Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

BlueMoonFromAcrossThePond said:
I completely disagree.

You seem to desire a very progressive social-democracy or maybe even socialist US government - this isn't going to happen within the next few decades - rural America is entirely against this - and rural Americans hold roughly 1/2 the national vote.

Whereas, under Biden, massive change will occur - decision making based on science and expert consensus will once again prevail - as opposed to anti-science/whatever Trump believes governance.

On the world stage, the US will once again engage as a force for Democracy - renewing our friendships with traditional allies.

With respect to policing - the prospect for major reform now exists under Biden. Police are far too aggressive in their interactions - especially with minorities and for sure with African-Americans. The over-aggressive posture adopted by police far too often leads to bad outcomes - officers draw their guns and shoot - when less aggressive actions would have sufficed.

Finally, the caustic us-versus-them mentality advanced at every turn by Trump - will be replaced by leadership wishing not to spark confrontation where possible.
Click to expand...

I desire a lack of corruption in government, currently that encompasses both Dems & Repubs - there is a political elite class of politicians that are only concerned with getting elected, catering to special interests & continuity rather than serving their constituency. If that equates to socialism then you are free to call it what you like

Massive change under Biden will NEVER occur. He is not someone who has ever voted for making massive changes either as a senator or pushing for legislation as VP under Obama. If the comparison is only Trump then of course it will be a massive change in approach but in terms of actual legislation to improve the country or those who are affected much, there is no precedent to support the notion he or Harris will usher in massive changes. At best, they will reset to pre-Trump and while that is a welcome move, it is more a question of taking one step forward after 2 back

If you think Biden is going to reform police anymore than Harris, then you have not at all been paying attention to either. It won't be the wild, wild, west like it has been under Trump but violence against Blacks and unchecked police brutality were occurring under Obama/Biden & Harris in California. Harris' record when it comes to this is appalling

As I have said before, when the clapping & dancing have subsided we will see that Biden will move to return things to the status quo pre-Trump but even the country was in desperate need of actual change

The progressive block led by AOC actually inspire change and are being binned by their own party, it is a telling indictment of what you can expect when even she was thinking of not running again. America will rid themselves of the cancer that is Trump but half of America that supports him remain as does a toxic Democratic party. It's fiction to think massive change is on the horizon
 
Shit's been really complicated, so I've not been on as much as I have and may continue in this way for the short term.

However, I have been noting that the former incumbent Dems that had been ousted from their seats have been claiming their policies have been successful elsewhere, proving that the voter were centrists. Hilarious and contradictory as to why they had their own losses. Claire McCaskill has been VERY vocal on it, followed by ousted Republican John Kasich. These two, already pitching for places in the Biden Admin, blaming progressives and claiming false reasoning on the voting pattern!





They're idiots and don't see the issues ahead.

And there are posters claiming Biden will be "pushed to the left"! It's side splittingly hilarious that there's in-fighting already. This will just force a greater split and that will force something happening whether in the party or the vote.
 
It's not clear to me whether posters in this thread are aspirational - hoping for the changes that AOC is pushing for - or pragmatic - believing that an AOC agenda would garner enough support to win in a national election.

Here's the 2020 live election results map:
abcnews.go.com

2020 US Presidential Election Results: Live Map

View live updates on electoral votes by state for presidential candidates Joe Biden and Donald Trump on ABC News. Senate, House, and Governor Election results also available at ABCNews.com
abcnews.go.com abcnews.go.com

For those in the pragmatic camp, assuming that AOC plus a candidate of her choice were magically able to run for President in this past election, please describe a path to 270 electoral votes.
 
BlueMoonFromAcrossThePond said:
It's not clear to me whether posters in this thread are aspirational - hoping for the changes that AOC is pushing for - or pragmatic - believing that an AOC agenda would garner enough support to win in a national election.

Here's the 2020 live election results map:
abcnews.go.com

2020 US Presidential Election Results: Live Map

View live updates on electoral votes by state for presidential candidates Joe Biden and Donald Trump on ABC News. Senate, House, and Governor Election results also available at ABCNews.com
abcnews.go.com abcnews.go.com

For those in the pragmatic camp, assuming that AOC plus a candidate of her choice were magically able to run for President in this past election, please describe a path to 270 electoral votes.
Click to expand...
"Aspirational" or "pragmatic"?

Mate, you're new here. You haven't spent the last several months attempting to discern a proper description for certain posters.

Try "dumber than goose shit."
 
FogBlueInSanFran said:
"Aspirational" or "pragmatic"?

Mate, you're new here. You haven't spent the last several months attempting to discern a proper description for certain posters.

Try "dumber than goose shit."
Click to expand...
Well...

No AOC enthusiast has yet replied my post :-).

The election map sledge hammer might possibly have finally gotten through - or not; we'll see.

Still, I much prefer trying to persuade an AOC supporter to bring his or her position a bit to the right - pragmatically (that is, not giving up on their beliefs, but instead, changing their opinion on how best to see as much of their beliefs put into practice given current reality - an AOC-lead 3rd party, IMO would be disastrous - all but handing an election to the right, splitting the former Democratic vote - so to the extent that the election map may have changed minds - this discussion, however fruitless it may prove - unless absolutely pointless - is at least worth bringing up) - than trying to reason with a Trump radical - the pro-Trump individuals are, in my experience, beyond reason - they listen only to Fox News and other Murdoch outlets - to them, anything else is biased, fake journalism.
 
Last edited:
BlueMoonFromAcrossThePond said:
Well...

No AOC enthusiast has yet replied my post :-).

The election map sledge hammer might possibly have finally gotten through - or not; we'll see.

Still, I much prefer trying to persuade an AOC supporter to bring his or her position a bit to the right - pragmatically (that is, not giving up on their beliefs, but instead, changing their opinion on how best to see as much of their beliefs put into practice given current reality - an AOC-lead 3rd party, IMO would be disastrous - all but handing an election to the right, splitting the former Democratic vote - so to the extent that the election map may have changed minds - this discussion, however fruitless it may prove - unless absolutely pointless - is at least worth bringing up) - than trying to reason with a Trump radical - the pro-Trump individuals are, in my experience, beyond reason - they listen only to Fox News and other Murdoch outlets - to them, anything else is biased, fake journalism.
Click to expand...
There is no difference between trying to reason with this particular poster and a Trump radical.

You’ll thank me later.
 
BlueMoonFromAcrossThePond said:
Well...

No AOC enthusiast has yet replied my post :-).

The election map sledge hammer might possibly have finally gotten through - or not; we'll see.

Still, I much prefer trying to persuade an AOC supporter to bring his or her position a bit to the right - pragmatically (that is, not giving up on their beliefs, but instead, changing their opinion on how best to see as much of their beliefs put into practice given current reality - an AOC-lead 3rd party, IMO would be disastrous - all but handing an election to the right, splitting the former Democratic vote - so to the extent that the election map may have changed minds - this discussion, however fruitless it may prove - unless absolutely pointless - is at least worth bringing up) - than trying to reason with a Trump radical - the pro-Trump individuals are, in my experience, beyond reason - they listen only to Fox News and other Murdoch outlets - to them, anything else is biased, fake journalism.
Click to expand...
Ignoring the UTTER tool on here who thinks

71M.
PEOPLE.
ARE.
PART.
OF.
A.
DEATH.
CULT.

let me you a question; what's your opinion on healthcare being a Human Right or not?
 
Bigga said:
Ignoring the UTTER tool on here who thinks

71M.
PEOPLE.
ARE.
PART.
OF.
A.
DEATH.
CULT.

let me you a question; what's your opinion on healthcare being a Human Right or not?
Click to expand...
I think it's a basic human right - now your turn.. answer my question.
 
Bigga said:
There's a line of thinking that comes to the answer you seek or to help you get there.

So what do you mean by basic or does your view depend on where you personally live?
Click to expand...
You haven't answered my question, whereas I have unequivocally answered yours.
 
Bigga said:
You're not absorbing the conversation.
Click to expand...
This line of response is only reinforcing FogBlue/SebastianBlue's viewpoints. If you have a cogent response to my question I'd like to hear it - if you're going to persist this way I'm going to admit, sadly, that FogBlue/SebastianBlue were right - and it's a waste of time conversing with you (at least) and perhaps others with similar viewpoints in this thread - hell, you won't even outline your point of view - whether you're aspirational or pragmatic - and if the later how you expect those with similar viewpoints to succeed in a near future US election.
 
Last edited:
BlueMoonFromAcrossThePond said:
This line of response is only reinforcing FogBlue/SebastianBlue's viewpoints. If you have a cogent response to my question I'd like to hear it - if you're going to persist this way I'm going to admit, sadly, that FogBlue/SebastianBlue were right - and it's a waste of time conversing with you - hell, you won't even outline your point of view.
Click to expand...
In order for you to see or engage in the PoV, it helps if you answer the questions. That way you get to see how Progressives think.

But, like one of those individuals especially, if you can't see the greater context, you'll NEVER understand why 72% of US citizens support the healthcare angle and therefore refuse to see how someone could reach 270.

How about start from being objective?

It would certainly help your cause.
 
Bigga said:
In order for you to see or engage in the PoV, it helps if you answer the questions. That way you get to see how Progressives think.

But, like one of those individuals especially, if you can't see the greater context, you'll NEVER understand why 72% of US citizens support the healthcare angle and therefore refuse to see how someone could reach 270.

How about start from being objective?

It would certainly help your cause.
Click to expand...
I give up.

/ignore BIgga sadly.
 
And here is EXACTLY the problem, ladies and gents.

Instead of going through a logical assessment on why Progressives think the way we do, people get all huffed and don't want to engage. Critical thinking is needed at some point. If your political beliefs are strong you would be able to defend it without question.

If you're afraid of that probe, don't attempt the discussion.
 
I hate the word progressives and the word moderates

But back on topic. Mr Pond, you are asking the wrong question unless you are specifically addressing certain people on here, AOC ideas and ideals would be considered in the UK and many other democratic nations as nowt very radical or off putting to a vast number of the respectuve nations electorate, so many on here will not be either pragmatic or aspirational, just giving an opinion on the subject from afar.
 
urban genie said:
I hate the word progressives and the word moderates

But back on topic. Mr Pond, you are asking the wrong question unless you are specifically addressing certain people on here, AOC ideas and ideals would be considered in the UK and many other democratic nations as nowt very radical or off putting to a vast number of the respectuve nations electorate, so many on here will not be either pragmatic or aspirational, just giving an opinion on the subject from afar.
Click to expand...
I'm not asking about viewpoints in the UK.

I'm specifically asking how an AOC agenda - if you view it as pragmatic (in the sense that a candidate with her viewpoints might win a Presidential election) - can possibly succeed near term in the USA.

I provided the current election map as a basis for discussion.

Disclosure - I endorse many of AOC's viewpoints - I am however a capitalist - and as you've correctly inferred - I do indeed live in the USA.
 
Last edited:
urban genie said:
I hate the word progressives and the word moderates

But back on topic. Mr Pond, you are asking the wrong question unless you are specifically addressing certain people on here, AOC ideas and ideals would be considered in the UK and many other democratic nations as nowt very radical or off putting to a vast number of the respectuve nations electorate, so many on here will not be either pragmatic or aspirational, just giving an opinion on the subject from afar.
Click to expand...
So, I was trying to get him to a point to see through eyes of a European, who doesn't understand why the US do what they do, starting with M4A.

That way, he'd have seen things a little more as to why 'Progressives' are winning their argument and expanding their numbers in the House.

It's a process he didn't want to engage in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top