What in the world is AOC doing

[DLCWIdem]

According to polling we are now favored to win the House and we are in good to expand the Senate. But she is going on Chris Hayes and making the rounds to "challenge" the leadership. Why at this time. Does she want to lose?

[emulatorloo]

1. I wish she would put her very capable mind towards writing legislation.

[Peacetrain]

2. AOC was the flavor of the week with the press when she first ran

the Savior of the Democratic Parity.. etc etc etc.. totally unfair to her.. She is kind of trapped in that now.. and that is too bad.. It really is a lesson for everyone .. Mass Media is a profit machine.. and in order to keep the stations clicked on, and the commercials coming .. drama must be produced..

[unblock]

10. The media gives her airtime oddly enough because the right-wing loves her as a lightning rod

Personally I love seeing her pull no punches and tell it like it is. I'm more pragmatic in terms of tactics, but I love her passion and vision and we need strong voices on the left like hers.

But the reality is that she doesn't speak for a massive bloc within the Democratic Party (though I expect she will someday in the not too distant future) and she's still a relative newcomer to the house.

For now, her amplified media presence allows republicans to paint democrats as out of touch and fundraise massively. Of course she is quite in touch with the needs and attitudes of her district, which is diverse, working class, and urban. But republicans can say it's out of touch because she doesn't try to appeal to the white rural districts that she doesn't represent.

[PatSeg]

88. I agree with everything you said

She is so intelligent and articulate, but I'm not sure she always sees the big picture. In order to accomplish the changes she espouses we need to win more seats and not all districts are as liberal as hers. Meanwhile, republicans will use her in their campaigns as the face of the entire Democratic party.

Now is the time to support Democrats and save the artillery for republicans. There is too much at stake right now. For every time there is a season and this is mid-term season.

[Cha]

122. Aloha Peacetrain..

There's No excuse for bashing Dems Now and depressing the vote.

We should All be Uniting Against FAscism.

The media likes those who bash Dems and our Party.

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[lapucelle]

3. Well, she's amplyfying this bogus group's anti-Democratic Party message to 13.1 million followers.

Link to tweet

==============================================================

RiseUp4AbortionRights / PplsCityCouncil are offshoots of RevCom (Revolutionary Communist Party). Unfortunately they got some air time on MSNBC during last Sunday's march. They used that time to slam Biden and Democrats in an effort to depress the Democratic midterm vote.

Any group whose message after the Dobbs decision includes mocking Democratic Party efforts to win in November coupled with feigned sighs over "the pointlessness of voting" is working for the opposition.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTK9_SCexYezxIplFRbQPTn-hNXp7o2kUBJamwXC4-yzeVcfSmDglx9iL3zOfeo66SHX3T9ktjmUAt_/pub

[DLCWIdem]

24. What do you want to bet those 2 women didn't vote in 2016 or 2018?

[Mariana]

93. I am certain they didn't vote in 2016, and they probably didn't in 2018 either.

Can you guess why?

[Iggo]

94. They were children?

[Mariana]

97. Yes!

[betsuni]

43. What I've been seeing is the idea that Democrats could've codified abortion rights any time

but refuse because they wanted to fundraise, and of course all Democratic fundraising goes directly into their pockets (corrupt) and not to elect more Democrats to have enough votes to codify abortion rights. Also, if there were different leadership everything would be different. Too many are repeating this.

[Cha]

124. The Only Thing Standing Between Us & Christian Fascism is..

Link to tweet

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[fleabiscuit]

164. CHA!

You are always on my mind.

[Cha]

168. flea! 💙 Miss you!

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[unblock]

4. She's an activist; she wants action

I won't disagree that there are benefits to having a singular focus on elections and securing power first and acting with that power later.

But she said it herself: if there's an executive order that gives people abortion access now, and the radical Supreme Court strikes it down 3 months later, that's 3 months of protection for women who need abortions, 3 months of not needing more dangerous alternatives, 3 months of not being stuck with an unwanted pregnancy.

The Dobbs case and the new generation of gestational slavery laws affect women in real time, now. Not just after the next election.


There's often a trade off between securing power and exercising it. Aoc has the benefit of being hugely popular in a solidly blue district, so she can more comfortably push for action than others.

[lapucelle]

6. Activists act.

Tweeting and pontificating on talk shows are secondary.

[unblock]

11. Being vocal and visible is a huge part of politics

[lapucelle]

46. Legislative know-how and collegiality are a huge part of leadership. N/T

[unblock]

55. So is challenging for action, advocacy, and confrontation

And she's not leadership. She's not the president, she's not the speaker. She doesn't have close to the seniority to be the smooth back room deal-maker. But she does have quite a talent for passionate and eloquent advocacy.

There's room for and a need for many skill sets and roles in a strong party. Having a strong advocate for liberal positions is great, if only to help pull the center of conversation a bit back to reasonable.

[lapucelle]

75. I didn't mean Leadership. I meant leadership.

As for skill sets, anyone retweeting the vote-depressing message of an sketchy organization described by some as a cult still has work to do.

[unblock]

79. Oh noes! A 2nd term democrat did something imperfectly! Run her out of town!

I have no idea what you're referring to but personally I don't demand on-message perfection from politicians I support.

[lapucelle]

81. No one is demanding perfection, and no one is disputing anyone's status as a politician,

but leadership takes judgement.

Link to tweet

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disturbing to see a young woman interviewed on MSNBC, complaining about Democrats

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=16851745

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RiseUp4AbortionRights / PplsCityCouncil are offshoots of RevCom (Revolutionary Communist Party). Unfortunately they got some air time on MSNBC during last Sunday's march. They used that time to slam Biden and Democrats in an effort to depress the Democratic midterm vote.

Any group whose message after the Dobbs decision includes mocking Democratic Party efforts to win in November coupled with feigned sighs over "the pointlessness of voting" is working for the opposition.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTK9_SCexYezxIplFRbQPTn-hNXp7o2kUBJamwXC4-yzeVcfSmDglx9iL3zOfeo66SHX3T9ktjmUAt_/pub

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[unblock]

86. i remain perplex at the criticism of a democrat urging democratic action on a democratic issue

and even so more at the constant efforts to justify criticizing a democratic congresswoman.

could it have been phrased better, both the person in the link and any of aoc's comments? surely.

are we ever going to get anywhere infighting and slamming any democrat who doesn't do exactly what we all might want?

gimme a break.

she's urging action, which i hope we can all agree would be helpful for us in november.


as soon as biden does do something, which i'm guessing is highly likely, only haters will remember or care if aoc had said something imperfect as part of an effort to build support for an executive order.


can we focus on things we agree on, like that an executive order finding some way to continue access to abortion would be a good idea?


i am soooo fed up with people here dissecting everything aoc says and always coming up with some way to slam her.

[lapucelle]

91. Within hours of the release of the decision, both President Biden and Attorney General Garland

outlined immediate steps that are being taken.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-merrick-b-garland-statement-supreme-court-ruling-dobbs-v-jackson-women-s

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/06/24/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-actions-in-light-of-todays-supreme-court-decision-on-dobbs-v-jackson-womens-health-organization/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

President Biden is currently at the NATO summit where yesterday Turkey dropped its veto on membership for Finland and Sweden.

And given that Congress is in recess, it's likely that many Democratic members are busy working on constituent services or coordinating efforts to facilitate or insure access to reproductive health services.

Very few of those members of Congress, however, have been on twitter amplifying anti-Democratic Party talking points or on the teevee demanding that "somebody do something".

[unblock]

102. it's a start but not a solution for everyone.

abortion on federal/tribal lands idea sounds like good to me, and a federal law guaranteeing abortion access sounds even better.

both those aren't going to happen without people like aoc going on air drumming up support.


challenging the biden administration to do more in not anti-democratic party any more than challenging america to do better is unamerican.

you know what sounds like unhelpful to the democratic party? advocating that our congresspeople stay off the media.

[lapucelle]

111. Can the Executive Branch or Congress determine tribal land policy?

What exactly comprises "federal lands"? Military bases? National parks? Are those lands any more accessible to women who need abortion procedures?

Are elective abortions legal on federal lands? Are logs kept for visitors on federal lands seeking medical procedures? Are those logs available through FOIA requests?

Everyone should be trying to do everything possible, but wish lists are not helpful in the absence of detailed plans to accomplish policy goals. That takes work.

No one is advocating that politicians stay off media, only that they think about the message before they put it out there. And that includes retweeting anti-Democratic Party talking points which give the impression that one party is no different from the other.

[betsuni]

118. +1

[Cha]

128. Mahalo, lapucelle! 💕🤷‍♂️

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[lapucelle]

131. Mahalo Cha! Thanks for the link to the tweet.

It really is that simple.

Link to tweet

[Cha]

134. Yes IT IS! Teri Kanefiend Knows

exactly What's Gong ON!

Too bad more can't see it.

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[Cha]

127. Yeah, No one is talking about anyone

being "Perfect".. Just Some GOTV VOTE for DEMS💙 Against Fascism would be Fucking Great!!

Mahalo, lapucelle for being someone who Cares about our Winning Elections Against fucking MAGATS.

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[Fiendish Thingy]

19. Which is why she was in the streets protesting immediately after the Dobbs ruling

Unlike others.

[lapucelle]

22. Attending a protest while calling on others in Congress and the Executive branch to do something

is an interesting tactic, as is retweeting a message that mocks and maligns Democrats.

[Fiendish Thingy]

23. She is the face and more importantly, the voice of the future, and it scares some people so much

That they have launched a PAC to stop challengers to incumbents, to prevent more AOC’s from coming to power.

Meanwhile, she has the support of a large segment of The People.

[DLCWIdem]

25. I don't care if she challenges Biden

Except do it in 5 months after the midterms. There is nothing the leadership can do about this u til we win.

[lapucelle]

26. That she is the face and voice of the future is arguable at best,

as is any contention that "she has the support of a large segment of 'The People'".

Anyone who is is a member of Congress and is running around from talk show to talk show demanding that "Congress do something" really should be getting down to work.

[DLCWIdem]

38. Yes

[unblock]

52. In case you're not familiar with politics, drumming up public support and pressure *is*

getting down to work.

Ffs! The complaints people have about aoc are absurd.

It's fine if she's not your favorite democrat, you're entitled to you opinion. But since when to politicians get slammed for publicly advocating for their constituents and the policies they want?

If you disagree with the timing, fine. If you disagree with a politician going on talk shows, seriously,

[Duncan Grant]

78. +1

[lapucelle]

129. I disagree with anyone retweeting anti-Democratic Party messaging,

and I'm wary of any group that stokes Democratic voter depression.

Link to tweet

[Cha]

132. So the Hell Do I! Unite Against Fascism!

Link to tweet

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[dmacdon4]

47. True

True

[Demsrule86]

64. She is not the future. A don't doubt progressives will win in the end. But she will not lead them.

I consider her very talented but, not a team player.

[Cha]

133. She needs to get a clue that the only

thing standing between Us and Christian Fascism is the Dem Party.. That is Fighting on the Front Lines to Save Our Democracy!

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[question everything]

7. Actually, she wants attention

[unblock]

12. ...

[Sugarcoated]

74. Oh, bullshit

You just don't like her

[Blecht]

165. +1

[Cha]

136. I wish it were For Fighting Against Fascims!

We Need All Hands ON DECK For Midterms!

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[DLCWIdem]

44. Wouldn't make Biden like King Donald

Not only that those states would not follow an executive order because they would know its unconstitutional. Much rather do things that are achievable. Such as that federal lands idea. But was she actually helping come up with the proposal or did she just jump on the bandwagon after.

[unblock]

49. What the everlovin' fuuuck???

Why go out of your way to bash a democratic congresswoman and hold her to a standard no other politician is held to?

Who gives a fuck if it was her idea or she's promoting someone else's idea? Most politicians get most of their ideas from other people anyway!

If you think the federal lands idea is a god idea, why on earth complain about aoc jumping on the bandwagon? It ain't gonna happen if no one advocates for it!

[DLCWIdem]

57. It's her standard for the leadership

She is complaining that the leadership is doing nothing BUT I thought that the federal lands idea was actually thought up by the leadership. Do you get the point. She is saying that the leadership is not doing anything even while she is jumping on an idea that was actually proposed by the leadership.

[unblock]

60. well i guess i must have missed that because all i saw was her advocating certain policy moves

it actually looked to me like she might have been part of an administration push to help drum up support for an executive order.

a prudent president like biden would probably want to test the waters and see how much public support there is for such a move. so aoc making the rounds to drum up support seems perfectly reasonable, whether it's what biden wants, pelosi wants, or if she just decided it was what her constituents want after internal discussions among democrats as to how to react to dobbs.

i certainly didn't hear her say that biden was opposed or wasn't going to do anything and how dare he.

[DLCWIdem]

61. If she was part of a push

She wouldn't be calling Biden weak

[unblock]

73. she didn't call him weak, that's a gross distortion of what she said.

she said he was historically weak on this particular issue, having supported the hyde amendment for a long time.

saying he has been weak in support of full abortion rights is very, very different from simply saying he's weak, implying he's a weak person or weak president overall.

i'm not saying biden specifically asked her to make the rounds, she would have been an unlikely choice to do so, but i am saying that democrats can and should be mobilizing, motivating, making speeches, appearing on air, drumming up support for abortion protections and various moves to counter dobbs. coordinated or not, aoc's appearances are part of that and it's totally legitimate and entirely appropriate in terms of trying to help women preserve access to abortion rights.

[DLCWIdem]

82. Sorry. Her exact words were

The leadership has failed....
A couple of weeks ago (before Dobbs came out) she was on Chuck Todd's. MTP and she said she wasn't committed to voting for him in 2024. At the time, I thought she is probably going after her own run. Which is fine. But I think Dems can hold on because of this issue, and now is not the time to call our Pres weak or use the f word. Meaning fail. Now is the time to fight together.

[Cha]

137. Nobody has "Failed" you want to know FAIL?

If Dems Lose the Midterms.. then the Country will be under Fake Christian Fascism..

Then see what Happens to Poor People, Women, Gays, the Environment, and Social Security.. to name just a few fucking Tragedies!

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[DLCWIdem]

140. Yes. We can win

This is a winning issue women are mad and will vote. It is an issue that overrides inflation and gas prices. Take away our rights and see how much we fight.

[Cha]

144. I Agree But We Still Don't need anyone Depressing

Dem Votes!

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[jcgoldie]

53. exactly

Somehow the GOP seems to understand that far right wingnuts in safe red districts pull the entire national political conversation to the right and allow less ideological members of the party to appear as logical moderates with appeal to independent voters. Here at DU there is a large contingent who consistently fails to see how ultra progressive voices like AOC in safe blue districts pushing for more liberal legislation can do the same thing for moderates in the Democratic party. They argue we need 100% conformity and unity of message even when all that does is pull the debate closer to the center. AOC is doing her job pushing the conversation and debate to the left similar to what Bernie and Elizabeth do in the Senate.

[unblock]

56. Right! Republicans never attack or apologize for coulter or Limbaugh or mtg or

*any* extremists or extreme positions on their side.

They recognize that having absurdly right-wing firebrands out there help pull the final result to something well to the right of what would otherwise be the case.

Often, the result is everything the right wing actually wanted, but it would have green considered too extreme without the even more extreme zealots.


But when aoc advocates for even perfectly reasonable things, out come all the attackers. How attacking a strong liberal voice helpful to any one other than republicans, I have no idea.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

114. And how has not countering extremists in their party

worked out for the Republicans and for the nation?

[unblock]

116. Seriously, what is your point here?

I would ascribe all the Republican party success to their extremists, but in any event the Republican Party, I case you haven't noticed, has had incredible success far beyond their ability to appeal to anything like a majority lately.

And no worries, neither the Democratic Party nor the country are in any great danger of reaching anything like an extreme left simply due to supporting people like aoc while we struggle to maintain the house.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

117. What's your point?

You wrote: "Republicans never attack or apologize for coulter or Limbaugh or mtg or
*any* extremists or extreme positions on their side."

I don't think their party or the nation has been well served by their failure to counter extremists in their ranks, do you?

[unblock]

119. The explanation is in the rest of that post.

It's helped them negotiate and achieve their goals.

Now tell me how spending our time running down someone trying to advocate for abortion rights helps our side.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

121. Whose goals?

I'm not running down Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and the liberal Democratic leadership of our party--I can assure you of that. I wish that was a universal operating position of all Democrats.

[Cha]

138. Mahalo, Just A Box Of Rain!💕🤷‍♂️

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[Just A Box Of Rain]

141. And Mahalo to you, Cha!

[Cha]

145. Thank You!💙

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[Hortensis]

104. "Ultra progressive voices" is one thing to call them.

Link to tweet

Note: I could not eliminate the link to replies, some of which are not appropriate for DU, so don't open them.

What's worth noting in this is that the parent organization of the newly formed RiseUp4AbortionRights's is reportedly the Revolutionary Communist Group, revcom.us. Perhaps AOC didn't know what she was exposing her followers to, though RiseUp's Sunsara Taylor is strongly involved with Revcom. Apparently some other pro-abortion rights groups have issued a statement rejecting RiseUp because of tactics, etc, they can't be associated with.

Link to tweet

[Cha]

125. There's No Excuse for Not Uniting

Against Christian Fascism.

There are Razor Thin Margins in the Midterms.. WE don't need anyone Depressing the VOTE Against Dems & our Dem Party.

WE NEED GOTV!!!💙💙💙💙

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[brooklynite]

5. We are NOT "favored to win the House"

A Generic House poll is "generic" and "national". It doesn't reflect gerrymandering of districts or individual candidates.

This weekend, Cook updated 8 ratings; 6 were towards the Republican Party. There MIGHT be a change over time in individual races but its not showing up yet.

[FBaggins]

17. A poll was released that was spun as a ten point swing post-Dobbs

It wasn't true, but I'm sure it caused many to take a deep break and return to complacency.

Who cares if three other polls have also been released (with Economist/YouGov showing us at a new low post-Dobbs)? All is now right with the world again.

[Demsrule86]

36. There is such a poll and it is true. In fact state polls look even better. And words like those

AOC uses do not fight complacency but cause lower Democratic voter turnout. People give up. I have done GOTV for years...and I want to ask her what has she done personally while in office.

[FBaggins]

37. Nope

The poll showed a two-point shift pre/post Dobbs. Not ten.

And it isn't consistent with the other polling. It may turn out to be a true reflection of a changing race. But that's premature at the best.

[Celerity]

139. The 10 point net swing was from April (pre leak) to June. You are correct that from May to June

we only went up a net 2 points, from +5 net to +7 net.

https://maristpoll.marist.edu/polls/npr-pbs-newshour-marist-national-poll-the-overturning-of-roe-v-wade-june-2022/

Democrats (48%) currently have the advantage over the Republicans (41%) among registered voters in the congressional generic ballot question. Their advantage has slightly widened from five points (47% for the Democratic candidate and 42% for the Republican candidate) in May after the leaked draft of the Roe v. Wade decision.

snip

April
Republican 47%
Democratic 44%

May
Republican 42%
Democratic 47%

June
Democratic 48%
Republican 41%

[FBaggins]

148. The rest of the story matters

The latest poll was taken immediately after the decision (including a weekend day which is usually avoided). It was short both in terms of numbers reached and in days in the field (meaning larger MOE). It was clearly an attempt to get the first glimpse of the public's response to the actual ruling. And that change wasn't big enough to even say that it wasn't just statistical variation.

Yes - the earlier poll was a few days after the leak... so perhaps we could claim that it's the result of Dobbs. The problem with that is that we've seen dozens of polls since then and the big eight-point shift pre/post leak is not consistent with the rest of the data. It's the post-ruling data that claims to tell a new story.

Republicans could point to the Economist poll that had Democrats at +3 right after the leak and now show Republicans +5. Should they be able to claim that Dobbs has resulted in a huge shift towards them? Of course not. It's fairly normal noise and both of the common tracking/averaging sites (538 and RCP) essentially show the generic ballot as pretty stable all year long. The Politico poll releases very frequently and shows essentially no change over the last few weeks.

[Celerity]

135. Biden backs anti-abortion Republican for Kentucky federal judgeship in apparent McConnell deal

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216869761


That is exactly the type of thing she is talking about.

[DLCWIdem]

27. I am not complacent.

But 3 months ago people at DU were hopeful. Now your not when it looks like we the polls have swung are way. She should be channeling that anger towards the Repugs not towards Dem leadership.

[bottomofthehill]

8. She just can't help herself

[Effete Snob]

9. Running for re-election, like most everyone in the House

[FBaggins]

13. She could lock herself in her basement for the next four months and still win re-election

She doesn't have to take on the party to run for reelection.

[Effete Snob]

16. Everyone will survive

She'll be fine. The party will be fine.

[Cha]

130. We DonT Nedd anyone Depressing

the Vote Against Dems.

We should all be on board and United Against Fascism.

GOTV!💙💙💙💙

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[H2O Man]

14. Her job.

[obnoxiousdrunk]

20. +1. N/T

[DLCWIdem]

40. Is she

What has she actually done. Her tweet says she knew it was coming. Was she working with the other congress women who were getting services ready for those that needed it? This is not facetious I would really like to know if she actually does work or if it's all show.

[H2O Man]

58. I think so,

though I recognize there are a number of factors involved in everyone's opinion. A good starting place is considering how one understands the House of Representatives runs. Then consider the role of the average Democrat serving their first few terms there. Is it simply based upon "how many bills have they passed?" If so, is that same standard applied across the board? Is a quiet, moderate white man, for example, judged by the same standards as an outspoken brown woman? If so, not too many new members pass the test.

Second, does one limit their thinking to only this? Or perhaps might fighting against bad legislation almost as important? Maybe as important? And how about considering not only President Wilson's thoughts that the number one role of Congress is to educate the public, but two U.S. Supreme Courts has twice noted this in significant rulings. (Maybe I'll do an essay on that soon. Too many people are unaware of the significance. Luckily, the J6 Committee is fully aware.

Now, let's think about what individual or individuals are best suited for using their skills to communicate and educate people who likely to vote for Democrats when elections come in November? In my opinion, that isn't a serious question. But I can respect for others, they have very different opinions that they have as much right to as I do mine. And that beats the hell out of being a republican.

[Hortensis]

95. :) If you want to shrink the comparison of newcomer colleagues

who are outperforming Ocasio-Cortez by doing their jobs to ONLY "brown" females, okaaay, but I'm going to include Black too. Just because. That very pared down group still leaves some outstanding new additions to congress, elected when and after Ocasio was, who already have impressive records of serving their districts and the nation. And who are becoming important to and taking on greater responsibilities for their committees and elsewhere. Such as the example below.

Link to tweet

(There are some new "brown" guys doing their jobs notably well too, whose voters deserve some kudos for electing them, but as agreed, they're cut from the comparison pool.)

It doesn't help Ocasio-Cortez's standing in the comparison with her legislative colleagues.

BUT, when she criticizes Democrats to those who like her and votes against legislation her colleagues on the House Progressive Caucus have created and are working to get passed, or holds her vote, donations to her rise and political media, especially anti-Democratic, push her name, her face, and her messages across and to the far corners of the political sphere.

THAT's where she performs.

Link to tweet

Cut off the bottom of that last from the Justice Democrats is: "We have no allegiance to the Democratic Party."

[H2O Man]

106. Yes, I could have

expanded almost without limit, but because the OP & following conversation on this thread are specific to AOC, I thought it was better to write it exactly as I did. Still do.

[betsuni]

120. [phone]

[jcgoldie]

54. Hear hear!

[Duncan Grant]

63. +1

[demmiblue]

109. +1

[Voltaire2]

149. This.

[bigtree]

156. correct.

...she's doing her job.

[SharonClark]

15. Maybe the "leadership" needs challenging.

Too many times women have been told to "play nice", shut up, and sit down. Putting pressure on politicians is exactly what we need, despite how inarticulate it may be expressed, while the rest of us (I hope) do all we can to elect pro-choice candidates. These women will be with us in the fall and AOC knows that.

[Demsrule86]

35. I heard that in 2016 just before we lost...do not attack Democrats if you are a Democrat.

She is ruining her chances for higher office. She has talents...it really is a shame.

[DLCWIdem]

92. 👍

[Cosmocat]

18. She isn't wrong

nm

[Demsrule86]

34. She is absolutely wrong to attack Democrat leadership in a midterm...unforgivable in face given

how high the stakes are in this midterm.

[Hortensis]

99. She IS wrong, and she's absolutely wrong to pick this time to push this message.

IF she wants to restore legal abortion and accomplish any other of the goals Democratic voters want her to help achieve.

[kentuck]

21. She wants to be the next Speaker...

would be my guess.

[Demsrule86]

33. That will not happen.

[cally]

28. She is trying to help the progressives

I think she speaks for many of us and motivates younger voters. I just wish more folks in politics my age or older would listen to her.

[Demsrule86]

32. She attacks Democrats. I am solidly progressive and she does not motivate me. It reminds me

of the 2016 loss.

[cally]

70. I think leadership needs to change

And reflect their base better. It’s too old and institutionalize. I’m very, very disappointed in response to Roe and soon stopping any chance of addressing climate change. We are in a crisis and Democratic leadership seem happy to think about it as usual politics. I know Democrats are our only hope but I am absolutely livid at them. I’ve never been so outraged at Dems before. I think it does no good to pretend many people share my outrage and say we have to support Democrats.

By the way, I walk every week in 100 degree heat (usually) to try to get votes for moderate Dem candidate that reflects my district. Still Dems must show more plans for action and quit using old institutional norms in the hopes Republicans will play nice.

[cally]

84. Double post

[former9thward]

29. What polling are you looking at that says we are favored to win the House?

I have not seen any of that.

[Demsrule86]

31. Google...one of many.

https://www.voanews.com/a/abortion-rights-could-drive-democratic-voters-to-polls-in-november-/6635497.html

[former9thward]

41. I follow actual polling, not google.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2022-generic-congressional-vote-7361.html

It shows Rs with a generic lead including polling since the abortion decision.

[DLCWIdem]

48. Did you look at those polls?

Most of those polls were pre Dobbs. The last 4 were post. One of those polls is the one I was talking about Dem +7. The next polls were Dems plus 3. Plus in Georgia I herd there was an uptick I Dem registration. I know it's early. But it's got to motivate women which was who Trump lost in 2020.

[Demsrule86]

67. You have real clear politics poll? Really. well you can be as doom and gloom as you choose.

But looking at the polls compostion, they don't account for those outraged about Roe and other rogue SCOTUS rulings...more the effect of the January 6th Hearings.

[DLCWIdem]

107. That article did reference a NPR marist poll

I know it's only 1 poll. But I am talking about in general. For example, there is a Quiniopic poll which puts Warnock 10 ahead of Walker's.

[867-5309.]

50. That article doesn't say we're winning the House

It just says the abortion issue could potentially help Dems

[Demsrule86]

68. Yeah...well we shall see. I have put my OP in my Journal so after the election, we can look back

and see who was correct. I predict we win the midterm against all odds and get sufficient Senators to overturn the filibuster.

[DLCWIdem]

85. From your mouth to God's ear

[Demsrule86]

30. She is not a team player...I believe she is a Justice Democrat or was one, and they intend

to destroy the Democratic party. She may believe this is the way she makes it into leadership, but it isn't. I for one will never support her for a presidential run in any primary going forward. I don't live in New York so I can't vote against her in a primary. It is very sad as she is without a doubt very talented.

[Celerity]

39. disagree with your take on AOC

and

According to polling we are now favored to win the House

generic congressional national sentiment polls are not very valid nor accurate (when you truly drill down) due to all the gerrymandering on both sides (thus eliminating a lot of competitiveness in most races), the incredible level of Blue vote concentration into large urban areas and Blue States, and the fact it includes a lot of people giving input statistically on races they will never vote in

[DLCWIdem]

42. You disagree with whose post

Plain common sense should tell us we have a good chance if we get women to vote because of Dobbs. If they are angry with the President and not the Repugs we lose momentum.

[Act_of_Reparation]

62. "Common sense"

If common sense was enough to win elections we wouldn't need to spend millions of dollars on campaign managers and strategists.

Women aren't lemmings. Dobbs may prove broadly motivating, but the Democratic response is likely more important. And in that case, not all women are going to find the same response equally motivating.

The GOP can afford to be uniform because their voters come largely in one flavor. We don't have that luxury. Democratic politicians are ideologically diverse because the Democratic party is ideologically diverse. We have to appeal to a broad range of people. It's very, very difficult.

[DLCWIdem]

65. True

But we certainly won't motivate women by saying the Dem leadership are ineffective and not doing anything.

[Celerity]

66. You posted no link to what she actually said, you only extrapolated a negative opinion about her

actions based off you own characterisations of a construct you put up with no verifiable background.

Also, we are a big tent party. Different wings are going to have different takes on what we should do. There is a tendency here from a small but very vocal and active contingent to always reflexively criticise the progressive wing, to claim that their views are a priori wrong and/or illegitimate. That stance is simply becoming less and less representative of the potential voting bloc that we can, must, and will draw from as time inexorably marches on.

The way the US Constitutional system of federal governance is structured (majoritarian, first past the post, single member district), the status quo is most always going to default to a 2 party system.

There will always be dialectical tensions both inside and outside of the resultant two main parties. They are both, by nature, 'catch-all' parties, one each within the two overarching ideological bubbles, left and right, with fewer and fewer overlapping vectors.

[DLCWIdem]

76. I am actually not good with posting links.

But it was multiple instances. First of all she was on MSNBC Chris Hayes show yesterday where she said that the leadership, meaning Biden, failed. She was also on Colbert last night. She retweeted those remarks on by those 2 women that someone cited above. BTW That was also on Chris Hayes. ( If you remember Hayes was the only one to broadcast that woman who accused Biden of rape without checking her credibility.

Of course, the Dem is a big tent party and we have big sweeping opinions. But I would like to know what the hell Biden can do about the Dobbs decision at this time. This happened because Trump became President and got 3 Supremes. She had a list of 7 or 8 things, one of them expanding the court. Which we cannot do until we get more than a 2 seats in Senate. I am sorry but if you want to run down the Democrats 4 months before the midterms and call us weak right before we may see some sunshine. I am going to call it out. She was even on Chuck Todd MTP a couple of weeks ago and said she didn't know if she was going to support the President in 2024. She is obviously going for her own run which is fine but don't primary him before the midterms please.

[Celerity]

80. We need more than 2 more Dem Senators to expand SCOTUS

I fear. Others oppose it (or did, hopefully the overturning of Roe has changed their mind) as well.

Btw, to post a link, it's so simple.

Just copy the URL and paste it directly into the body (not the title space) part of your post.

Like this (done from an Android phone)

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1002&pid=16868883

Cheers

[DLCWIdem]

83. 2 more to change fillibuster

[Celerity]

89. Yes, but simply overcoming the filibuster 60 vote blockage doesn't guarantee

that there are 50 votes to expand the SCOTUS. Some Dem Senators 8 or so if memory serves) opposed expansion on its face.

Plus there is this:

Biden doesn't support expanding the Supreme Court, White House says

https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/US/biden-support-expanding-supreme-court-white-house/story%3fid=85703773


sigh

[DLCWIdem]

98. We still 52 to get anything done like codified Roe

After the midterms I would freely join in support to AOC if we win to prod Biden. But that is after the midterms. I truly am hopeful we can win.

[Celerity]

108. The law codifying Roe will be struck down by the christofash SCOTUS I wager

[Novara]

45. I want to know what she hopes to accomplish with so much criticism of her own party

I'm not saying that Dems can't be criticized - I think that's a stupid rule. Sometimes they do stupid stuff and deserve criticism. But what does she think she is accomplishing?

In my mind she needs to shut up and study Nancy Pelosi. SHE is a fucking FORCE. AOC can learn a lot from her.

[867-5309.]

51. DLCW - what polling says we're winning the House?

[Polybius]

59. We're not winning the House

Economist/YouGov has Republicans 45, Democrats 40. And that's just on paper. If they lead by 5, then they win by 8-10 because of gerrymandering.

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/uhxw71f4tf/econTabReport.pdf

[DLCWIdem]

142. New polls

https://www.salon.com/2022/06/29/post-roe-polls-midterm-support-for-democrats-soars-after-strikes-down-abortion-access/

[DLCWIdem]

162. Doesn't the Economist polling lean right?

[Cuthbert Allgood]

69. It's funny you think the average voter

gives two fucks about the leadership that is only decided by votes of the politicians. Hell, I know a lot of people that actively don't like the leadership currently.

Both if it gives you a stab at AOC...

[DLCWIdem]

87. I am an average voter.

And I know you don't want to project weakness if you want to win. And I also know that the average woman voter cares about losing her rights. We all know what's next. C

[Cuthbert Allgood]

152. I think the fact that you are on and read DU means you aren't an average voter.

You likely know a LOT more than the average voter.

She isn't projecting weakness; she is talking about how to solve the problem that we are in. That is what people care about. Don't you think it's a bit tone deaf to just say "Hey, we did everything right. Nothing we could have done differently. Vote for us. And donate."?

[Celerity]

158. +10000000000000000

[DLCWIdem]

163. Thank you for the compliment. I would say informed voter.

[Hortensis]

101. It's funny that someone might think the choice of colleagues who know them isn't significant.

When over 200 elected representatives of the Democratic caucus won't even consider and don't respect someone, the average voter really SHOULD give two fucks worth of attention. And wonder why anyone would regard the someone as a leader.

As for those "lot of people," it'd be interesting to see how many could name anyone but Pelosi, and for the high achievers one or two others -- just the surname, and maybe a generic agitprop theme associated with it, like "just like the Republicans," or "corporate Democrat," not a high bar.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

151. Seems like you are on both sides of this, so I'm a bit confused.

But most people can't name the Vice President on any given year. Is that somehow shocking? Most people that vote (and that we want to vote) aren't political nerds that follow this stuff. And, as to the OP, AOC is trying to get people motivated by what she perceives (correctly in my mind) as being important to people.

And the "lot of people" that I know are not happy have a good understanding of the political leadership and discuss things for years they aren't happy with.

But my point is that I don't think there is any data to support that people voting for their representative is based on that person's perception of the leadership of that party.

[Hortensis]

154. I AM on both sides -- FOR repeating our positive Democratic messaging

on our issues and AGAINST a long and strong pattern of negative messaging against the Democratic Party and our leadership.

Especially, I'm against some of the anti-Democratic, and even anti-democratic, people and organizations that following messaging links and looking for others repeating these themes have always exposed those drawn to her to. Of course, many had aligned with anti-Democratic ideologies first, long before she ran for congress, but not all. Some are young, impressionable idealists looking for something and, for some, someone to believe in.

[48656c6c6f20]

71. Nancy ought to put her to work

Triple her commitees, add her to important legislation. Fill that plate until it's gonna tumble. More education and work always is good for the soul.

[budkin]

72. "We are now favored to win the house..."

NO. We're not.

[DLCWIdem]

100. Post #41 has the 2 polls I am referring to

The latest 2 polls of the last 3 has Dems +7 and Dems +3. These are both post Dobbs

[AntivaxHunters]

90. The generation gap is very evident

between those who are older and younger voters.
And that's all I'm saying on this.

[Iggo]

96. Challenge the leadership to do what?

[oioioi]

103. She's too loud. She needs to wait her turn and ask for permission...

[DLCWIdem]

105. Which I never said

I said wait until after the midterms to attack the President from your own party unless you want to lose

[Azathoth]

110. "we are now favored to win the House"

Is this a joke?

[Blasphemer]

112. For once, I am with AOC...

I have been weary of AOC, Sanders, the Justice Democrats (the current mainstream incarnation of progressivism) for various reasons, including a lack of savvy political strategy. However, they are right about Roe and the post-Roe response. We are in a "nothing to lose" moment. We've already lost a massive part of the party's platform - a part that reflects the core of the left's value system. This is not a time for moderation. If we respond tepidly here, we will not energize voters. Quite the opposite is likely. AOC understands this. 2020 was much closer than anyone imagined given how motivated the left was. This is a time when clear and powerful leadership is necessary. It's a time to be willing to get hosed in the streets.

[DLCWIdem]

113. I withdraw all my comments about AOC because

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216869761

[lapucelle]

146. "There are no current judicial vacancies open in Kentucky, but the Courier Journal reports

that the deal is in place for as soon as one opens."

Source: Jezebel

[DLCWIdem]

147. So it's probably not true then

Biden is in Europe. Shit it could have been Mcturtle who leaked it

[myohmy2]

115. maybe...

...she wants to win better...

...

...

[SYFROYH]

123. She's simply speaking her mind about things that matter to her.

[Hekate]

126. Nothing is that simple when we are in the midst of a literal theocratic takeover

[MC Sniper]

143. Aoc

Love me some AOC…..gurl

[gopiscrap]

169. welcome to DU

[Emile]

150. Love AOC. I think she

could very well be our first woman president.

[Blecht]

153. She's getting action

Does this sound like Biden hate?

Link to tweet

She is our strongest Democrat right now. She is working hard to promote Democratic ideals, and I find all this hand-wringing about her ridiculous.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

160. Right?

Isn't it weird that the responses to her seem to be that we just act like everything we've done is all good and there is nothing that needs changing? Someone advocating for a change that solidifies rights should be applauded.

[867-5309.]

155. And suddenly Joe says he'd ditch the filibuster to codify Roe

Activism works.

[DLCWIdem]

157. He had already said days ago Roe was on the ballot

I was taken as a given being implicit in that statement. But I am glad its explicitly stated. Now we have to win in November.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

159. So in your mind "Roe is on the ballot" "limit the filibuster to codify"?

Interesting. Because those aren't remotely close.

It's OK to say that AOC might have actually had a hand in getting the leadership to change their mind on the filibuster. You won't die or anything if you do. It'll be fine.

[DLCWIdem]

161. My point

Last edited Sat Jul 2, 2022, 10:34 PM - Edit history (1)

Was that he said that days ago. I, for one,took it for granted that was what he meant . Post #91 states the other measures he and Garland took right after the decision. In my mind this just clarifies what he meant. He and Harris were already saying they would have to make an amendment to codify Roe. He wasn't "failing" or doing "nothing". But look now AOC can take credit for "prodding" him to do what he was going to do anyway.

[Blecht]

166. Glad we have the Ignore button here

I do not have to read any more of the tripe you post.

[Marius25]

167. Where are we favored to win the House and Senate?

538 still has us losing.