2 2
Iago

Ocasio-Cortez- I'm a big girl now!

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, billvon said:

It is ironic that AOC, the woman that Iago compared to both a dog and an illiterate child, was one of the few representatives who asked actual well-researched questions at the Cohen hearing.  While very little new information came out at the hearing, much of the information that DID come out came from Ocasio's questions.

Did Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez draw Trump's ire questioning Michael Cohen about the president's tax returns?

" the committee's professional staff worked with the congresswoman’s personal aides to select a line of questioning that Ocasio-Cortez could then fine tune when her turn came in the high-profile showdown. ..

Ocasio-Cortez followed up on Missouri Democrat William Lacy Clay’s questions, leading Cohen to disclose how he claimed Trump had strived to defraud insurance companies and misrepresent the value of his assets, laying the groundwork to possibly acquire the tax returns by committee subpoena. "

I'll paraphrase for trumpeters. trump enterprises has already been served with subpoenas to investigate insurance fraud.That would be five days after her five minutes of House questioning of Cohen. Her staff helped formulate the pertinent questions that led to this and to the upcoming subpoenas of trump's tax returns. Yeah that would be the $50K a year staff mentioned earlier.

Mmmm a brown skinned Latina woman laying the groundwork for a nice eight by eight prison cell. Should be hearing from Hannity, trump and his other conservative delinquent supporters soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why the GOP (and even some Dems) are so afraid of AOC:

"I find it revealing when people mock where I came from, & say they’re going to “send me back to waitressing,” as if that is bad or shameful. It’s as though they think being a member of Congress makes you intrinsically “better” than a waitress. But our job is to serve, not rule."

If that sort of meme starts spreading, you might see more pressure on politicians to serve, rather than rule.  And given the contempt that many politicians hold for the people who elected them, it's not a position they want to be put in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/5/2019 at 1:00 PM, gowlerk said:

That is also why the Dem establishment is afraid of her.

I've seen way more outlandish statements and claims from AOC than anything rational. We could start an AOC gaffe thread, and there would be new posts nearly every day, if there were enough Republican supporters on here, but most of them are busy with their lives and can't be bothered to deal with the heavily left leaning group on here. (shrugs)

And yes, I am seeing a shift in the Democratic party. The new group is making a lot of noise and challenging the old guard for control. Maybe that is welcome news for some of you. Personally I don't like it. It's going in the wrong direction. But maybe, just maybe, that's good news for the Republicans and Trump. The more left the Democrats go, and rifts develop in the party, the more it helps Trump in 2020.

Remember how many counties and states Trump won. The electoral college was established for a reason, and now I'm seeing the Democratic party's efforts to try to change the law to their benefit. Everything I'm hearing on Mueller's Russian Collusion investigation is that there's nothing significant. You've already got Adam Schitt declaring that he's going to investigate the Trumps even further. They're desperate. They know they can't beat Trump on the issues. They're doing everything but throw the kitchen sink at him. And it's gonna backfire on them, bigly. :D

2016-presidential-election-map.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
2 hours ago, BillyVance said:

he electoral college was established for a reason, and now I'm seeing the Democratic party's efforts to try to change the law to their benefit. 

Yes, it was established to stop the people from being able to choose the President. If you think it benefits the Democrats to have the people choose the President, you may want to think about what that means for the Republican party.

 

Quote

They know they can't beat Trump on the issues. 

How can anyone tell? Trump has never run on any real issues.

Edited by jakee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, jakee said:

Yes, it was established to stop the people from being able to choose the President. If you think it benefits the Democrats to have the people choose the President, you may want to think about what that means for the Republican party.

 

How can anyone tell? Trump has never run on any real issues.

He reversed a lot of Obama's bullshit, and now the economy is booming. And you've got Democrats left and right poo-pooing it. They know it too.

As for the electoral college, it was meant to prevent small sections of the country from having more power over large sections of the country. The founding fathers knew what they were doing and wanted everyone to have fair and equal representation. Look at the map I posted earlier. Then compare that to what it would look like without the electoral college here...

Now tell me, how is it fair for a few populous states to tell the rest of the country what to do? Fuck that.

 

1cfc7a6417b07a7fa1d59f65c37ee502.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BillyVance said:

He reversed a lot of Obama's bullshit, and now the economy is booming. And you've got Democrats left and right poo-pooing it. They know it too.

As for the electoral college, it was meant to prevent small sections of the country from having more power over large sections of the country. The founding fathers knew what they were doing and wanted everyone to have fair and equal representation. Look at the map I posted earlier. Then compare that to what it would look like without the electoral college here...

Now tell me, how is it fair for a few populous states to tell the rest of the country what to do? Fuck that.

 

1cfc7a6417b07a7fa1d59f65c37ee502.jpg

"Government of the PEOPLE by the PEOPLE for the PEOPLE."  Not government by somewhat arbitrary  lines drawn on a map

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kallend said:

"Government of the PEOPLE by the PEOPLE for the PEOPLE."  Not government by somewhat arbitrary  lines drawn on a map

Like I said, the FOUNDING FATHERS saw a potential problem and installed the Electoral College as a check and balance measure. You're a socialist so I'm not surprised you don't agree with them. (shrugs)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, BillyVance said:

Like I said, the FOUNDING FATHERS saw a potential problem and installed the Electoral College as a check and balance measure. You're a socialist so I'm not surprised you don't agree with them. (shrugs)

If you read the Federalist Papers you will find that your explanation is incorrect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dmcoco84 said:
On 3/8/2019 at 3:14 PM, billvon said:

"afraid"

"AayOckK"

 

On 3/8/2019 at 3:14 PM, billvon said:

 “send me back to waitressing,”

Because people are fucking assholes and idiots; See: Geoffrey Owens Trader Joe.

I loved my jobs at Food Lion and Kroger... I just love emergency medicine more.

Alright, well, there we go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BillyVance said:

He reversed a lot of Obama's bullshit, and now the economy is booming. And you've got Democrats left and right poo-pooing it. They know it too.

The economy was booming under Obama, too. The continuation of an upward trend doesn't mean White House policies are responsible. The large rise in the trade defecit, acceleration of national debt growth and volatile recont market performance may result from them, though.

 

Quote

As for the electoral college, it was meant to prevent small sections of the country from having more power over large sections of the country. The founding fathers knew what they were doing and wanted everyone to have fair and equal representation.

Actually, the founding fathers gave everyone no representation, except for the very few members of the electoral college. That's quite drastically unequal.

Quote

Now tell me, how is it fair for a few populous states to tell the rest of the country what to do? Fuck that.

It's fairer than allowing a few un-populous states to tell the rest of the country what to do, isn't it? Right now 3M people in the Dakotas, Wyoming and Montana have 1 less vote than 8.5M people in Virginia. What have you got against Virginia?

Quote

Look at the map I posted earlier. Then compare that to what it would look like without the electoral college here...

Electoral maps are, quite obviously, ridiculously stupid things to base decisions about fairness on. Electoral maps reduce every state or county or whatever from a set of diverse communities with numerous and varied opinions into a single homogenous block of all A or all B. Take Texas. Over 4M people voted for someone other than Trump, to 4.5M voting for Trump, yet your map shows Texas almost completely red. It's not. Even those big empty desert counties that make up most of it will have a decent number of Democrats and independents that you are completely ignoring. Florida is even worse, more people voted for not Trump than for Trump yet your map shows it mostly red, and the even dumber state by state maps show it as a simple block of red. It's not. That simply isn't how population demographics work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BillyVance said:

Like I said, the FOUNDING FATHERS saw a potential problem and installed the Electoral College as a check and balance measure. You're a socialist so I'm not surprised you don't agree with them. (shrugs)

The creation of the electoral college instituted a system whereby a very small class of unelected political elites could make decisions for the benefit of the masses who couldn't be trusted to make the right decisions on their own. Does that not sound aggressively socialist to you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, jakee said:

The creation of the electoral college instituted a system whereby a very small class of unelected political elites could make decisions for the benefit of the masses who couldn't be trusted to make the right decisions on their own. Does that not sound aggressively socialist to you?

And how did the rest of that work, that you had to be a land owner?  That part wasn't rescinded for another 80 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
44 minutes ago, DJL said:

And how did the rest of that work, that you had to be a land owner?  That part wasn't rescinded for another 80 years.

To be an Elector? Not as a Federal edict, but I guess individual states could have done. The Constitution itself was utterly bereft of detail on that point.

 

To be a voter? Well, no-one has the absolute right to vote. States can't abridge the right to vote in a presidential election through discrimination of any kind or poll tax etc, but I'm reasonably certain that nothing exists at federal level to stop any state simply taking away the entire popular vote, and triggering the biggest constitutional crisis ever seen in a modern western democracy xD

Edited by jakee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BillyVance said:

I've seen way more outlandish statements and claims from AOC than anything rational.

Wow, she must scare the piss out of you, too.

Quote

Everything I'm hearing on Mueller's Russian Collusion investigation is that there's nothing significant.

199 charges.  37 people charged.  Seven guilty pleas.  One indictment. If that's "nothing significant" then you have no sense of significance.

To be a Trump supporter, it sounds like you really do have to be OK with Trump shooting someone in the face on Fifth Avenue.

Quote

You've already got Adam Schitt declaring that he's going to investigate the Trumps even further.

Yep.  Now that he doesn't have his own party covering for him, he's going to have to account for his actions.  O the horror.

Quote

They're desperate. They know they can't beat Trump on the issues.

Record deficit.  Kids in cages.  Record foreign trade deficit.  Sagging economy.  Increased border incursions.  Nepotism.  Emoluments.  I don't think Dems will be hard-put to find issues to challenge him on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

As for the electoral college, it was meant to prevent small sections of the country from having more power over large sections of the country. The founding fathers knew what they were doing and wanted everyone to have fair and equal representation.

No, it was meant to give power to states, rather than people.  That was a bone thrown to states to get their agreement to the original Constitution.  A fair and equal vote for everyone?  That would be a popular vote.  Sounds like you are against that.

Quote

Now tell me, how is it fair for a few populous states to tell the rest of the country what to do? Fuck that.

Why do you think electors should vote instead of people?  People should vote, not politically appointed state electors. Fuck that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, billvon said:

 

Record deficit.  Kids in cages.  Record foreign trade deficit.  Sagging economy.  Increased border incursions.  Nepotism.  Emoluments.  I don't think Dems will be hard-put to find issues to challenge him on.

You left out the part about a foreign policy that alienates and drives away our allies, destroys NATO, and empowers China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and North Korea. 

While Trump never stood up and bent forward at the waist, his treatment of KJU has been nothing short of servile. His excuses and justifications for the Saudis murdering Kashoggi are even worse. It's also apparent to anyone who looks closely that he is essentially in Putin's control. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jakee said:
Quote

As for the electoral college, it was meant to prevent small sections of the country from having more power over large sections of the country. The founding fathers knew what they were doing and wanted everyone to have fair and equal representation.

Actually, the founding fathers gave everyone no representation, except for the very few members of the electoral college. That's quite drastically unequal. 

That is equally as ridiculous as BASE570's "Act of 1871" posts.

(1) Framers... not Founders.

(2) Like Senators, they didn't want direct election. House, Senate, SCOTUS... and POTUS. All different, intentionally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jakee said:
2 hours ago, DJL said:

And how did the rest of that work, that you had to be a land owner?  That part wasn't rescinded for another 80 years.

To be an Elector? Not as a Federal edict, but I guess individual states could have done. The Constitution itself was utterly bereft of detail on that point.

 

To be a voter? Well, no-one has the absolute right to vote. States can't abridge the right to vote in a presidential election through discrimination of any kind or poll tax etc, but I'm reasonably certain that nothing exists at federal level to stop any state simply taking away the entire popular vote, and triggering the biggest constitutional crisis ever seen in a modern western democracy

We are not a democracy.

And Doug... how much did land cost back then? You should look into that.

Answer: Not Much... they wanted people to have skin in the game; for a reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

2 2