In my best adopted southern vernacular – what do y’all think of Cortez. I like her fearless attitude at times and standing strong for her beliefs - BUT - I am beginning to think she has a big mouth, but does not see the big picture – which is to get trump and republicans out of office and now is not the time to divide the Democratic Party. I know she is young and wants immediate change – but she seems oblivious to strategy at a crucial time. I also have a nagging feeling she is enjoying the attention and the power it is giving her, and is not all that altruistic in the end. I think she is a bright woman with a lot of potential, but not especially clever by creating division within the Democratic Party when unity is essential at this juncture.

Would like other opinions so I can access her better, the same, or differently altogether.

My opinion does not differ from yours.
Damn, we don't need such inter-party fights at this moment!

You summed AOC up well, KB ~ she is wickedly smart and is obviously very people-oriented ~ but she's also brash, impatient, and needs some "seasoning" ~ she has a boatload of "potential", but she needs to rein it in and establish her own credibility first ~ and she definitely needs to accept that Nancy Pelosi is better as a friend than an enemy ~ she'll also get much further/much faster if she can/will do that ~

Sooz

My read is that the Dems are about to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

1. As much as I admire AOC and her cohorts for their fire and energy (as well as dance skills) she's got to rein it in a bit at least until the election is over. It's not going to sit well with the electorate if everyone in the Dems is pulling in different directions.

2. They've got to empty their own clown car fast or, at least, get the number down to a manageable level with, as above, all of them basically pulling in the same direction. Frankly none of them spin my wheels at all. Trump could wind up getting elected just because the Dem presidential hopefuls are just too freaking boring and second string. Isn't there a governor or somebody out there with a few brains and a bit of personality? Kamala came on strong during the first debates but whining about what somebody said does not encourage votes.

3. Pelosi has reached her best before date. She needs to start grooming a replacement right quick. There's just too many Dem knives out for her right now and she could do her party the best favor by getting a good replacement installed and exiting stage left. The last thing the Dems need is a whole series of kitten fights and inner turmoil at this stage of the game.

4. Biden also has to withdraw. He's got the chops for the job and would do America proud but he's just too old, has too much baggage and is prone to silly gaffes.

I think the extent of the supposed rift between her and Pelosi has been monstrously magnified by the Right. They are desperate to try and pull AOC down, even to the extent of supporting Pelosi.

I suspect that all that is actually going on is a few shots across the bows from both sides.

You can't expect the Democrats (or the members of any significant party) to walk in lockstep, and you wouldn't really want them too. If you are too desperate to try and capyure the middle ground you just end up looking like your opponents, and then your opponents just move further to the extremes.

That's why the "left wing" Parties of today look more and more like the "right wing" parties of 20 or 30 years ago.

AOC and Co. are just bucking the trend. Good on them.

I am not actually that interested in this flight, and think too much is being made of it.

I can agree the republicans are making an issue of it, and therein lies the problem - why give them anything negative to grab on to? Too much being made of something can cause deflection from real issues which is the republicans wont - so i think AOC has to tone herself down a bit to get her points across without acting so belligerent, and use her smarts instead.

I am not concerned with what the GOP thinks. they clearly are wrong about a great deal.

A bit off topic but, IMO, the Dems are all pretty much on the same page as to their vision for the future. Their job is to show that it's possible and how they would implement that vision.

oskar576 wrote:

A bit off topic but, IMO, the Dems are all pretty much on the same page as to their vision for the future. Their job is to show that it's possible and how they would implement that vision.

It seems to me about the only thing they're on topic about is that Grabem has to go. Other than that, they're like a herd of cats.

really?

from where I sit they mostly agree on tax policy, foreign policy, health care, education, gun control, abortion, and almost every other major issue. where are you seeing major disagreement?

That's my impression as well.

It's not so much the broad policies but how they deal with them. There's a wide and different range and they don't necessarily have the same end result. I mean even the Republicans have a position on gun control but it doesn't match in any, shape or form with the left's idea of gun control. the same applies with health care, taxes, everything on your list. They have positions but they're pretty much at complete odds with all of the Dem positions.

yes, they disagree on specific policies.
but that is what legislating is about.
it is not about having your own policy, and getting everyone to agree to it.
it is about having different policies and crafting one that is a good compromise.

I know Republicans hate that idea. but that is how it is supposed to work.

but I think you will find that ALL Democrats agree with things like criminal background checks and gun safety locks.
I think you will find that ALL Democrats agree that health coverage should be universal.

what the specific piece of legislation is kinda doesn't matter to me.

does it matter to you?

I think its interesting how people who are concerned about Democrats criticizing each other spend so much time criticizing Democrats for being critical of Democrats.

You make a valid point, CM ~ ~ we're all human, we all "evolve" as we age, and I'm convinced we all have something [be it a decision or a comment or an action] that we'd personally like a chance to re-do ~ I learn more and can refine my own opinions if I hear all sides of an issue ~ so I don't have a problem with Dems criticizing other Dems so long as it doesn't get personal ~

Sooz

what do y’all think of Cortez

I think if the right-wing Trump supporters hate and vilify her - and they do - then she's on the right track.

what the specific piece of legislation is kinda doesn't matter to me.

does it matter to you?

The legislation doesn't - unless it allows for still more guns on the street. What does concern me is the number of disparate candidates all vying for their version of a policy and giving the Republicans also sorts of club to beat them over the head with. That's why I say they have to empty the clown car real quick so that they can get down to one policy and not get into some hare brained spitting match like the one that started the birther rampage. The sooner they realize they're all on the same side, the better their chances will be of beating Grabem and unseating the Republicans.

I know that I am going to sound contrary, here, but I am only looking at viable candidates.
right now, there are four. maybe five if you count Buttigieg, although he is barely in it, imo.

so, we have Sanders, Harris, Biden, and Warren.
how much do their positions really differ?

IMO, Sanders has missed the boat. His opportunity was last election and the Dems themselves did him in.

I honestly don't see any of the four as being particularly viable and the gay guy is out because he's a gay guy.
It's getting better but I don't think America is quite there yet.

Sanders big draw backs are his age and the fact a lot of Dems blame him for Hillary losing the last election. We could just see a reverse of last time when Dems just refused to vote for him. Even slightly right leaning independents just hear the word "socialist" and head in the opposite direction.

If he had been there four years ago he would probably now be President Biden. But his age is against him. He might be acceptable as a one termer but he's looking at being close to 86 if he goes for a second. Just living that long would be quite a feat especially under the pressures of being President. He's also not that acceptable to the left wing of the party - too that's the way it's always been - although several of the real lefty groups have said whoever gets the nomination will have their support.

Kamala Harris has two problems. First, she's a woman which, like it or not, is still a bit of a handicap even among many of the Hispanic and other immigrants the Dems rely on for support. Being mixed brown and black will hold her back in some areas as well. Most of all though, her biggest drawback is she's not that well known. Mind you, neither was Obama when he first started to roll so maybe she could overcome it. So far, though, she only has one quote to give her distinction and it wasn't particularly uplifting.

As a woman, Elizabeth Warren has one of the same problems as Harris. She's also not really well known although more high profile than Harris. She's certainly smart enough although a little to professorial and something of a policy wonk in her approach. Her biggest problem, though, is she's just not all that likeable. She's like the bespectacled, scrunch faced, permed to death, cranky old fifth grade teacher we all had - me, anyway who smacked the desk with her yardstick and kicked the garbage can whenever you tried to debate with her. I get the feeling the only reason anyone would vote for her is because she's not Donald Trump.

My feeling is this election, like 2016, is the Dems' to lose. They succeeded in 2016 and could well succeed again in 2020 if they don't get their act in gear, put forward a good candidate and a realistic, sound platform. There's a good chance the economy will be deep into a recession by November, 2020 so pie in the sky harping on the glories of socialism is not going to fly. Either way the economy goes it's going to work in Grabem's favor. If it's going well he'll take the credit. If badly he'll claim he's the only one who can fix it. The trouble is the American people will believe him. Despite the fact the economy usually thrives under Dem Presidents and flounders under Republicans, they've been bamboozled into thinking it's the other way around.

The only ones who "harp on about socialism" are the republicans.

And if the economy goes bad he can claim all he likes, he'll still get the blame (whether its true or not). Historically that's always been the way its gone.

I think people here keep on forgetting just how damned lucky he was to win the last election.

Cattleman wrote:

He was lucky because the Dems were stupid. Let's hope they don't go for an encore.

I think all four are viable.
not that I really care.
next election is my last opportunity to vote, and
I won't be voting for any major party candidate again.

TERRIFIC post #21, jim! ~ I agree with most of your take on the top 5 [including Mayor Pete] ~ I'm mentally drafting a more complete/deeper response and will post it once I clarify my own thoughts ~

And just FTR ... I'm one of those libs who will vote for the D candidate no matter who it is ~

Sooz