politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Define "hard". If you mean antagonistic, that's because she wisely tries not to waste too much time and energy boosting the false narratives of the billionaire-owned mass media that bear a lot of the blame for how things got awful enough for fascism to return.
As do pretty much anyone. Which is why she and most competent politicians make sure to be prepared for all possible pertinent questions.
It still depends btw: do you call refusing to entertain a deliberately false narrative "stumbling"?
That's a bit of an exaggeration but she's not made herself available as much as for example Ro Khanna, I'll give you that.
Ro and most of the ones making that many media appearances don't seem as genuine and principled, though.
Whether that's due to the sheer volume of gotcha questions or because they ARE less principled, that's not a good look to the ones they need to reach.
AKA contributing to disinformation by accepting their clickbait false narratives as legitimately in the interest of the people.
Yeah, imagine preferring to talk about the REAL issues rather than how everyone to the left of Ronald Reagan are either immature children or dangerous radicals 🙄
I'd argue the exact opposite. If you mud wrestle with a pig, the pig beats you with experience and you get filthy no matter how well you do.
Dude. The way she ENTERED politics was by going from volunteering for Bernie to unseating a 10-term incumbent who was the third ranking Dem representative in two years!
She has since easily beaten more right wing Dems favored by the DNC in primaries twice (and won unopposed except for the Republican nominee once).
If anyone knows how to beat overwhelming odds and win against the experienced establishment favorite, it's her.
Fox news, Piers Morgon, are both very antogonistic as examples, and I would list Zeteo, any interview with Medhi or Pratt as a hard interview (I personally think Medhi is one of the bester interviewers in medi, hands down).
It's not a matter of it being time wasting, it's a matter of putting in reps and communicating a message. It's about rhetoric and convincing an audience. Bernie finds time for those audiences. Ro Khanna finds time for those audiences. Ilhan finds time for those interviews. And go read the comments under those interviews: MAGA trust Bernie and Ro more than they do most of their own Republicans because Bernie and Ro have put in the reps, done the laps.
And to volley the question back over the net, why does AOC get an accountability pass when all the rest of her squad cohort don't suffer from this same issue? Its not like they aren't effective or productive members of Congress, I'd argue quite the opposite. It was not the Cortesse-Massie bill that got the Epstein files released it wash the Khanna Massie bill that did, and Ro found ample time to take his messages and arguments before the people while doing so.
Let's take the example I gave. AOC got asked by dropsite if she supported her former chief of staff who is trying to oust Pelosi in California. A fairly gentle question from a friendly source about litterally the person who helped get you into Congress. And she fumbled it. Badly. In a way that should give any progressive pause.
When Ilhan Omar was attacked by a maga supporter at a recent event she didn't back down. She litterally got in the attackers face in a way that should have made national headlines. We're she running for another seat, it would have.
It's fair to juxtapose AOC against her cohort, and she is at the back of that pack in my view. The pack is still leagues ahead of other Democrats but that's beside the point, because now is when we need to make these evaluations.
I think your an utter fool to believe you can get away from hard interviews. I will not support a candidate who can't handle the pressure of a campaign or read the room or the moment. That's how you get "Please clap." Jeb, and "Nothing would fundamentally change Harris".
These politicians are not your children. It's not your job to protect them. They need to be held up and have their mettle tested before we need to rely upon them to be a backstop against fascism, not after.
You not only have to be able to get jnto the mud and learn to wrestle with the pigs, you need to be able to do so and win. I'm not interested in someone who hasn't put the time in to win dirty fights.
The candidate will have to face down Tucker Carlson or Candice Owens, or any one of the innumerable shit birds who have piled up on the right.
Yeah and for the first two years she was a fire brand. Then something happened and she became far more reserved and calculating. She genuinely changed after getting iced by Pelosi for occupying her office. I think it impacted her and she shifted her approach.
I need to see her taking harder more competitive interviews. I need to see her all over leftwing media and safe space interviews. I need to see her in spaces where her team doesn't control the questions getting asked.
Because there are other progressives who had just as difficult if not more difficult fights than AOC has had, and they don't seem to have a problem taking in those battles.