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.
- 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.
- 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
The most dangerous thing (for republicans) about AOC is that she has never been simply a member of the squad. That is simply how they wanted to define her. She is leaving her junior House experience and growing into a senior operative. It's been fun watching her grow. Both Senators from NY are not that far away from retirement and running state wide might be in AOC's future.
Might? I'm pretty sure that the general consensus is that, given her intelligence, political talent, and enormous popularity in spite of all the smear campaigns from both parties, it's a question of WHEN she will, not IF she might..
The fact that the Democratic establishment gave her a speech at the convention proves this. I was waiting if they'd come around to her instead of kind of distancing themselves from her for a while.
When Bernie ran he didn't have the Democratic establishment's blessing; nor a fair media presence especially in 2015. But like Obama, AOC is going to have the trifecta of a) Grassroots energy, b) DNC support, and c) Solid media coverage.
Some Congress Critters like living in the House, so the first question is, does she want to? Perhaps her bucket list doesn't have a state wide race in it. The second question has more nuance. In order to run statewide, there are compromises to be made with the party and the electorate. Will she make those compromises? Then there's the side element of money.
If anyone could run statewide without compromising too much, I would think it is someone like AOC.
Progressives won't sell across NY. It ain't Vermont. She currently represents a D+15 district where that doesn't matter what that much.
You’re not wrong and shouldn’t have gotten downvotes. There’s a lot of NY outside the metro areas, and they are rural and conservative. That said, it all depends on where the votes come from and that’s the blue population centers. So while she may not sell across the state, she may sell in enough of the right places to make it.
Gillibrand is only 57, she's got at least 40 good years left.
Ugh, I hope not. The whole reason Joe Crowley got run out of his seat was due to his fixation on national issues above and beyond the local concerns. Some of the biggest criticisms I've seen leveled at AOC amount to her national ambition running contrary to the demands of her local constituents. Some of her biggest defeats involved backing down and submitting to the demands of Dem leadership.
Christ, Schumer's old af, but its Gillibrand who really needs to GTFO. After getting caught with her hand in the FTX cookie jar, she should have been tossed out with the rest of the congressional trash. Its so gross to see Senators from an ostensibly blue state like New York practically living in the pocket of the worst finance-bros you can think of.
Would love to see an AOC-style candidate replace her. But there's no chance Wall Street lets anyone like that near the position.
i mean being a congressional representative in washington has always been about representing your district on national issues.
being a state representative is about representing your district on local issues.
The conflict is between climbing the leadership ladder within the institution (which periodically means compromising your constituents to ingratiate yourself with leadership) and serving your constituents with relatively little influence in party leadership (which means being strident but ineffectual, because you're not in a powerful committee).
In order to climb, AOC has repeatedly been forced to downplay issues and vote in ways that alienate her from her constituency. And that's what lead to her predecessor's downfall.
Not what I intended. Congressmen must first learn to the internal politics of the House, who to see to get things done, which committee is important, etc. AOC has already been assigned to some important committees and as she goes on will gain more power if Democrats get a majority.