What Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Victory Says About The Democratic Party And 2020

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Frank Underwood, Jun 29, 2018.

  1. Frank Underwood

    Frank Underwood Soap Chat Addict

    Message Count:
    1,063
    Trophy Points:
    3,591
    Ratings:
    +492
    Member Since:
    June 2001
    (CNN) - Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's upset of Rep. Joe Crowley in New York's 14th District's Democratic primary is sending shockwaves through Washington.

    A lot of people are asking how she pulled it off. Like many shocking victories, there probably isn't one cause.
    But a number of the different factors that likely catapulted Ocasio-Cortez tell us a lot about where the Democratic Party is and could be heading for the 2020 presidential nomination.

    A diversifying party
    Democratic candidates need to appeal to minority voters with increasingly urgency.

    One of Hillary Clinton's big problems in 2016 is that she didn't turn out nonwhite voters at the same level Barack Obama did during his general election campaigns. She did, however, win her primary against Bernie Sanders in large part because nonwhite voters cast ballots for her in large numbers over Sanders.

    In Ocasio-Cortez's case, she was a Latina woman running in a district where over two-thirds of citizens of voting age were nonwhite. As of this Congress, there were only three other white representatives in districts with a higher minority population than New York 14. Two of those (Gene Green and Beto O'Rourke) are leaving the House.

    White voters now make up less than 60% of Democrats nationwide, according to the Pew Research Center.That's down from 67% in 2007 and 75% in 1997.

    Victories like Ocasio-Cortez's are an example of why many people think that California Sen. Kamala Harris is a formidable national candidate heading into 2020.

    A more progressive party
    Ocasio-Cortez ran to Crowley's left. She was an unapologetic Democratic Socialist who wants to eliminate Immigration and Customs Enforcement and wants Medicare for all. Crowley had a more liberal record than most of his Democratic colleagues. It wasn't enough.

    The ability for Sanders to get over 40% of the Democratic primary vote in 2016 was at minimum a sign that a high percentage of voters was willing to vote for a candidate on the leftward edge of the American political spectrum.

    That shouldn't be too much of a surprise because Democratic voters are becoming a lot more liberal. According to Gallup, self-identified liberals made up 50% of Democrats in 2017. That's up from 40% at the beginning of the decade and 31% at the beginning of the decade before that.

    Being more progressive goes beyond just being anti-Doanld Trump. Yes, being against Trump is usually a given. Crowley voted against Trump more often than the majority of House Democrats. Ocasio-Cortez's win was likely about more than being against Trump.

    It's certainly conceivable that someone who isn't very liberal could win the Democratic nomination in 2020. It will be difficult, however. We saw Clinton tack to the left in 2016 because she felt the pressure on the left from Sanders. Expect the pressure to be even greater on Democrats heading into 2020.

    A young party
    One of the biggest differences between Ocasio-Cortez and Crowley was their age. Ocasio-Cortez is just 28 compared to Crowley who is 56. Crowley is actually one of the youngest members of the Democratic leadership in Washington. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is 78 and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is 67.

    Ocasio-Cortez is the latest young upstart to win on the Democratic side this season. Democratic nominee Abby Finkenauer in Iowa's first district is only 29. Rep. Conor Lamb is just 34.

    You don't need to be young to appeal to youth voters (as Sanders showed), though it can't hurt. Young voters are a larger a part of the Democratic Party (20%) than they have been in the last 20 years per Pew. That's still a minority, but it's one that has showed itself to be willing to vote in a bloc in presidential primaries.

    If Democrats are looking to draw the strongest contrast with Trump in 2020, a younger candidate might be the ticket. In 2016, Clinton and Sanders were both over 65.

    The fact that Jason Kander (before deciding on a run for mayor of Kansas City) got so much buzz, despite never winning political office, gives you the understanding that there is certainly an appetite for younger candidates.

    A women-led party
    One way in which Ocasio-Cortez's win lines up perfectly with other primaries from this season is women have been dominating men. Usually, that has been confined to open seat races, though it came against an incumbent on Tuesday in New York's 14th.

    The gender gap was exploited by Clinton in her 2016 win against Sanders.

    The 2016 general election featured the largest gender gap on record for a presidential general election. The gap has maintained itself today with only 30% of women approving of Trump's job performance in the latest CNN poll compared to 48% of men. If Democrats win back the House in 2018, it will be because of large support from women.

    The 2020 campaign could feature that same anger that women have against the Trump presidency. Democrats seem to want women to take Trump down. That's part of the reason why women candidates like Harris and New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand are getting a lot of buzz.

    A more independent party
    Perhaps the most controversial statement of Ocasio-Cortez's campaign was when she didn't commit to backing Crowley if she lost the nomination. Maybe it shouldn't be too surprising that she was still able to win given that Sanders, himself, isn't even a Democrat and yet did quite well in 2016.

    This independent spirit fits well with the polling data. The percentage of Americans calling themselves independents is at a near record high at 42% in Gallup's 2017 average. Now many of those independents lean toward one party or the other. Still, about 40% of Democrats initially identified as independents and only said they were Democrats when pushed. That's a higher share than has usually been the case over the last three decades.

    This could mean that Democratic primary voters will be more willing to go with someone who doesn't toe the line with the establishment. We already saw how more independent voters affected the Republican primary in 2016 in going with an outsider.

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/27/politics/what-ocasio-cortez-says-about-democrats/index.html
     
  2. Frank Underwood

    Frank Underwood Soap Chat Addict

    Message Count:
    1,063
    Trophy Points:
    3,591
    Ratings:
    +492
    Member Since:
    June 2001
    Dem Adios: How Alexandria Ocasio Cortez Shellacked the Party of Neoliberalism
    BY JACK PERRY ON JUNE 27, 2018

    The victory of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez over Rep. Joe Crowley was more evidence that the Democratic Party has outlived its usefulness. Of course, Democrat fossils are already lashing out with angry criticism, fueled by their own fears of moving Democratic Party headquarters to the nearest antique store. An antique store where people will say, “I can’t believe we used to vote for them!” Basically, people sent a message that they’re tired of empty promises, failure-prone “middle road” Republican Lite legislation, and the same old faces. The Democratic Party needs to get out of the way.

    The Democrats sat there and voter-blamed ever since Trump got elected. As if it isn’t their own fault they ran retread Hillary Clinton who lost the primary to Barack Obama in 2008. Not to mention her husband was president for two terms. The entire quasi-dynasty of both political parties is why Trump got elected. Trump, like it or not, was not another Bush or career politician and that’s why he won the Republican primary. He was not career politician Hillary Clinton and that’s why he won the election. That’s also why Obama won in 2008 and 2012, but people are not going to fall for the fake new face again. You better run someone genuine. The only way you’re going to win 2020 is to not run another careerist or retread or a Fauxbama.

    Both of these political parties are the ruling factions of a tyrannical regime. Their argument is not over the tyranny and injustice of it, their argument is a squabble over who gets to control it. It’s a power struggle. But when someone gets elected who isn’t one of them, they’re terrified because the elections are still the Achilles heel of the regime. The elections are rigged, make no mistake. But they can’t rig all of them. They don’t have the resources. Obviously, they dumped a ton of cash into Crowley, but the usual avalanche of cash failed this time. And it can fail again.

    The other thing is, they’re also terrified about public anger manifested in things like being confronted in public and denied seats at restaurants. Both political parties are coming out and condemning this because they know it can eventually lead up to civil unrest if they do get caught rigging an election in favor of the retread. Fear of the people, at this point, is the only thing that will change this system. Everything else has failed. Both political parties have failed, but especially the Democrats. The so-called “checks and balances” have failed with all three branches of government corrupt and compromised. The Supreme Court justifying the Trump ban on certain Muslims entering the country demonstrated the Supreme Court is merely a kangaroo court rubber stamping the decrees of the de facto king.

    People are now wide awake and can see exactly what's going on. And they're tired of false choices and fake indignation.

    These politicians are not some type of nobility to be immunized against public rebuke. No. When you create “free speech zones” or send in riot police to quell protests, you just denied people the Constitutional right to petition government for a redress of grievances. When you arrest and jail clergy praying in front of the Supreme Court, you denied freedom of speech and religion. When you punish athletes for taking a knee to protest police brutality, you said they’re not allowed peaceful dissent. So why then are you surprised people have to use confrontation to make their voices heard? You refused to hear their voices in the method the Bill of Rights allegedly protected because you quashed that peaceful dissent. So people decided to take it to the streets. Let me put it this way: If we’re not allowed in your little world, then you are not welcome in our bigger world. Stay behind your gated little bastions and fortresses with your concrete barricades and heavily armed guards. Eat your meals there in your fuehrerbunkers.

    Yes, and I’ll say it again. You have locked us out of your world. But you can’t silence us. So stay out of our world. We don’t want you there. We don’t need you there. We’re not graced by your presence. We don’t need to see you. You do nothing for us and you continually sell us out. On top of that, you build concentration camps and cart children off to them. And you think we shouldn’t confront you publicly over that?! Who, exactly, do you think you are?!

    See, people used to ask “How come the Germans sat quietly while the concentration camps were bring built?” Because their newspapers told them to! Their government told them to! And so all of you now want that exact same silence from us, just as American newspapers and politicians whine about “civility” after concentration camps are built here? Someone has to speak so you all finally hear it! No, not in a free speech zone in a place you can’t see or hear it. No. You put kids into a concentration camp, don’t expect us not to block those buses, deny you seats in restaurants, and confront you publicly. We saw in 1945 what silence does. And we will not be silent. You can’t silence us. No, not anymore.

    No one attacked you. People just served you a fine dish of karma in that restaurant. And if you don’t like being confronted publicly about the injustice you helped create, then stop creating injustice. Start hearing the people instead of insulating yourselves from them and expecting your little ventures into the public eye to go off without a hitch. You don’t have a right to refuse to hear us. You took the job as politician. No one drafted you. So sit down and stop whining because you have to do your job. Yes! Your job is to hear us, to hear our dissent, to be criticized for your poor decisions, and to be called out on your stuff. If you don’t like it, hey, you know what? The doors in your offices open both ways. Tender your resignations and quit. Ah, but then where is your free health care, pension, and elite status, right? Ok, then earn it. Or quit.

    Here’s the thing. These public confrontations aren’t civil unrest. Yet. But that’s the direction we’re headed. So you better head the warning signs and start making the changes people want and answering the true needs of the people. Wall Street and the rich have enough money. The military has enough weapons. Now it’s our turn. So you better hop to it and get busy. We’re tired of waiting. This “kicking the can down the road” has gone on for decades now. People are done waiting. You think it can’t happen here? Yeah, well, hold a séance and ask the Shah of Iran how that worked out for him in 1979. Again, you better wake up to the warning signs that people are angry enough to risk arrest to confront politicians publicly. That means people are desperate. So, again, you better look at how it all went down with the Shah in 1979.

    There’s a way out of it. It was shown you. You can start doing right. You can clean out your political parties and run genuine candidates who work for the people and not Wall Street. You can pass a universal health care system, a genuine minimum wage that provides an actual living wage, and abolish ICE and their concentration camps. My gosh, people, ICE was a George W. Bush creation! What, are we wedded for life to this cabal of human rights abusers? See, you can do all of those things and the rich will still be rich. But you can’t just keep refusing anymore.

    It can be done. We can elect genuine people to office. But we have to make that happen. We have to refuse to vote for the retreads. “What if Trump wins again?!” That’s not a question for we the people to answer. That’s a question for the Democratic Party to answer. They need to ask themselves how they plan to prevent that from happening. The way to prevent that was just shown to them. But let’s see if they understand it. #DemAdios

    Source: https://ghionjournal.com/how-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-shellacked-the-party-of-neoliberalism/
     
  3. Frank Underwood

    Frank Underwood Soap Chat Addict

    Message Count:
    1,063
    Trophy Points:
    3,591
    Ratings:
    +492
    Member Since:
    June 2001
    It's funny reading all the different hot takes regarding Ocasio-Cortez's win over Crowley. Establishment Dems think (and hope) she's an anomaly, conservatives think she's a far left radical, SJWs are more impressed with her identity than her policies, and progressives believe she managed to slay Goliath by being the candidate with the best positions.

    This just reinforces why I'm a fan of independent media. They've been covering her for a year, while mainstream media only discovered her on Tuesday.
     
  4. Michael Torrance

    Michael Torrance Soap Chat Well-Known Member

    Message Count:
    744
    Trophy Points:
    480
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alexis' studio
    Ratings:
    +1,272
    Gender:
    Male
    Member Since:
    2017 I think (unless it is 2016)
    I don't know that her victory says anything about 2020 and presidential elections. For starters, the people voting in the NY 14th congressional district (where I live) democratic primary are certainly not representative of the general US population that will vote in November 2020. But it does say that the establishment candidates will face serious headwinds within the Democratic party going forward in more leftist leaning areas.
     
  5. Frank Underwood

    Frank Underwood Soap Chat Addict

    Message Count:
    1,063
    Trophy Points:
    3,591
    Ratings:
    +492
    Member Since:
    June 2001
    According to the polls I've seen, the positions supported by people like Bernie Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have majority support. Of course, that doesn't always translate into actual votes. It's one thing to support a politician's agenda, but it's another to make the effort to vote for them. Many establishment Dems also have the benefit of having the party's backing, corporate cash, and name recognition behind them. What I find interesting in Crowley's case is that he was the number 4 Democrat in the House, has served for 19 years, and hasn't been primaried in 14 years. The fact that Ocasio-Cortez challenged him and won in the wake of what the establishment did to Bernie Sanders is fascinating to me. The Dem establishment awakened a sleeping giant with their anti-progressive antics in 2016, and they're being challenged by progressives like never before. There have been some disappointing losses and there will continue to be. Change doesn't happen overnight. Still, Ocasio-Cortez's shocking win has taught the establishment not to count out progressives just yet. I predict the centrists' days are numbered.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2018

Users Who Have Read This Thread (Total: 2)

Share This Page