AOC isn't dumb, but most of her detractors are

  • 144 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#1 Posted by texasgoldrush (12801 posts) -

Seriously, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez seems to win by making her opponents think they are winning, or to think they can win against her, and then she crushes them. And this is how her political career started when she upset Joe Crowley in the primary.

The truth is she is one of the most talented and intelligent politicians in America right now, and is one of the most powerful congress members despite not being in any leadership position. She is an excellent public speaker and orator (level of the Obamas), social media savvy in a time where social media has growing importance in politics, knows how to attack Republicans effectively and fight back against their attacks (which Dems do poorly), a killer on committees (the Cohen hearing anyone), and just last weekend, is able to be an influential fundraiser. She has proven to be politically skilled so far, choosing her battles quite well (unlike say, Rashida Tlaib), knowing when to press and when to tactically retreat, and has been pragmatic in her policy approaches. Add this to her work and moral ethic that can influence the rest of congress, and AOC is the complete package. Nevermind that her policy proposals, The Green New Deal, Medicare For All (in some form), and a raise in tax bracket for the rich, seem to have popular support.

But wow, does the right wing go absolutely nuts over her: Conspiracy theories about her economic status and her campaign, attacks on her intelligence by either taking her out of context, missing the point on what she said, amplifying minor errors, and a crazy conspiracy about her being a planted actress to advance the Justice Democrats plans. Much of these attacks are pretty racial and misogynistic, which shows the bigotry of the right. I do think AOC has made two significant mistakes (one from her team), which has lead to more crazy attacks from the right, so she still has to learn.....but these attacks on her are disgusting and in the end, will be ineffective and counterproductive, no matter how much right wing media, like Fox News, covers her. And really, AOC has embarrassed these people, including several congressmen, that had the audacity to disrespect her.

The reality is that she is a threat to them, a Latina millennial with left wing views who found killer success that has influenced the country. And she doesn't achieve this by being dumb. She lets her opponents be dumb.

Avatar image for Sevenizz
#2 Edited by Sevenizz (3616 posts) -

April Fool’s Day is over.

She’s dumb. Her Green Deal is all the proof you need. Not even her party endorsed it. No one.

She’s not even Left wing - she’s a total socialist. How many billions and jobs did she deter from her state? A lot.

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#3 Edited by texasgoldrush (12801 posts) -

@Sevenizz said:

April Fool’s Day is over.

She’s dumb. Her Green Deal is all the proof you need. Not even her party endorsed it. No one.

She’s not even Left wing - she’s a total socialist. How many billions and jobs did she deter from her state? A lot.

Wrong....

All SIX candidates for President that are in the Senate support the Green New Deal. The reason why the GND got no votes in the Senate is the party with AOC's backing chose to vote "present" in order to not divide the caucus.

AOC models her policies after Northern Europe, so no, she is not totally socialist.

You are proving my point on this thread. You are misrepresenting her and the reality of her influence.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
#4 Posted by mrbojangles25 (43781 posts) -

Completely agree. AOC is intelligent, and has the charisma and public speaking to boot. I think if she can endure the cold shoulders from within and without her party and gain some seniority, she will be a real force in the political world.

Right now people are sort of blowing her off as some young hothead, but I think that will backfire. The political system is only going to get younger and younger and soon the Pelosis and McConnels of the world will be the minority. Or dead. I'm fine with either lol.

Now we just need a progressive, moderate Republican version of AOC and we might actually get somewhere.

Avatar image for vfighter
#5 Posted by VFighter (4797 posts) -

Oh wow, thanks for the laugh.

Avatar image for Maroxad
#6 Posted by Maroxad (15229 posts) -

Politics 101: Everyone I disagree with is an idiot.

Granted, AOC has made a few blunders here and there. But her engineering and scientific skills would make sure I do not call her an idiot. She even has an asteroid named after her... that happened 10 years ago.

From Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandria_Ocasio-Cortez

Ocasio-Cortez attended Yorktown High School, graduating in 2007. She came in second in the Microbiology category of the Intel International Science and Engineering Fair with a microbiology research project on the effect of antioxidants on the lifespan of the nematodeC. elegans. In a show of appreciation for her efforts, the MIT Lincoln Laboratory named a small asteroid after her: 23238 Ocasio-Cortez.

She is not stupid, but she is inexperienced.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#7 Posted by ronvalencia (27436 posts) -

@texasgoldrush:

Loading Video...

AOC's maths problems spreads among the Democrats with Kamala Harris wrongly thinks the unemployment rate is low because people work multiple jobs.

Avatar image for joebones5000
#8 Posted by joebones5000 (2107 posts) -

She makes goofy conservatives heads explode. They have to say stupid things about her like banning cows and ending air travel because it's the only thing their dim-witted base will understand.

Avatar image for Sevenizz
#9 Posted by Sevenizz (3616 posts) -

@ronvalencia: Her math gets worse. Like when she said she’d put the 3 billion in Amazon tax incentives into schools and transit - but forgot to subtract that without Amazon, there’s no billions to put towards anything.

This brilliantly sums up the stupidity of AOC...

https://youtu.be/3nrGlDCEQ8c

Oh, and this beaut...

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ocasio-cortezs-millionaire-chief-of-staff-violated-fec-rules-to-hide-885g-fec-complaint-alleges

Avatar image for Nuck81
#10 Posted by Nuck81 (7431 posts) -

@ronvalencia: lol. A party that has been all in on trickle down for 40 years is arguing math and economics.

Thanks for the belly laugh

Avatar image for vl4d_l3nin
#11 Posted by vl4d_l3nin (1799 posts) -

She's entertaining I'll give her that. She's basically like Trump with the politics inverted.

It's almost a shame she can't run for President. Her against Trump would be the greatest WWE matchup of all time.

Avatar image for JimB
#12 Posted by JimB (2431 posts) -

@Nuck81 said:

@ronvalencia: lol. A party that has been all in on trickle down for 40 years is arguing math and economics.

Thanks for the belly laugh

What ever it is it works. Jobs never seem to be an issue when it is in play.

Avatar image for nattydaddy604
#13 Posted by NattyDaddy604 (304 posts) -

@mrbojangles25 said:

Completely agree. AOC is intelligent, and has the charisma and public speaking to boot. I think if she can endure the cold shoulders from within and without her party and gain some seniority, she will be a real force in the political world.

Right now people are sort of blowing her off as some young hothead, but I think that will backfire. The political system is only going to get younger and younger and soon the Pelosis and McConnels of the world will be the minority. Or dead. I'm fine with either lol.

Now we just need a progressive, moderate Republican version of AOC and we might actually get somewhere.

She has a degree in economics and was a bartender... she is 29 years old. This makes her inexperienced.

Her public speaking? Last time I checked, shes refused to debate many different politicians on economics and other matters. She is only good at public speaking when she is not being criticized in person.

The last thing we need is another progressive poisoning the country with their Marxist doctrine.

Avatar image for Serraph105
#14 Posted by Serraph105 (33662 posts) -

Conservatives recognizing stupidity and sticking it to the libs

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#15 Posted by texasgoldrush (12801 posts) -

@Sevenizz said:

@ronvalencia: Her math gets worse. Like when she said she’d put the 3 billion in Amazon tax incentives into schools and transit - but forgot to subtract that without Amazon, there’s no billions to put towards anything.

This brilliantly sums up the stupidity of AOC...

https://youtu.be/3nrGlDCEQ8c

Oh, and this beaut...

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ocasio-cortezs-millionaire-chief-of-staff-violated-fec-rules-to-hide-885g-fec-complaint-alleges

Right wing conspiracy theories and commentary...thank you for proving my point.

@Maroxad said:

Politics 101: Everyone I disagree with is an idiot.

Granted, AOC has made a few blunders here and there. But her engineering and scientific skills would make sure I do not call her an idiot. She even has an asteroid named after her... that happened 10 years ago.

From Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandria_Ocasio-Cortez

Ocasio-Cortez attended Yorktown High School, graduating in 2007. She came in second in the Microbiology category of the Intel International Science and Engineering Fair with a microbiology research project on the effect of antioxidants on the lifespan of the nematodeC. elegans. In a show of appreciation for her efforts, the MIT Lincoln Laboratory named a small asteroid after her: 23238 Ocasio-Cortez.

She is not stupid, but she is inexperienced.

While she may be inexperienced, she also has brought new angles for others to learn in Congress, and she taught other members how to use social media more effectively, for example. And in Congress, political intelligence is far more valuable than experience. The Cohen hearing made it look like she was the most "experienced" representative there as most of the rest embarrassed themselves.

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#16 Posted by texasgoldrush (12801 posts) -

@nattydaddy604 said:
@mrbojangles25 said:

Completely agree. AOC is intelligent, and has the charisma and public speaking to boot. I think if she can endure the cold shoulders from within and without her party and gain some seniority, she will be a real force in the political world.

Right now people are sort of blowing her off as some young hothead, but I think that will backfire. The political system is only going to get younger and younger and soon the Pelosis and McConnels of the world will be the minority. Or dead. I'm fine with either lol.

Now we just need a progressive, moderate Republican version of AOC and we might actually get somewhere.

She has a degree in economics and was a bartender... she is 29 years old. This makes her inexperienced.

Her public speaking? Last time I checked, shes refused to debate many different politicians on economics and other matters. She is only good at public speaking when she is not being criticized in person.

The last thing we need is another progressive poisoning the country with their Marxist doctrine.

Ummmm........she is criticized in person all the time (as well as disrespected) and manages to counterattack effectively. What are you talking about?

Her complete annihilation of Sean Duffy has millions of views, for example, but I guess right wing world doesn't see it.

Avatar image for Nuck81
#17 Edited by Nuck81 (7431 posts) -

@JimB: lol. Thanks for the second belly laugh.

except for the first bush recession, and the second bush recession, and the recession the economy is headed towards now. Luckily we've always had democrats in charge to rebuild the economy so a Republican can **** it up again.

The unemployment numbers are fake. Trump said so during the campaign. He's using the same numbers now that Obama did then.

He didn't lie about them not being real did he?

Avatar image for nattydaddy604
#18 Posted by NattyDaddy604 (304 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:
@nattydaddy604 said:
@mrbojangles25 said:

Completely agree. AOC is intelligent, and has the charisma and public speaking to boot. I think if she can endure the cold shoulders from within and without her party and gain some seniority, she will be a real force in the political world.

Right now people are sort of blowing her off as some young hothead, but I think that will backfire. The political system is only going to get younger and younger and soon the Pelosis and McConnels of the world will be the minority. Or dead. I'm fine with either lol.

Now we just need a progressive, moderate Republican version of AOC and we might actually get somewhere.

She has a degree in economics and was a bartender... she is 29 years old. This makes her inexperienced.

Her public speaking? Last time I checked, shes refused to debate many different politicians on economics and other matters. She is only good at public speaking when she is not being criticized in person.

The last thing we need is another progressive poisoning the country with their Marxist doctrine.

Ummmm........she is criticized in person all the time (as well as disrespected) and manages to counterattack effectively. What are you talking about?

Her complete annihilation of Sean Duffy has millions of views, for example, but I guess right wing world doesn't see it.

What criticism? The only "right winger" shes debated in person is congress. She can't debate anybody outside of that. Find me a REAL right winger shes debated. I'm talking about someone whos looking to REMOVE regulations, give more power to people by deregulating and promoting free market. She will be utterly crushed.

What complete destruction of Sean Duffy? I've watched clips and its pure emotional drivel on both ends. A clown act. Ironic how they bring up Flint having terrible drinking water yet Flint officials decided the water source should be changed to save money... How hilarious.

The truth is her proposed new deal will be TERRIBLE for the people. More regulations will shift power further away from the people, to the few. Any time a deal talks about the government regulating something, its taking away power from the people.

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#19 Edited by texasgoldrush (12801 posts) -

@nattydaddy604: And who are the most important people to debate for her? Politicians, not some assclown commentators who do not hold positions in government. And really, you actually think these wingnuts on the right can debate her? No, because she takes out low information trash, and most of these people are low information trash, including many in Congress who listen to low information trash. And Sean Duffy is an example.

If her Green New Deal is so terrible, why does it have support even in red states? You cannot see past you own ideology and it shows.

Avatar image for horgen
#20 Posted by Horgen (120157 posts) -

Has right wingers decided if they want to label her as socialist or communist yet? And when

@texasgoldrush said:

AOC models her policies after Northern Europe, so no, she is not totally socialist.

Northern Europe which is even more capitalistic than US I hear on these boards. So she is a capitalist? What is it?

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#21 Posted by texasgoldrush (12801 posts) -

@horgen said:

Has right wingers decided if they want to label her as socialist or communist yet? And when

@texasgoldrush said:

AOC models her policies after Northern Europe, so no, she is not totally socialist.

Northern Europe which is even more capitalistic than US I hear on these boards. So she is a capitalist? What is it?

Northern Europe is socialist in some areas like health care, but capitalist in others. They mix it well and it has been a success. AOC has the same ideology. She would easily be a Labour PM in the UK.

Avatar image for nattydaddy604
#22 Posted by NattyDaddy604 (304 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@nattydaddy604: And who are the most important people to debate for her? Politicians, not some assclown commentators who do not hold positions in government. And really, you actually think these wingnuts on the right can debate her? No, because she takes out low information trash, and most of these people are low information trash, including many in Congress who listen to low information trash.

If her Green New Deal is so terrible, why does it have support even in red states? You cannot see past you own ideology and it shows.

Your first section is pure drivel. All congress members are lobbied by corporations, they do not represent the best interests of the American people. If they cannot debate her, than she should be dismantling them every step of the way. But she isn't. She's made to look all amazing on national television.

There's idiotic people in both blue and red wing states. My ideology is based on historical understandings of economy, and analyzing data. Your ideology is based on blue state beliefs, as clearly demonstrated by trying to justify your position because "red states like it too".

Avatar image for judaspete
#23 Posted by judaspete (2904 posts) -

Conservatives keep making the same mistakes about AOC that I made about Trump.

Me 2016 - "You're going to cut taxes, and it will cause soooo much economic growth that the cuts will pay for themselves? That's a perpetual motion device! No one is dumb enough to fall for this!"

Boy was I wrong.

Avatar image for Sevenizz
#24 Edited by Sevenizz (3616 posts) -

@texasgoldrush: The Amazon debacle was not a theory or a conspiracy - that happened. She literally cost her state thousands of jobs, billions in taxes, and the run off effect of thousands of jobs serving those employees. Sounds very dumb to me.

Avatar image for Nuck81
#25 Posted by Nuck81 (7431 posts) -

@Sevenizz: Amazon doesn't pay taxes, and they were getting further tax incentives to go there.

Why you worried about costing New York jobs. I thought Trump made sure everyone had a job? Now we are short on jobs?

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#26 Edited by texasgoldrush (12801 posts) -

@Sevenizz said:

@texasgoldrush: The Amazon debacle was not a theory or a conspiracy - that happened. She literally cost her state thousands of jobs, billions in taxes, and the run off effect of thousands of jobs serving those employees. Sounds very dumb to me.

Yet she saved her community from rising rents and gentrification.

NYC has a housing crisis, not an employment crisis. Those who opposed the deal had a point too.

And it was not her that sunk the deal either, so get your facts straight.

@nattydaddy604 said:
@texasgoldrush said:

@nattydaddy604: And who are the most important people to debate for her? Politicians, not some assclown commentators who do not hold positions in government. And really, you actually think these wingnuts on the right can debate her? No, because she takes out low information trash, and most of these people are low information trash, including many in Congress who listen to low information trash.

If her Green New Deal is so terrible, why does it have support even in red states? You cannot see past you own ideology and it shows.

Your first section is pure drivel. All congress members are lobbied by corporations, they do not represent the best interests of the American people. If they cannot debate her, than she should be dismantling them every step of the way. But she isn't. She's made to look all amazing on national television.

There's idiotic people in both blue and red wing states. My ideology is based on historical understandings of economy, and analyzing data. Your ideology is based on blue state beliefs, as clearly demonstrated by trying to justify your position because "red states like it too".

No, your response is. Congresspeople being lobbied has nothing to do with it. The fact is that she can hold her own and counterpunch her opponents, and they are ignorant of this fact. Conservatives are badly underestimating her skill and intelligence, and the people you claim she should debate, are doing so as well.

Historical understandings of the economy do not address climate change and market cannot solve everything. And you regulations and power of people nonsense is straight misinterpretation of reality.

Avatar image for vl4d_l3nin
#27 Posted by vl4d_l3nin (1799 posts) -

@judaspete said:

Conservatives keep making the same mistakes about AOC that I made about Trump.

Me 2016 - "You're going to cut taxes, and it will cause soooo much economic growth that the cuts will pay for themselves? That's a perpetual motion device! No one is dumb enough to fall for this!"

Boy was I wrong.

What are you talking about? Trump campaigned on raising taxes on the rich.

Avatar image for nattydaddy604
#28 Posted by NattyDaddy604 (304 posts) -
@nattydaddy604 said:
@texasgoldrush said:

@nattydaddy604: And who are the most important people to debate for her? Politicians, not some assclown commentators who do not hold positions in government. And really, you actually think these wingnuts on the right can debate her? No, because she takes out low information trash, and most of these people are low information trash, including many in Congress who listen to low information trash.

If her Green New Deal is so terrible, why does it have support even in red states? You cannot see past you own ideology and it shows.

Your first section is pure drivel. All congress members are lobbied by corporations, they do not represent the best interests of the American people. If they cannot debate her, than she should be dismantling them every step of the way. But she isn't. She's made to look all amazing on national television.

There's idiotic people in both blue and red wing states. My ideology is based on historical understandings of economy, and analyzing data. Your ideology is based on blue state beliefs, as clearly demonstrated by trying to justify your position because "red states like it too".

No, your response is. Congresspeople being lobbied has nothing to do with it. The fact is that she can hold her own and counterpunch her opponents, and they are ignorant of this fact. Conservatives are badly underestimating her skill and intelligence, and the people you claim she should debate, are doing so as well.

Historical understandings of the economy do not address climate change and market cannot solve everything. And you regulations and power of people nonsense is straight misinterpretation of reality.

Yes it does, because congress will NOT discuss REAL CHANGES for the average citizen. Her entire argument against Sean Duffy was pure drivel again. Don't get me wrong, Sean was using horrible arguments (although it holds more merit than what she was saying) to prove his point. It is purposely done to entertain the ignorant, you.

As per many sources, climate change talks is too late. If humans wanted to prevent climate change, it must have been dealt with decades ago. Doing anything now will not result in any noticeable changes. So why are we still talking about climate change, if its irreversible?

Except historical understanding is important. Extremely important. It is how you learn from mistakes. I think your lack of understanding of history is the issue. Regulations monopolize the market. It takes away the peoples ability to judge what is right/wrong and shifts it over to the govt who makes that decision. It takes away power from the people. High school history does not count as being informed so go brush up on some REAL history for a proper reality check.

Avatar image for volsung
#29 Edited by Volsung (261 posts) -
@horgen said:

Has right wingers decided if they want to label her as socialist or communist yet? And when

@texasgoldrush said:

AOC models her policies after Northern Europe, so no, she is not totally socialist.

Northern Europe which is even more capitalistic than US I hear on these boards. So she is a capitalist? What is it?

We could just call her and Bernie social democrats, which is what they actually are.

Avatar image for judaspete
#30 Edited by judaspete (2904 posts) -

@vl4d_l3nin said:
@judaspete said:

Conservatives keep making the same mistakes about AOC that I made about Trump.

Me 2016 - "You're going to cut taxes, and it will cause soooo much economic growth that the cuts will pay for themselves? That's a perpetual motion device! No one is dumb enough to fall for this!"

Boy was I wrong.

What are you talking about? Trump campaigned on raising taxes on the rich.

Trump held every position on every issue at one point or another, and you're right, he did say that at one point.

Avatar image for judaspete
#31 Posted by judaspete (2904 posts) -

@nattydaddy604 said:
@nattydaddy604 said:
@texasgoldrush said:

@nattydaddy604: And who are the most important people to debate for her? Politicians, not some assclown commentators who do not hold positions in government. And really, you actually think these wingnuts on the right can debate her? No, because she takes out low information trash, and most of these people are low information trash, including many in Congress who listen to low information trash.

If her Green New Deal is so terrible, why does it have support even in red states? You cannot see past you own ideology and it shows.

Your first section is pure drivel. All congress members are lobbied by corporations, they do not represent the best interests of the American people. If they cannot debate her, than she should be dismantling them every step of the way. But she isn't. She's made to look all amazing on national television.

There's idiotic people in both blue and red wing states. My ideology is based on historical understandings of economy, and analyzing data. Your ideology is based on blue state beliefs, as clearly demonstrated by trying to justify your position because "red states like it too".

No, your response is. Congresspeople being lobbied has nothing to do with it. The fact is that she can hold her own and counterpunch her opponents, and they are ignorant of this fact. Conservatives are badly underestimating her skill and intelligence, and the people you claim she should debate, are doing so as well.

Historical understandings of the economy do not address climate change and market cannot solve everything. And you regulations and power of people nonsense is straight misinterpretation of reality.

Yes it does, because congress will NOT discuss REAL CHANGES for the average citizen. Her entire argument against Sean Duffy was pure drivel again. Don't get me wrong, Sean was using horrible arguments (although it holds more merit than what she was saying) to prove his point. It is purposely done to entertain the ignorant, you.

As per many sources, climate change talks is too late. If humans wanted to prevent climate change, it must have been dealt with decades ago. Doing anything now will not result in any noticeable changes. So why are we still talking about climate change, if its irreversible?

Except historical understanding is important. Extremely important. It is how you learn from mistakes. I think your lack of understanding of history is the issue. Regulations monopolize the market. It takes away the peoples ability to judge what is right/wrong and shifts it over to the govt who makes that decision. It takes away power from the people. High school history does not count as being informed so go brush up on some REAL history for a proper reality check.

While it's too late to stop climate change, acting now could cause it to change less.

Avatar image for nattydaddy604
#32 Posted by NattyDaddy604 (304 posts) -

@judaspete: I understand the point, but its not consistent IMO. All these policies that are being brought up are going to result in heavy taxation, massive changes in societies that people may/may not be ready for. All these solutions are not going to prevent climate change, just prolong it.
Why would I as a human being, be ok with my life drastically changing, for something that cannot be changed positively anyways? It makes no sense

Avatar image for Vaasman
#33 Edited by Vaasman (13637 posts) -

@nattydaddy604 said:

@judaspete: I understand the point, but its not consistent IMO. All these policies that are being brought up are going to result in heavy taxation, massive changes in societies that people may/may not be ready for. All these solutions are not going to prevent climate change, just prolong it.

Why would I as a human being, be ok with my life drastically changing, for something that cannot be changed positively anyways? It makes no sense

If you're sitting on a nuclear bomb that's going to blow and you need to figure out how to survive it, I can tell you that the answer is not to set it off faster.

Also, do you consider your theoretical inconvenience more or less significant than that of people who will need to move because their living areas become too hot, too cold, or too underwater?

Avatar image for nattydaddy604
#34 Posted by NattyDaddy604 (304 posts) -

@Vaasman said:
@nattydaddy604 said:

@judaspete: I understand the point, but its not consistent IMO. All these policies that are being brought up are going to result in heavy taxation, massive changes in societies that people may/may not be ready for. All these solutions are not going to prevent climate change, just prolong it.

Why would I as a human being, be ok with my life drastically changing, for something that cannot be changed positively anyways? It makes no sense

If you're sitting on a nuclear bomb that's going to blow and you need to figure out how to survive it, I can tell you that the answer is not to set it off faster.

Also, do you consider your theoretical inconvenience more or less significant than that of people who will need to move because their living areas become too hot, too cold, or too underwater?

If climate is irreversible, why subject yourself to heavier taxation and a radical change in lifestyle? Nothing we do can impact the results.

My inconvenience theory does not change whether those people will have to move. Climate change is supposedly irreversible. If it is, why would I subject my life to heavier taxation, more regulations, and rapid change of lifestyle because of that?

I live in the "too underwater" region. I am going underneath. Why would I want to be subjected to above mentioned, when its going to happen regardless of any changes?

Avatar image for Vaasman
#35 Edited by Vaasman (13637 posts) -

@nattydaddy604 said:

If climate is irreversible, why subject yourself to heavier taxation and a radical change in lifestyle? Nothing we do can impact the results.

My inconvenience theory does not change whether those people will have to move. Climate change is supposedly irreversible. If it is, why would I subject my life to heavier taxation, more regulations, and rapid change of lifestyle because of that?

I live in the "too underwater" region. I am going underneath. Why would I want to be subjected to above mentioned, when its going to happen regardless of any changes?

The question anymore isn't if it's inevitable, the question is if it's going to be manageable, and how fast are we going to make it happen. The difference between uncomfortable seasons and 3 feet sea level with endless hurricanes, is pretty significant. And at any rate, the changes of the deal would benefit the environment regardless by reducing the necessity for harmful waste and finite sources of energy. Which is a change we absolutely need climate change or no. At our current rate of consumption, oil will be rare or gone in the next 40-50 years, coal not long after.

So is the answer just wait and do nothing and eventually we slip into economic disaster and environmental disaster all at once? That seems like what you would prefer compared to a tax that most likely wouldn't be applied to you anyway.

Avatar image for nattydaddy604
#36 Posted by NattyDaddy604 (304 posts) -

@Vaasman said:
@nattydaddy604 said:

If climate is irreversible, why subject yourself to heavier taxation and a radical change in lifestyle? Nothing we do can impact the results.

My inconvenience theory does not change whether those people will have to move. Climate change is supposedly irreversible. If it is, why would I subject my life to heavier taxation, more regulations, and rapid change of lifestyle because of that?

I live in the "too underwater" region. I am going underneath. Why would I want to be subjected to above mentioned, when its going to happen regardless of any changes?

The question anymore isn't if it's inevitable, the question is if it's going to be manageable, and how fast are we going to make it happen. The difference between uncomfortable seasons and 3 feet sea level with endless hurricanes, is pretty significant. And at any rate, the changes of the deal would benefit the environment regardless by reducing the necessity for harmful waste and finite sources of energy. Which is a change we absolutely need climate change or no. At our current rate of consumption, oil will be a rare or gone in the next 40-50 years, coal not long after.

So is the answer just wait and do nothing and eventually we slip into economic disaster and environmental disaster all at once? That seems like what you would prefer compared to a tax that most likely wouldn't be applied to you anyway.

Except you cannot determine how bad the climate is going to be. They've been saying coal was going to disappear decades ago, its still around. All these new regulations are just meant to tax and control people more. That's all. You're free to submit to these ideas, I won't. Especially when MNC's are the ones doing the most damages to our environment. Especially when its the elitists (such as Al Gore & Dicaprio) who are all for regulating the environment, yet make the most profit off "climate change" and continue to contribute heavily to so called climate issues they care about

Avatar image for evilross
#37 Posted by evilross (1975 posts) -

This was the best April Fools thread on Gamespot this year.

Avatar image for Damedius
#38 Posted by Damedius (551 posts) -

She is just a puppet. A group called the Justice Democrats found her while looking for people to run on their platform.

They did everything for her and there is no way she gets elected without them.

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#39 Posted by texasgoldrush (12801 posts) -

@Damedius said:

She is just a puppet. A group called the Justice Democrats found her while looking for people to run on their platform.

They did everything for her and there is no way she gets elected without them.

More conspiracy theories, further proving my point.

Avatar image for Damedius
#40 Posted by Damedius (551 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:
@Damedius said:

She is just a puppet. A group called the Justice Democrats found her while looking for people to run on their platform.

They did everything for her and there is no way she gets elected without them.

More conspiracy theories, further proving my point.

They put out a video A)Bragging out it and B)With AOC saying her bother sent in the nomination for her.

Avatar image for nintendoboy16
#41 Posted by nintendoboy16 (36059 posts) -

@Damedius said:

She is just a puppet. A group called the Justice Democrats found her while looking for people to run on their platform.

They did everything for her and there is no way she gets elected without them.

While I do agree that her association with the Justice Dems is a bit troubling (it was founded by Cenk Ugyur and Kyle Kulisnki, who are two of the most unlikeable people of the American Left). I actually think she's one of the better politicians in a while.

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#42 Posted by texasgoldrush (12801 posts) -

@Damedius said:
@texasgoldrush said:
@Damedius said:

She is just a puppet. A group called the Justice Democrats found her while looking for people to run on their platform.

They did everything for her and there is no way she gets elected without them.

More conspiracy theories, further proving my point.

They put out a video A)Bragging out it and B)With AOC saying her bother sent in the nomination for her.

She was recruited by a PAC. PACs do that. The GOP is no different.

Doesn't make her a puppet.

Avatar image for Damedius
#43 Edited by Damedius (551 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:
@Damedius said:
@texasgoldrush said:
@Damedius said:

She is just a puppet. A group called the Justice Democrats found her while looking for people to run on their platform.

They did everything for her and there is no way she gets elected without them.

More conspiracy theories, further proving my point.

They put out a video A)Bragging out it and B)With AOC saying her bother sent in the nomination for her.

She was recruited by a PAC. PACs do that. The GOP is no different.

Doesn't make her a puppet.

She repeats their talking points word for word. They script what she says and coach her. She is essentially an actress playing a part.

Avatar image for Damedius
#44 Posted by Damedius (551 posts) -

@nintendoboy16 said:
@Damedius said:

She is just a puppet. A group called the Justice Democrats found her while looking for people to run on their platform.

They did everything for her and there is no way she gets elected without them.

While I do agree that her association with the Justice Dems is a bit troubling (it was founded by Cenk Ugyur and Kyle Kulisnki, who are two of the most unlikeable people of the American Left). I actually think she's one of the better politicians in a while.

She has Charisma, I will give her that.

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#45 Posted by texasgoldrush (12801 posts) -

@Damedius said:
@texasgoldrush said:
@Damedius said:
@texasgoldrush said:
@Damedius said:

She is just a puppet. A group called the Justice Democrats found her while looking for people to run on their platform.

They did everything for her and there is no way she gets elected without them.

More conspiracy theories, further proving my point.

They put out a video A)Bragging out it and B)With AOC saying her bother sent in the nomination for her.

She was recruited by a PAC. PACs do that. The GOP is no different.

Doesn't make her a puppet.

She repeats their talking points word for word. They script what she says and coach her. She is essentially an actress playing a part.

Which this statement has no proof and you are peddling a right wing conspiracy theory.

Avatar image for Damedius
#46 Posted by Damedius (551 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

Which this statement has no proof and you are peddling a right wing conspiracy theory.

Watch videos of the Justice Democrats, then rewarch videos of AOC. You will see she regurgitates the same talking points.

You should change the title of the thread to "Justice Democrats aren't Dumb, they Got AOC elected."

Avatar image for Nuck81
#47 Posted by Nuck81 (7431 posts) -

Can't believe no one has mentioned how smoking hot she is.

Avatar image for sonicare
#48 Posted by sonicare (56647 posts) -

I think social media and its followers are dumb.

Avatar image for texasgoldrush
#49 Posted by texasgoldrush (12801 posts) -

@Damedius said:
@texasgoldrush said:

Which this statement has no proof and you are peddling a right wing conspiracy theory.

Watch videos of the Justice Democrats, then rewarch videos of AOC. You will see she regurgitates the same talking points.

You should change the title of the thread to "Justice Democrats aren't Dumb, they Got AOC elected."

Doesn't mean she is an actress. Once again, you prove my point.

Avatar image for Damedius
#50 Edited by Damedius (551 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:
@Damedius said:
@texasgoldrush said:

Which this statement has no proof and you are peddling a right wing conspiracy theory.

Watch videos of the Justice Democrats, then rewarch videos of AOC. You will see she regurgitates the same talking points.

You should change the title of the thread to "Justice Democrats aren't Dumb, they Got AOC elected."

Doesn't mean she is an actress. Once again, you prove my point.

The only point you have proven in this thread is that you are lovesick puppy that will defend his favorite waifu even if that means ignoring the truth that is smacking you over the head.

Who do you think came up with the Green New Deal that AOC sponsored?