I’ve been impressed by her ability to actually get things done. She’s been getting community programs funded in her district that accomplish Green New Deal goals but doing it silently without attaching Green New Deal wording anywhere. She got other representatives running similar programs in the same way. I respect someone who is willing to speak up but also believes in their mission enough to do it quietly if that’s what it takes.
She’s great, and she’s one of the few Democrats capable of hard hitting soundbites like this one. Buuuuut, she’s super controversial due to the constant attacks by the right. In a way, she rose to fame because of that, but they might have set her up to fail on any stage larger than her home district. I would love to be proven wrong there though.
The right can make anyone controversial in the right. Because they’re detached from reality. Completely untethered. We can’t really worry about that. I think if she continues in the path she’s currently on. Supporting labor and actually working in her community. That can go a long ways towards taking the name recognition she was gifted and building an even better structure on top of it.
She’ll never get the misogynist and the fascist that’s for sure. But she doesn’t have to. She just has to be better than what we’re used to.
… and this is where NPR and the New York Times step in and tell their audience they need to vote for Adam Schiff because AOC is too controversial and can’t win a general.
Look at how they handled Bernie '16 and drove Biden '20 in the primaries.
While NPR does have a definitive and visible right wing bias. They are much better than any other outlets. Though they will still entertain false questions in the name of pursuing a narrative.
I think the New York Times Etc have largely ruined what reputations they had. That we should never rely on a publicly traded company to inform us. The moment any company becomes publicly traded marks the decline and ultimate death knell of their reputation and reliability. Because even if the family or original owners retain a controlling amount. Eventually someone won’t care enough to hold on to it as tightly or it will be given away / diluted to the point it becomes meaningless. And then the shareholders will take over. And their bottom line is money not truth. Which is where a lot of the current problem resides. Too much focus on money and how to make more of it. With very little concern for facts or truth.
She’s great, and she’s one of the few Democrats capable of hard hitting soundbites like this one. Buuuuut, she’s super controversial due to the constant attacks by the right.
Some of those attacks are even coming from Republicans.
I honesty hope she runs in 2028 if we’re still having elections. She’s not perfect. But world’s better than what we’re used to.
Sad, yet accurate. Worst timeline.
I’ve been impressed by her ability to actually get things done. She’s been getting community programs funded in her district that accomplish Green New Deal goals but doing it silently without attaching Green New Deal wording anywhere. She got other representatives running similar programs in the same way. I respect someone who is willing to speak up but also believes in their mission enough to do it quietly if that’s what it takes.
She’s great, and she’s one of the few Democrats capable of hard hitting soundbites like this one. Buuuuut, she’s super controversial due to the constant attacks by the right. In a way, she rose to fame because of that, but they might have set her up to fail on any stage larger than her home district. I would love to be proven wrong there though.
The right can make anyone controversial in the right. Because they’re detached from reality. Completely untethered. We can’t really worry about that. I think if she continues in the path she’s currently on. Supporting labor and actually working in her community. That can go a long ways towards taking the name recognition she was gifted and building an even better structure on top of it.
She’ll never get the misogynist and the fascist that’s for sure. But she doesn’t have to. She just has to be better than what we’re used to.
… and this is where NPR and the New York Times step in and tell their audience they need to vote for Adam Schiff because AOC is too controversial and can’t win a general.
Look at how they handled Bernie '16 and drove Biden '20 in the primaries.
While NPR does have a definitive and visible right wing bias. They are much better than any other outlets. Though they will still entertain false questions in the name of pursuing a narrative.
I think the New York Times Etc have largely ruined what reputations they had. That we should never rely on a publicly traded company to inform us. The moment any company becomes publicly traded marks the decline and ultimate death knell of their reputation and reliability. Because even if the family or original owners retain a controlling amount. Eventually someone won’t care enough to hold on to it as tightly or it will be given away / diluted to the point it becomes meaningless. And then the shareholders will take over. And their bottom line is money not truth. Which is where a lot of the current problem resides. Too much focus on money and how to make more of it. With very little concern for facts or truth.
Honestly AP news is better than NPR in my book, they do a little better at not mixing in editorial.
Some of those attacks are even coming from Republicans.
No fucking way.