Joe Lieberman urges voters to back Crowley over Ocasio-Cortez in general - Polidicks

No because Bernie isn't a democrat. He only registered for the presidential primary. The party endorses/chooses their preferred candidates, and they don't have to reverse that because some hippie senator decides after decades in politics to be a democrat after having been an independent socialist for his entire career. Why would the DNC fund an outsider?

Easy, he was a better candidate who polled better than Trump every time and would have actually been good for the country, and one they could still claim and work with as opposed to Trump. I'd say they cut off their nose to spite their face, but it's more like they cut off their head to spite their left eyebrow. They fucked themselves and they fucked us.

That or its so happens former DNC leader during 2016 election was former SuperPAC leader for Hillary's 2008 presidential campaign.

Love that you're still dripping with condescendion and hate for Sanders, even after your golden girl Hillary lost a presidential election to DONALD FUCKING TRUMP. You're absolutely out of your mind

I don't hate Sanders; he did his part and some of his platform was integrated into Hillary's platform and afterwords he endorsed Clinton. I just don't like this myth that somehow the DNC gave Hillary an unfair advantage; Bernie had a MASSIVE grassroots campaign, but when it came down to the primaries, Clinton won and Bernie lost. It's as simple as that: the young people he appealed to didn't bother to actually vote, and the older, more conservative folks voted for Clinton. Yes, Clinton lost, but there was so much shit flinging from the right (Donald Trump plus 20 years of republican conspiracy theories about the Clintons) and the left (Sanders' camp acted no better than the Trump camp did with their political discourse, engendering the same conspiracy theories that the right did) that there was a lot stacked against her in the public's mind before she had even begun to campaign. Not to mention the fact that Russian astroturfing helped both Trump's AND Bernie's campaign

The DNC has admitted in court that they were biased in Hillary's favor. I don't know if you're being this ignorant on purpose but you are simply wrong. And there you go with the rationalizing. You Democratic hacks never fucking learn. Hillary losing was her own goddamn fault. The election was a lay up. She could have come out strong for a living wage and picked a better VP and she'd be in office right now. It wasn't Bernie, it wasn't Trump, it wasn't Russia. It was her own fault. And until you accept that you're just going to keep losing.

You simultaneously DEFEND and DENY that the DNC preferred Hillary and gave her the edge. The dissonance fluctuates from post to post. You can't rant about how they preferred Clinton because Sanders wasn't a real party member and then turn around and say the DNC had no preference, fuck sake

I don't really deny that they were biased toward her, just that there's anything wrong with that. Bernie was an outsider; the DNC had no obligation to help a 3rd party candidate. See that's the difference between you and me; I'm a Democrat, you're... a progressive or a democratic socialist or some shit idk. You're right to say that she has no charisma for the majority of voters, I won't argue there, but calling her "corrupt to the core" is just more of that 2016 meaningless rhetoric coming out of both the Trump and Bernie camps. I don't recall anyone having a problem with Tim Kaine, I don't recall any problem with her voting record, and her message was pretty clear: you ask her what she thinks about a certain subject and she says "alright I think we should do ___". By comparison, you ask Bernie his opinion on something and he just goes on about "the milyinays and the bilyinays", claiming to give away free (college/education/etc) with absolutely no plan to do it or work with a republican congress. At best, Clinton would have gotten a couple big pieces of legislation like the ACA through, maybe for student loans or healthcare. At worst, she would have sunk into the background like Obama did for 90% of his term, nothing like the apocalyptic visions coming from Bernie's supporters. Here's a tip: being anti-establishment and vehemently against parties isn't a political opinion, it's a cop-out for people who know what they want but either lack to spine to do something about it or have no idea how government works

You sound like a mid-twenties kid trying to play adult by talking about the importance of the party and establishment lol. You're not really in a position to be doling out advice and life lessons about politics imo, if only because of how blind you are to the ongoing downfall of the Democrat party in a time where the GOP is basically tying their own noose. Democrats are just too stupid to kick the fucking stool.

alright I think you're about out of arguments at this point

Universal healthcare consistently polls pretty well across the country so I don't think it's a problem of progressives being too left, more that people don't want to support candidates who don't support their constituents. And Neo-liberals like clinton and obama struggle with that.

That hasn't stopped them from begging for his email lists and attempting to hijack his progressive image for their own selfish gain.

projecting, I see

Cause everybody knows the best way to beat the Republicans is to do the exact same things that made you lose to the Republicans before, and that there ain't nothing as dissuading of disunity as dismissing legitimate concerns as conspiracy theories

I mean... good luck with her. Just because someone is charasmatic and fits your checkboxes for diversity doesn't mean they're qualified to hold public office. I know Trump is president but we shouldn't follow a trend where we throw "outsiders" in and "change things up". Ocasio-Cortez has proven over and over again that she has no clue what she is talking about.

What is the measure for whether someone should be qualified to hold public office? The Libertarian party believes in some wacky shit but I wouldn't say Gary Johnson wasn't qualified. She busted her ass to oust an establishment incumbant; I don't agree with everything she advocates for her but give her a chance before comparing her to Trump.

Can you explain what's bad about her? Honestly I heard her do an NPR interview right before she blew up and she sounded a bit airheaded to me, maybe it was just that interview. I really don't know anything else about her, not sure how to feel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=120&v=AjH9FAXkPSo Ocasio-Cortez also said, "when this country started, we were not a capitalist economy." MARGARET HOOVER, HOST: Do you think that capitalism has failed to deliver for working-class Americans or is no longer the best vehicle for working-class Americans? ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ: Well, I think the numbers that you just talked about is part of the problem, right? Because we look at these figures, and we say, ‘Oh, unemployment is low. Everything is fine,’ right? Well, unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs. Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their kids. And so, I do think that, right now, when we have this no-holds-barred, Wild West hypercapitalism, what that means is profit at any cost. Capitalism has not always existed in the world, and it will not always exist in the world. When this country started, we were not a capitalist — we did not operate on a capitalist economy. Ocasio-Cortez is asked to expand on her opinion that Israel is "occupying" Palestine: HOOVER: You used the term ‘the occupation of Palestine.’ OCASIO-CORTEZ: Mm-hmm. Oh. HOOVER: What did you mean by that? OCASIO-CORTEZ: Oh. I think what I meant is, like, the settlements that are increasing in some of these areas and in places where Palestinians are experiencing difficulty in access to their housing and homes. HOOVER: Do you think you can expand on that? OCASIO-CORTEZ: Yeah. I mean, I think I’d also just — I am not the expert [Laughing] at geopolitics on this issue. You know, for me, I’m a firm believer in finding a two-state solution in this issue, and I’m happy to sit down with leaders on both of this — on both of these — for me, I just look at things through a human-rights lens. And I may not use the right words. [ Laughs ] I know this is a very intense issue. She majored in Economics at Boston University mind you.

She is explicitly right in her criticism of capitalism and the observation that the country wasn't founded under a capitalist economic system. I'm not sure how that's relevant but that part's really not too far out there. The Palestine thing is kind of a gaffe though. The way you wrote your post made it seem like she wanted to do crazy shit like get rid of currency and abolish the borders.

You said she clueless, but you acknowledged she have good economical degree in Boston? So she not fully clueless. Your other post: Plus she give her more time in evolve and adopted new issues after she won her district general election. (if Crowley unintentional third-party run won't intervene)

The argument that the DNC should be able to do whatever they want because they're technically a private institution is as brain-dead an appeal to authority as you can get. There are two actual political parties in this country. If they don't have to act democratically, then we aren't in a democracy.