PDA

View Full Version : Dems float idea of primary challenge to AOC



Peter1469
01-29-2019, 06:21 PM
Dems float idea of primary challenge to AOC (https://thehill.com/homenews/house/427364-some-dems-float-idea-of-primary-challenge-for-ocasio-cortez)

That was fast. Dems want AOC gone.


Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (https://thehill.com/people/alexandria-ocasio-cortez) (D-N.Y.) has infuriated colleagues by aligning with a progressive outside group that’s threatening to primary entrenched Democrats. Now some of those lawmakers are turning the tables on her and are discussing recruiting a primary challenger to run against the social media sensation.


At least one House Democrat has been privately urging members of the New York delegation to recruit a local politician from the Bronx or Queens to challenge Ocasio-Cortez.


“What I have recommended to the New York delegation is that you find her a primary opponent and make her a one-term congressperson,” the Democratic lawmaker, who requested anonymity, told The Hill. “You’ve got numerous council people and state legislators who’ve been waiting 20 years for that seat. I’m sure they can find numerous people who want that seat in that district.”


The New York delegation has eyed Ocasio-Cortez with skepticism ever since last summer when the 29-year-old self-described democratic socialist shocked the political world and defeated then-Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-N.Y.) in what many thought would be a sleepy primary race. Crowley, a Queens powerbroker and affable House Democratic Caucus chairman, had been considered a possible future Speaker.


Many New York and Congressional Black Caucus lawmakers were also furious with Ocasio-Cortez after a recent Politico report stated she and the grass-roots group aligned with her, Justice Democrats, were considering backing a primary challenge to fellow New York Democrat Hakeem Jeffries (https://thehill.com/people/hakeem-jeffries), a Black Caucus member and establishment insider who succeeded Crowley as caucus chairman.

Common
01-29-2019, 06:26 PM
PAY ATTENTION DEMOCRATS, you will NOT unseat Ocasio, she is from the Bronx, shes hispanic, shes loud, she talks out of her ass and thats why she beat the long time democrat and why she will be a congresswoman from the bronx as long as she wants.

Its too late for you to be concerned now democrats, you have screwed YOURSELVES in a couple of cycles you will most all be gone replaced by OCAs.

Tahuyaman
01-29-2019, 07:04 PM
I would advise the long time establishment Democrats to put this woman out there as the new face of their party. After all we all say that we need fresh faces in Washington DC. New faces. New ideas.

Reject that movement and make this woman the new fresh face of the Democratic Party.

texan
01-29-2019, 09:39 PM
Please keep her talking.

Green Arrow
01-29-2019, 11:58 PM
Likely will crash and burn. She won in the first place because she went against the establishment, those same voters aren’t going to suddenly back the establishment over her, particularly when she has put her money where her mouth is and walked her talk.

Safety
01-30-2019, 12:01 AM
I'm more interested in the sudden infatuation with anonymous sources...are they to be credible now because we are talking about AOC, or are they not to be trusted only when they are talking about Trump.

Asking for a friend.

Tahuyaman
01-30-2019, 10:52 AM
Can we have one thread where someone does not insert Trump into the discussion?

Peter1469
01-30-2019, 11:01 AM
Can we have one thread where someone does not insert Trump into the discussion?
Not during TDS fever season.

Tahuyaman
01-30-2019, 11:19 AM
Not during TDS fever season.


Back to to the subject. I can see why many Democrats would oppose AOC. She is part of the fringe element which is moving the Democratic Party to the extreme far left. That is going cause them to fracture. The more moderate Democrats will be forced out.

Captdon
01-30-2019, 12:53 PM
I'm more interested in the sudden infatuation with anonymous sources...are they to be credible now because we are talking about AOC, or are they not to be trusted only when they are talking about Trump.

Asking for a friend.

Anonymous sources are never to be trusted. They may be right but never trusted.

Captdon
01-30-2019, 12:54 PM
Can we have one thread where someone does not insert Trump into the discussion?

No.

Safety
01-30-2019, 01:22 PM
Can we have one thread where someone does not insert Trump into the discussion?


Not during TDS fever season.

Did y’all get tired of Obama getting inserted into the conversation when he was in office? If you did, it must have been when the forum was offline due to maintenance.

Just in case anyone tries, whining about whataboutism will garner an emoji response given the no fucks given in other threads.

Tahuyaman
01-30-2019, 01:56 PM
Did y’all get tired of Obama getting inserted into the conversation when he was in office? If you did, it must have been when the forum was offline due to maintenance.

Just in case anyone tries, whining about whataboutism will garner an emoji response given the no $#@!s given in other threads.


I'm tired of you inserting him into discussions now where he is irrelevant.

Your comparison of this annonymous source to some others with issues surrounding the current administration is idiotic and just partisan hackery. The annonymous source in this case is not attempting to accuse someone of committing a crime.

Safety
01-30-2019, 02:51 PM
I'm tired of you inserting him into discussions now where he is irrelevant.

Your comparison of this annonymous source to some others with issues surrounding the current administration is idiotic and just partisan hackery. The annonymous source in this case is not attempting to accuse someone of committing a crime.

That’s just it, it wasn’t irrelevant. In order to establish credibility, past discussions are fair game, and if it shows that your stance wobbles back and forth depending on the target of the discussion, then it shows that you are not really concerned about the means, but the end.

Tahuyaman
01-30-2019, 02:54 PM
That’s just it, it wasn’t irrelevant. In order to establish credibility, past discussions are fair game, and if it shows that your stance wobbles back and forth depending on the target of the discussion, then it shows that you are not really concerned about the means, but the end.
If you could show an example of me doing that in the past, it would help your case. But I suspect you won't do that.

Safety
01-30-2019, 03:10 PM
If you could show an example of me doing that in the past, it would help your case. But I suspect you won't do that.

Why else did you win the biggest douchebag award at tPF?

Start there.

Tahuyaman
01-30-2019, 03:18 PM
If you could show an example of me doing that in the past, it would help your case. But I suspect you won't do that.


Why else did you win the biggest douchebag award at tPF?

Start there.

I knew that you could not defend your accusation once it was challenged. That's your MO.

Safety
01-30-2019, 03:27 PM
I knew that you could not defend your accusation once it was challenged. That's your MO.

If you know so much, why don’t you know when to stop digging?

Tahuyaman
01-30-2019, 03:31 PM
If you know so much, why don’t you know when to stop digging?

I do know that you generally refuse to defend one of your comments once it's challenged.