MI-GOV: Ocasio-Cortez hoping for 25% turnout or lower

[RandySF]

Link to tweet

?s=21

[Me.]

1. Wow...Really?

Suppress the vote? Is she really a Dem?

[R B Garr]

2. This was exactly my reaction. Unbelievable. nt

[oberliner]

4. Low turnout in primaries is a historical and mathematical fact

She’s saying if you encourage/inspire more voters that impact will have a higher chance of affecting a primary because of the math.

[R B Garr]

11. Actually, she is saying a lot more than that.

[pnwmom]

77. Sounds like she's saying the opposite -- that her candidate is more likely to win with low turnout.

[NCTraveler]

118. Lol nt

[oberliner]

135. Don't we usually give Democrats the benefit of the doubt?

[Hortensis]

180. Democrats believe in the will of the people,

though. We're the ones who believe in expanding the vote to include as many Democrats as possible in the electoral process, not in how to screw over the majority to get power.

A dissenting minority feels free only when it can impose its will on the majority: what it abominates most is the dissent of the majority. ~ Eric Hoffer

[RhodeIslandOne]

185. LOL

She's saying she wants the "right people" to show up.

[Ninsianna]

208. What an odd choice of words she used if that is what she intended to say. She managed

to say the exact opposite of your interpretation.

[sheshe2]

7. Sounds like it. nt

[brush]

9. Wonder what her backers think of this? She wants a lower turnout.

Astounding.

I've only heard that before from repugs.

What is the purpose of our GOTV campaigns if the suddenly famous media darling wants to actually suppress Dem votes?

[Me.]

13. Precisely

I've never heard of such a thing from a 'Dem'. Suppress the vote to win is the twin sister of Con gerrymandering.

[Blue_true]

149. Some are right here on DU defending her. nt

[JCanete]

14. That isn't what she said. And she's explained it well before. She's said that candidates who

have far less big money resources behind them have a chance when the knocking on doors matters, because that's one of the few tools these candidates have. If the opponent in the race doesn't excite his or her voters to get to the polls, whereas this candidate does, that distinction could put this candidate on the map, as it did for her.

She isn't campaigning to suppress the dem vote. Yes, she's really a dem.

[Me.]

20. Dear Me, Here I am Believing My Lying Eyes

despite spin

[JCanete]

60. She didnt' say at any point that the vote should be suppressed. Wehre did she say we should

suppress it? That's really a different thing than hoping people aren't that excited to go out to vote for Whitmer. Now, if she wanted that result in the GE, I'd agree with you, and I do think that its a fairly complicated argument to make. But unless you can cite where she hopes to literally discourage people from voting for Whitmer and staying home instead, or to literally obstruct people from voting for Whitmer, your interpretation is not meted out by the facts.

[Me.]

68. Thanks But I'll Take Her At Her Intention

[JCanete]

71. You'll put words in her mouth that don't exist. Put up already.

[Me.]

72. I'd Say Her Meaning Was Quite Clear

but it's your choice to defend that position as much as you like

[Hortensis]

182. She unquestionably sees low representation as

a good thing, a path to a victory that would not happen if more people voted. Sure, it's a statement of reality, but to try to slip candidates the people specifically don't want past them into office shows disregard and contempt for the will of the people.

And it shows clear awareness that the candidate she supports does not appeal to the majority.

[Me.]

190. Things Have Come To Such A Pass That Now

low representation can be viewed as a good thing...sigh

[Hortensis]

215. It always was by people who couldn't get elected

by majorities, of course. Ruthless anti-democracy political manipulators aren't the problem, it's voters who want them to do end runs around democracy to overcome the majorities who prefer another candidate. Democracy not as a guiding principle but as tool or obstruction depending.

[George II]

36. Okay, so what EXACTLY did she say? Apparently you heard/read something different.

[JCanete]

62. Hoping turnout is low due to excitement level for a candidate is not the same thing as advocating

for or hoping for voter suppression. That was the accusation. You want to take a different criticism about her statement, by all means, but we can at least try to be honest about what was said.

[George II]

73. I'll try again, so what EXACTLY did she say?

[JCanete]

75. First, did she say that votes should be suppressed? Show me you're serious about this conversation

and admit that nowhere does she suggest that.

[George II]

92. I'll try again, so what EXACTLY did she say?

[JCanete]

94. I'll try again. Prove you are being sincere and accept that she did not say votes should be

suppressed, that she did not advocate for voter suppression. If you want to talk about her statement being problematic then do so, but you jumped into a discussion where that accusation was levied. Do you agree with that accusation? Can you support it? Or do you admit that it was stretching?

[ehrnst]

99. "Prove you are being sincere"

Digging deep, are you?

[JCanete]

103. I dont' follow. Hope your laugh was cathartic though. nt

[ehrnst]

123. It was, thanks.

The words were yours, in case you forgot...

Nice try.

[honest.abe]

76. Pretzel logic.

Her candidate wins if low turnout but she not hoping for or advocating for low turnout.

[JCanete]

89. She is not advocating for low turnout and that shit doesn't even make sense...advocating to who,

Whitmer voters? She hopes they will hear her advice and stay home so that Whitmer's opponent wins? Did you think that through?

[honest.abe]

119. Wow.. that really clears thing up?!?!

I am done with this thread but just to say no matter what her real intentions are with what she said, it just doesnt sit right with me or I suspect most Democrats. We as Democrats have never suggested or commented or intimated that low voter turnout helps our candidate to win. That just sounds so GOPish and so wrong.

[pnwmom]

82. She said that her candidate has a majority of votes AS LONG AS the majority of voters don't vote.

The only logical conclusion to be drawn is that she hopes the majority of voters don't vote -- because that's what will benefit her candidate.

[JCanete]

87. and is that the same thing as hoping that voter suppression occurs, or advocating for it?

[pnwmom]

93. The OP didn't say she hoped or advocated for voter suppression, and neither do I.

But she seems to be happy with the thought that the voters might be disinterested.

[JCanete]

95. I wasn't responding to the op. I was responding to Me.

[pnwmom]

105. Your post 87 was responding to MY post 82. You and I were talking here. n/t

[JCanete]

107. my original post had to do with Me's claim, correct? Everyting that came after, presumably

was still under the umbrella of that conversation.

I appreciate that you alone have said that's not what you think she said. It has been pulling teeth for anybody else to admit that.

[kcr]

125. That makes absolutely no sense.

If your message excites voters, then money has absolutely nothing to do with it. You should want a high turnout. Your message is a popular one! You're exciting the voters with your message that the people want! That is something that outwardly they're always crowing about. Look at our rallies! If you have the people craving your message, you want them showing up.

What she's saying, and I'm really surprised that she's stupid enough to say it out loud, is their message is apparently really not all that popular which is why they're hoping for the low turn out.

[JCanete]

143. what? your point makes no sense. If you excite the voters that you reach but if you can't

reach nearly as many as your opponent can, because- incase you are just catching up - money does help to give you exposure, then you might excite a bunch of voters who have actually heard of you, and maybe even have directly talked to you because you went door to door. But you can't hit every voter that way.

So no that is clearly not what she is saying, because I've heard her speak to it in much more detail when she was on Morning Joe. It isn't at all her point. She is cognizent of the fact that upstart candidates don't have much of a prayer against well established, well bankrolled candidates unless those candidates are not exciting the base enough to come out in the primary. She recognizes the limitations of small campaigns in terms of outreach. That this honesty is a dangerous one to make public because of threads like this is something I certainly don't disagree with. That she would hope for such a thing on election day does certainly suggest to me a strategic blunder, since that's a hell of a last minute campaign slogan for El-Sayed's opponent, but the reaction is different than the statement.

To be clear, I would say that if you win with a small amount of turn-out, as Ocasio-Cortez did, the obvious problem with that is that it doesn't represent what kind of excitement you might produce in the GE. It doesn't necessarily even speak to whether or not you truly are the candidate who best meshes with the constituency of your district. But it also gives you a big chance to prove to your theoretical constituents that you are the best fit, and that's a chance you don't have if you just get buried in the primaries by far better funded and connected candidates.

[kcr]

146. They only go door to door?

They've never been to my door. How is it I've ever even heard of these people?

Sorry. Hoping for a low turnout never means anything good. It's why you never hear anyone besides her saying it because they aren't stupid enough to say it.

[lark]

42. No, she is not a Dem.

She is a Democratic Socialist, a different animal closely aligned, but definitely not the same at all.

[Me.]

45. Quite

[JCanete]

85. She is literally a democrat. You don't get to decide which of us who are registered as democrats

are democrats...or are you going to renege on the constant refrain here that we're a big tent? I say we both respect each other enough to not deny the other membership into this group that supposedly has common cause just because we have disagreements on philosophy, etc. but what say you? Reconsider? Or double down?

[whathehell]

171. Thank you.

The constant attempts to demonize this young woman would be dismaying, were it not so lame and predictable.

[brush]

184. I distinctly remember her saying she was a democratic socialist.

[JCanete]

191. What party did she run in? How is she registered? What's the point of trying to be cute? nt

[brush]

227. Trying to be cute? Are you kidding? We all just saw how the party was used...

Last edited Wed Aug 8, 2018, 12:22 PM - Edit history (1)

in 2016 by someone who ran on the Dem ticket only to leave the party after he was done with us.

That wasn't cute at all.

And IMO, AOC was used by the OR crowd to get their chosen candidates elected thousands of miles from her district. Looks like they failed again and it's tainted AOC.

[JCanete]

241. You don't get to decide what we as a party want, unilaterally. PLenty of us in the democratic party

welcomed Bernie.

They hardly failed. Your rubric is stupid and favors big money. They have a far harder slog and they know it, and you know it, or should. But they got on the map...welder put up a strong fight but was swamped by the excitement that surrounded Davids that was certainly shared by big institutions. I'd like to say voters here were excited for her policies, but I have yet to see a post here on DU citing one position of hers that made them cut that way.

How many small donors does it take to make up big lobbyist contributions? Do you want to pretend money has no impact on exposure and that connectedness to the establishment democratic insiders doesn't help you with newspaper endorsements, etc. ? The bottom line is that rich democrats have a lot of influence and they I'm sure, are deeply caring people, but almost none of them believe in a system of economic justice...they believe we have a meritocracy that should most benefit the most "productive" in society, albeit somewhat less-so than it does now. They believe in equality of opportunity, that I'm sure, but that just isn't the same thing.

Now, who do you think their papers and their companies, etc. are going to endorse and support?

hint: probably nobody with socialist in their self-styled label.

[brush]

242. You don't get to decide either. And I still say they used AOC.

And if we keep up this Dem vs Dem it'll be a repeat of 2016 and trump will win again.

[Cha]

116. It's not Democratic to want low turnout..

She's desperate to admit the only way Abdul could win is if people stay home.

[Me.]

122. And No One Forced Her To...

"Osacio-Cortez Offered a peculiar stratagem"

stratagems (plural noun)
a plan or scheme, especially one used to outwit an opponent or achieve an end.
"a series of devious stratagems"
synonyms: plan · scheme · tactic · maneuver · move · course/line of action · ploy · gambit · device · wile · trick · ruse · plot · machination · subterfuge · artifice · [more]

archaic
skill in devising plans or schemes; cunning.
synonyms: trickery · cunning · artfulness · craftiness · craft · wiles · chicanery · skulduggery · deceit · deception · artifice · cheating · dissimulation · [more]

[Cha]

126. Right.. and Yet all kinds of Pretzel logic

coming from the defenders of said stratagem.

Mahalo for the dictionary definition, Me

[Cha]

169. Sweet! Gretchen Whitmer: I voted! Make sure you do too!

Link to tweet

[W_HAMILTON]

3. Wasn't that essentially how she won her primary?

[honest.abe]

5. Yes, the turnout was tiny around 13%

I think she won by about 4000 votes.

That's not the best way to win.

[oberliner]

10. She worked hard to get those votes and her opponent didn't work as hard

Which shows that in a low-turnout primary (as most midterm primaries are) you can have a huge impact if you turn out your voters.

[honest.abe]

12. It sounds like a GOP style tactic.

[R B Garr]

15. It sure does sound like that. GOP loves low voter turnout.

Justice Democrats is funded by a so-called "ex Republican".

[George II]

24. That's not entirely true. Voters in NY were expecting a primary in September....

....when the highly visible Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and Attorney General primaries are being held.

To illustrate that, the voter turnout in June 2018 was roughly equivalent to the last primary in the district almost 20 years ago. Surely the voter base in 2018 is much higher than 20 years ago.

[OnDoutside]

31. That is something that needs to change. That's how Ted Cruz won his primary in 2012.

[dsc]

115. that one was a new definition of low

I live in a vastly less Democratic district (my seat is rated as solid GOP) and the turnout in the primary was about double her district by number. The turnout in that primary was nothing short of appalling especially given that the Democratic primary was nearly certain to be the election. That said, the fault is her opponents more than hers.

[George II]

30. It was 11%, and she got 6% of the vote of registered Democrats in the district.

[honest.abe]

33. Thanks for the correction.

I wasnt sure of the actual number. I knew it was tiny.

[George II]

34. No problem - the turnout was about 27,000 in a district with 245,000 registered Democrats.

[oberliner]

6. Yes, in a low turnout primary - getting out your voters will have an enormous impact

It's mathematically easier to pull off an upset when the pool of people voting is smaller as it historically is in midterm primaries.

[kcr]

21. And just how do you get that pool to shrink?

Yeah...

[George II]

25. Um, tell people not to get out and vote. Which is essentially what it seems she's doing.

[kcr]

136. That's what I was getting at, yes.

Actually, I think their style is more attacking other Dems, but yes.

I think her real goof was giving up the fact that their messaging really isn't as popular as they claim. Whenever a campaign is hoping for low turnout, that means their internals aren't telling them anything good.

[George II]

139. Exactly. I guess she's looking at her own primary, where turnout was 11%.

[R B Garr]

8. Yes. She was very aware of it back then, too, as I heard her on a talk show

explaining in detail how the low voter turnout helped her.

[George II]

19. Exactly, she got 6% of the votes of registered Democrats in her district.

[George II]

16. That's the way to sneak in.

However, based on how the campaign has gotten nasty over the last week or so (i.e., accusing the opposition TWICE of "money laundering" ) I wouldn't be surprised if the electorate is energized.

This is unbelievable. With all the Democrats talking for the last decade about the importance of getting out the vote and the GOTV campaigns, she's encouraging suppression of the vote?

I just don't understand it. This is not the party I belong to.

[mcar]

17. Now where have I heard that philosophy before?

[George II]

26. That's one of the first rules of republican campaign strategy - suppress the vote.

[mcar]

28. Yep

Sad to see from a Democrat.

[comradebillyboy]

18. I am less and less impressed by Ocasio-Cortez every day.

I am sorry Joe Crowley didn't bother to campaign in the primary.

[lapucelle]

22. This is almost as troubling as the "crossover vote in the open primary" strategy.

Has that happened in Michigan?

[kcr]

23. Someone forgot to turn on the filter.

Not the first time for her, either.

[OKNancy]

27. Her once shining star has really faded

She’s such a neophyte. But anyway her guy in the last poll two weeks ago was it 19%. I don’t think Gretchen will have much problem winning this one .

[George II]

32. She has yet to actively campaign against a republican, all of her campaigning efforts....

....have been against Democrats.

[theaocp]

35. I imagine that will change once primary season is over. n/t

[AlexSFCA]

37. cant wait to see that

she seems smart but I would like to see her debate kgop.

[George II]

38. I know of only two candidates who have been actively campaigning outside their district....

....and/or state.

[theaocp]

40. Okay. She must be one of them.

That continues to allow her the opportunity to attack Republicans in both her own race and others with extreme prejudice. It should be fun. Primaries are never really fun, I think we can all agree.

[George II]

44. All she's "attacked" (i.e., campaigned against) so far this year is Democrats, in her district.....

...(Crowley), in Kansas, Michigan, Pennsylvania, etc.

I follow NYC campaigns closely, I haven't seen her make one campaign appearance against Pappas.

[theaocp]

46. Again, okay. So look forward to her attacks in the coming days. Cheers to that. n/t

[bigtree]

98. she's running a smart campaign. Talking about her republican opponent just gives him a platform

..at her expense.

Likewise, jumping ahead of people she supports and engaging their opponent would be the height of arrogance, especially if not asked to by the candidate.

The political logic expressed here is amateurish and purely reserved for AOC alone. It's hypocritical and completely makes a lie about all of the blather from her opponents about 'unity' and supporting Dems.

They ask why she isn't attacking republicans while actively attacking her. It's a game for fools, and it should be against the rules here for open season on a Democratic nominee. Look how they taunt her about their invented concern about AOC losing her race. It's sickening partisanship which I'd expect from ..., not from Democrats here, but there it is..

[lapucelle]

133. She also endorsed Nixon over Cuomo in the Democratic state governor's primary.

That's not until September, so this may go on a while.

[qazplm135]

59. it better

or her bloom will fade quickly.

[Squinch]

51. No, but her guy gave the GOP plenty to smear Gretchen with in the general.

Honestly, the stupidity.

[theaocp]

80. OMG, it's a primary!

It's like after a mass shooting: it's too soon to talk about it. Then WHY bother having primaries at all? Politics is dirty. Everyone acts like this is nothing but Republicans running against the ONE TRUE DEMOCRAT. If you want to have everyone saying the exact same thing and having the voters choose, that's not reality. Foes attack their opponent. It happens. Then, they're supposed to slap hands, say "good game", and support the winners. I realize everyone is afraid of conservatives, but unite fucking TOMORROW.

Today, we primary. Tomorrow, we slaughter conservatives.

[Squinch]

83. Its a primary in 2018. And you still don't get that this is different from every other primary we

have ever had since this country was born.

[theaocp]

101. I know.

That could be said by anybody with a megaphone for every primary. We are where we are. Work with the army you have and not the army you wish you had. That's 45's territory.

[Squinch]

110. No, intelligent people understand that, unlike what you have just said, this is not like every

primary. Like I said, you clearly just don't get it.

[theaocp]

112. Thanks for clarifying that you see me as unintelligent.

Enjoy the rest of your day.

[Cha]

100. El Sayed Accused Gretchen of "Money Laundering" and

then he Deleted it Finally. Then he Accused her of "Legally Money Laundering".. then he Deleted that.

Some are smarter in Primaries than Abdul.

[theaocp]

106. Yea, I know. You've been on that tip for days now.

If she wins, I'll support her hands down. While I support El-Sayed, I don't want more Republicans in my state. Christ, I worked my ass off on the streets to get Proposition 2 on the ballot, so we get more of the peoples' representatives in our legislature. If it must be Whitmer, it sure as fuck won't be a Republican. Peace, Cha.

[Cha]

109. Too bad you don't like it pointed out. Abdul was on it for days.

[theaocp]

114. Like I could stop you?

I said, "Peace, Cha." Damn. You're welcome to come visit Michigan anytime. Our lakes are pretty great.

[Cha]

121. Gretchen Whitmer for Governor of Michigan!

Link to tweet

Endorsements..

Progressive groups:

EMILY’s List
MI List
Michigan Association for Justice
Progressive Women’s Alliance
Sierra Club Michigan Chapter
Planned Parenthood Advocates of Michigan

Unions (representing more than 1 million Michigan workers):

the Michigan AFL-CIO;
the United Auto Workers;
the Michigan Education Association;
the Michigan Construction and Building Trades Council;
the Michigan Regional Council of Carpenters and Millwrights;
the Michigan State Utility Workers Council;
the Michigan Pipe Trades Association;
the Michigan Joint Council of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union;
the Service Employees International Union
United Food and Commercial Workers Locals 876 and 951;
United Steelworkers;
Communications Workers of America District 4;
Iron Workers Local 25;
the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Joint Council #43;
the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades District Council 1M;
the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Michigan State Conference;
the Michigan Professional Fire Fighters Union;
AFSCME Council 25;
the Michigan Laborers District Council

Progressive leaders:

Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan
Former Governor Jim Blanchard
Wayne County Executive Warren Evans
Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy
Wayne County Sheriff Benny Napoleon
Oakland County Treasurer Andy Meisner
Oakland County Water Resources Commissioner Jim Nash
Oakland County Commissioner Helaine Zack
Oakland County Commissioner Gary McGillivray
Macomb County Executive Mark Hackel
Macomb County Sheriff Anthony Wickersham
Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith
U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand
U.S. Rep. Sander Levin (D-MI09) of Royal Oak
U.S. Rep. Dan Kildee (D-MI05) of Flint Township
U.S. Rep. Brenda Lawrence (D-MI14) of Southfield
U.S. Rep Debbie Dingell (D-MI12) of Dearborn
Former Michigan Attorney General Frank J. Kelley
Lansing Mayor Andy Schor
Senate Democratic Leader Jim Ananich (Flint)
Democratic Senate Floor Leader Morris Hood III (Detroit)
Senator Steve Bieda (Warren)
Senator Hoon-Yung Hopgood (Taylor)
Senator Vincent Gregory (Lathrup Village)
Senator Curtis Hertel (East Lansing)
Senator Rebekah Warren (Ann Arbor)
Democratic House Leader Sam Singh (East Lansing)
Democratic House Floor Leader Christine Greig (Farmington Hills)
Representative Jeremy Moss (Southfield)
Representative Erika Geiss (Taylor)
Representative Fred Durhal (Detroit)
Representative Sherry Gay-Dagnogo (Detroit)
Representative Stephanie Chang (Detroit)
Representative Leslie Love (Detroit)
Representative Robert Kosowski (Westland)
Representative Kevin Hertel (St. Clair Shores)
Representative Kristy Pagan (Canton)
Representative Robert Wittenberg (Huntington Woods)
Representative Patrick Green (Warren)
Representative Tim Greimel (Auburn Hills)
Representative Pam Faris (Clio)
Representative Phil Phelps (Flint)
Representative Tim Sneller (Burton)
Representative Donna Lasinski (D-Scio Township)
Representative Ronnie Peterson (Ypsilanti)
Representative Jon Hoadley (Kalamazoo)
Representative Tom Cochran (Mason)
Representative David LaGrand (Grand Rapids)
Representative Winnie Brinks (Grand Rapids)
Representative Terry Sabo (Muskegon)
Representative Sara Cambensy (Marquette)
Representative Scott Dianda (Calumet)
Oak Park Mayor Marian McClellan

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=10966949

[joshcryer]

144. Primaries are dirty yes, but if you run a dirty primary...

...you better damn well support the other candidate with as much ferocity as you attacked them. Which is highly unlikely to happen here. These candidates after running scorched earth campagins if they lose they go back and slink away.

[lapucelle]

231. "Politics is dirty"?

"It's like after a mass shooting: it's too soon to talk about it"?

[joshcryer]

140. Not really.

People who already like her and read negative stuff about her will only be more favored toward her.

[LonePirate]

29. Regardless if we do or do not like the outcome, we should encourage everyone to vote.

While 100% turnout may be impossible to achieve, we should always want it to be as high as possible and we should do whatever is legal to ensure that turnout is high.

[Gothmog]

39. Wanting a low turnout is a sign of weakness

[DinahMoeHum]

41. The full story, from Playboy magazine. . .

Last edited Tue Aug 7, 2018, 05:47 PM - Edit history (1)

https://www.playboy.com/read/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-michigan-primary?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=native&utm_content=article

. . .therein is the Ocasio-Cortez gambit that could either bolster her star power or, should it prove less transferrable, turn her into this year’s hottest summer fad. The concept of a previously anonymous woman who has yet to actually even be elected zipping around the nation declaring she knows how it’s done is an American political novelty; even that other zero-to-hero Democratic phenom, Barack Obama, waited until he was in the U.S. Senate before publicly lending his rarified aura and fundraising prowess to others.

“She’s now staked her name and reputation on this Michigan race and she’s campaigning for candidates in Massachusetts, Mississippi and Florida,” says Donald Zinman, political science professor at Grand Valley State University near Grand Rapids, where Ocasio-Cortez and El-Sayed spoke to a crowd of 1,000 recently. “If all those candidates lose, it does suggest fairly or not that she is not as influential that people maybe think she is. She’s a very promising young woman who could have a great career and work up the ladder, but a lot of people in Michigan are going to ask what authority she has to inject herself in our governor’s race.”

[lapucelle]

120. More of the full story from the Playboy interview,

That [low voter turnout] remark may join the many gaffes she’s committed—and that right-wing media outlets have enjoyed exploiting—in the month since she popped on the scene. She’s claimed the U.S. was not oriented toward capitalism at its birth, she was incorrect about the mechanics of military spending and showed a misunderstanding of how the unemployment rate is calculated. Norm Ornstein, the American Enterprise Institute scholar, was among those urging her, via Twitter, to “stop campaigning & do a crash course on basics, including economics and foreign policy. Otherwise, she will stumble badly out of the blocks and do major damage. Early impressions hard to erase.”

snip===================================

Case in point: After telling that Flint story and then referencing the launch of her Congressional campaign in the spring of 2017, she went on this rant: “After two years of being ignored, two years of knocking on doors, two years of people saying, ‘Little girl, it ain’t possible’, two years of stop selling a pipe dream, two years of saying this country won’t vote for Medicare-for-all, two years of people saying tuition-free college isn’t supported even in the state of New York, two years of saying a Green New Deal is not possible, two years of that where we proved all of it wrong.”

On my own Twitter account, I wondered how it could be two years if she started running a year ago. To which one of my followers replied with an apt distillation of Ocasio-Cortez’s response to pretty much every criticism or naysayer: “Oh shut up.”

It is also interesting that in the two years she says people were telling her that tuition free college and a living minimum wage were "impossible", the Democratic governor of NY was actually getting it done.

https://www.suny.edu/suny-news/press-releases/10-2017/10-1-17/tuition-free-suny-cuny-numbers.html

https://www.ny.gov/new-york-states-minimum-wage/new-york-states-minimum-wage

https://www.playboy.com/read/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-michigan-primary

[OilemFirchen]

128. The author's presumption is faulty.

If "her" candidates lose (and they will), it will suggest that she is a one-off locally, and failure nationally. That won't bode well for her mentors, either.

She'll put in her two years and, at best, fade from view. Especially in light of NY's impending redistricting.

[TeamPooka]

43. this was part of the Tea party's strategy too.

[oasis]

74. It certainly has the Tea Party......aroma.

[Renew Deal]

47. That's how she won and why she would be vulnerable if Crowley ran in the GE

[brush]

48. Could be problems then. He's not actively running but his name is on the ballot.

Wonder if people in her district feel neglected by AOC campaigning everywhere but at home?

[theaocp]

53. Are you advocating people don't support the Democratic candidate, as she irritates you?

That sounds like ratfuckery. Why else "wonder"?

[Renew Deal]

55. DU is a wonderous place

And wondering is sort of the point as well as corn flake chicken.

[brush]

56. Oh please. I don't live in that district or even the state.

You do know that Crowley's name is on the ballot, right?

Just as I see disillusionment here on DU with her campaigning against other Dems, especially incumbent Dems, thousands of miles from her district, word gets back to New York.

Just saying she should take care of home instead of doing rat fuckery herself.

[theaocp]

61. Unfortunate.

I was with you until your last sentence. Yes, I do know Crowley is on the ballot. Thanks for the clarity. I don't think she's doing ratfuckery, but I suppose that's a matter of opinion these days. Even if she wins, people will try to distance themselves from "that woman" unless she is everything they want and desire. It's like the purity test times Pantera.

[brush]

91. Ratfuckery is in the eye of the beholder. Did you see the clip of her on income inequality?

[theaocp]

97. These days, everything is in the eye of the beholder. Just ask 45. lol

I saw the clip. There's more to that than the headline, for sure. We have a big tent and if it can bring in Manchin, Heitkamp, et al, it can make some room for "that woman", yes?

[brush]

104. I've never used the term "that woman". My issue is her campaigning against Dem incumbents.

And as far as the income inequality faux pas, I just chalk that up to inexperience in blaming that on too-old Democrats.

[theaocp]

108. I guess we disagree with the campaigning against the incumbents, but

inexperience can be fixed. Take it easy.

[brush]

127. Give me your reasons for backing campaigning against a Democratic incumbent...

who has proven he/she can win a general election?

We need majorities in the legislative bodies to get Dem platform policies to the floor and passed into law.

We need numbers. Swapping one Dem for another does not gain us a seat.

It's all about the math for me. Spinning our wheels trying to oust sitting Dems makes no sense to me. Let's get the numbers first so we can move to the left.

Without the majority we have no power. We see that in Washington where we control nothing because we are in the minority—no speakership, no Senate Majority leader, no committee chairpersons.

We can do nothing without the numbers.

[R B Garr]

244. Crowley is a Democrat. Wasn't the refrain used before

that voters deserve lots of choices on the ballot so staying on longer was good for the voters....I distinctly remember that argument. Has something changed??

[Squinch]

49. I really did like her when I first saw her, and I thought she was great for Brooklyn. Now

I truly hope someone talks some sense into her.

This is disgusting.

[lapucelle]

137. We're curious to see what happens in the runup to the September primary.

I'm wondering whether Nixon will run third party if she loses and if so, who will endorse her.

[Squinch]

145. Nixon is ridiculous.

[lapucelle]

150. She went upstate to campaign. She spelled "Ithaca" wrong in her invites.

"Cynthia is coming to Ithica!" the subject line of the email to supporters reads.

"Will you sign up now to attend a candidate meet & greet in Ithica on Sunday evening, and learn how you can be involved?" the invite continues.

"Ithica Round-Table with Cynthia Nixon," the email continues.

Ithaca Mayor Svante Myrick wasn't too offended by the mistake, saying, "We all make typos." But Myrick is supporting Gov. Andrew Cuomo for a third term, and he said the typo may go to a larger concern he has about Nixon's candidacy.

https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/politics/albany/2018/06/01/oops-cynthia-nixons-campaign-misspells-ithaca-repeatedly-invitation/663930002/

[Squinch]

152. Oh, dear.

[lapucelle]

156. My son lives in Ithica. His partner is doing a Ph.D. at Cornnel.

[Squinch]

158. I hear there's a nice skool there.

[lapucelle]

166. It's part of the Ivory Leeg.

[DinahMoeHum]

179. Very interesting paradox here. . .

The Working Families Party endorsed Joseph Crowley. He lost the Democratic primary to AOC.
He's still on the ballot on that party line. Will he play spoiler (ala Joe Lieberman)?

Thing is, Cynthia Nixon is also on the WFP line, for Governor.
I severely doubt she's going to get the Democratic primary win.
Will she also play spoiler?

[lapucelle]

181. Joe Crowley is not running.

If Nixon loses the primary, she has five options:
1. move
2. die
3. accept a spot on the ballot in a different race (if one is offered to her by WFP)
4. remain on the ballot, but endorse the Democrat, refuse to campaign, and keep a low profile
5. actively run for governor against the Democratic candidate

It remains to be seen what choice Nixon will make if she loses.

[DinahMoeHum]

183. I'll believe that when he's officially off the line.

Hopefully, if Nixon does not get the nomination, she will follow suit and urge NYers to vote Democratic.

[lapucelle]

186. You can believe whatever you choose to believe.

I live here, and I'm very active locally. Joe Crowley is not running, and Ocasio-Cortez will win her election.

We'd love to see her here in Nassau County to help us topple Peter King and put Emily's List/OR endorsed Democrat Liuba Grechen Shirley in his seat.

[DFW]

50. I get where she's coming from

Low voter turnout in a primary gives an outsider a better chance at an upset victory-no one knows that better than she does.

However, gleefully noting that doesn't lend much credibility to the vital messsge of GOTV that we need in November. An advocate of GOTV on a selective basis doesn't exactly inspire a lot of trust in the messenger.

The fact that she has so far only campaigned against Democrats is her biggest negative for me. Shooting at your allies requires a lot less guts than taking the fight to your enemies.

[theaocp]

54. Agree and disagree.

I don't like the idea of suppressing the vote. Not cool. However, of course she's campaigning against CERTAIN Democrats. She's trying to spread the progressive message when it will have the greatest impact. I think we can all agree that primaries SUCK. Nobody likes infighting (well, maybe the whole Bravo network), but it's how evolution works.

[Cha]

57. AOC is WRONG to want the Vote Suppressed

It's a non Democratic tactic. She sounds desperate.

Besides Gretchen Whitmer is a much better candidate than Abdul El Sayed.

[theaocp]

64. You made me laugh.

I didn't think it was possible, but seriously, what is up with Vote Supressed? Either way, I think I made clear it's not a good tactic. Learning moment, for sure. Show her the "goo-goo" tape from 1980. I disagree about Whitmer, but it's all good. My voting today is done and I'll support whoever comes out of the Democratic primary with the fury of the anti-45. There is no room for compromise these days! Rooooooaaarrrrrr!

[Cha]

84. AOC sounds desperate.. hoping for low turnout.

[theaocp]

90. We'll see in a few hours.

The polls are supposed to close at 8P. If Whitmer wins, I'll be behind her 110%.

[ehrnst]

79. +1000. (nt)

[Tom Rinaldo]

65. I hate voter supression also. But she isn't advocating that

She is saying that a strong GOTV effort among your constituency can deliver an election in which the average voters is relatively apathetic. She is right about that.

[theaocp]

67. I agree, but it came across poorly.

This is what the quote means: "Good judgment is the result of years of experience. Experience is the result of years of bad judgment."

[Tom Rinaldo]

86. We can agree on that. n/t

[kcr]

111. Then why didn't she say that? That's entirely different than what she actually said.

There's more and more of this I'm going to project what I wanted my OR candidate to say when they say something stupid/awful and then claim that's what they actually said. How about realizing that these poorly vetted candidates are crappy and demanding more from OR?

[ehrnst]

124. You got that from what she said?

Really?

[Gothmog]

70. The only way that this candidate can win is in low turnout

That is a sign of weakness and would hurt the winner in the primary.

Michigan has suffered under a GOP governor for 7+ years and we need a Democratic candidate who can win in the general election. Whitmer can win but I doubt that they other candidates would be able to come close

[DFW]

81. I have no idea who or what the Bravo network is

I live in Europe, so forgive me if I have missed something

I see that she is campaigning against certain Democrats, but I find her choice of Democrats to campaign against to be questionable at best. Whitmer in MI and Davids in Kansas are perfectly acceptable Democrats, and certainly have not committed sins great enough to deserve derailment, and nor have their OR-endorsed opponents proven themselves to be so saintly as to warrant abandoning our best chances for a pickup.

Some primaries suck but are needed for the greater good. I don't find either of these two races to fall into that category, and thus fall into the category of self-promotion, which I do not condone outside the district or State being contested.

[theaocp]

88. No worries.

I'm a native Michigander, so forgive me not supporting Whitmer TODAY. Should she win, I'll have her back tomorrow. The Bravo Network is best known for overly-dramatic television, such as the Real Housewives of Wherever.

Can anyone give me a list of OR-endorsed candidates? I haven't been able to find one and don't follow OR.

[DFW]

113. I'm sure they must have a web site somewhere

Last edited Tue Aug 7, 2018, 06:19 PM - Edit history (1)

We have no Bravo network in Germany, so that is why I didn't get the reference.

Not supporting Whitmer in the primary is not the same as actively trying to take her down. That is a fine line I applaud you for not crossing. Too many others do so with suspiciously great enthusiasm.

[joshcryer]

147. She's not wrong but it's definitely a gaff.

And it's sending a signal to other supporters that this is the proper strategy.

And this is why the leading candidate is being attacked so heavily, they want to give people no good reason to go vote, because the leading candidate is "bad" and the other candidate is, well, you know why people won't vote for El-Sayed in MI, but if you say it you're a terrible person. Put it this way, same reason Sharice Davids is a long shot in KS.

[safeinOhio]

52. To get out the vote you need good organizing, like

the UAW, Teamsters and Teacher Unions, like the other candidate has.

[Kaleva]

58. 25% turnout would be a record in Michigan for a primary election.

[workinclasszero]

63. WTF?

Hoping for a low democratic voter turnout?

[Tiggeroshii]

66. The same rule applied to Trump

Turnout was higher in Michigan which put him over the top. If less people voted (especially in the reddest districts), Hillary would have won.

[ehrnst]

69. Straight out of the GOP playbook.

WTF?

[bigtree]

78. one of the things I'll long remember

...is how much this Democratic NOMINEE was CAMPAIGNED AGAINST here in your obsessive string of posts.

I haven't noticed but a few anti-Dem candidate threads here. Yours stand out because of all of the concern expressed about supporting Dems and so forth.

I don't think I've seen one criticizing a Democratic nominee other than AOC.

I've never seen anything like it against a Democratic nominee.

It's been normalized here (jury apparently is fine with it), but I'll bet the honor is only reserved for AOC.

Glad these races are over. Good time to disconnect from AOC critics. I've absolutely had enough of this.

[brush]

96. Be fair. AOC has campaigned against more than one Dem incumbent. Not a good thing.

That's my issue with her. Unfortunately she seems to be following the Our Revolution/you know who playbook in that regard.

[Cha]

102. Yeah, he can't address what AOC said in the OP.. trying

to change the subject.

[bigtree]

117. she's doing it in a primary IN FAVOR of Democratic candidates

...don't just lie about it. What she's doing is legitimate and not just something that she's doing alone. EVERY candidate and their supporters are campaigning against SOMEONE in our primary. Only AOC is getting pilloried for it here.

And that's my issue, what's occurring on this Democratic board. Pretending like this is normal is dishonest. We're not supposed to be pummeling Democratic nominees here, essentially doing the work of the republican opposition for them.

This is an all-out attack against AOC, primarily for having the temerity to participate in our primary. Not on the issues she raises in support of the candidates she advocates for, but on the basis of her participation, alone.

It's a disgusting trend which has soured the primary here. It shouldn't be allowed or tolerated. This isn't the campaign and we have rules that are supposed to prevent piling onto a nominee, no matter what's occurring on the trail.

The most ridiculous claim is that she's only attacking Democrats. It's not only a despicable lie, it's dirt-dump politics to give your opponents a platform by giving them attention. Just shows how craven the effort is against her here. She's busy telling voters what she and the people she supports stand for, and folks here are bashing her for it.

She has a perfect right, just like her Democratic opponents criticize their Democratic rivals, to criticize them in our primary, if she sees fit, but the claim that it's her main enterprise is the type of lie that should not be allowed to be swung around like a cudgel.

It's a measure of just how nasty the campaigning against her here has gotten. It's been personal and demagogic. It's a DU shame.

[George II]

175. How many candidates are traveling all over the country participating in OTHERS' primaries?

Not many.

You keep complaining about "all-out attacks" over and over again. She was well received and congratulated after she won on June 26. But the "all-out attacks" (an exaggeration) began mounting a few days after her primary ONLY when she attacked Joe Crowley, falsely claiming he was "mounting a third-party candidacy" against her, then proceeded to attack the decorated war hero (who lost 2-1/2 limbs in battle) Senator Tammy Duckworth, then moved on to Kirsten Gilibrand - all within days of her June 26 victory. And on and on. Seems you don't see those, only the reactions to such attacks.

Now she's attacking the Democratic Party in general, saying our leaders are "too old" and hoping for LOW turnout in Michigan, which is contrary to the very premise of the Democratic Party. We see around here that some want the Democratic Party to be a "big tent" party, but to some that's fine as long as that tent isn't too full.

What she's receiving by many (not just here) is not "craven", it's precisely what you defend about her. I'm sorry you don't see that.

[brush]

176. Why would you call me a liar in your first sentence?

Is there a comprehension problem? Has she not campaigned against Dem incumbents in some races. That is my issue with her.

Campaigning against a Democratic incumbent who has proven he/she can win a general election makes little sense to me.

We need majorities in the legislative bodies to get Dem platform policies to the floor and passed into law. Swapping one Dem for another does not gain us a seat, does not whittle down the repug majority.

It's all about the math for me. Spinning our wheels trying to oust sitting Dems is not smart if we want to gain power, in fact, dumping a proven winner for an untested Dem might lose us a seat. Let's get the numbers first so we can move to the left.

Without the majority we have no power. We see that in Washington where we control nothing because we are in the minority—no speakership, no Senate Majority leader, no committee chairpersons to hold hearings and conduct investigations.

We have to work smart. Back Dem candidates in races held by repugs. It's not rocket science, folks.

[George II]

188. I've been called that by that person several times in these discussions. I just....

.....

[George II]

172. 3....2....1...."it's participating in the democratic process"

[George II]

138. Perhaps a lot of the pushback she's getting is because since June...

...she's been criticizing the Democratic Party and has traveled to several states (other than her own) to campaign against Democrats.

Maybe once she starts supporting her Party and stops bashing it and other Democrats (not nominees but respected Democratic OFFICE HOLDERS) the criticism will end.

That would be welcome.

[Cha]

163. Yes, shocking that AOC is getting Pushback on a Democratic

Underground Board!

Ocasio-Cortez: House Democrats too old to understand income inequality

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=10973695

[wonkwest]

177. It's a Bernie thing

Transparently so. She supported him. The original sin. And now she must be burned.

In all these outrage threads about her, I'm always chuckling because of the hypocrisy involved. "Support All Dems! (er, except for that one). Don't bash! (er, it's ok to bash her). We're a big tent! (er, except progressives aren't so good)." And on and on and on.

I mean, I know why this place is like this, but can't say because the last time I did I earned a hide.

I'll just say, Millennial politics and concerns are very much condescended to if not met with outright hostility here very, very often. OC is the latest incarnation of my generation to come to the fore, so she must be beaten down.

Whack whack whack whack.

I'm just glad message boards don't seem populated by working political strategists with an effect on outcomes. It would be disastrous.

[brer cat]

178. Really?

I've never seen anything like it against a Democratic nominee.

Did you sleep through the 2016 primary?

[Cha]

210. Score!

brer

[pwb]

129. He said she said ? Give her a break.

How she will vote is what counts. Putins bots are picking on this young lady big time. She will be great. Much better than than the (R) Russian party. Lots here falling for the divide tactics again. Sad to read. She is a fucking democrat people.

[dansolo]

200. Stop with the russian bot accusations

Funny how some posters will accept any and all attacks of the Democratic Party, but when there is pushback, those posters are accused of being russian bots in order to shut them up. That is the same thing Republicans are doing with their calls for "civility". If AOC is going to follow Bernie's approach of attacking the Democratic Party as a whole, she will righfully get criticized for it.

[betsuni]

202. Thank you!

[Cha]

211. Mahalo, dansolo!

Exactly!

[OilemFirchen]

130. Anyone hoping for low turnout in ANY election can go fuck themselves.

That she's doing so for her own self-aggrandizement is pathetic.

[kcr]

131. That really shows her inexperience. And also how El-Sayed has no chance,

I'm sure she had no clue she was blabbing stuff she shouldn't have been blabbing, either.

[Voltaire2]

132. Where is the link to Ocasio-Cortez actually saying

the things she is “said to have said”? What you have quoted smells like intentionally divisive spin doctoring to me.

[lapucelle]

142. Here's the link.

The tweet is from the interviewer/author of the article.

https://www.playboy.com/read/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-michigan-primary

Here's the full paragraph:

In fact, part of Ocasio-Cortez offered a peculiar stratagem to me for putting El-Sayed over the top next week that suggested she knows her approach works best when, uh, the other side’s voters don’t show up: “All you need to look at is voter turnout. Only 25 percent of Michiganders vote in the primary. So, so long as the majority of people don’t vote, then the majority of votes are there to win the primary.” (Actually, just 17.4 percent of registered voters in Michigan turned out for the primary in 2014, the last non-presidential election year.)

[Voltaire2]

157. That is peculiar tortured English followed by spin.

“part of Ocasio-Cortez offered a peculiar stratagem to me for putting El-Sayed over the top next week that suggested she knows her approach works best when, uh, the other side’s voters don’t show up”

Which part was that? Plus the clue it’s bullshit is “suggested she knows”.

You’re being played to increase the divisions.

[lapucelle]

164. I'm not being played.

You asked for a link. I gave it to you.

Now I'll give you the AOC quote from the interview:

“All you need to look at is voter turnout. Only 25 percent of Michiganders vote in the primary. So, so long as the majority of people don’t vote, then the majority of votes are there to win the primary.”

If you think the quote is fake or doctored, you should take it up with the author or his editor.

[R B Garr]

187. She was very knowledgeable and conversant about her

own win due to low turnout.

[doxyluv13]

134. Progressive Derangement at DU???? She never said she was hoping for low turn out.

Read it, guys. The most she's saying is that with only 25% turnout, you don't need anything like a majority of registered Democrats to vote for you to win. This idea is dumb as her best rationale for her candidate going into the primary but to suggest GOP-like motives of vote-suppression is against the facts and vile.

[Cha]

174. AOC is Getting Pushback from her OWN WORDS.

Your spinning that is Not working.

Gretchen Whitmer's encouraging Michiganders to GOTV!

Link to tweet

[ehrnst]

141. In Ocasio-Cortez' New York City Campaign Finance Board profile,

she claimed to have been a “Foreign Affairs & Immigration Liaison” for Ted Kennedy, who died in 2009 when Ocasio-Cortez was 19 years old.

This raises questions.

[DFW]

153. It may just be a fancy way of saying "intern."

Though having interned for Teddy Kennedy, if that's what she did, doesn't seem to me to be something needing any embellishment at all.

[ehrnst]

154. Indeed. (nt)

[Blue_true]

159. She did work for Kennedy's office before she went off to Boston College.

Close, but I don't see where she is lying. Liason does not have to mean a big important job, she could have been just someone that the DNC for her area had interfacing with the people that she shares a language with, that beats having some blonde young woman from Kansas trying to fill that role, although one that has studied and understand the culture could.

[ehrnst]

161. Who said she was "lying?"

Pointing out some questions isn't the same thing.

[Blue_true]

165. I did not say you were lying. I was just pointing out how her claim can be totally legit.

Regardless, we are talking maybe months with her being in that role.

[ehrnst]

167. Nice try. The question was "Who said she was "lying?"

It's right here, in case you need to review: https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=10974610

Again.. why do you equate pointing out some questions with accusing her of lying?

Please don't try to misrepresent what I said in order to avoid answering.

[Blue_true]

170. Your original post had a link to her campaign.

Where she made the claim in debate. Then you posted in response to her claim saying that Kennedy died when she was 19. Tell me how a person should read that? I read it as you implying that she may have played fast with the truth.

Look, in case you think that I am an OR talker, maybe you should read my posts on OR and on Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie getting involved in democratic primaries in an aggressive way - I think that is bullshit.

[ehrnst]

173. I kinda thought you would actually address the post that you were replying to.

That's all.

[dgauss]

148. If she keeps getting the Bernie Sanders treatment at this rate

she'll be a full blown villain within two months. Take something like this quote and a little twist here, exaggeration there, bounce it around in the echo chamber and it blows up into another manufactured little "outrage" that will be kept track of and repeated. Sorry but this stuff reminds me of swift boating.

[kcr]

155. "Sorry but this stuff reminds me of swift boating"

Speaking of adding a little twist here, an exaggeration there.

[Cha]

160. AOC's quote is indefensible but you thought to turn

her into the victim

[ehrnst]

151. Interestingly in Detroit, power outages have knocked out 14 polling locations.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210973704#post25

[Cha]

162. Oh NO!

[Cha]

168. Sweet! Gretchen Whitmer.. I voted! Make sure you do, too!

Link to tweet

[heaven05]

189. divisive and destructive faction

leader along with her mentor. Good solid Democrats are in her sights Sayed is not a person to be trusted. He went scorched earth on Wittmer with lies, had to retract then lied again on Wittmer all the time having some very noticeable problems with money he received. Projection is a trumpchump trait. This democratic-socialist has shown me that they will go to any lengths to destroy good solid democrats, NATIONWIDE, in favour of their 'usual suspects'. This faction is out of control. Sad really. Let them go. Let them start their own Party somewhere. We don't need people like this trying to sow confusion, division and mayhem in our Party.

http://pleasecutthecrap.com/the-cult-of-bernie/ This is just a very learned opinion from someone else. I don't affirm it as my own.... someone else said it, not me

[SkyDancer]

192. I can debunk literally every single talking point in that link

Every single one. It's an opinion piece which isn't based in facts but someone still mad.

What I find interesting is the animosity which seems to be happening foe young candidates, specifically progressives. Cynthia Nixon, AOC, Brent Welder, Cori Bush, Al-Sayed, etc. It seems rather odd to me and I have to question why some are against these people whose policies IMHO would help people the very most? They're all Democrats as well.

Fascinating.

[Cha]

193. You and your candidates aren't so high and mighty pure...

Michiganders chose the BEST Candidate for the Democratic Gov Nominee.

Link to tweet

Endorsements..
Progressive groups:

EMILY’s List
MI List
Michigan Association for Justice
Progressive Women’s Alliance
Sierra Club Michigan Chapter
Planned Parenthood Advocates of Michigan

Unions (representing more than 1 million Michigan workers):

the Michigan AFL-CIO;
the United Auto Workers;
the Michigan Education Association;
the Michigan Construction and Building Trades Council;
the Michigan Regional Council of Carpenters and Millwrights;
the Michigan State Utility Workers Council;
the Michigan Pipe Trades Association;
the Michigan Joint Council of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union;
the Service Employees International Union
United Food and Commercial Workers Locals 876 and 951;
United Steelworkers;
Communications Workers of America District 4;
Iron Workers Local 25;
the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Joint Council #43;
the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades District Council 1M;
the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Michigan State Conference;
the Michigan Professional Fire Fighters Union;
AFSCME Council 25;
the Michigan Laborers District Council

Progressive leaders:

Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan
Former Governor Jim Blanchard
Wayne County Executive Warren Evans
Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy
Wayne County Sheriff Benny Napoleon
Oakland County Treasurer Andy Meisner
Oakland County Water Resources Commissioner Jim Nash
Oakland County Commissioner Helaine Zack
Oakland County Commissioner Gary McGillivray
Macomb County Executive Mark Hackel
Macomb County Sheriff Anthony Wickersham
Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith
U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand
U.S. Rep. Sander Levin (D-MI09) of Royal Oak
U.S. Rep. Dan Kildee (D-MI05) of Flint Township
U.S. Rep. Brenda Lawrence (D-MI14) of Southfield
U.S. Rep Debbie Dingell (D-MI12) of Dearborn
Former Michigan Attorney General Frank J. Kelley
Lansing Mayor Andy Schor
Senate Democratic Leader Jim Ananich (Flint)
Democratic Senate Floor Leader Morris Hood III (Detroit)
Senator Steve Bieda (Warren)
Senator Hoon-Yung Hopgood (Taylor)
Senator Vincent Gregory (Lathrup Village)
Senator Curtis Hertel (East Lansing)
Senator Rebekah Warren (Ann Arbor)
Democratic House Leader Sam Singh (East Lansing)
Democratic House Floor Leader Christine Greig (Farmington Hills)
Representative Jeremy Moss (Southfield)
Representative Erika Geiss (Taylor)
Representative Fred Durhal (Detroit)
Representative Sherry Gay-Dagnogo (Detroit)
Representative Stephanie Chang (Detroit)
Representative Leslie Love (Detroit)
Representative Robert Kosowski (Westland)
Representative Kevin Hertel (St. Clair Shores)
Representative Kristy Pagan (Canton)
Representative Robert Wittenberg (Huntington Woods)
Representative Patrick Green (Warren)
Representative Tim Greimel (Auburn Hills)
Representative Pam Faris (Clio)
Representative Phil Phelps (Flint)
Representative Tim Sneller (Burton)
Representative Donna Lasinski (D-Scio Township)
Representative Ronnie Peterson (Ypsilanti)
Representative Jon Hoadley (Kalamazoo)
Representative Tom Cochran (Mason)
Representative David LaGrand (Grand Rapids)
Representative Winnie Brinks (Grand Rapids)
Representative Terry Sabo (Muskegon)
Representative Sara Cambensy (Marquette)
Representative Scott Dianda (Calumet)
Oak Park Mayor Marian McClellan

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=10966949

William Lacy Clay is a progressive CBC member of Congress and he won his primary

Sharice Davids, a Native American, Lesbian, Progressive is running in Kansas District 3.. she has an Awesome resume.

And, yeah.. It's just "your opinion".. we have our own educated opinions.

[SkyDancer]

194. "My candidates" are Democrats

Is there a problem with that?

[Cha]

195. I just told you why that you have no room

to say yours are better than Gretchen Whitmer, William Lacy Clay and Sharice Davids.

[SkyDancer]

196. Where did I say anything like that?

I'm not even sure what you're talking about here?

EDIT - Read what you said wrong.

I support Democrats. I also support candidates who want single payer health care, a living wage, cannabis legalization, tuition free college because I feel those candidates would help people MORE than those who don't.

This is an age of where nearly 50% of American's can't even afford the basics.

In the end I support Democrats no matter what but like you, I too have my preferences.

[Cha]

197. OK.. I'll bring your quote on here..

What I find interesting is the animosity which seems to be happening foe young candidates, specifically progressives. Cynthia Nixon, AOC, Brent Welder, Cori Bush, Al-Sayed, etc. It seems rather odd to me and I have to question why some are against these people whose policies IMHO would help people the very most?

You say you "..have to question why some are against these people whose policies IMHO would help people the very most?"

I say Gretchen Whitmer, William Lacy Clay, and Sharice Davids are every bit as good as your candidates, IMHO.

The "animosity" as you call it.. is pushback on El Sayed tweeting out that Gretchen Whitmer is "money laundering" and then the genius deleted it.. then he Tweeted out that she was "Legally Money Laundering.. " genius Deleted that one, too.

I don't like his scorched earth tactics.. evidently most Michiganders didn't like it, either.

[SkyDancer]

198. I don't agree with his tactics either

I also don't agree with some things Whitmer has done too.

So in the end it's a wash. It comes down to issues between the 2 candidates.

[Cha]

199. Yeah, IMO.. just because El Sayed

has all these justice dems and OR issues.. does NOT mean he would make a better Gov.

Thank Goodness Michigan saw that, too.

[SkyDancer]

201. I believe he would make a better governor

Single payer.

In the end we have to make sure MI goes blue!

[Cha]

203. Nah, he isn't Gov material.. Gretchen Whitmer is.

[SkyDancer]

216. Both are

[betsuni]

205. +1

[Cha]

206. Mahalo, betsuni..

[betsuni]

204. Every single one?

I beg to differ.

[heaven05]

212. debunk all you please

Means ZERO in my book. Divisive and nothing is new in the democratic-socialist agenda since I dealt with them in the 70's in college. With them, it is ALWAYS about everyone toeing their line of BS or nothing. A big tent Party allows debate but does not need minor faction members and leaders trying to dictate complete policy and trying to run our Party and some Democrats into the ground. Same as I've seen since the 70's more or less. Their effectiveness since the 70's can be seen by all. Nada. Have not impressed many under our big tent Party to take ANY leadership role. Debunk all you please, makes no nevermind. Done with this faction and members. . Tell him and AOC to visit the border and talk about that. Talk about the shootings, lynchings murdering of POC and of unarmed AA and the EWB, SWB, WWB, DWB phenomena that have been since trump and his chumps arrived on the scene. Haven't heard a peep. But what can be expected of a minor leader of a minor faction under our big tent that is the bulwark against the fascist forces on the right.

Oh, that's right when all those AA that have been accosted by white people for just trying to live start getting an equal shake in pay, see an end to redlining ect, ect ect, all the Sandra Blands and Trayvon Martin's will end and racism will stop. Tell that to Ving Rhames. And any other rich and famous AA stopped by white racist police. Nope, the same spiel since the 70's that is just not true. JFK pushed for universal health care and an end to racist amerika. AA made good money for a while there and guess what, racist whites still hated and murdered us for one reason only that is still their focus since Massa Lincoln freed the slaves and gave them 40 acres and a mule, right? You know what AA got right? Tell the minors to talk about that. Because I have not heard a peep.

I am not fooled by democratic-socialist agenda(s) and know it because I have watched it since the 70's when they really didn't let me in when I tried to join at a college I attended. Same as I got in 2015 when I was searching for a change in the agenda of socialist democrats by looking closely at a primary Party candidate. Nah treated me like dirt.

I am soooo glad My candidate beat the hell out of one of the touted 'rising stars' of the Democratic Party coming from the minor faction and minor leader making so much familiar noise and delivering NOTHING, NEVER HAS. Sorry, that's the truth. NEVER!!!!

edit: Two of the 'rising stars' of the faction of our Democratic Party where the leader and his star acolyte went and campaigned for, fell in total defeat yesterday. That's all I need to see. To prove a point about minor factions and leaders.

[betsuni]

213. +1

[SkyDancer]

218. This is division

and accomplishes nothing.

The largest voting bloc, millennial's, wasn't even around in the 70s. Think about that. The times are changing, quickly.

Three years ago nobody was even talking about DSA and yet here we are.

Looking through past thread during AOC's primary, many here didn't think she would win and yet here we are.

A few years ago, nobody would have thought Democrats would be winning in states like Oklahoma. Yet here we are.

Progress is evolution. We as a party are doing just that and we are a big tent! I welcome any and all because the bigger the tent, the bigger we win!

FYI-- Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez endorsed candidates James Thompson, Jamie Schoolcraft, Matt Morgan, Rashida Tlaib, & Robert Davidson all won.

[heaven05]

220. I counseled

to those in my state to look at records, Senate or otherwise for original thought and plans from minor faction people in our Party. Wittmer won. Sharise Davis won. The millennials need to study more to be fully informed and quit reading blaring headlines about rising stars. Optics great, substance lacking.

I am glad for every win yesterday by Democrats. I know of the two major races I watched and one I took part in, Democratic Party candidates won, no matter the mud slung by members of our Party against them. That's not divisive though, right?

I just know whether 1970-2015, agenda HAS NOT changed. Tell Millenials to go read about Eugene Debs, minor faction's hero, which I did. That democratic-socialist agenda just does not work as a major plank of our Party. No ifs, and or buts. I am not divisive, I am discerning. Something a lot more should look into as being, with study one can get to the truth about anything. I don't care if people don't like me not wanting democratic-socialist telling me to toe their line. I will not. Have a good one.

[SkyDancer]

221. Explain to me please

How "that democratic-socialist agenda just does not work as a major plank of our Party".

I'd like to hear this.

Especially when DSA backed candidates are running as Democrats. A Dem win is a Dem win.

These are all wins for Democrats. From November....

[heaven05]

222. Their leadership and advice

did not work for Sayeds, Sharice Davis defeated their candidate. Explained. Democrats have fought for universal health care since JFK. Democrats with all our flaws are still the Party of the people, LBQGT, most POC, AA especially, women and finally white males. No need to explain faction leaders especially not millionaire Independents who NEVER WANT TO BE A DEMOCRAT, direct quote. I am done with their BS and 'rising stars'. I wish them luck in November because they are a vote to be counted on sometimes.

[SkyDancer]

223. And as I said, division

I'm a card carrying member of DSA & a registered Democrat.

Tell me how I'm not welcome in the party some more.

[heaven05]

228. Never said you're not welcome

in our Party. I just know a Party has factions, some major, some minor and difference. This DSA difference, part of a minor faction squabbling to be more than they are. A minor faction with a minor leader, who has said he really never wanted to be a Democrat, direct quote, and NEVER would be. That makes that leader of that minor faction, minor, in the huge tent called the Democratic Party. On to November and the DEMOCRATIC PARTY victories over the RW party of putin.

I am done with democratic-socialists and their timeworn agenda. Maybe young fresh faces will offer new blood and ideas for our Democratic Party and if by chance a DSA member wins, okay. Hopefully, they will vote with us. You are claiming card member status of a DSA member. That tells me a lot. Registered Democrat? Fine. I am just a registered Democrat, no faction membership card needed. My Party is all I need to feel a part of something.

[George II]

240. In the 70s there was a different bloc of voters the age of today's Millenials. You think....

....there was a 30-40 year gap in births in the United States?

Robert Davidson and Matt Morgan were "unopposed" (Morgan only needed 4,000 write in votes to get on the ballot)

[George II]

239. Cynthia Nixon is young? Maybe compared to me but she's only a few years younger than Cuomo.

Some of the others you mention are right around the same age as the candidates who beat them or maybe even older.

[ehrnst]

207. Michigan voters set new turnout record for August primary

https://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2018/08/michigan_voters_set_new_turnou.html

[Gothmog]

226. Yeah

This is a great sign for November

[Ninsianna]

209. They ran out of ballots, 70% turnout.

When people turn out, they reject the absolute nonsense that neophytes with poor knowledge of issues, the electorate and basic civics.

We got this crap shoved down our throats for weeks. Had people swoop in from out of state who insisted that they had some clue how we thought, ignored and abused us when we explained that we knew our candidates and we could smell the BS.

Michiganders do not appreciate the condescending bull shit from out of state that descended.

[Blue_Tires]

214. 1. Why is Ocasio giving interviews to "Playboy"?

2. Sooner or later, if a political neophyte gets enough ink/airtime, he or she is going to say something really really stupid... Perhaps Ocasio could dial down her profile a little??

[MineralMan]

217. Success often goes to the heads of neophytes.

They win a primary and are suddenly convinced that they have all the answers. It's a mark of inexperience. With luck, Ocasio-Cortez will learn over time. Actually doing the job is very instructive, usually.

[ehrnst]

229. Think about who reads Playboy.

White men. Particularly young white men.

[Blue_Tires]

238. And she's a young dynamic attractive woman........?

I get it now, that's quite smart in retrospect...

But as an aside, do young men even read Playboy anymore (or any magazine not named Game Informer or High Times or whatever comes free through the mail)? My dad (r.i.p.) and his generation seemed to be the last that were hardcore dedicated subscribers of Playboy *AND* readers of it from cover to cover...

(Personally, I only buy foreign issues when I go abroad and I haven't gone abroad in years... FWIW, Brazil's version of Playboy is the greatest ever)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

219. What a deeply cynical strategy.

It been a guiding principle of our party that when everybody votes we win.

[Gothmog]

224. I am so glad that there was good turnout in Michigan

[NastyRiffraff]

225. I know what she's saying

and it's still wrong. Deadly wrong. It's NEVER a good idea to suppress the vote, even by vocally wishing for it. It can backfire, badly.

I have to say, the more I hear about this woman the less I like her. I'd vote for her if I were in her district because I'd never vote for a Republican and not voting isn't an option, but it would be with a firmly held nose.

[gtar100]

230. Wow, a lot of effort going in on destroying Ocasio.

Efforts are paying off well it seems. She's the Democratic nominee in her district, if I'm not mistaken. I'm sure the russian bot makers are enjoying the shit show going on the Democratic side. I recall the repubs freaking out about the word "socialist" associated with Ms. Ocasio. Several weeks later, here we are. Interesting turn in the media.

[honest.abe]

232. She's destroying herself.

Going a 100 mph before learning how to drive.

[gtar100]

233. She's getting the right-wing smear big time.

They are very good at it with all the experience they've had with the Clintons. She's the Democratic nominee in her district. I hope she wins. Period.

[honest.abe]

234. She will win unless she completely self-destructs.

The issue is her prancing around the country bashing good Democrats.

[RandySF]

245. She will in November

But if she ignores her district, she could be at risk in the 2020 and/or 2022 primaries.

[workinclasszero]

235. Yup

Looks like self-inflicted wounds to me.

I hope she gets a minute in between the attack Democrats nationwide tour to criticize the fu**ing GOP who are halfway to making America into a fascist theocracy.

I mean if it ain't to much trouble.

Of course I'm an older dem so I know nothing of struggle in my life.

[theaocp]

236. Well, the primaries ended YESTERDAY, so perhaps you'll be in luck in another few hours? n/t

[workinclasszero]

237. Lets hope so

[Gothmog]

243. Voter turnout shatters recent records for Michigan primary elections

This is why Gretchen Whitmer won https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2018/08/08/turnout-shatters-recent-records-michigan-primary-elections/932623002/

LANSING – Voter turnout in Tuesday's primary election in Michigan broke records going back at least as far as 1978, a state elections official confirmed Wednesday.

More than 2.1 million votes were cast, and based on still incomplete and unofficial election returns, it appears voter turnout — measured by the percentage of registered voters who cast ballots — was close to 29 percent.

When turnout is measured based on the number of Michigan residents who are of voting age — the way the state tracks its historical data — Tuesday's figure was slightly lower, at 27 percent.

But both the total number of votes cast and the 27 percent turnout beat primary records of just more than 1.7 million votes cast in the 2002 gubernatorial primary and the previous high turnout percentage of 24.4 percent, set in 1982. Those numbers were the highest recorded in the state, going back at least as far as 1978, records show.