Alexandria Ocasio Cortez - "Not All Dems Are The Same"

[AnonymityX1000]

Progressives are turning on aoc

Since Force the Vote she has been suspect. She could have beat all her detractors from that movement by doing something just as or more progressive then what they were suggesting. She did nothing but talk a lot but never any passed legislation or standing up to Dem leadership.
For Progressives who gave up on the Dem party she is persona non grata but I know for Dems who still believe in the party they still have hope for her being a leader in the future.
Lauren Underwood is way better. Right Nap? lol

 

[wire28]

Progressives are turning on aoc

@the cac mamba

 

[wire28]

Since Force the Vote she has been suspect. She could have beat all her detractors from that movement by doing something just as or more progressive then what they were suggesting. She did nothing but talk a lot but never any passed legislation or standing up to Dem leadership.
For Progressives who gave up on the Dem party she is persona non grata but I know for Dems who still believe in the party they still have hope for her being a leader in the future.
Lauren Underwood is way better. Right Nap? lol

So keep it a buck with us, if she is on the ticket in 28, does Always On Camera have your vote??

 

[AnonymityX1000]

So keep it a buck with us, if she is on the ticket in 28, does Always On Camera have your vote??

Depends what her position is on certain issues.
Voting for the Iron Dome, voting for 'defensive military aid' to Israel earlier this year are bad signs to get my vote. Plus, read the country. I don't care about what sex my president is but many Christians men especially are against female leadership in the United States. I hope the Dems are smart enough to pick a basic white male.

 

[Loose]

Since Force the Vote she has been suspect. She could have beat all her detractors from that movement by doing something just as or more progressive then what they were suggesting. She did nothing but talk a lot but never any passed legislation or standing up to Dem leadership.
For Progressives who gave up on the Dem party she is persona non grata but I know for Dems who still believe in the party they still have hope for her being a leader in the future.
Lauren Underwood is way better. Right Nap? lol

She doesn’t have many detractors; in fact, she’s one of the most liked politicians. A very small subset of people question her moderation on certain issues, but it’s nothing major. People should hold their politicians’ feet to the fire—it’s a good thing. As long as the progressive wing remains small, standing up to leadership isn’t really possible, because unlike Republicans, the Democratic establishment is completely entrenched and beholden to consultants. Mike Johnson, for example, will be gone if Republicans lose in 2026, whereas Democrats are forced to wait their turn for leadership positions based on seniority —a terrible concept.

 

[AnonymityX1000]

She doesn’t have many detractors; in fact, she’s one of the most liked politicians. A very small subset of people question her moderation on certain issues, but it’s nothing major. People should hold their politicians’ feet to the fire—it’s a good thing. As long as the progressive wing remains small, standing up to leadership isn’t really possible, because unlike Republicans, the Democratic establishment is completely entrenched and beholden to consultants. Mike Johnson, for example, will be gone if Republicans lose in 2026, whereas Democrats are forced to wait their turn for leadership positions based on seniority —a terrible concept.

Pols feet should be held to fire but not Dem leadership because of what again? Consultants?!
Why couldn't the squad when they actually had a couple of handful of members withhold their vote to confirm Pelosi for some Progressive consessions? You know like The Freedom caucus did to Kevin McCarthy in 2023? Because of consultants?! That's unconvincing horseshyt. Sorry.
You are doing what AOC is doing talking out of both sides fo your mouth. "Hold pols feet to the fire but not like that!"

 

[wire28]

Pols feet should be held to fire but not Dem leadership because of what again? Consultants?!
Why couldn't the squad when they actually had a couple of handful of members withhold their vote to confirm Pelosi for some Progressive consessions? You know like The Freedom caucus did to Kevin McCarthy in 2023? Because of consultants?! That's unconvincing horseshyt. Sorry.
You are doing what AOC is doing talking out of both sides fo your mouth. "Hold pols feet to the fire but not like that!"

I haven’t seen this passion from you since we fought along side @Bryan Danielson in the great Marvel DC wars years ago

Depends what her position is on certain issues.
Voting for the Iron Dome, voting for 'defensive military aid' to Israel earlier this year are bad signs to get my vote. Plus, read the country. I don't care about what sex my president is but many Christians men especially are against female leadership in the United States. I hope the Dems are smart enough to pick a basic white male.

Oh I’m sure they will overcorrect and pick two males, top of ticket being white. Their dream ticket is probably Newsome Beshear.

 

[Loose]

Pols feet should be held to fire but not Dem leadership because of what again? Consultants?!

Where did I argue this what? Lol

Why couldn't the squad when they actually had a couple of handful of members withhold their vote to confirm Pelosi for some Progressive consessions?

Because they would have been primaried and out of their seats within a year, Democrats remain beholden to donors and billionaires. Congressional leadership will go down burning before making many concessions. The concessions progressives did get were with Biden—and they were significant ones. Progressives took stands against BBB and dem leadership let their pacs attack them.

You know like The Freedom caucus did to Kevin McCarthy in 2023? Because of consultants?! That's unconvincing horseshyt. Sorry.

The Freedom Caucus stands for the same things as Republican donors and has caved on hundreds of bills, so it’s not really a distinct force. A better example you could have used was the Tea Party, whose members have all lost their seats. Republican ideology is essentially the same regardless of the caucus: they all want to cut taxes for billionaires, which donors and consultants support. The only minimal differences lie in whether they want to cut social programs completely.

You are doing what AOC is doing talking out of both sides fo your mouth. "Hold pols feet to the fire but not like that!"

What? I said they should be replaced tf u talking about lol. I want the entire leadership gone

 

[AnonymityX1000]

Where did I argue this what? Lol


Because they would have been primaried and out of their seats within a year, Democrats remain beholden to donors and billionaires. Congressional leadership will go down burning before making many concessions. The concessions progressives did get were with Biden—and they were significant ones. Progressives took stands against BBB and dem leadership let their pacs attack them.



The Freedom Caucus stands for the same things as Republican donors and has caved on hundreds of bills, so it’s not really a distinct force. A better example you could have used was the Tea Party, whose members have all lost their seats. Republican ideology is essentially the same regardless of the caucus: they all want to cut taxes for billionaires, which donors and consultants support. The only minimal differences lie in whether they want to cut social programs completely.

What? I said they should be replaced tf u talking about lol. I want the entire leadership gone

Some got primaried anyway (Bush, Bowman) so it was dumb to suck up to leadership. They would have gotten more grassroots support and $ would have had less effect if they stood up to leadership. AND they would have gotten leadership the fukk outta here if they aren't giving consessions. That's a W for the Progressive movement. lol
What you're ignoring is Progressive values are what voters overwhelmingly support. You can bypass donors if you speak directly to what the people want.
If you want the entire leadership gone why argue against the steps that could have made that happen? Even if it didn't work, it would show Dems stepping on progress for consultant concerns. Not a good example for Dem leadership going forward.

 

[Loose]

Some got primaried anyway (Bush, Bowman) so it was dumb to suck up to leadership. They would have gotten more grassroots support and $ would have had less effect if they stood up to leadership. AND they would have gotten leadership the fukk outta here if they aren't giving consessions. That's a W for the Progressive movement. lol
What you're ignoring is Progressive values are what voters overwhelmingly support. You can bypass donors if you speak directly to what the people want.
If you want the entire leadership gone why argue against the steps that could have made that happen? Even if it didn't work, it would show Dems stepping on progress for consultant concerns. Not a good example for Dem leadership going forward.

I’m a pragmatist. I understand what we’re dealing with, and that it’s going to take time to get rid of them. It won’t happen overnight, and it won’t be possible simply by creating noise—which is exactly what they tried to do, and failed at.The first course of action is to get money out of politics. With money in politics—something that hurts Democrats significantly more than Republicans—it forces Democrats to maintain a middle-of-the-road baseline. Any bill that impacts donors is disregarded, or leadership refuses to run on certain issues because, as I said, donors want to keep them as moderate as possible, essentially like standard Republicans. Look at Kyrsten Sinema: she single-handedly sunk medical reform because she was beholden to special interests and donors. She didn’t care about the future prospects of the party; at the end of the day, she had billionaires in her ear.
AOC creating a bunch of noise will only alienate her, leaving her on the outside looking in. That’s the unfortunate reality of a party designed to remain stuck in this stagnant period. Would it be nice if progressives could just overthrow the party quickly and gain power? Absolutely but it's going to take them messaging to the voters over time that will hopefully lead to them questioning why the party behaves the way it does.

 

[AnonymityX1000]

I’m a pragmatist. I understand what we’re dealing with, and that it’s going to take time to get rid of them. It won’t happen overnight, and it won’t be possible simply by creating noise—which is exactly what they tried to do, and failed at.The first course of action is to get money out of politics. With money in politics—something that hurts Democrats significantly more than Republicans—it forces Democrats to maintain a middle-of-the-road baseline. Any bill that impacts donors is disregarded, or leadership refuses to run on certain issues because, as I said, donors want to keep them as moderate as possible, essentially like standard Republicans. Look at Kyrsten Sinema: she single-handedly sunk medical reform because she was beholden to special interests and donors. She didn’t care about the future prospects of the party; at the end of the day, she had billionaires in her ear.
AOC creating a bunch of noise will only alienate her, leaving her on the outside looking in. That’s the unfortunate reality of a party designed to remain stuck in this stagnant period. Would it be nice if progressives could just overthrow the party quickly and gain power? Absolutely but it's going to take them messaging to the voters over time that will hopefully lead to them questioning why the party behaves the way it does.

If the leadership stays the same there is 0 chance of getting money out of politics. Noise is heard by the voters. Maybe the noisemaker of the time pays the consequences but the next Progressive can use their sacrifice to actually get the change needed. When she ran AOC said she doesn't care if she is a one term Congress member. She acted like she was so "Bout' It"she was ready to crash out. She has done a complete 180 on that and it's very disappointing.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Since Force the Vote she has been suspect. She could have beat all her detractors from that movement by doing something just as or more progressive then what they were suggesting. She did nothing but talk a lot but never any passed legislation or standing up to Dem leadership.
For Progressives who gave up on the Dem party she is persona non grata but I know for Dems who still believe in the party they still have hope for her being a leader in the future.
Lauren Underwood is way better. Right Nap? lol

Force the vote was designed to be some exhibition in noble failure

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

If the leadership stays the same there is 0 chance of getting money out of politics. Noise is heard by the voters. Maybe the noisemaker of the time pays the consequences but the next Progressive can use their sacrifice to actually get the change needed. When she ran AOC said she doesn't care if she is a one term Congress member. She acted like she was so "Bout' It"she was ready to crash out. She has done a complete 180 on that and it's very disappointing.

What are you asking that bowman and Bush didn’t try?

 

[AnonymityX1000]

What are you asking that bowman and Bush didn’t try?

Force the vote. Der

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Force the vote. Der

What was force the vote meant to accomplish?