point where the two sides finally align, for fuck's sake.

[DonkeyCigars 144]

43 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

this whole conversation obviously belongs in a different thread.  there are about 10 threads better suited than this one, but here we are.

the gop has been running on fear tactics forever, because they understand how the american voter works.  the dems run on ideas, many of which are not only great, but immensely popular, but they lose because they don't understand how the american voter works.

as it's been said multiple times, certain members of the democratic party are showing a spine and fighting back, which has caused some republicans to be like "whoa whoa, we just want unity and stuff."  it's bullshit.  dems are taking a page out of the gop playbook and now the gop is crying foul.  meanwhile, many on the left who are sick of the pelosi and schumer types sitting idly by are rightfully, and finally, excited about it.

the gop overachieved at the ballot box last november because they ran on fear.  the left are socialist communists and they're coming to take your stuff like guns and freedoms and dismantle (defund) the police.  that's why trump was so worried about biden - he knew he was more difficult to paint with that same brush.  bernie, warren, sure, no problem.  but biden is a bland vanilla moderate centrist, and many saw through the bullshit.  still, the gop did very well at the state and local levels because of fear.  same as it ever was.  trump overachieved as well, but he just fucking sucked so bad that it didn't matter.

ted cruz is not a normal gop clown.  he's a gop clown who helped spur on the capitol siege by objecting to the election, and then continuing the process even after they reconvened.  even the nutbag ex-senator loeffler changed her mind after that shit.  he also likes to mix it up on twitter with politics and anyone else (see rogen, seth) and often embarrasses himself in the process.

many people see him and hawley as a stain on the us government and want them removed, not just censured or slapped on the wrist.  like i said, he's not just a run-of-the-mill gop senate troll like cornyn or cotton or a number of others.  he's been part of the problem for a long time, and now it's worse.  so yeah, when he piles on with aoc and rails against billion dollar hedge funds, she's not just gonna turn around and say, "hey bud, too soon."  he deserved a fuck off and that's what he got.

That all sounds reasonable and good. What were we disagreeing about again?

[WhatTheBuck 28,708]

2 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

No need to strawman bro.  We can have an adult discussion.  Policies and method of politik are not the same.  My sentence was "the worshiping of AOC seems to be a promotion of trumpist style of politics by the left...."  The rest of the sentence was an accurate an accurate description of trumpism, IMO.

My position is that they are both attack dogs for their side.  That doesn't mean they are equivalent - but equivalent in that role and how they fit in the current game of trumpian attack-style politics. Are they each more than that? Sure. Of course. Some were upset with the use of attack dog and brisket prefers a shepherd with other qualifiers.

“Strawman” doesn’t mean what you think it means. 

[henrygandorf 29,174]

2 hours ago, DonkeyCigars said:

That all sounds reasonable and good. What were we disagreeing about again?

if that all sounds reasonable to you, then not a thing.

[Dahobbs 17,444]

2 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

Yes. It is my fault you didn't understand the sentence.  I'll do better next time. 

Yes, it is your fault if you're claiming that you said something other than what I described. I'm sorry you don't know how to describe whatever you're thinking or that you don't have a clear idea of what you're trying to say (more likely in my view). Stop getting angry at others because of your lack of clarity. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13,049]

Well that was a hot mess of a page. All I have to say is Ted Cruz doesn't get to decide when and if he is 'forgiven' for his egregious behavior and if he wanted a rapprochement for the benefit of American citizens he should have picked up the phone.....and called. In private.

 

[wildcat09 29,233]

5 hours ago, DonkeyCigars said:

I hear you and agree. We should just let them fight.

I'm just lamenting generally I guess, about how we have the most obvious and unifying event since 9/11 and it's going to be squandered because the well is too poisoned. But the reality is the reality and I'm being anachronistic by romancing a past that the internet has obliterated and will never be a political reality again, short of bloody revolution, it seems.

Anyways, AoC is cool. I think Ted Cruz is funny and glad he's doing his thing. Let them fight it out on twitter. Gives us something to discuss and distract ourselves with and props up the general mainstream media jobs that are probably not long for this world.

We're not making common cause with fascists. They only pretend to want to reduce the power of the wealthiest as a way of gaining political power, so they can kill us.

No platform for fascists, only pavement.

[BradInATX 9,208]

@GW Hayduke the issue with the equivocation you're trying to make is the fact that you're equating an "attack dog" who aggressively pushes policies and calls out the corruption of the other side with "attack dogs" who gaslight, lie, cheat, and solicit their followers to commit murder and Treason.

They are not the same thing. At all.

[DonkeyCigars 144]

2 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

We're not making common cause with fascists. They only pretend to want to reduce the power of the wealthiest as a way of gaining political power, so they can kill us.

No platform for fascists, only pavement.

Ok cool hook em. Onward and upward to you and all!

[washparkhorn 9,935]

2 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

No platform for fascists

tip of the mug to you 

 

[TXSG8R 3,360]

16 hours ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Robinhood's malfeasance, so yea, tangentially. My point is there hasn't been much that has been overwhelmingly agreed upon or rallied around that crosses so deeply across both aisles and into some fringes of both sides then "my right to try and get rich stonking and don't screw me over for teh big billionaire HF" since 9/11.

It’s funny that you think there’s any significant portion of the right agreeing with the left about rich people getting screwed. Ted agrees with anything that’s trending on Twitter, because he likes to frame himself as a populist. He even said something supporting unions in one of his snarky replies to AOC.  He will talk out of both sides of his mouth when it comes to actual legislation though, and fall back on blaming someone else for not being able to help the little guy. 

[GW Hayduke 1,952]

11 hours ago, BradInATX said:

@GW Hayduke the issue with the equivocation you're trying to make is the fact that you're equating an "attack dog" who aggressively pushes policies and calls out the corruption of the other side with "attack dogs" who gaslight, lie, cheat, and solicit their followers to commit murder and Treason.

They are not the same thing. At all.

So you agree they are both attack dogs for their side. That is the point. Your qualification is that they have different method of attacking the other side. I’m not arguing against that, just like I’m not arguing against brisket’s qualification that her attacks are only “defensive.”

[TXSG8R 3,360]

12 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

So you agree they are both attack dogs for their side. That is the point. Your qualification is that they have different method of attacking the other side. I’m not arguing against that, just like I’m not arguing against brisket’s qualification that her attacks are only “defensive.”

I guess I just don’t see the comparison to a real attack dog like Matt Gaetz or Gym Jordan. I don’t see AOC on prime time shows blowing bullshit party positions. I don’t see AOC making the rounds on the Sunday morning shows hammering the other party. Has she taken some shots at Trump, Cruz, Or Hawley unprovoked?  Yes, but it’s also usually following some serious shit that impacts her or the country at large. I think Ted Lieu and Adam Schiff are more attack dogs for the left than AOC is. 

[Biff Tannen 45,492]

27 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

So you agree they are both attack dogs for their side. That is the point. Your qualification is that they have different method of attacking the other side. I’m not arguing against that, just like I’m not arguing against brisket’s qualification that her attacks are only “defensive.”

One method is using truth, the other is using lies. This isn’t difficult. 

[GW Hayduke 1,952]

2 minutes ago, TXSG8R said:

I guess I just don’t see the comparison to a real attack dog like Matt Gaetz or Gym Jordan. I don’t see AOC on prime time shows blowing bullshit party positions. I don’t see AOC making the rounds on the Sunday morning shows hammering the other party. Has she taken some shots at Trump, Cruz, Or Hawley unprovoked?  Yes, but it’s also usually following some serious shit that impacts her or the country at large. I think Ted Lieu and Adam Schiff are more attack dogs for the left than AOC is. 

Don’t let brisket know that she attacks unprovoked. 

I agree Schiff was an attack dog during the first impeachment.  Lieu is rather similar to AOC in my opinion as they both seem to operate heavily through twitter.

[immamac 42,516]

@GW Hayduke you need to stop provoking posters and actually respond to them or you are gonna be out of the thread. 

[GW Hayduke 1,952]

17 minutes ago, immamac said:

@GW Hayduke you need to stop provoking posters and actually respond to them or you are gonna be out of the thread. 

Are you serious?

What serious comment have I not responded to?

My position from the beginning is that the worshiping of AOC seems to be a promotion of trumpist style politics that is based on tribalism and attacking the “others” and that that type of politics has costs. 

Different folks introduced their own qualifications. As I have stated, I don’t disagree with any of them.

I was initially labeled as an other or trumpkin by multiple posters - evidence in my mind of the tribalism that surrounds AOC. Bernie had it too.

I’ll leave it at that and stop responding since the mods seem to have an issue with something

[DDD Dad 14,251]

Are you serious?
What serious comment have I not responded to?
My position from the beginning is that the worshiping of AOC seems to be a promotion of trumpist style politics that is based on tribalism and attacking the “others” and that that type of politics has costs. 
Different folks introduced their own qualifications. As I have stated, I don’t disagree with any of them.
I was initially labeled as an other or trumpkin by multiple posters - evidence in my mind of the tribalism that surrounds AOC. Bernie had it too.
I’ll leave it at that and stop responding since the mods seem to have an issue with something

Shit posting typically provokes the mods. Just saying.....

[Celery Man 20,883]

You came into a conversation where people were liking a thing that AOC said wanting to talk about the tribalism of aoc by calling her an attack dog. However the context for you to make that argument was horrible since literally the reason she was posterizing Ted Cruz is because he actually sent a literal attack mob to literally attack her. Also you are confusing "people liking AOC curb stomping the anti democracy mob ringleader on twitter" with "people worshiping AOC", which isn't really what is happening here (it may actually be happening a lot more in the totally not trumpy or echo chambery places that are molding your thoughts about AOC). Since you said you won't respond anymore I won't get any further into the ridiculousness of the apparent onus placing for healing. Chemo is destructive but you don't just embrace the cancer to heal. Or the ridiculous "both sides" argument you seem to be making here regarding Jim Jordan or whatever the fuck, which is asinine and people are tired of it.

[Bullneck 18,987]

1 hour ago, GW Hayduke said:

Don’t let brisket know that she attacks unprovoked. 

I agree Schiff was an attack dog  impeachment manager during the first impeachment.  Lieu is rather similar to AOC in my opinion as they both seem to operate heavily through twitter.

Let me know when you think you understand the difference between right and wrong, as opposed to "us v. them."

[GW Hayduke 1,952]

21 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

Or the ridiculous "both sides" argument you seem to be making here regarding Jim Jordan or whatever the fuck, which is asinine and people are tired of it.

I lied - one last point is that there aren’t just two sides to the trumpist style attack based politics issue. And this is critical. The third side includes White House press briefings that address problems and policies rather than the “others.” That side includes a Biden team hitting the circuit making the case for policies and not against “others.” Hopefully that means a legislative branch passing meaningful laws. That is the side I am contrasting against AOC’s method and resulting tribalism.

I get that the context contributed to some of the excessive emotions, strawmen, and labeling.  I think it has more to do with tribal instincts - I called it worshiping but maybe people felt that is a loaded term 

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

9 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

Let me know when you think you understand the difference between right and wrong, as opposed to "us v. them."

Yep. FDR's play nice letter to Hitler in 1938 didn't work. In 1941, he switched to attack dog.

But in reality, FDR was never an attack dog. He was fighting fire with fire. Same thing Truman did after the war.  Same thing AOC is doing as well. You can't have "unity" with evil. You can only work to remove evil and then try to have "unity" with what is left.  Hitler killed himself, but the Allies didn't work with Donitz either. They should have hanged him, but they at least threw him in jail. They worked with Adenauer. 

But you can't compare Trump and Cruz with Hitler, they say. Well, Hitler definitely did worse things overall than Trump and Cruz. But Trump and Cruz attempted to have elected officials murdered and end our democracy. Had they been successful, we may still have the name USA, but the Constitution would have become toilet paper.  Hitler may have wanted to do that to America, but he didn't live long enough to try. What Trump and Cruz did to America is worse than what the Nazis did to America. 

[TXSG8R 3,360]

2 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

Don’t let brisket know that she attacks unprovoked. 

I agree Schiff was an attack dog during the first impeachment.  Lieu is rather similar to AOC in my opinion as they both seem to operate heavily through twitter.

Unprovoked meaning they didn’t take the first shot via Twitter. She is still reacting to something, not coming out of the blue and laying into them. 

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Very interesting conversation - AOC learning about the nuances around this Robinhood situation.

Very refreshing to watch a politician actually ask questions to learn something instead of pretending to know everything or being a troll.

But she’s just a shallow attention seeking “attack dog “.

[Dahobbs 17,444]

7 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

I lied - one last point is that there aren’t just two sides to the trumpist style attack based politics issue. And this is critical. The third side includes White House press briefings that address problems and policies rather than the “others.” That side includes a Biden team hitting the circuit making the case for policies and not against “others.” Hopefully that means a legislative branch passing meaningful laws. That is the side I am contrasting against AOC’s method and resulting tribalism.

I get that the context contributed to some of the excessive emotions, strawmen, and labeling.  I think it has more to do with tribal instincts - I called it worshiping but maybe people felt that is a loaded term 

Was the green new deal an attack?

Was her proposal on taxes an attack?

Why do you ignore the substantive policy she advocates for when characterizing her? Your position appears to be: AOC occasionally "attacks" on twitter, and therefore that is the only way to characterize her political method. That is stupid. Ridiculously stupid. She advocates for and debates substantive policy positions. She tries to understand the issues and figure out how make the government work for the people she represents. She "attacks" when attacked. Again, as I said before, government would be better if all Congress people approached the job like AOC. 

The person primarily contributing "excessive motions, strawmen, and labeling" is you my friend.

e.g.:

On 1/29/2021 at 9:48 AM, GW Hayduke said:

Fuck you, pussy.  

You guys are a piece of work.  I didn't do shit and am not a GOP supporter and never have been.  Fuck you again.

 

On 1/29/2021 at 10:07 AM, GW Hayduke said:

You guys need to wind down the tribalism. Anyone that accurately describes AOC's politik is labeled the "others." That's rather crazy.

Attack dogs have a purpose in politics.  They may or may not turn out the vote, but I personally think they suck.  They suck when Gym Jordan screams in a committee hearing.  They suck when POTUS was an attack dog - Trump tweeting bullshit hourly from the oval office. They suck when AOC clap backs on twitter.  It sucks even more when folks equate that to making someone a great politician. 

 

On 1/29/2021 at 11:27 AM, GW Hayduke said:

This is full tilt tribe-based politics up in here.  Any thought or idea about method of politik shall be shouted down.  It is all about sides here, seemingly

 

On 1/29/2021 at 11:55 AM, GW Hayduke said:

Fuck you, pussy.  

For some reason you aren't able to contribute except for random worthless dribble.  Share a position. Contribute. Or shut the fuck up, pussy.  I get that your brain might have melted by a constant stream of tribal dribble, but at least you can shut the fuck up, pussy. 

No one is saying to work with fascists. The two options are not "work with fascists" or "worship AOC." 

 

On 1/29/2021 at 1:32 PM, GW Hayduke said:

First you haggle over "counter" and now "for." You can do better.

You are for attack-based politics.  You are for them because the other side uses them and because you say they are needed in order to win.  Meet force with force.  That is ok.

You are for AOC being the attack dog - as long as that label expands to include "counter-attack dog that is only aggressive because it was provoked."  None of your qualifications matter to my position.  You are just playing a game with yourself.

 

On 1/29/2021 at 1:52 PM, GW Hayduke said:

I understand the concept of counter attack.  It just isn't relevant unless someone is overly sensitive about discussions about their tribe and wants to haggle.

No one said she wasn't serious about policy. Again, policies and method of politik are not the same. 

 

On 1/29/2021 at 2:43 PM, GW Hayduke said:

I mean, you've got brisket on here promoting the use of attack-based politics - since that is what the other side does and (per him) that it is needed in order to win - as long we qualify that those attacks are actually defensive (per him).  You should look closely at what he is saying and then look closely at what I am  saying.

 

[Hank Scorpio 17,723]

 

[GW Hayduke 1,952]

2 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Was the green new deal an attack?

Was her proposal on taxes an attack?

Why do you ignore the substantive policy she advocates for when characterizing her? Your position appears to be: AOC occasionally "attacks" on twitter, and therefore that is the only way to characterize her political method. That is stupid. Ridiculously stupid. She advocates for and debates substantive policy positions. She tries to understand the issues and figure out how make the government work for the people she represents. She "attacks" when attacked. Again, as I said before, government would be better if all Congress people approached the job like AOC. 

The person primarily contributing "excessive motions, strawmen, and labeling" is you my friend.

e.g.:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I get it. You are the slow guy on the board.  The GND and her tax policies are policies. Policies aren’t the same as method of politik. That’s been stated several times. I typed that slow for you. She has sound policies that mostly align with Dem platform, but that isn’t relevant to anything I was talking about. 

[Anastasis 23,394]

[wildcat09 29,233]

13 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

Are you serious?

What serious comment have I not responded to?

My position from the beginning is that the worshiping of AOC seems to be a promotion of trumpist style politics that is based on tribalism and attacking the “others” and that that type of politics has costs. 

Different folks introduced their own qualifications. As I have stated, I don’t disagree with any of them.

I was initially labeled as an other or trumpkin by multiple posters - evidence in my mind of the tribalism that surrounds AOC. Bernie had it too.

I’ll leave it at that and stop responding since the mods seem to have an issue with something

[Dahobbs 17,444]

2 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

I get it. You are the slow guy on the board.  The GND and her tax policies are policies. Policies aren’t the same as method of politik. That’s been stated several times. I typed that slow for you. She has sound policies that mostly align with Dem platform, but that isn’t relevant to anything I was talking about. 

So she has policies, argues for those policies, submits legislation for those policies, but, for you, her "method politk" is defined entirely by a few tweets and none thing else? You are a goddamn idiot. 

Edited January 31, 2021 by Dahobbs

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Ahem.

[bad_teammate 13,132]

Jesus, this is harrowing.

Every Republican who encouraged these people should be censured, impeached, and/or jailed.

[Satchel 6,908]

55 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Jesus, this is harrowing.

Every Republican who encouraged these people should be censured, impeached, and/or jailed.

Just watched Katie Porter tell how a scared and vulnerable AOC hid in her (Katie’s) office lamenting the fact that she wouldn’t live long enough to be a mother and that she wore heels that would prevent her from being able to run for her life. That Republicans lived through similar experiences and will allow Trump to go unpunished is nauseating.

[Dr. Teeth 5,832]

It wasn't a similar experience. They weren't coming for Republicans.

[Bama Chick 28,596]

But she’s the same as Marjorie Whatsherface!!!!!!!