Author Topic: AOC thread  (Read 6432 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4774
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #175 on: May 09, 2019, 07:29:01 PM »
To a certain type of personality, I'm sure that's true.

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3506
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #176 on: May 09, 2019, 08:01:54 PM »

But where she makes herself an easy target is by voluntarily putting herself out there on social media about it.  Which, as Kev pointed out, makes her come across as "one of those attention-starved teenagers who posts any thought that pops into their head."

So she is just like the POTUS.  I can see that to a degree, yes.
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Cool Chris

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 7848
  • Gender: Male
  • Rest in Peace
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #177 on: May 09, 2019, 08:12:47 PM »
I outlined earlier (or in another thread), how similar they are in many ways. Except she is a protected class x2 (1. female 2. person of color) so to ridicule her for anything is misogynistic and racist.
"Nostalgia is just the ability to forget the things that sucked" - Nelson DeMille, 'Up Country'

Offline SystematicThought

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4751
  • Gender: Male
  • Carpe Diem-2019
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #178 on: May 09, 2019, 08:27:34 PM »
I outlined earlier (or in another thread), how similar they are in many ways. Except she is a protected class x2 (1. female 2. person of color) so to ridicule her for anything is misogynistic and racist.
Don't forget "Popular Democrat" as a protected class
"Keep your stick on the ice. I'm pulling for ya. Remember we're all in this together."
-Red Green

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7231
  • You can't spell "America" without "Erica"
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #179 on: May 10, 2019, 07:36:36 AM »
:lol  Bingo.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4774
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #180 on: May 10, 2019, 12:10:38 PM »
I outlined earlier (or in another thread), how similar they are in many ways. Except she is a protected class x2 (1. female 2. person of color) so to ridicule her for anything is misogynistic and racist.

Nah, its just quite a lot of the people who mock her are doing so from a position of misogyny and racism.

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 22457
  • Bad Craziness
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #181 on: May 10, 2019, 12:16:57 PM »
I outlined earlier (or in another thread), how similar they are in many ways. Except she is a protected class x2 (1. female 2. person of color) so to ridicule her for anything is misogynistic and racist.
And yet here she is, probably the second most mocked person in American politics.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 30600
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #182 on: May 10, 2019, 01:34:03 PM »
I outlined earlier (or in another thread), how similar they are in many ways. Except she is a protected class x2 (1. female 2. person of color) so to ridicule her for anything is misogynistic and racist.

Nah, its just quite a lot of the people who mock her are doing so from a position of misogyny and racism.

Where is your proof?

Let me guess: you don't have any, but you are taking the "most who criticize a female and/or a person of color is either a bigot, racist and/or misogynist" stance, which far too many foolishly adopt these days.

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4774
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #183 on: May 10, 2019, 01:51:58 PM »
I didn't say "most", I said "quite a lot". As for proof, try twitter.com.


Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 30600
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #184 on: May 10, 2019, 01:55:05 PM »
Oh, if that is the standard, then any of us can throw out any opinion we want and say, "See Twitter!!" for proof that we are at least somewhat right.  Noted. 

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4774
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #185 on: May 10, 2019, 01:58:50 PM »
You mean you haven't already?

Sorry, I wasn't aware the suggestion that a sizable percentage of the people "critiquing" AOC are doing so from a racist/misogynistic position needed peer reviewed statistics backing it up. Its not exactly a controversial statement.

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 30600
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #186 on: May 10, 2019, 02:19:30 PM »
You mean you haven't already?


If I have, please post a link to where I did it.

Sorry, I wasn't aware the suggestion that a sizable percentage of the people "critiquing" AOC are doing so from a racist/misogynistic position needed peer reviewed statistics backing it up. Its not exactly a controversial statement.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that what you are saying it is true: how does that help a discussion to post a "drive-by" comment like that?  Answer: it doesn't.  If you are going to throw out the racism and misogyny card every single time AOC is criticized, you might as well lock this thread now.

"A lot of people hate on Trump because he is white."  There is another non-controversial statement, agreed?  How productive would that be if someone said that every time Trump was criticized? 

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4774
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #187 on: May 10, 2019, 02:24:28 PM »
It was actually in direct response to Cool Chris' assertion that "You can't criticize her without being accused of racism/misogny", whereas what actually happens is that there are a lot of critiques of her that ARE racist and misognistic (not here, but on the internet in general) which are, rightly, called out as such.

And the level of discussion right now is calling her an "attention starved teenager" for posting a vaguely amusing video about a bit of technology every civilized country except America manages to do without, so in all honesty, I'm not sure I'm really bringing it down significantly by making the rather noncontroversial observation that she gets a lot of flack from racists and misogynists.

Quote
"A lot of people hate on Trump because he is white."  There is another non-controversial statement, agreed?  How productive would that be if someone said that every time Trump was criticized?

Not extremely.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2019, 02:36:57 PM by XJDenton »

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 1167
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #188 on: May 10, 2019, 04:07:00 PM »
My take: there are certainly a lot of people who mock AOC for racist and/or misogynist reasons. I've said several times, the American right couldn't have been handed a better Emmanuel Goldstein if they'd created her themselves (to an extent, they did). In this thread though, I haven't seen any of that (sexism or racism I mean). To be honest I haven't seen much of anything. 6 pages in and I still don't think we've had a single policy discussion yet. Yesterday the 'attention-starved teenager' along with Bernie Sanders introduced plans to cap credit card interest rates while calling on the US Postal Service to provide basic banking services as a way to provide affordable competition to traditional banks. This is not a subject that concerns or interests me, not being American. I'm simply aware of it because it was reported on the BBC and was the subject of an interesting discussion about the pros (few) and cons (many) of their proposal. Not a mention of it in this thread however, nor of any of the other legislation she's proposed during the last month.

And that's my overall impression of this, which I've generally stated before. She really is the other side of the Donald Trump coin in so many ways. Both of them are media creations (the left created Donald Trump, the right created AOC). Both of them serve as either cartoonish boogey(wo)men for their opponents, or as shining rays of hope for their supporters. Both of them receive criticism for their mannerisms and comportment. Both are intruders into a type of world that wants them gone (the same political elites that despise AOC despise Trump far more - I have a theory that this is in part why Trump never criticises her or calls her names. I think he genuinely likes and admires the middle finger she flips to the establishment). Both of them know that in 2019 America, it's image, not policy, that gets the headlines, and it's headlines that sway the votes.

This 'defence' (not exactly what it is, but close enough) of AOC may seem hypocritical coming from me, as one of the most persistent critics of Donald Trump on here. I think it's partly because I'm guilty of doing to Trump what I criticise others for doing to AOC (focusing relentlessly on the negative) that I'm able to recognise what's going on. Case in point, and strictly between us on here: this week was an impressive one for Trump, believe it or not. CNN were wrong (not just wrong; irresponsibly stupid) this morning to publish that article (it's still on their front page I think) about how his foreign policy is "unraveling before his eyes".  No it isn't, or at least, that's not the information we (Russia) have. Trump was correct to rein in John Bolton over Venezuela. His words about avoiding military conflict with Iran were a welcome change from the bluster he tweets out. His refusal to budge over China's theft of intellectual property (our news says that's the main reason the trade talks failed, and bear in mind our news reports word for word what Putin - bosom buddies with Xi - tells them) is by far his best foreign policy to date (because that's one of the main threats facing US security). And I don't believe for one second he or anyone at the Pentagon loses a wink of sleep about Kim Jong-un firing off another missile. He had a generally good week on the geopolitical front. Did I post about any of it in the Trump thread? Fuck no. Not what I do. Nor will I ever, because I dislike him immensely and (unless Biden gets the nod from the Dems) I want him gone in 2020. But I like to think that I'm at least aware of my bias. I know Trump's good points, I just choose not to talk about them or bring them to people's attention.

To me, that's how I see this thread. It's not really a thread to discuss the ideas and policies of AOC (or if it is, I haven't seen it) but more a place to point out her inexperience and her lack of political nous. Which is fine. As I said, that's why the Trump Tweets thread exists for me - to laugh at his illiteracy and hypocrisy. But all I would point out is that AOC (and what she represents) isn't going anywhere. Her (and Trump's) style of politics is going to dominate America for a good while to come in my opinion (before writing this I read an analysis whose conclusion was that AOC's endorsement in the Dem primary is the most powerful and coveted endorsement there is. That's incredible if you really stop and think about what that implies, the sheer grass-roots power this young woman has). It's not a coincidence she and Bernie put out those proposals together yesterday, or appeared together during the streamed chat about them.

Long story short: people like me made the mistake in 2015 of focusing on the patently stupid shit Trump said and we pretty much just treated him as a joke to be laughed at. We dismissed him as a clown. A year on, he got elected. And so, anyone 'scared' of AOC (and the faction of the left she represents) I'd advise to learn from our mistakes and take her seriously. Or if not her, take seriously the huge power and influence she already has over a demographic you may not be aware of (as I was not aware of the MAGA crowd back in 2015) . Less discussion of how the dumb broad doesn't know how to use a kitchen appliance, more discussion of what she's actually proposing.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2019, 04:34:49 PM by Dave_Manchester »
"As democracy is perfected, the office of President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts' desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron" - H.L.Mencken, 26th July 1920.

"China has total respect for Donald Trump and for Donald Trump's very very large brain" - American President Donald Trump, September 26th 2018.

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17601
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #189 on: May 13, 2019, 12:05:49 PM »
I didn't say "most", I said "quite a lot". As for proof, try twitter.com.

Using "Twitter.com" as a source is a step and a half below using Wikipedia, and about on par with using the "inside cap of a Snapple  bottle".    Very little of it is fact driven and most of it is noise.   

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17601
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #190 on: May 13, 2019, 12:18:48 PM »
To me, that's how I see this thread. It's not really a thread to discuss the ideas and policies of AOC (or if it is, I haven't seen it) but more a place to point out her inexperience and her lack of political nous. Which is fine. As I said, that's why the Trump Tweets thread exists for me - to laugh at his illiteracy and hypocrisy. But all I would point out is that AOC (and what she represents) isn't going anywhere. Her (and Trump's) style of politics is going to dominate America for a good while to come in my opinion (before writing this I read an analysis whose conclusion was that AOC's endorsement in the Dem primary is the most powerful and coveted endorsement there is. That's incredible if you really stop and think about what that implies, the sheer grass-roots power this young woman has). It's not a coincidence she and Bernie put out those proposals together yesterday, or appeared together during the streamed chat about them.

Long story short: people like me made the mistake in 2015 of focusing on the patently stupid shit Trump said and we pretty much just treated him as a joke to be laughed at. We dismissed him as a clown. A year on, he got elected. And so, anyone 'scared' of AOC (and the faction of the left she represents) I'd advise to learn from our mistakes and take her seriously. Or if not her, take seriously the huge power and influence she already has over a demographic you may not be aware of (as I was not aware of the MAGA crowd back in 2015) . Less discussion of how the dumb broad doesn't know how to use a kitchen appliance, more discussion of what she's actually proposing.

I love that post, Dave, and I think you're spot on.  Where we veer apart - or rather, where I keep going - is that you seem to accept (or maybe you don't care, since you're not an American citizen) that this is the way that politics are from this point forward.  I refuse to do that.  I think if you consider Trump "bad" and buy into the "he's damaging democracy" arguments, then you have to accept the same of those on the other side doing the same thing.   And I do.   You noted the lack of "policy" discussions.  I know for me, they are irrelevant here, since that's not the standard by which anyone is judged.  If we want to talk about policy we can; she is the paradigm of my theory that the difference between "left" and "right" in America isn't that great, and is more about the "how" than the "what".  I even have a couple areas - renewable energy - where I go farther than her, but again, focus on the "how" not the "what".   

I'm far more concerned with the idea - exemplified by the resurging (again) discussion about the Electoral College - that our elections are turning into popularity contests.   For fuck's sake, the way we're going, in 2028 you'll have to be on Facebook to vote, and we'll vote by clicking the little "thumb's up!" under a candidates name.   Count me out.  It's NOT a popularity contest and shouldn't be.  And this is the root of my distaste for Ocasio-Cortez.  She's either oblivious (or unapologetic) of the similarities with that with which she disagrees, and that's a problem for me (and what separates Bernie from her).  I think Bernie is genuinely and sincerely embarrassed by those ways in which he overlaps with other career politicians. I think the wealth he has amassed well and truly embarrasses him.   Part of Trump's problem is that he DOESN'T embarrass, he doesn't feel shame.   And that's the overriding feeling I get from Ocasio-Cortez, and that's the biggest sin I can see in politics these days. 

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Back for the Attack
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40973
  • Gender: Male
  • Postwhore Emeritus
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #191 on: May 13, 2019, 03:08:23 PM »
Stadler, our elections have ALWAYS been popularity contests.

Maybe you haven't looked at them that way, but the vast majority of our blithering idiots certainly have.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4774
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #192 on: May 14, 2019, 06:45:19 AM »
Very little of it is fact driven and most of it is noise.   

As opposed to all that fact-driven, non-noisy racist/misogynist vitriol directed at AOC.

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17601
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #193 on: May 14, 2019, 08:49:29 AM »
Stadler, our elections have ALWAYS been popularity contests.

Maybe you haven't looked at them that way, but the vast majority of our blithering idiots certainly have.

There's always that element, but not like this.  Not to this degree. 

Prior to Clinton in '92, candidates didn't even bother with late night or "infotainment" television.  Now?  A spot on Fallon is more important than any debate, any town hall, any political rally.   

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17601
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #194 on: May 14, 2019, 08:53:21 AM »
Very little of it is fact driven and most of it is noise.   

As opposed to all that fact-driven, non-noisy racist/misogynist vitriol directed at AOC.

Not sure what that's supposed to accomplish; there is fair, reasoned criticism of Ocasio-Cortez, and there is that which veers into the pale.  There is fair, reasoned criticism of Trump, and there is that which veers into the pale.   It's far easier to attain the latter in both instances when limited to 140 characters.  The politics of a $20 trillion economy and 320 million people CANNOT be distilled in any meaningful way into cute snarky soundbites, yet that's where we are. 

The one thing that even her critics agree is her strength - social media - is exactly that:  dumbing down our discourse (and so that this isn't "racist/misogynist vitriol", ask Dave what his biggest peeve about Trump is; hint, I share it.)

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 22457
  • Bad Craziness
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #195 on: May 14, 2019, 08:55:19 AM »
Prior to Clinton in '92, candidates didn't even bother with late night or "infotainment" television.  Now?  A spot on Fallon is more important than any debate, any town hall, any political rally.
Out of curiosity, of those four forums which do you think gives you the best insight into a candidate? In my book three of them are completely scripted and one is halfway off the cuff.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4774
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #196 on: May 14, 2019, 10:52:52 AM »
Not sure what that's supposed to accomplish; there is fair, reasoned criticism of Ocasio-Cortez, and there is that which veers into the pale.  There is fair, reasoned criticism of Trump, and there is that which veers into the pale.   It's far easier to attain the latter in both instances when limited to 140 characters.

Right, so what exactly was the problem with me citing twitter as an example of the racist/misogynistic vitriol directed at AOC? I made the rather innocuous observation in response to Cool Chris's claims that the accusations of racism and misogyny are directed not at any and all criticism of AOC but the rather substantial amount online that IS rooted in those vile views, and suddenly Kev is asking for citations and you are critiquing a "source" for being unreliable as if I was using it as a reliable source of statistics rather than "try reading some of the stuff  directed at her online, and you'll see there's a lot of vile crap there." I mean, good grief.

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17601
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #197 on: May 14, 2019, 11:12:41 AM »
Prior to Clinton in '92, candidates didn't even bother with late night or "infotainment" television.  Now?  A spot on Fallon is more important than any debate, any town hall, any political rally.
Out of curiosity, of those four forums which do you think gives you the best insight into a candidate? In my book three of them are completely scripted and one is halfway off the cuff.

Of those four?  Well I think ALL are scripted, so I'd probably say "debate" if only because there's at least the possibility of a negative/adversarial input.   Colbert giving intellectual handjobs across the desk is no different than the half-ass softball lobs at a town hall, or the built-in, home field advantage at a rally.   (Trump is the exception here, since he gets so drunk on the moment that for him the rallies are really the insightful moment). 

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17601
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #198 on: May 14, 2019, 11:44:25 AM »
Not sure what that's supposed to accomplish; there is fair, reasoned criticism of Ocasio-Cortez, and there is that which veers into the pale.  There is fair, reasoned criticism of Trump, and there is that which veers into the pale.   It's far easier to attain the latter in both instances when limited to 140 characters.

Right, so what exactly was the problem with me citing twitter as an example of the racist/misogynistic vitriol directed at AOC? I made the rather innocuous observation in response to Cool Chris's claims that the accusations of racism and misogyny are directed not at any and all criticism of AOC but the rather substantial amount online that IS rooted in those vile views, and suddenly Kev is asking for citations and you are critiquing a "source" for being unreliable as if I was using it as a reliable source of statistics rather than "try reading some of the stuff  directed at her online, and you'll see there's a lot of vile crap there." I mean, good grief.

"Good grief"?  Maybe I'm the one that isn't understanding your point.  I'm saying that using Twitter - on either side - is useless. It's a cesspool.   The social media sewer is disgusting at times.  It's a touchy subject, I recognize, but when Mike left DT there was a flood of commentary that was so anti-semitic, so hateful (at one point it was suggested by one stellar wit that Mike was too busy with incestuous pedophilia to continue drumming his main gig) that at one point I looked into what it would take to involve the authorities in "online bullying" (for my own entertainment, not directly involving Mike or his family). 

And I read your comment at sort of suggesting a hypocrisy in pointing it out, as if I wasn't being fair by not explicitly acknowledging that there might be misogyny or racism directed toward Ocasio-Cortez.   I've no doubt there is.  It's ALL a wasteland.  I see no difference in attacking Ocasio-Cortez for her race or gender or attacking Trump for his weight or any of the personal characteristics that he gets lambasted for (and don't even get me started on the intellectual Einsteins that still think "Drumpf" is somehow clever, deep analysis into the psyche of one Donald John Trump.)

EDIT: And I'll say again; this isn't partisan politics.  This is more general "political science" analysis. We've been told for the better part of two and a half years (more, if you count the campaigns) how toxic Trump is, how "terrifying" Trump is, how dangerous it is to "normalize" him, how justified we are in assuming "by any means necessary" because HIS tactics were so outrageous... and yet we're seeing those very same tactics, that very same toxicity, being injected into the resistance.  In my view, ALL the major Democratic players save one (Pelosi), including all the burgeoning Democratic challengers save one (Buttigeig), has exhibited some or all of these approaches in either their current role or their campaign for their next role, and THAT'S my issue here. 
« Last Edit: May 14, 2019, 12:00:23 PM by Stadler »

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4774
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #199 on: May 14, 2019, 12:08:08 PM »
My point, stated several times, is:

Quote
the accusations of racism and misogyny are directed not at any and all criticism of AOC but the rather substantial amount online that IS rooted in those vile views

I cited twitter (being the "cesspool" that it is) as an example of such directed hate. That was it. That was my entire point.

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17601
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #200 on: May 14, 2019, 12:11:39 PM »
My point, stated several times, is:

Quote
the accusations of racism and misogyny are directed not at any and all criticism of AOC but the rather substantial amount online that IS rooted in those vile views

I cited twitter (being the "cesspool" that it is) as an example of such directed hate. That was it. That was my entire point.

Okay.   Can't argue that.

Offline Cool Chris

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 7848
  • Gender: Male
  • Rest in Peace
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #201 on: May 14, 2019, 12:23:21 PM »
My point (since apparently this goes way back to what I said) was that  criticism of hers is dismissed as being borne of racism/sexism/misogyny, etc...

And how about this now. "I will be damned if the same politicians who refused to act then are going to try to come back today and say we need a 'middle of the road' approach to save our lives, Ocasio-Cortez said at a Green New Deal rally Monday night....The freshman Democrat criticized "conservatives on both sides of the aisle" who have not signed on to support the Green New Deal bill."

This "if you aren't with us you are against us!" mentality has not done this country any favors for the past 20 years. "You have not signed on to my $90 trillion dollar bill to re-completely change the structure of this nation's economy fight global warming, how dare you?! I have been a public servant for, like, 6 months, I totally know way more than the rest of you. And I will not compromise, discuss, and understand differences of thought and opinion even though that is the nature of politics, business, and basic societal interaction.

And getting back to a point I think I made a while back, while I do fault her for this pedastal she has put herself upon, I fault the media more for erecting the pedastal for her.
"Nostalgia is just the ability to forget the things that sucked" - Nelson DeMille, 'Up Country'

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 22457
  • Bad Craziness
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #202 on: May 14, 2019, 12:25:35 PM »
Prior to Clinton in '92, candidates didn't even bother with late night or "infotainment" television.  Now?  A spot on Fallon is more important than any debate, any town hall, any political rally.
Out of curiosity, of those four forums which do you think gives you the best insight into a candidate? In my book three of them are completely scripted and one is halfway off the cuff.

Of those four?  Well I think ALL are scripted, so I'd probably say "debate" if only because there's at least the possibility of a negative/adversarial input.   Colbert giving intellectual handjobs across the desk is no different than the half-ass softball lobs at a town hall, or the built-in, home field advantage at a rally.   (Trump is the exception here, since he gets so drunk on the moment that for him the rallies are really the insightful moment).
Trump's rallies don't count because he can say up is down and pigs can fly (they just don't when somebody's looking) and his audience will lap it up. It's the equivalent of David Lee Roth yelling "FUUUUUCCCCCKKKKKKKK!" and the audience going wild. The only insight to be gained is that he is strangely Jim Jonesish.

I've seen casual chat show interviews that afford a fair amount of spontaneity. Obama and Clinton were both pretty sharp when speaking off the cuff, which is something that I look for and something you don't get to see in other formats. Back in the day the president and the press could spar back and forth with each other and it was quite telling. Now we have to settle for comedians asking outlandish questions to figure out how their heads work. You ask a president (or candidate) what their position on X, Y, or Z is and they're going to rattle off a speech they've practiced 30 times. You blindside one of them with "what kind of shampoo so you use" and you're likely to get bewilderment, a thoughtful explanation, or a witty quip, each of which are very telling of how they work. I want the guy that says "I use this twice a week for dandruff, and follow it up with a proper shampoo/conditioner to counter the harshness, and the other days I use this because it's cheaper." Or, the guy who says "what the fuck kind of question is that? You're an idiot. I'm out of hear, dumbass." You don't get that level of insight from a debate.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4774
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #203 on: May 14, 2019, 12:47:01 PM »
My point (since apparently this goes way back to what I said) was that  criticism of hers is dismissed as being borne of racism/sexism/misogyny, etc...

No, you said you can't criticize her WITHOUT being accused of racism/misogyny. That is false.

Quote
This "if you aren't with us you are against us!" mentality has not done this country any favors for the past 20 years. "You have not signed on to my $90 trillion dollar bill to re-completely change the structure of this nation's economy fight global warming, how dare you?! I have been a public servant for, like, 6 months, I totally know way more than the rest of you. And I will not compromise, discuss, and understand differences of thought and opinion even though that is the nature of politics, business, and basic societal interaction.

Almost every scientist who actually knows what they are talking about states that drastic measures are required to avoid catastrophic effects from climate change. Biden suggested that we find a "middle ground" solution. You don't solve problems by compromising with people who think the problem does not exist.

Offline Cool Chris

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 7848
  • Gender: Male
  • Rest in Peace
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #204 on: May 14, 2019, 12:53:55 PM »
My point (since apparently this goes way back to what I said) was that  criticism of hers is dismissed as being borne of racism/sexism/misogyny, etc...

No, you said you can't criticize her WITHOUT being accused of racism/misogyny. That is false.

Fair point, I am at work and not conveying my thoughts well here on this issue.

This "if you aren't with us you are against us!" mentality has not done this country any favors for the past 20 years. "You have not signed on to my $90 trillion dollar bill to re-completely change the structure of this nation's economy fight global warming, how dare you?! I have been a public servant for, like, 6 months, I totally know way more than the rest of you. And I will not compromise, discuss, and understand differences of thought and opinion even though that is the nature of politics, business, and basic societal interaction.

Almost every scientist who actually knows what they are talking about states that drastic measures are required to avoid catastophic effects from climate change. Biden suggested that we find a "middle ground" solution. You don't solve problems by compromising with people who think the problem does not exist.

But then why is the GND the only way to achieve this? You can be against that plan and not be a "climate change denier." Of course if you are against a plan you should come up with one of your own that is 1) more realistic, and 2) has a better chance of becoming law, and it sounds like that is something Biden is doing. And apparently being criticized for it solely because it doesn't do what team Sanders/Ocasio-Cortez wants it to.
"Nostalgia is just the ability to forget the things that sucked" - Nelson DeMille, 'Up Country'

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4774
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #205 on: May 14, 2019, 01:02:12 PM »
The GND doesn't actually lay out specific policy plans, it just sets out the aggressive goals that are required to actually avoid catastrophic damage. The whole point of the GND isn't that it's "The only solution". According to AOCits aim is to define the scale of the problem and kick start conversations on how to actually achieve them. There's very little that is controversial for anyone who actually believes in the science of climate change.

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 22457
  • Bad Craziness
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #206 on: May 14, 2019, 01:05:20 PM »
My point (since apparently this goes way back to what I said) was that  criticism of hers is dismissed as being borne of racism/sexism/misogyny, etc...

No, you said you can't criticize her WITHOUT being accused of racism/misogyny. That is false.

Fair point, I am at work and not conveying my thoughts well here on this issue.

This "if you aren't with us you are against us!" mentality has not done this country any favors for the past 20 years. "You have not signed on to my $90 trillion dollar bill to re-completely change the structure of this nation's economy fight global warming, how dare you?! I have been a public servant for, like, 6 months, I totally know way more than the rest of you. And I will not compromise, discuss, and understand differences of thought and opinion even though that is the nature of politics, business, and basic societal interaction.

Almost every scientist who actually knows what they are talking about states that drastic measures are required to avoid catastophic effects from climate change. Biden suggested that we find a "middle ground" solution. You don't solve problems by compromising with people who think the problem does not exist.

But then why is the GND the only way to achieve this? You can be against that plan and not be a "climate change denier." Of course if you are against a plan you should come up with one of your own that is 1) more realistic, and 2) has a better chance of becoming law, and it sounds like that is something Biden is doing. And apparently being criticized for it solely because it doesn't do what team Sanders/Ocasio-Cortez wants it to.
Who says that it is? Honestly, man, from what I see the only people keeping it in the spotlight are the people who cling to it as a convenient effigy. I gather you watch more cable news than I do, so I might well be wrong, but the right seems to spend far more time on it than the left does. Actually, this applies to AOC herself, hence this thread.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Online Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 21362
  • Gender: Male
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #207 on: May 14, 2019, 01:12:44 PM »
I've written RC monster truck how-to guides that were longer than the Green New Deal. I don't understand why people are holding it up to be this be all or end all document. It's not a document outlining specific policies, but rather a road map of what needs to be addressed and why it's urgent. I'm convinced nobody at Fox News has even read the fucking thing.   

If anyone is interested in what it says, you can read the whopping 13 pages (not including the title page) here:
https://www.brightest.io/green-new-deal

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 22457
  • Bad Craziness
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #208 on: May 14, 2019, 01:26:32 PM »
I've written RC monster truck how-to guides that were longer than the Green New Deal. I don't understand why people are holding it up to be this be all or end all document. It's not a document outlining specific policies, but rather a road map of what needs to be addressed and why it's urgent. I'm convinced nobody at Fox News has even read the fucking thing.   

If anyone is interested in what it says, you can read the whopping 13 pages (not including the title page) here:
https://www.brightest.io/green-new-deal
The strange part is that while half of it is ripe for ridicule, they're misrepresenting the reasonable parts and bashing them. It's like they read the first four pages and decided "yeah, we've got more than enough material now," and have no idea how the next 9 turned out.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7231
  • You can't spell "America" without "Erica"
Re: AOC thread
« Reply #209 on: May 14, 2019, 01:38:45 PM »
No, you said you can't criticize her WITHOUT being accused of racism/misogyny. That is false.

Eh, I don't really think it is. 

You don't solve problems by compromising with people who think the problem does not exist.

Of course you do, assuming of course that you actually do want to solve problems.  Refusal to compromise (even aside from being a strong indicator of gross immaturity) is very often entirely counterproductive, whereas compromise typically gives everyone something (but not everything) they want and moves the ball forward.  And it often fosters trust and respect that enable future, bigger compromises that move the ball even farther.  Belief in the opponent's concerns is not at all necessary to that process.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."