Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez-Cortez is Terrifying Fox News

[Hassin Bin Sober]

Fox loses its damn mind over a freshman Democratic Congresswoman.

[jaysunb]

1. She will replace Nancy Pelosi as the

foil of the right wingers. Bet on it.

[Gothmog]

66. Yes the GOP and Fox will use her to stoke fear but they are not afraid of her

AOC has no power and there is no reason to fear her

[ProfessorPlum]

138. they can hate all strong Democratic women

Pelosi, Clinton, Waters, AOC .. .Imagine how they would have treated Bella Abzug in the day.

don't underestimate their power to multitask when it comes to hate

[Voltaire2]

2. Not just on Fox News.

[Victor_c3]

58. +1 n/t

[Gothmog]

3. Fox is not terrified of AOC

Fox is using AOC to stir up the base. No one thinks that AOC will have any real power in the new congress other than the power to stir up hatred in the fox base

Fox and the GOP are not scared of AOC

[libdem4life]

5. This is how I see it, too. She needs to calm down and start playing on the team...

like she was elected to do. Her youth and hubris is showing. I hope she gets it right before she loses her seat in 2 years. At this point, I'm not betting on it. This is going to be quite a Democratic Soap Opera, I fear.

[Kath2]

6. Exactly.

They actually need her now. To stir the pot and inspire the base.

[libdem4life]

7. I think she can be an asset.

Just hope not a stumbling block. There is no doubt she packs a punch with her formidable personal and political qualities. It's hard to handle all of that so young. How many times have we seen it before? Celebrities, rock would-be stars, etc. Some learn and make it big. Some come back later. Others don't. But you have to pay the dues and put in the time, in the end, no matter what.

[empedocles]

8. Fox was most important in promoting AOC out of obscurity. Keys were villainous

'Abolish Ice' and 'Socialism'.

I suspect in the latest group of 'anti-pelosi's' some are hoping for similar to AOC promotion of their name by fox. Negative promotion could work for them as it did for AOC .

[Gothmog]

69. Fox is promoting AOC to have a convienent target

AOC is helping Fox by making ill advised statements

[empedocles]

76. Certainly

fox, et al, presented AOC as the horrid face of Democrats running for office.

[R B Garr]

102. Exactly. They want her to be the face of the party. They

love her and she makes it easy for them,

[Gothmog]

135. Fox relies on fear to motivate its viewers to keep watching

Fox is using AOC to make its viewers afraid

AOC has no power and will get nothing done

[empedocles]

132. STILL ANOTHER ONE OF THESE STUBBORN, ENDLESS THREADS

[Kaleva]

13. It seems that Nancy supports her and her goals.

[justie18]

19. Exactly!

The only way to be effective in Congress is teamwork!

[sheshe2]

100. Brava/ Bravo justie!

You are correct. Welcome to DU.

[DownriverDem]

25. Hope it won't

just be about her so nothing gets done.

[libdem4life]

54. Yes, and hope she grows into the job quickly.

I'm starting to warm up to her.

It was at the turn of the century, when Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony clawed their way...literally...into our social consciousness . They were skewered as witches and heretics. That time in history is deplorable. Children were dying working in dangerous factories for pennies a day. The corporations must exist at any cost. Those women had the nerve....

Women of my age grew up with the notion you had to "go along to get along". My final college class...at a liberal arts college...was the first course ever offered in Feminism. 1971.


Same story, umpteenth verse...you must be patient. I see it as perhaps a paradigm shift. Maybe that's a good thing...they are setting the stage for generations to come. The old guard...male and female...are aging and dying. The laws of culture. Hell, we are paving our way to extinction...via the corporate mindset...and there is urgent cause to push hard.

[samnsara]

127. i agree...i fear folks following someone just cuz they are popular....

..I need to see results not just hear them....

[samnsara]

129. same here...new pups need to sit, stay and learn..getting elected to this position only...

..gives them the honor of serving....now they have to earn the right to be leaders.....and not by preaching (loudly) to the choir. I find such rhetoric to be insulting. I know this is what got them elected..in their district...but that loud obnoxious rally cry doesnt sit well with other parts of the country. It can actually be a turn off.

[libdem4life]

143. What I find intriguing is that every AOC thread, there are long, long number of posts.

Just goes to show how powerful she is. I've not seen the likes of this in my years here. Doesn't mean it hasn't happened, but wow...a 29 year old Latina. I'm impressed.

[Fullduplexxx]

9. Theyre are trying to stir infighting amongst the dems

[bhikkhu]

22. And succeeding, so far, if this site is an indication

I've read more disappointing tossed-off smears and passive-aggressive patriarchal advice here than I would have expected. To the point that it reminds me of 2008, Hillary vs Obama, when I was on more juries than I care to remember. And clever trolls were in abundance, and it took a long time to get rid of many of them.

In any case, I'm a long way from discouraged. I would wish, as at any other time, that people might check themselves and their assumptions and judgments; think a bit first before obnoxious posting. She's on our side, and her most important goals and objectives line up with the Democratic party platform quite well.

[DownriverDem]

28. All for the young

as long as Nancy is Speaker. She's going to mentor and put newbies in leadership positions. In 2 years we will be ready with a progressive platform that wins.

[Gothmog]

73. Not really

Most of the Democrats who I know do not care what a brand new congressperson thinks. It takes time to build up power and I doubt that AOC will be able to get any legislation through a committee much less the floor of the House

[still_one]

10. exactly. It is fodder for their base

[melman]

11. 'Fox and the GOP are not scared of AOC'

Oh yes they are. They are terrified of her and others like her.

[Gothmog]

51. AOC has no power

Last edited Sun Nov 18, 2018, 08:34 PM - Edit history (1)

There is no need to beafraid of her. It is doubtful that she will get any legislation passed in the new congress

Fox is using her to stoke up the base.

[Eliot Rosewater]

62. That is what they are doing, and it does prove what some have said all along, if Nancy

goes the right will just demonize whoever replaces her, so whoever replaces her better have skin like an elephant and several years experience.

[Gothmog]

137. Fox News is using AOC to drive ratings by making its viewers afraid

Link to tweet

[melman]

78. 'Fox is using her to stoke up the base.'

How so? Just what is it about her that 'stokes up the base'?


Would it be preferable to have someone Fox viewers find appealing?

[Gothmog]

136. Fox News relies on fear to keep its viewers watching the news

I find it sad that AOC is being used by Fox but she makes it so easy for Fox

Link to tweet

[Voltaire2]

139. You do know that Pelosi is the other

boogeyman Fox uses to scare its base, right? And in fact Pelosi is used far more frequently than Ocasio-Cortez. So by the logic I’ve seen here both Pelosi and Ocasio-Cortez need to sit down and shut up.

Or not. Actually as far as I am concerned they both should continue to make lots of noise.

[Gothmog]

140. Yes but that is because Pelosi has power and is effective

Nancy Pelosi is a very effective leader and helped elect a ton of democrats. The GOP has reason to be afraid of her

I do not care if AOC makes noise. She is a baby congresscritter with no power who appears to be alienating her fellow Democrats (threatening to primary you fellow Democrats is not a smart move). AOC has no power and will not get any meaningful legislation passed. Reminds me of someone

[Voltaire2]

142. I Lulzd.

[JustAnotherGen]

38. I kind of agree with jaysunb

You know - if they target her and the rest of her squad - then Speaker Pelosi is off the hook.

[Eliot Rosewater]

65. Could be...My only concern ever is control of the government so nazis arent in control

and to NOT have a group that stops us from progress.

What would have happened when a public option was NOT possible and IF people had DEMANDED it back when, there would be no Obamacare, that is what.

[Gothmog]

67. AOC will be targeted only because the GOP base and Fox news viewers are stupid

AOC has no power and cannot pass any legislation. No one is paying much attention to her other than Fox and the GOP idiots because they rely on fear

[RKP5637]

4. K&R !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! n/t

[melman]

12. Absolutely

They would not make her into a boogeyman if they were not scared of her and what she represents.



It's the Karl Rove strategy in action: Attack the opponent's strengths, not their weaknesses. They do this 100% of the time.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

15. It's from the right.

[SixString]

17. True, you're righ... er correct.

[Autumn]

16. Like all fucking Republicans the whisper of Socialism or anything that people

might decide would benefit them has to be destroyed or shut down.

[murielm99]

18. She's not terrifying anybody.

How tiresome. She needs to be quiet and learn her job. The other newly elected members are doing that.

[JCanete]

24. nobody needs to be quiet. That's fucking gross. nt

[melman]

26. "She needs to be quiet "

Sit down and shut up? Lovely.

[murielm99]

32. I did not say that.

Don't try to twist my words. I did not say sit down and shut up. The other newly elected people are learning their jobs without creating such division in our ranks. She should be doing the same.

She can listen and learn. She can ask questions, like most people learning a new job.

[melman]

70. You said 'be quiet'

That's close enough.

[murielm99]

113. Don't tell me what I said.

I started out liking this woman. She has earned my suspicion and distrust.

[melman]

115. Did you not say she needs to be quiet?

Yes you absolutely did.

[murielm99]

116. Yep, I did.

And she does.

She has complained about how she cannot afford to find a place to live in Washington. Yet she is running around the country making appearances. Who is paying for that? Is any other newly elected Congress person complaining about how they cannot afford rent?

She is speaking up about primarying sitting Democrats. Are any other newly elected Congress people doing that? Most of them seem to be concentrating on learning their jobs with little fanfare. She could take a hint from them.

I stand by what I said.

[essme]

123. Really?

you are earning mine.

[murielm99]

125. I am not a newly elected Congresswoman.

Feel free to think what you like of me.

[Voltaire2]

93. It's sort of sad.

[USALiberal]

35. LOL, really? Maybe let her decide how she should act. Sound ok to you? nt

[murielm99]

55. Okay.

She may end up with just one term, and lousy committee assignments. Sound OK to you?

[USALiberal]

56. Sounds fine! Better than you telling her how to act. nt

[murielm99]

57. I have every right to express my opinion of her

behavior, or the behavior of any other elected official.

[USALiberal]

59. Yet she worked her ass off to win. So she earned her right to decide how she should act. nt

[shanny]

46. ugh

to expand on that a bit: Congress has an approval rating that is barely out of single digits and has had for years. Maybe it isn't AOC who needs to learn something.

[Ferrets are Cool]

72. Be quiet? Give me a break...

her voters did not vote her into office for her to BE QUIET. And how do you know WHAT other elected members are doing? Are you in daily contact with each of them?

[murielm99]

99. Her behavior is over the top.

I will stand by what I have said.

[essme]

124. Awwwwww

I HATE it when that happens. Why don't you "be quiet" and watch history unfold like so many others are doing?

[murielm99]

126. Your post makes no sense.

You hate it when people stand by what they say?

[Cuthbert Allgood]

103. How fucking insulting.

She is doing her job.

I know why millennials are frustrated. Most of the time it's "They don't care about anything. They just want trophies." And then when a millennial actually starts fighting for the change they want, they are told they are too young and need to shut up.

Fuck that. She needs to fight for the people that voted her in. THAT'S her job and she seems to be doing it.

[BamaRefugee]

20. IMHO, AOC needs to BE WHO SHE IS. That's what got her here. Leave the cookie cutter mentality to the

REPUBLICANS!

[JCanete]

23. some argument, or cited evidence would be helpful to your case...but if you just want to fume,

go right ahead. But apparently the agenda of money out of politics, higher minimum wage, medicare for all, free college tuition...is scary to you. Cool...

[murielm99]

27. Those have been the goals of many Democrats for a long time.

She is not saying anything new.

[JCanete]

30. If all democrats sounded the same on these issues then Sanders would not have been interesting

to people, nor Ocasio-Cortez. Please don't tell me there isn't a difference between campaigning on something and simply having it typed somewhere on your platform.

I guess you don't remember all of the unicorn comments out of the mouths of DUers, as well as Clinton herself when it came to Sanders platform. You want to stand by your comment?

[murielm99]

34. How does Sanders figure into this thread?

Who mentioned him?

[JCanete]

36. wow...maybe read through the posts before you jump in. nt

[murielm99]

39. Wow.

I did just that.

[JCanete]

40. I'll help you out, and sorry. I should take a second before I just get irritated and post.

The post of mine you responded to is literally in response to somebody saying that Ocasio Cortez is scary because she's adhering too tightly to a Sanders agenda.

[murielm99]

41. Bye.

[JCanete]

42. hahahahahahah!

[shanny]

45. lordy lordy...

in case that wasn't clear

[SidDithers]

61. Laugh it up...

Sid

[George II]

63. There are only three posts in thread that mentioned Sanders, #30 (yours), #34 in response to #30...

...and #40.

[JCanete]

64. Great....yeah, now. Somebody alerted on post#21, that I responded to and now its gone. I wish

that hadn't happened, but it doesn't change the fact that my post #30 that muriem responded to was literally in response to a mention of Sanders.

thanks though, for doing the research!

[lapucelle]

83. Now we have to count your post, George!

So it's 5 mentions in a thread of 79 posts.

Two of the 5 mentions are from people asking why the politician in question is relevant to a discussion in which no one is discussing him.

Two of the 5 mentions are from a single poster.

One of the five mentions is hidden.

That's 6.25%, if we count the hidden post and your inadvertent use of the politician in question's name.

It's 4% if we don't count the invisible hidden post. (Do invisible things count?)

[George II]

85. bwahahahahaha!!!!

[JCanete]

89. silly as fuck. Which one do you think most matters to my Sanders mention, which was the

one originally being challenged by muriem. I would think that if somebody is going to question why I'm mentioning Sanders, they might just look up through the very tree we're talking in, hell, at least to the one right above mine. It was not hidden at the time.

[lapucelle]

90. Is that the invisible post?

It's probably good policy to read through the posts to see if any of them have gone missing before one jumps in to berate someone for not reading something that wasn't even there.

[JCanete]

91. It wasn't when the conversation was going. It still wasn't when I responded a second time to point

muriem to it.

[R B Garr]

97. Thanks for the reality check, lapucelle!

Now we have to figure out why the same group keeps dragging Fox News here.

[emulatorloo]

50. Please stop re-litigating the 2016 primary

It is over.

This is 2018 and there are plenty of good things to say about Rep Ocasio-Cortez right now (without needlessly sullying her with DU melodrama from 2 years ago)

[JCanete]

60. what I said was relevant to what we were talking about. Sorry it bothered you. I'm not

refighting the primaries. I'm talking about our opinions on things here and what is being claimed about what they are and have been.

[emulatorloo]

105. No, you were regurgitating tired nonsense from the hellhole of GD P:2016.

There isn’t anything “relevant” about rehashing that nonsense.

Why can’t you support Rep Ocasio-Cortez on her many merits here and now in 2018? She has a ton of potential, and while she isn’t my rep I like her a lot. She doesn’t have a damn thing to do with DU’s past bullshit. I want to hear positive stuff about her in the here and now.

[JCanete]

107. I'm not going to bother having a conversation with you about what I should or should not talk about.

If you disagree with a specific point I make, then challenge it. If you can't challenge because you don't have the ammo, then I suggest you reevaluate your position. If you don't want to engage on it for other reasons, that's entirely valid. What I was talking about seemed relevant to me in the context of the conversation, and I haven't changed my mind on that point, and you berating my post hasn't exactly done that work either.

[emulatorloo]

108. "I guess you don't remember all of the unicorn comments out of the mouths of DUers"

“I guess you don't remember all of the unicorn comments out of the mouths of DUers, as well as Clinton herself when it came to Sanders platform.”

Don’t be disingenuous or try to gaslight me about what you wrote in that post. You are clearly relitigating the 2016 primary with that statement.

We aren’t talking about the 2016 primary at DU anymore. It is over. It is dead. Admins are definitely done with it. DU is way beyond that.

[JCanete]

109. so you are saying if somebody makes a claim about how things are and have always been,

the actual history should be off limits in challenging that statement? That sounds ridiculous.

[emulatorloo]

110. I am saying 1) we don't re-litigate Primary 2016 at DU (check the TOS)

It is not productive.

And I am saying 2) Rep Ocasio-Cortez is her own person and a great addition to Congress.

Why not talk positively about AOC rather than trying to tie her to old and irrelevant DU melodrama and butthurt?

[JCanete]

112. I'm not tying her to the past. I'm talking about us, and since we need a level of intelectual

honesty to have a real conversation here, what we say we are about versus the evidence, is something worth being brought up...because this is about making claims about who dems are and have always been...what we've always fought for.

if somebody wants to pretend like "we've always been at war with East Asia", that the progressive wing of the party is just stirring shit up for no reason since everybody is and has always been on the same page, that statement does warrant a challenge.

as to your personal opinion of AOC, I agree with you there and I'm glad we have some common agreement.

[emulatorloo]

117. See Democrats.org "What We Beleive"

I think we all pretty much agree here on our goals. You are surrounded by left-liberals and progressives here. There are no doubt differences in opinion about roadmaps and strategies but to me that is something we can work out.

Rep. Ocasio-Cortez is a proud Democrat and I look forward to a long productive time for her in Congress.


https://democrats.org/about/what-we-believe/

What We Believe

“Our full party platform is available here — but for the sake of time, here’s a condensed version of what you’ll find on the platform page:

Raising wages, closing the wealth gap, strengthening Social Security
Lowering health care costs; ensuring all Americans have access to quality, affordable health care; stabilizing Medicare and Medicaid
Sensible immigration reform that keeps America’s promise
Defending our borders, our ideals, and our institutions
Supporting our veterans and military families
Fixing our criminal justice system to eliminate systemic racism
Guaranteeing rights for minorities, people with disabilities, the LGBTQ community, and all Americans
Acting to advance women’s rights, protect access to reproductive care, fight for equal pay, stop violence against women, and elect more women to public office
Protecting and promoting every American’s fundamental right to vote
Advancing clean energy and climate change action
Common-sense gun reforms
Smarter infrastructure investments
Advancing access to liberty and equality for all”
Investing in modern education and jobs programs that prepare our kids for tomorrow’s challenges”

[JCanete]

118. ....money out of politics...

[emulatorloo]

119. Yes money out of politics. All Dems and DU'ers I know want Citizens United gone.

Have a good night

[Squinch]

68. If all Democrats sounded the same on these issues, we would never have just had a blue wave.

Why do some people absolutely refuse to see this?

I am sick to death of the stupidity of some people who insist that all Democrats must tailor their message to them personally, rather than tailoring their message to the voters in their own districts who will actually vote for them.

[JCanete]

71. I don't insist on that. That's what primaries are for. Determining what a district or state, etc.

will go for, but you kind of have to give people there an option if you want to know. And sometimes some issues take time to build momentum, but again, that never comes if no energy is put into that momentum.

Careful of the strawmanning. Those of us on DU at least, you should be able to safely assume, vote blue no matter what in the GE.

[Squinch]

74. I will turn your "strawmanning" warning back on you. There have always been options. As you say,

that's what primaries are for, and I can't recall a time when we haven't had primaries, can you?

So what is your point? Surely you don't mean to say there were no options before Sanders and OC.

Or were you saying the options that were offered were not acceptable to you? Or that not enough energy was put into your favorite issues to allow them to build momentum? If so, re-read the comment you responded to.

[JCanete]

81. I'm saying that there's nothing wrong with politicians exerting/testing their influence,

by suggesting they will support different candidates in primaries against other sitting members if they feel these members are in the way of the things they are fighting for.


What's funny is people take issue with this, but seem to gleefully suggest that it would totally serve Cortez right if Pelosi punished her by not giving her any good committees...

politics is politics.

[George II]

88. We've had primaries before those two and we will have primaries after them. I just don't recall....

....anyone calling for primaries two years before an election cycle.

[samnsara]

128. i think its a symptom of newbie-ism...

[DownriverDem]

33. Yep

You are so right. We just didn't have any power to get anything done. Sometimes when folks attack the Dems that have been there, they seem to forget what the tone was.

[murielm99]

37. Thank you.

[PaulX2]

49. 7 million more votes adds up to lots of power use it to make a better world

No surrendering before the battle begins

Crush the swiftboaters

[Squinch]

75. LOL! This is who is castigating others for "strawmanning." SMH.

[JCanete]

82. it was in a certain context that you can't see now...and it was admittedly goading a bit because

the person literally said he or she was going to make a claim and then entirely walk away from it and not respond to anybody who challenged it.

It was strawmanning though...sure. I'll cop to that and will agree that even there it wasn't appropriate.

[Squinch]

86. It was in bad faith. And this is at least the second time just in this thread in which you

said obnoxious things, then when you were called on them you said how wrong you were to say them, but you didn't take them down.

That also shows bad faith.

There's nothing to be gained by engaging with that nonsense. Buh bye.

[JCanete]

87. oh cool...glad you didn't say anything obnoxious yourself. I'll certainlly take your

example as a way to be going forward, thank you!


As to taking down things I say that I later regret...I don't take them down because I feel like that's scrubbing. I'd rather leave my mistakes than hide them.

[Squinch]

92. You've hit the "I know you are but what am I?" phase. Maybe it's time for you to walk away.

[JCanete]

94. No, I've copped to being harsh and even strawmanning where you called me on it, and agreed

that my reasons there weren't good enough for doing so. I'm just not going to accept your indignance regarding my decorum any more than you're going to accept my comment about your own straw-manning. . Still, that only leaves one of us who has ceded any ground and taken any personal responsibility. Not sure that counts as "I know you are but what am I."

[Squinch]

95. Ahh! I get it! You are virtuous! LOL!

Have a nice life.

[JCanete]

96. not what I said, but okay. I've got my strengths. I'm sure you do too. nt

[Algernon Moncrieff]

29. Love it!

I hope she keeps wearing the coat everyone is criticizing, much as Nebraska State Senator Ernie Chambers shows up in a T-Shirt for the legislature.

[oberliner]

31. I think the opposite is true

[JCanete]

104. I think your suggestion might be true, or partly at least. They may think that she's

easy prey while she's still a pup and that they can catch her slip ups and look the fool before she grows real teeth. On the other hand, the rule for a long time has been to push the left off the map entirely and to pretend Pelosi and Clinton were as far left as has ever been.

I'd argue that was a far better strategy, and that the only reason it isn't being employed now is that Cortez has too much name recognition to simply be ignored.

Whatever the reason though, the case they've been making has flailed pretty wildly, and it has allowed her to get a few good haymakers in on them. Not sure that nervous system is connected to the typical FOX viewer though, but its still good for energizing her base, and presenting as a strong, unapologetic progressive who can and will fight.

[oberliner]

122. I also think they like creating characters for their viewers to dislike

How soon before we hear chants of "lock her up" or Trump calling her "low-IQ" etc.

[JCanete]

141. If they can pull off either, sure...but the difference between Cortez and Clinton and Pelosi, is

that Fox News went after the latter two when the conventional wisdom was to ignore unseemly attacks, OR to even be apologetic about liberalism and distance ourselves, …"no we are progressives..." rather than to say "Damn fucking right we are...and this is our platform. Try to pick that apart."

And in that lies the flailing that has been occurring against Cortez. Maybe they can catch her not being overly adept at one policy question or numbers question here or there, but if they want to attack her they have to go at the issues that they don't really want to bring to their audience, and it has been utterly hilarious when they've attempted to do so thus far.

[shanny]

43. Makes me like her even more.

[SimpleC]

44. Anyone who terriffies fox news...

Is ok with me...

[klook]

47. and many DUers. (nt)

[Pepsidog]

48. Republican scary cats, afraid of their own shadow. Tear them up AOC!!

[PaulX2]

52. Someone loudly trying to help struggling Americans instead of billionaires

Scares the crap outa more than fox. See Corporate America.

Take the borrowed trillion and help the poor then watch the economy really explode. Stock buybacks dont do much at all.

[Eliot Rosewater]

79. Democratic party been doing that for decades.

[zentrum]

53. She's fantastic.

Fearless. Authentic.

[Iggo]

80. No, they actually love her.

She's everything they've trained their brain-dead viewers to be afraid of: Woman. Minority. Democrat.

[DFW]

130. I agree. She's the answer to Fox Noise's prayers--for now.

They were probably getting tired of beating on Pelosi. Like with Hillary, they were running out of bad things to say about her that they hadn't repeated ten thousand broadcasts ago. AOC can decide whether to feed them their next meal or not. She could also decide to drive Fox and Frauds crazy by working discreetly for her goals without giving them a free target on her back, too.

I don't think she has made that decision yet, and I don't think she's worth all the posts about her until she does. She hasn't even taken the oath of office yet, so who knows WHAT her agenda will be as a member of the House? I'm talking reality, not boastful posts on some website. She certainly seems to have the energy. It could take her to the speaker's chair in fifteen or twenty years, or it could take her out in the next primary in less than two years. I THINK she is smart enough to realize this, but I'm not convinced yet.

[Hortensis]

131. +1. Notably, Brand New Congress (Justice Democrats' sister,

or perhaps brother, organization) wants to defeat Republican politicians by uniting right wing and left wing populists against them. The same for Democrats they don't like, of course, which would be all who wouldn't align with Brand New Congress.

Trump's and Sanders's campaigns in 2016 were of course both powered by appeals to populist passions. Sanders tried to draw social conservatives away from Trump, and no doubt succeeded with some. Trump drew more away from Sanders, including those famous white working class male Democrats who turned out to lean socially conservative and were primarily motivated by loss of both white and male privilege.

Some observers are confirming these organizations' stated goals of trying to build a large left-wing tea party movement by drawing away large numbers of dissatisfied right-wing populists to whatever leader they put up. After all, populist organizations get a large part of their energy from the passions of those social conservatives who favor progressive government programs. And the right has a bunch of them, who'll all be looking for a new leader after Trump.

The strategic thinkers both within and behind Fox and the Republican leadership have to be very aware of this , and Ocasio is currently strongly associated with these groups.

(Btw, on another line of thought, my question is if they succeeded which side the new leader would come from. Given their outstanding success with the tea party movement, it would be entirely predictable if right-wing billionaires secretly helped create and took over and chose leaders for a unified populist movement. The more politically extremist people get, the less difference there is between right and left, so those involved might have no idea for some while.)

[DFW]

133. I had never heard of them

So, I went to look at their website. Brand New Congress sounds like Same Old Sanders.

[Hortensis]

134. :) Yes. But this time they won't be promoting Sanders,

at least not as their main candidate. Been there, moved on. They formed formally right after his concession.

But for now, I'm thinking this all helps explain Fox's "blowing hot and cold" behavior toward Congresswoman-elect Ocasio: Her current connection to radical left-wing organizations that are helpful against Democrats but which intend to develop into a threat to Republicans.

[GulfCoast66]

84. Terrifying? Hardly that. She is their new foil.

Young Black Woman who actually is a socialist.

They love her.

Their viewers? She does terrify them which is why Fox loves her.

[R B Garr]

98. Yes, Fox loves her. She is making it easy for them. nt

[UTUSN]

101. She's doing a pretty good job on me, too!1 (I've never been with Faux Propaganda Network before)

[Liberal In Texas]

106. Good commentary.

Fox is using her to scare the base. They're all about keeping the fear going.

[fescuerescue]

111. She is making Fox news alot of money

AOC and Fox news are in different busineses. AOC is in politics, Fox News is in advertising.

AOC brings viewers to Fox news, and Fox news focuses attention on AOC. It's symbiotic.

They aren't terrified. They are thrilled. As is she.

[NoMoreRepugs]

114. Lots of talk about "what" might happen. Let's wait and see.

[Hekate]

121. A bridge too far, BlahFreakinBlah

Enjoy your stay.