NY-14: Goliath falls to OCASIO!

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It was a pretty embarrassing black eye for a week or two, IIRC.  Democrats have a hard enough time staying on message and navigating infighting as it is; there’s no sense making the situation worse.  Although this is all kinda moot since Crowley is probably safe.  

The Democratic party leadership have a hard time staying on message, so shouldn't defeat any of them?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/13/ro-khanna-joe-crowley-endorsement-643663

Pathetic

What a fraud. He so transparently wants to run for President or something as a progressive, too be he has neither the heart nor the brains for it.

So few Democrats even pretend to reach out to progressives that he gets seen as some sort of hero for his pretending.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

My guess is Crowley still wins 65-35. Ocasio-Cortez would be an amazing congresswoman but I feel like her momentum is too little, too late.

And what's so amazing about her??? Besides gender and Hispanic name...

Because she’s a progressive actually willing to fix the fundamentals problems of our declining middle class and growing gap between rich and poor.

So, only progressives are allowed to serve as Democratic congressmembers? With such "ideological purity" forget about House majority then - there are simply not enough such districts. Besides - i was (and IS) never a fan of wild-eyed idealists...

It's the establishment who are the purity trolls who do their best to make sure that progressives aren't elected.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

My guess is Crowley still wins 65-35. Ocasio-Cortez would be an amazing congresswoman but I feel like her momentum is too little, too late.

And what's so amazing about her??? Besides gender and Hispanic name...

Because she’s a progressive actually willing to fix the fundamentals problems of our declining middle class and growing gap between rich and poor.

So, only progressives are allowed to serve as Democratic congressmembers? With such "ideological purity" forget about House majority then - there are simply not enough such districts. Besides - i was (and IS) never a fan of wild-eyed idealists...

When did he say that? Just because you have a fetish for dull machine hacks and partisan drones doesn't mean every person on the country is obliged to love them as well.

I never ask for somebody's "love" for "my" candidates - first. I am absolutely "anti-party" (at least - anti-present-parties as they are) - that's second. But if someone uses term "amazing" - i expect some more, then lleft-wing (in this case) loony...

NY-14 is a D+29 district. They can definitely afford to have an actually progressive rep. And what makes you think she's a loony?

Well, it CAN. But - not neccessarily MUST. Again - let's people of the district decide, and let no one tries to impose it's opinion about who is better on them. That's all i want.

About your second question - i never read on this forum about her other "virtues" besides "being progressive", and most of the "progressives" i met during my stay in US belonged to "loony" category. To be honest - most of the ultraconservatives i met belonged to this category as well...

Well, it's a D+29 district, so no harm in having her run as a 3rd party.

A lot of these "woke" progressive challengers seem mean and entitled they run on identity and cast anyone against them as racist or prejudice.

That's some amazing projection from the wing who blamed Hillary's loss on sexism and racism.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It's pretty amazing to actually have some good news for once.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Lujan is probably worse than Crowley.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Lujan is probably worse than Crowley.

How?

The DCCC has been pretty awful, wasting tons of money on Ossoff while losing interest when a progressive gets the nomination. And he has a more conservative voting record than Crowley.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

About time that a member of the old guard was kicked out, but it probably won't be enough to "send a message" to the party elders.

Having all of the old guard kicked out might send a message to them, but I'm not sure about that.

Anyways, what's amazing is that she will be the only woman in their 20s to ever be in Congress.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Ocasio-Cortez says that she's a "Democratic Socialist" and is a member of the DSA. However, her policies AREN'T democratic socialist...they are social democratic.

She's actually an advocate for social democracy NOT democratic socialism. It's a common mistake that many young progressives especially since Bernie's campaign have made.

"Social Democracy" and "Democratic Socialism" are etymologically identical terms that refer to building - You guessed it! - socialism by democratic means, with the two terms only differing in certain political contexts. I take no issue with using the Democratic Socialist moniker to describe the new wave of left-of-American Liberalism we've been seeing to varying extents of the past couple of years, given that the Social Democracy is a term absent in American political parlance and the main figure in the movement proudly refers to himself as the latter.

Anyway, as stated on the New Place, I fully expect AOC to be one of the most visible Congresspeople in the entire country in just a years time - Just imagine how many rambling midnight toilet tweets Trump will dedicate to her once she's actually in office?

No, democratic socialism is NOT social democracy.

In democratic socialism, there is NO private industry and virtually NO free market but there is a democracy unlike totalitarian socialist regimes like the USSR & Cuba.

In a social democracy, there IS private industry and a free market but there are a lot checks and regulations. Also, the government doesn't own everything and provides basic services to it's citizens like maternity/paternity leave and single payer, universal health-care.

I used to think that they were basically the same but they are not and we shouldn't be getting stuff like this confused. Especially in a country like America, where being a "socialist" is considered by many people to be the equivalent of supporting the Soviet Union and Venezuela.

Well, DSA is obviously what you call social democracy.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

She wants to be President, according to her mother:

https://nypost.com/2018/06/27/ocasio-cortez-wants-to-be-president-mom-says/

She unseated the fourth most powerful Democrat and likely Speaker of the House, anything is possible.

Well, she is young, and has plenty of time to build a political portfolio. Who knows what happens in 20 years?

Sadly, in 20 years she'll probably have a trail of baggage as long as her voting record and won't be new or inspiring any more. One can hope it doesn't turn out that way but it turns out that way more often than not.

Bernie has been in congress 27 years, and the anti Bernie people are stuck with inane attacks about some essay he wrote 45 years ago.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

#

Uhhhh how was Ocasio-Cortez's campaign "identity politics"?

Read it again. The point is that there are certain people (i.e. Bernie Bros and the like) who seem to believe that any degree of focus on social liberalism means that you're fixated on "identity politics" and therefore can't be a genuine economic progressive. Ocasio-Cortez ran a campaign reconciling the two and showing how social and economic issues aren't mutually exclusive.

That's a stupid straw man. Bernie first became interested in politics because his family was killed in the Holocaust, not because of economic issues.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Waiting for The Hill to run an op-ed condemning Lieberman for speaking divisively. Link

I wish Lieberman would just go away already.

It's hilarious to see Lieberman talk about what hurts the party.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Bill Pascrell, Alcee Hastings, and Lacy Clay sounds like a great list of Congressmen who need to be primaried.

Throw in Lipinski and Cuellar and you'd have most of my list.

Most? I would hope just a tiny fraction.