Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

[gimmick]

Oh and if you don't let Blake win he will stop playing. Brave stance.

[GambleBotsSatire]

your tags suck jim

[Mintjewlips]

I'm committing to help out AOC, if it helps throw the final death throws into the cult of Hillary, then I'm game.

AOC, you're not stupid, everyone of your colleagues are just condescending, remember that...

[Mintjewlips]

Honestly I think if the right embraces her, she'll join the fray.

You don't have to be a hypocrite, if you like nice things, nothing wrong with that, just don't be a hypocrite, that's where Obama killed his legacy....so much potential....

[zealanddonk]

AOC sounds somewhat similar to the NZ Prime minister Jacinda Ardern who jigged together a leftist collation deal to beat the right wing ruling party.

Odd Druff thinks El Trumpo will be in a position to win the presidency in 2020 given Manafort just shipped 19 years in prison and others are waiting to be arrested.

[blake]

Oh and if you don't let Blake win he will stop playing. Brave stance.

gimmick, you're a complete fuckup and somehow, in a world with mintjewlips, you manage to be the least liked person on this forum.

to your credit, you manage to pull off the seemingly impossible combination of smugness and retardation.

and i don't debate to "win." if i think i'm wrong, i concede it. better yet, i don't reflexively defend someone because they're "on my side." that's a surefire way of ending up taking idiotic positions like, for example, saying that AOC chasing amazon out of NYC was a smart economic move for new yorkers.

just log the fuck off.

[GambleBotsSatire]

keep up the good work gimmick, maybe one day blake will get it

[BCR]

The reason she’s scary, to me, is all about branding. Arguing actual policy is lost on 90% of the population.

We have a country where a great many people wearing MAGA hats will say they hate Obamacare, but don’t want to lose their insurance card provided by the affordable health care act. That is the absurd reality. If you can brand Obama, who was an excellent communicator to the point that simply adding his name to a policy flips it’s approval to that degree, this girl is a huge net negative. You can’t get rid of Trump without winning a coalition of middle aged and older white midwestern voters left behind who traditionally voted Dem and upper middle class suburbanites generally embarrassed by Trump. That her policies might help that first group in many cases will be missed by that group. The second group isn’t that political. They can go either way and talk of 70% tax rates and celebrating job losses will more than turn them off. She’s basically designed in a lab to hurt the voters Dems need most to win, and the right will expertly inflate her importance and essentially put her on the ticket despite being largely irrelevant.

[blake]

The reason she’s scary, to me, is all about branding. Arguing actual policy is lost on 90% of the population.

We have a country where a great many people wearing MAGA hats will say they hate Obamacare, but don’t want to lose their insurance card provided by the affordable health care act. That is the absurd reality. If you can brand Obama, who was an excellent communicator to the point that simply adding his name to a policy flips it’s approval to that degree, this girl is a huge net negative. You can’t get rid of Trump without winning a coalition of middle aged and older white midwestern voters left behind who traditionally voted Dem and upper middle class suburbanites generally embarrassed by Trump. That her policies might help that first group in many cases will be missed by that group. The second group isn’t that political. They can go either way and talk of 70% tax rates and celebrating job losses will more than turn them off. She’s basically designed in a lab to hurt the voters Dems need most to win, and the right will expertly inflate her importance and essentially put her on the ticket despite being largely irrelevant.

correct. how many times have we seen presidential candidates questioned about AOC's green new deal? her policies have become a litmus test for democrats, as absurd as that may be. wait till you see the debates

[gimmick]

Oh and if you don't let Blake win he will stop playing. Brave stance.

gimmick, you're a complete fuckup and somehow, in a world with mintjewlips, you manage to be the least liked person on this forum.

to your credit, you manage to pull off the seemingly impossible combination of smugness and retardation.

and i don't debate to "win." if i think i'm wrong, i concede it. better yet, i don't reflexively defend someone because they're "on my side." that's a surefire way of ending up taking idiotic positions like, for example, saying that AOC chasing amazon out of NYC was a smart economic move for new yorkers.

just log the fuck off.

How is it my fault you suck at this?

So where are we now? You gave 3 stupid/extreme things AOC has done/said. 2 of those you gave up immediately (the environment ones) and now you're grasping at the last one.

Hella revolutionary to say that corporate socialism in the form of tax incentives that pit states/cities against each other isn't really a sound policy for a country. Yup. Good luck trying to find economists that even try to sell that shit.

Good thing you aren't tilting about any of this. That would be embarrassing.

[JimmyG_415]

Interesting take, when even Fox "news" viewers are voting for the 70%,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, on the 10th million (I love how you guys leave that part out, every time.).
You guys are giving her way too much credit for Amazon.



Most voters back Ocasio-Cortez plan to tax richest Americans up to 70 percent: poll.........FOX "NEWS"
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mos...americans-poll





This forum is the epitome of "Arguing actual policy is lost on 90% of the population.
I.E. Druff upset because AOC doesn't dance as well as him, or that him knowing for a fact that Hilary and Chelsea don't get along. Stupid.

The reason she’s scary, to me, is all about branding. Arguing actual policy is lost on 90% of the population.

We have a country where a great many people wearing MAGA hats will say they hate Obamacare, but don’t want to lose their insurance card provided by the affordable health care act. That is the absurd reality. If you can brand Obama, who was an excellent communicator to the point that simply adding his name to a policy flips it’s approval to that degree, this girl is a huge net negative. You can’t get rid of Trump without winning a coalition of middle aged and older white midwestern voters left behind who traditionally voted Dem and upper middle class suburbanites generally embarrassed by Trump. That her policies might help that first group in many cases will be missed by that group. The second group isn’t that political. They can go either way and talk of 70% tax rates and celebrating job losses will more than turn them off. She’s basically designed in a lab to hurt the voters Dems need most to win, and the right will expertly inflate her importance and essentially put her on the ticket despite being largely irrelevant.

[blake]

gimmick, you're a complete fuckup and somehow, in a world with mintjewlips, you manage to be the least liked person on this forum.

to your credit, you manage to pull off the seemingly impossible combination of smugness and retardation.

and i don't debate to "win." if i think i'm wrong, i concede it. better yet, i don't reflexively defend someone because they're "on my side." that's a surefire way of ending up taking idiotic positions like, for example, saying that AOC chasing amazon out of NYC was a smart economic move for new yorkers.

just log the fuck off.

How is it my fault you suck at this?

So where are we now? You gave 3 stupid/extreme things AOC has done/said. 2 of those you gave up immediately (the environment ones) and now you're grasping at the last one.

Hella revolutionary to say that corporate socialism in the form of tax incentives that pit states/cities against each other isn't really a sound policy for a country. Yup. Good luck trying to find economists that even try to sell that shit.

Good thing you aren't tilting about any of this. That would be embarrassing.

fine, but would you at least concede that you've got a unique blend of smug retard going?

[blake]

and of course, gimmick being gimmick, he won't even concede that.

[blake]

There are currently 5 users browsing this thread. (3 members and 2 guests)
blake, BCR, JimmyG_415

bcr i'd like you to chime in on this debate.

[blake]

the debate being whether gimmick gives off a smug retard vibe

[BCR]

the debate being whether gimmick gives off a smug retard vibe

To be perfectly honest, I’ve never thought that at all. I enjoy both your contributions here and I find that increasingly rare these days. It probably doesn’t hurt that I generally agree with him and he’s usually arguing against posters I disagree with.


On this issue though, I agree with you in a broad sense. He tends to argue these issues in an academic manner. For instance, I could know a ton about somewhere and be educated, but that misses the nuance of living somewhere and putting faces on people you know she turns off. Like I know a hundred people she’s going to turn off who won’t give a single fuck about the actual issue. I’m sure you know a hundred suburban Philly people who are going to cringe every time she speaks, and they’re not going to dive into the minutiae of the argument, they’ll just sit it out or vote Trump again. We both live in battleground states and it’s easy to feel.

Like I agree that fighting these tax incentive battles is likely detrimental to the country as a whole, but that’s viewing the US as some cohesive country. We’re not. When Trump neeesed to find his tax cuts, he targeted the deduction that would hit people in blue states. She’s elected to represent NY, and should be serving their interests. So I can see both your points, but facts don’t matter in American politics, and I agree with you she’s toxic because I’m seeing people who didn’t know her name two months ago already forming opinions and facts are irrelevant.

I’m not trying to be wishy washy and placate both of you. I’ve never been annoyed by either of you. I have thought at times he misses a few things, naturally, that are easier to know if you live here about the people behind the numbers.

[gimmick]

I guess that's a tactic. Not much of a follow-up when you start the day by bringing out the big guns. The good 'ol nobody likes you.

Just general wondering, why would i concede again?

You didn't really back your argument in any way. It's pretty clear i disagreed with your first assessment and after 20 posts you hadn't brought anything new to the table.

Fairly sure i answered all your questions and you answered none of mine.

Just making many posts isn't an argument. It doesn't ad any validity to your initial claim. Maybe it's an education thing. Americans seem to believe worthless points and arbitrary amount of words have intrinsic value. It's just wasting everyone's time.

Anyways AOC is totes the worst because reasons. Thank you for your participation.

[blake]

the debate being whether gimmick gives off a smug retard vibe

To be perfectly honest, I’ve never thought that at all. I enjoy both your contributions here and I find that increasingly rare these days. It probably doesn’t hurt that I generally agree with him and he’s usually arguing against posters I disagree with.


On this issue though, I agree with you in a broad sense. He tends to argue these issues in an academic manner. For instance, I could know a ton about somewhere and be educated, but that misses the nuance of living somewhere and putting faces on people you know she turns off. Like I know a hundred people she’s going to turn off who won’t give a single fuck about the actual issue. I’m sure you know a hundred suburban Philly people who are going to cringe every time she speaks, and they’re not going to dive into the minutiae of the argument, they’ll just sit it out or vote Trump again. We both live in battleground states and it’s easy to feel.

Like I agree that fighting these tax incentive battles is likely detrimental to the country as a whole, but that’s viewing the US as some cohesive country. We’re not. When Trump neeesed to find his tax cuts, he targeted the deduction that would hit people in blue states. She’s elected to represent NY, and should be serving their interests. So I can see both your points, but facts don’t matter in American politics, and I agree with you she’s toxic because I’m seeing people who didn’t know her name two months ago already forming opinions and facts are irrelevant.

I’m not trying to be wishy washy and placate both of you. I’ve never been annoyed by either of you. I have thought at times he misses a few things, naturally, that are easier to know if you live here about the people behind the numbers.

so to reiterate, you've read his arguments against me and don't think he gives off a smug retard vibe?

i feel like i need to ask that again cause your answer shocks me.

[blake]

I guess that's a tactic. Not much of a follow-up when you start the day by bringing out the big guns. The good 'ol nobody likes you.

Just general wondering, why would i concede again?

You didn't really back your argument in any way. It's pretty clear i disagreed with your first assessment and after 20 posts you hadn't brought anything new to the table.

Fairly sure i answered all your questions and you answered none of mine.

Just making many posts isn't an argument. It doesn't ad any validity to your initial claim. Maybe it's an education thing. Americans seem to believe worthless points and arbitrary amount of words have intrinsic value. It's just wasting everyone's time.

Anyways AOC is totes the worst because reasons. Thank you for your participation.

what's funny is that deep down, i believe you agree with me as absurd as that may appear.

let's blame me for poorly stating it (although i obv didn't).

once again, my general sentiment is that new york losing amazon will cause new york to lose out on tens of thousands of jobs and billions of tax dollars.

i'm not making any other point right now.

just that one.

no strawman arguments.

no red herrings.

that is my only point.

i know you agree with this.

why say you disagree, just to fuck with me?

if you really disagree, ok.

[BCR]

To be perfectly honest, I’ve never thought that at all. I enjoy both your contributions here and I find that increasingly rare these days. It probably doesn’t hurt that I generally agree with him and he’s usually arguing against posters I disagree with.


On this issue though, I agree with you in a broad sense. He tends to argue these issues in an academic manner. For instance, I could know a ton about somewhere and be educated, but that misses the nuance of living somewhere and putting faces on people you know she turns off. Like I know a hundred people she’s going to turn off who won’t give a single fuck about the actual issue. I’m sure you know a hundred suburban Philly people who are going to cringe every time she speaks, and they’re not going to dive into the minutiae of the argument, they’ll just sit it out or vote Trump again. We both live in battleground states and it’s easy to feel.

Like I agree that fighting these tax incentive battles is likely detrimental to the country as a whole, but that’s viewing the US as some cohesive country. We’re not. When Trump neeesed to find his tax cuts, he targeted the deduction that would hit people in blue states. She’s elected to represent NY, and should be serving their interests. So I can see both your points, but facts don’t matter in American politics, and I agree with you she’s toxic because I’m seeing people who didn’t know her name two months ago already forming opinions and facts are irrelevant.

I’m not trying to be wishy washy and placate both of you. I’ve never been annoyed by either of you. I have thought at times he misses a few things, naturally, that are easier to know if you live here about the people behind the numbers.

so to reiterate, you've read his arguments against me and don't think he gives off a smug retard vibe?

i feel like i need to ask that again cause your answer shocks me.

Lol. I just kind of skimmed them so I’ll read them again. I don’t fashion myself an experrt on tax breaks and tax revenue so I don’t know who is neccearuly right, but I’ll Look for smugness. He’s arguing in another language. One he knows very well, but I’ll reread them.