Republicans Are Extremely Fearful of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

[rightwinger]

Nobody should be afraid of her, if she gains any amount of power, she'll just make the State collapse faster. That benefits everyone. Also, it's about time we had a politician that needed a Retard Wrangler.

Cool

Doctored photos substituting for political discussion.

Never before has one made a clearer announcement that they didn't bother to listen to the evidence.

Never bothered to watch it

Nothing says....my video has no credibility than leading off with photoshop propaganda

 

[rightwinger]

Nobody should be afraid of her, if she gains any amount of power, she'll just make the State collapse faster. That benefits everyone. Also, it's about time we had a politician that needed a Retard Wrangler.

What a load of hooey.

What a fantastic way to debate. Everyone else provides an explanation of their position, explains why it's correct, explains why the other individual's position is wrong, provides citations, you? Well, all of that's for noobs, you just basically hold your hands over your ears and yell 'Lalala, I can't hear you!'. Grade schooler tactics are for pros, clearly.

PF is correct, you posted juvenile hooey and cartoon characters and snickering double images in lieu of rational argument.

Your post above is supreme irony. Check your mirror.

OR you could actually view the video, in which they discuss her statements and policy in detail and explain what's wrong with it, instead of glancing at the thumbnails and choosing to ignore them.

Not only do not apparently not understand irony, but you also choose not to educate yourself. Then again, I'm talking to a Democratic Party voter, if you were interested in educating yourself, you wouldn't be.

You have to get a better video

Better yet, make your own points and don’t rely on Rightwing propaganda

 

[hadit]

Finally had to make up a number. Lol!

I am willing to go with seven percent.

Go with what makes you feel good, the number doesn’t matter to me.

solving simple poverty at the rock bottom cost of less than the minimum wage, is the concept.

Like I said, go with what makes you feel good, doesn’t matter to me. Your concept has been proven wrong, so it a mute point.

anybody can talk. it must take morals to actually argue.

You can argue that cats will float up to the ceiling if you rub them on your head, but it doesn't require morals. It's just dumb. Arguing your points after they've been repeatedly disproven is also dumb and doesn't take morals.

 

[rightwinger]

Alexandria Ocasio Cortez advocates programs that help the people

No wonder conservatives hate her so much

 

[Papageorgio]

Alexandria Ocasio Cortez advocates programs that help the people

No wonder conservatives hate her so much

I’m a conservative and I think she is a okay with me. I’m not sure Pelosi cares much for her.

 

[Deno]

They are fearful because, finally, they have to contend with an unabashed liberal progressive that's fighting for the people. Moreover, she's a woman, so they won't be able to just come out her any type of way.

And the best part is, she know exactly how to counter their foolishness.

Yes Republicans, she's coming, and HELL'S coming with her!!!

Any other thoughts on why Republicans are left quaking in their boots over this. one. little. woman?

Plain to see you have shit for brains...

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Nobody should be afraid of her, if she gains any amount of power, she'll just make the State collapse faster. That benefits everyone. Also, it's about time we had a politician that needed a Retard Wrangler.

Cool

Doctored photos substituting for political discussion.

Never before has one made a clearer announcement that they didn't bother to listen to the evidence.

Never bothered to watch it

Nothing says....my video has no credibility than leading off with photoshop propaganda

That's code for an admission that you don't watch anything that doesn't fit your narrative.

You have to get a better video

Better yet, make your own points and don’t rely on Rightwing propaganda

You literally admitted that you didn't watch it, then told me to get a better video, and called it right wing propaganda. You're making it pretty obvious that your only problem is that it's not repeating back to you what you've already concluded. You're hilariously closed-minded and disingenuous.

 

[rightwinger]

Alexandria Ocasio Cortez advocates programs that help the people

No wonder conservatives hate her so much

I’m a conservative and I think she is a okay with me. I’m not sure Pelosi cares much for her.

I like her

She is willing to tell Pelosi to go fuk herself

 

[rightwinger]

Nobody should be afraid of her, if she gains any amount of power, she'll just make the State collapse faster. That benefits everyone. Also, it's about time we had a politician that needed a Retard Wrangler.

Cool

Doctored photos substituting for political discussion.

Never before has one made a clearer announcement that they didn't bother to listen to the evidence.

Never bothered to watch it

Nothing says....my video has no credibility than leading off with photoshop propaganda

That's code for an admission that you don't watch anything that doesn't fit your narrative.

You have to get a better video

Better yet, make your own points and don’t rely on Rightwing propaganda

You literally admitted that you didn't watch it, then told me to get a better video, and called it right wing propaganda. You're making it pretty obvious that your only problem is that it's not repeating back to you what you've already concluded. You're hilariously closed-minded and disingenuous.

Rule Number One: I do not watch propaganda videos

If YouTube is the best you got to defend your position, you got to pick up your game!

 

[Papageorgio]

Alexandria Ocasio Cortez advocates programs that help the people

No wonder conservatives hate her so much

I’m a conservative and I think she is a okay with me. I’m not sure Pelosi cares much for her.

I like her

She is willing to tell Pelosi to go fuk herself

Looks like Democrats hate her, Democrats seem extremely fearful of her.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Nobody should be afraid of her, if she gains any amount of power, she'll just make the State collapse faster. That benefits everyone. Also, it's about time we had a politician that needed a Retard Wrangler.

Cool

Doctored photos substituting for political discussion.

Never before has one made a clearer announcement that they didn't bother to listen to the evidence.

Never bothered to watch it

Nothing says....my video has no credibility than leading off with photoshop propaganda

That's code for an admission that you don't watch anything that doesn't fit your narrative.

You have to get a better video

Better yet, make your own points and don’t rely on Rightwing propaganda

You literally admitted that you didn't watch it, then told me to get a better video, and called it right wing propaganda. You're making it pretty obvious that your only problem is that it's not repeating back to you what you've already concluded. You're hilariously closed-minded and disingenuous.

Rule Number One: I do not watch propaganda videos

If YouTube is the best you got to defend your position, you got to pick up your game!

First of all, saying "If Youtube is the best you got" doesn't mean anything, it's a platform where people can upload recordings, meaning literally anything which doesn't violate their terms of service can be put there. Arguments are verbal and through text, both of which can be transferred to video form, and descriptions can be filled with citations. You would know and understand this if you weren't a closed-minded old fool.

Secondly, you haven't bothered to watch the videos in question, so you know literally nothing about it other than the fact that it doesn't suit your narrative. This kind of mentality is proof in and of itself that you have no interest in what's right or wrong, only what you want to think.

Thirdly, even if the video WAS propaganda, rather than video discussing the individual's position and providing citations which back up that position, you'd have nothing to fear if your position was the correct one, you'd be able to just defend your position and explain why the other position is wrong. An individual who holds their current position due to being educated on the ideas involved, and the ideas which conflict with their position has nothing to fear from those conflicting ideas, because they've verified that their current position is the correct one through education. What you do, and what you have done since my arrival on this forum, and probably before then, is referred to as "wearing blinders". You actively avoid education and conflicting ideas because you're afraid that your position is wrong, or maybe because you're already aware that your position is wrong.

What's hilarious about you is that I can't tell whether you're a troll or not because other Democratic Party voters act the same way. They're afraid of conflicting ideas because they can't argue against them.

Since you're not going to educate yourself, I'll just explain to you in detail what's wrong with her platform, so that the lurkers can at least come to a understanding, because you sure as hell won't bother reading my full post, you'll at best see that I replied, then serve up a one-to-two sentence response that's so general that it can't even be mistaken for an argument by even the most illiterate of posters.

Point by point, directly from her website:

• Medicare for all does not work and has not worked. Consistently, we've seen in situations like Nazi Germany and the Nordic Nations, as well as Canada, that government control of healthcare is practically a joke. Government control of any service results in forced rationing, due to the government's inability to accurately measure the demand for any good or service, unlike the Private Sector, which has built-in methods for measuring it, such as supply and demand. This is what causes increased wait times and euthanasia in cases where it otherwise wouldn't have been needed.
• A Federal Jobs guarantee would result in people being paid to do nothing. If there's not a demand for additional workers, giving people government jobs instead results in jobs there's no demand for, such as digging holes and filling it back in. This results in jobs which are not self-sustaining.
• I have no problem with any government-controlled service being abolished, however what she wants is open boarders, which when coupled with social programs would just cause government debt to further increase, and cause the government to demand more funding due to the increasing cost of programs, which expedites the government's increasing unsustainability. In other words, the government is always unsustainable due to rapid growth, which causes growing costs, which causes growing taxes, however open boarders with social programs speeds up this process.()
• There's no such thing as clean campaign finance, all politicians are crooked, otherwise they wouldn't be seeking positions within the group of robbers, murderers, and kidnappers known as government.
• Supporting LGBTQIA+ with government programs only means that they'd be gaining additional rights which others don't have. This naturally increases the cost of sustaining the Government, which accelerates increasing taxes. Individuals do not need rights that others don't have, and increasing government cost of sustainability is always bad.
• Housing As a Human Right is flawed as a concept, the private sector already provides housing, at a cost to only the buyer, and it would be significantly cheaper if the government wasn't stomping out competition and increasing costs through regulation. It's also inherently unjustifiable to push the cost of an individual's housing onto others. Furthermore, the government will misallocate resources and cause artificial scarcity due to the economic calculation problem.
• Gun Control has already been proven not to work. Guns can be 3D printed, obtained illegally, or otherwise built from parts incredibly easily, so making it more difficult to obtain weapons only disarms potential victims. Gun control has already failed to stop any mass shootings. The government also cannot be relied upon for our protection, as the average response time for police is 15 minutes, making it pretty clear that a crime wouldn't be prevented, but simply cleaned up after. This is in addition to the consistently shown fact that areas with stricter gun laws result in higher crime rates, like California and Chicago, while locations with less strict gun laws, such as Kennesaw Georgia, result in significantly lower crime rates.(List of United States cities by crime rate - Wikipedia)
• Puerto Rico has been digging its own grave for years upon years, and financially bailing them out of their current problem will only encourage their current trend. They'd need no assistance if they started cutting government programs.
• Higher Education for everyone is a terrible idea. This wouldn't even be something advocated for by politicians if their programs weren't increasing the cost of college in the first place. Federal Aid covering college costs is encouraging colleges to raise their prices, just like when insurance pays for your bills after an accident. Even if the idea "worked", it would only result in overpopulation in the higher education job market, lowering the demand for higher education, causing those with higher education to be paid less.
• Supporting Seniors through government programs has the exact same problem as the government providing healthcare. See point 1.
• "A Peace Economy" is simply a talking point. The government decided to invade the Middle East because of oil, because the government's unsustainable fiat currency, known as the dollar, is worthless on the petrol market. The only reason any place accepts it as a medium of trade is because the government threatens them when they don't. You'll notice that the government and the mainstream media started the fake Russia narrative after Russia decided to stop accepting dollars.
• "Criminal Justice Reform" would not be advocated for if it wasn't for the government overfilling their prisons with individuals who committed victimless crimes.(BOP Statistics: Inmate Offenses). If people weren't jailed simply for living in a way the government didn't agree with, there would be a significantly lower prison population. The government has no business kidnapping and imprisoning people for making voluntary exchanges.
• There's no reason to "Mobilize Against Climate Change" because if it was an actual issue, they wouldn't have been falsifying and fudging data. Even if there were a problem, the government would be the absolute last organization qualified for solving it. There would be a demand for action to be taken against it, and private organizations would not only innovate to solve the problem faster, due to profit coming with demand, but they would do so without infringing on the individual rights of others. The government only impedes progress with its regulations, and the only reason the government would be needed for anything is if there was no demand for something, however if something is needed, there's a demand for it, thus profit incentive. For example, there was a demand to go to the moon, thus the private sector created space shuttles, while the government laughed off the request for funding.
• The government does not grant rights, it only infringes upon them. All humans have the same individual rights, unless government force and coercion infringes on certain rights. When she says "Women's Rights", what she's referring to is the Gender Wage Gap, which doesn't exist. The survey didn't account for the difference in the difference in the amount of each gender in the workplace, nor did it account for the difference in the amount of individuals in certain positions. The study that she's referring to has been debunked numerous times, and even if it wasn't, advocating for government force and coercion to MAKE people pay certain types of people an increased amount only ensures that people's individuals merits aren't accounted for when hiring. Best case scenario, fewer women are hired because the government is forcing businesses to pay women more, and then claims they need to create legislation to force businesses to hire more women, due to the government making women more expensive to hire. This section also refers to "reproductive rights", however what she's referring to is abortion and 'government-provided' contraception. Abortion is scientifically murder, as only force can prevent a child from growing and thriving. As for contraception, there's no reason for the government to get involved, because of the economic calculation problem, and because of the aforementioned growing cost of social programs. An individual also does not need to have sex to survive, therefor whether an individual can afford contraception or not is completely superfluous.
• "Curb Wall Street Gambling: Restore Glass Steagall" is just the government exerting more control over something it never should have been attempting to control in the first place. Government regulations result in smaller businesses being damaged due to being less established and having less money. The Cortez is specifically mentioning Wall Street due to it being a better-known bank. This is a common politician tactic. For example, the government also wants to further regulate the gaming industry due to the anger gamers feel towards Electronic Arts, Ubisoft, and Activision and their microtransactions and loot crates, however those Developers are only able to engage in tactics their customers don't approve of because they're receiving subsidies. The government's response in both cases is to point at larger businesses, claim they need to be regulated due to shady tactics, however in reality if a business was treating customers badly, they would simply go to competition and that business would go under. The only thing which subverts this is government interference in the market. There is no such thing as a business which is too big to fail, and only government regulation preventing competitors from entering the market could create such a situation if there hypothetically were.

 

[hadit]

Alexandria Ocasio Cortez advocates programs that help the people

No wonder conservatives hate her so much

You seem desperate to prove something to someone. Maybe you should get that checked out.

 

[william104]

They are fearful because, finally, they have to contend with an unabashed liberal progressive that's fighting for the people. Moreover, she's a woman, so they won't be able to just come out her any type of way.

And the best part is, she know exactly how to counter their foolishness.

Yes Republicans, she's coming, and HELL'S coming with her!!!

Any other thoughts on why Republicans are left quaking in their boots over this. one. little. woman?

Not only Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Should this be GOPer suicide watch?

 

[danielpalos]

On what basis does EDD deny or disparage benefits if no for-cause employment can be proven?

What does EDD mean? Another diversion based on your feelings?

that i should not take you seriously in our at-will employment States. are you even American.

Lots of initials in the world today and I’m not good at the game, you going to continue to divert?

employment development department.

Our state calls it something completely different. It’s the TBP in our state. In fact only California appears to use those initials for their program, so unless you live in California a person wouldn’t know the initials. I surprised you thought all states called it the same. Have anymore diversions?

lol. what is your State?

 

[danielpalos]

I am willing to go with seven percent.

Go with what makes you feel good, the number doesn’t matter to me.

solving simple poverty at the rock bottom cost of less than the minimum wage, is the concept.

Like I said, go with what makes you feel good, doesn’t matter to me. Your concept has been proven wrong, so it a mute point.

anybody can talk. it must take morals to actually argue.

You can argue that cats will float up to the ceiling if you rub them on your head, but it doesn't require morals. It's just dumb. Arguing your points after they've been repeatedly disproven is also dumb and doesn't take morals.

you only have gossip not valid rebuttals. anybody can talk. men can argue.

solving simple poverty at the rock bottom cost of less than the minimum wage, is the concept.

 

[dannyboys]

I'm not going to worry about the Communist bitch until after she is "inaugurated".
Maybe Bernie will rent the poor thing a bedroom in one of his three houses.

 

[hadit]

They are fearful because, finally, they have to contend with an unabashed liberal progressive that's fighting for the people. Moreover, she's a woman, so they won't be able to just come out her any type of way.

And the best part is, she know exactly how to counter their foolishness.

Yes Republicans, she's coming, and HELL'S coming with her!!!

Any other thoughts on why Republicans are left quaking in their boots over this. one. little. woman?

Not only Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Should this be GOPer suicide watch?

Does that mean she's living in hell now?

 

[hadit]

Go with what makes you feel good, the number doesn’t matter to me.

solving simple poverty at the rock bottom cost of less than the minimum wage, is the concept.

Like I said, go with what makes you feel good, doesn’t matter to me. Your concept has been proven wrong, so it a mute point.

anybody can talk. it must take morals to actually argue.

You can argue that cats will float up to the ceiling if you rub them on your head, but it doesn't require morals. It's just dumb. Arguing your points after they've been repeatedly disproven is also dumb and doesn't take morals.

you only have gossip not valid rebuttals. anybody can talk. men can argue.

solving simple poverty at the rock bottom cost of less than the minimum wage, is the concept.

How much will it cost?

 

[danielpalos]

solving simple poverty at the rock bottom cost of less than the minimum wage, is the concept.

Like I said, go with what makes you feel good, doesn’t matter to me. Your concept has been proven wrong, so it a mute point.

anybody can talk. it must take morals to actually argue.

You can argue that cats will float up to the ceiling if you rub them on your head, but it doesn't require morals. It's just dumb. Arguing your points after they've been repeatedly disproven is also dumb and doesn't take morals.

you only have gossip not valid rebuttals. anybody can talk. men can argue.

solving simple poverty at the rock bottom cost of less than the minimum wage, is the concept.

How much will it cost?

This is the approximate labor force participation rate, 62.9%. That should mean, approximately 37.1% could need compensation for simply being unemployed.

It seems like a lot; but, it will result in a more efficient economy that is more stable and will need to grow to meet that new demand.

 

[Nova78]

Just pay for it !