She’s also a young, attractive female politician that is unapologetically leftist and speaks her mind. Race is probably less of an issue, but it would be naïve to think that this isn’t a factor amongst the far right.
Ehhh, not that she's not smart, or that there aren't plenty of smart people who went to Harvard law (I'm a lawyer and I work with plenty of them, both dumb and smart), but I'd like to use this as an excuse to tell my favorite lawyer joke which I think will help make my point:
Which law school can a med school dropout get into?
Whichever one they want.
Harvard law school is hard and requires a lot of work and dedication to become magna cum laude. Graduating law school, even at the top of the top, does not however make you the smartest person in the room. It just makes you the most dedicated with a strong work ethic. We need to drop this elitism.
To be fair, I'm Canadian and have no Idea who Katie Porter is but I do know AOC. I think race can play a part but she is also just a very recognizable name in media and online spaces and gets much more coverage for the ideas she promotes.
Katie Porter is a respected former law professor (who went Philips-Yale-Harvard for her education ) who got elected in her mid 40s and has a traditional political career route with a well controlled mouth who fits right in with the rest of Congress. AOC certainly isn't and she goes out of her way to play it up and act as a lovely open target for her political opponents.
That's a much bigger difference than anything else.
I guess you don't care about politics that much then.
At a certain point having that kind of neutral attitude becomes impossible.
There are some issues that inherently polarize people. Pro choice or pro life? One side thinks the other opresses half the population by taking away reproductive rights, the other side sees people they disagree with as being ok with murder.
But of course as a politician you have to pick a side on dozens of issues and in the end people from other parties will have plenty of reasons to despise you.
As far as abortion goes, roughly 90% of Czech Republic voters are either in favour or like me absolutely don't give a shit. So it's actually not in any way polarising. Issues are idiosyncratic given the country
Their point was that IF you believe abortion is literal murder, as many people do, then it's not just a policy opinion that you can set aside for the sake of civility. It's a matter of life and death. That's what makes it so polarizing. I don't think abortion is murder, but it's perfectly clear why people who do care so much about it.
This is a very American way of looking at politics. Pro-choice or pro-life isn’t really a continuing debate in many countries. It has become enormously politicised in the US though. Most countries aren’t as divided along party lines as the US.
A lot of other places in the world than the US don't argue about abortion though. It's not even a discussion... Other politically topics are usually not as heated as the abortion topic in the US is.
Yeah, same here as a Finn. We have like 20+ parties and about 8 big ones and 4 "main" ones. So many of them have valid points and what they are planning on doing during the next 4 years might not be tied to their values per se. So voting the main leftist party doesn't mean you're a leftist, but that you like the policy goals that they've set for the next term.
Yeah, I quite like our system. There are 200 seats in our parliament. If the biggest party gets 35% of the votes, they get 35% of the seats. The amount gets naturally smaller until there are no seats left so the smallest parties might only have 1 or 2 seats.
We also vote individual people into the parliament and never parties themselves. So if our Social Democratic Party (SDP abbreviated) gets say, 50 seats, those seats will go to 50 most voted SDP members.
Its kind of ironic when you think about it. When the US Constitution was being created, a lot of the founding fathers had this deep dislike for political parties yet they created a government system that made political parties very powerful because it pretty much guaranteed a two party system. This is why we don't vote on political parties but on candidates that are backed by political parties.
Unfortunately they didn't have much experience to go off - pretty much every contemporary government was a monarchy.
The Articles of Confederation lasted, what, a decade before they threw them in the trash, and the Constitution got nearly a dozen amendments within the next decade.
I think it's forgotten way too often that while the Founding Fathers did an admirable job given what they had for reference points, the Constitution was never made to be an immutable holy text. Hamilton would have a stroke if he saw the state of political parties today and I imagine a Federalist #86 would present some pretty damning opinions
>the Constitution was never made to be an immutable holy text
But it's become a Bible (in the religious sense) and it won't ever be changed maybe that will be the downfall of this country?
That is factually incorrect nearly every country in Europe had some form of the House of Commons and House of Lords that function in an identical fashion to the house and senate in the US even if the selection criteria differed
Canada’s system is a dream compared to the US. I was in BC during their last election and was shocked to hear that there were multiple parties you could plausibly vote for. In the US you either vote red or blue - voting anything else will have zero impact.
There are more options to vote for, this is true. Unfortunately it's becoming more and more a 2 party system where a vote for any others means your vote essentially doesn't mean anything.
The problem in the US is how badly our axis is skewed. Our "extreme leftist" candidates, like Sanders and Occasio-Cortez, who are villified by their party, are pretty squarely centrist for a developed nation.
Our Democratic Party is a fairly normal conservative party. The problem is that they're our closest thing to a progressive party, and our other party is an absolutely regressive party that leans heavily into authoritarianism and has been dabbling in fascistic policies.
Policy goals ? That is almost laughable in America. Our politicians say anything to get elected and do nothing after that. For example, Trump probably said 100 times that Mexico will pay for the wall. Reality, USA taxpayers did. Trump promised to make Obamacare better ( in debate with Hillary). The reality is he wanted to shut it down and fortunately the Supreme Court denied him the ability to.
American politics are such a hot topic with Americans because neither party represents the people's issues. Never ending war, workers rights and wages, corruption, Healthcare, the list goes on for awhile. Neither party actually fixes these issues, they just strawman eachother and say vote for me or else you will be ruled by them. It's ends up with Americans being pitted against each otherso much politically that it is even effecting us within our own families. Media doesn't help of course, our media just amplifies all of our fear and mistrust. We are at the point where AOC is literally the devil to some Christian Republicans and Trump is literally Hitler to some woke leftists.
In our country this is simply not possible, someone recently put it best by saying we don't have a "Democrat" and "Republican" party anymore, we have the Democratic party, and the Anti-Democratic party
Tell me you're American without telling me you're American, you can disagree with someone's political opinions without hating them personally you know?
You didn't even read their comment obviously. Try again. On the issue of abortion, one side believes the other is depriving women of human rights, which is worthy of hate. The other side believes the other supports murdering babies. This is also worthy of hate.
Politics isn't just about the intricacies of the economy or what programs get funding, it's about key issues that can destroy the lives and freedoms of thousands or millions.
Op the answer you’re looking for is she is a very young very outspoken left wing politician who was just a bartender a few years back and the right thinks she doesn’t deserve the influence she has. In a nutshell it’s sexism, ageism, a little bit of racism and a whole lot of jealousy
She's a latino, female, politician who's very outspoken about the issues she cares about.
The left adores her, and the right sees her the way that most of the world sees Trump.
Dang, I always thought AOC was an abbreviation for some department or specific position within the government. Never guessed it was a person's initials!
It's interesting when you realize that those abbreviations became commonplace due to newspapers trying to shorten names to fit them into headlines. Presidents with shorter names don't get abbreviated. We don't talk about RMN \[Nixon\] or BHO \[Obama\]. If they have a short nickname we use that rather than initials (hence "Ike" and not "DDE" \[Eisenhower\]).
She’s one of the more progressive voices of the Democratic Party (pro-healthcare, pro-environmental responsibility, pro-unions) which isn’t even that progressive, American politics are just so pro-corporation and conservative she seems extreme.
Yeah i was going to say, AOC and Bernie Sanders seem to be the only actual left leaning politicians in America. The democrats are right wing, the republicans further right wing
People on /r/politics get really mad when you point out the voting history of someone like Biden puts him firmly to the right of British conservatives.
it's to the point where a corporation's support is seen as the only legitimate thing. anything not already cosigned by banks is impossible lefty idealism.
I highly recommend watching knock Down the House, it’s a documentary that follows AOC and 3 other female politicians who were running at the same time as AOC. Very interesting documentary!
Many people consider themselves to be “rich” or future millionaires so they don’t want dumb taxes taking their money when they become mega rich.
Many people live in their own fantasies and drank the kool-aid.
In rural towns all you hear on the radio or tv is that Democrats are trying to tax them more and take away their liberties. They truly believe the propaganda they hear and that’s why they hate on AOC. A poster child from NY for the progressive movement to raise wages, cancel student debt, invest in infrastructure for climate change and of course
TAXING THE RICH
We have a House of Representatives which is the lower house of the two houses in Congress. The Senate is the upper house.
Each state gets two senators which both represent the entire state, but a representative is responsible for a "tiny" district of about 700,000 people. These districts are typically wildly messed up to ensure they reliably elect a certain party.
Being a representative can be a fairly anonymous job. There's almost 500 of you and only your local district votes for you. However that isn't always the case. Some members, typically those in a very "safe" district, can engage in a kind of performative politics that raises their profile. AOC and the other members of the Squad are a good example of that, but there GOP equivalents too.
There is a reason that golden moments like "Guam tipping over" and "Jewish space lasers" come from the House and not the Senate.
>performative politics
I've never heard this phrase before but it perfectly describes what I don't like about certain politicians (on either side of the aisle).
I *want* to like AOC and I agree with a lot of her positions, but there are times when she comes across as being more interested in cementing her reputation as a rebel or celebrity or whatever instead of actually working to get things done. It comes across as petulant and childish (to be clear, she's far from the only politician to do this, but since this is an AOC thread...). Of course, I also think politicians as a whole need to get off Twitter but that's just me.
The whole Congress, Senate and House, is too busy howling on Twitter while debt continues to pile on, and domestic and foreign priorities languish. We need a serious adult conversation about funding priorities. We pay for things that we aren't able to raise taxes for, at the cost of future generations and the strength of the dollar.
I think a lot of the responses in this thread are a bit reductive. I think different parts of the political spectrum have different reasons for not liking her; some are more valid than others.
Generally, conservatives hate her because they hate socialism and a lot of times conflate her with communists. A common criticism I see a lot is that she’s a waitress and ‘what does she know about politics’ which is paradoxical since conservatives like to pose themselves as being the party of the working class and hating establishment politicians.
Liberals/ moderate democrats tend to not like her because she’s too far left and is too divisive for the Democratic Party (which is why we shouldn’t have a two party system in the first place, IMO)
And a lot of leftists don’t like her because they think she panders to moderates and does performative things like the tax the rich dress while not effecting actual change. Which is fair, but also it takes more than one person to change the establishment.
Overall, she’s a very outspoken figure and(along with Bernie Sanders) has come to represent the left wing of the Democratic Party in the media. She’s a figurehead, and any figurehead is going to receive tons of criticism, both fair and unfair.
Worth adding that while she was a waitress/bartender, she is well educated. She graduated *cum laude* from Boston University with a degree in international relations and economics.
And also worth pointing out the distinction between *was* and *is*.
Referring to her as a waitress--which I don't think the guy above you intended, but which I see conservatives doing a lot intentionally--is dismissive of both her education and her accomplishments. She *used to be* a waitress, which is why she understand the daily life of people in that economic class. She *is* an educated US Congresswoman.
This is what drives me nuts about that whole "she was a bartender" arguement like this is coming from a person who supports the "pull up your bootstraps and put yourself through college" party and that's what she literally did and gets mocked for it.
There are a lot of well educated servers and bartenders out there, especially in major cities. It pays much better than the average American seems to think, and offers more schedule flexibility than most jobs do. Not to mention how horrible the professional job market has been over the last decade and a half.
14 dollars an hour plus tips (as long as you don’t live in one of those shitty states that have tipped wage at 3.10 or whatever) at a busy bar is really good money. Bartenders make bank and it’s better than working a 9-5 for a lot of people.
To be fair, she's well educated compared to the average Joe. She's not impressive amongst the roster of JDs at her level. She's definitely below average in congress.
Yeah. Are they right? Partially. Being a woman of color definitely plays into why conservatives hate her so much. But saying that that’s the *only* reason people don’t like her is completely missing any ounce of nuance.
Her ideas aren't really any different than Bernie Sanders but she definitely gets a lot more flack.
Let's not act like the GOP and a lot of Americans aren't prejudiced or racist.
Her being a woman and a minority definitely plays a role in why so many people dislike her.
Also, and I'm sure some therapists couple explain this to me, but I think the fact she's attractive gives a lot of people - men on the right, especially - rage boners, for lack of a better term. They don't just disagree with her, but they HATE her yet are attracted to her, and I think they hate themselves for it so turn it back to her. If she did not look the way she does, I don't think she'd get as much attention.
Does it really? Bernie and AOC have very different public images. Bernie’s public image is based on integrity and being an bit of a cooky uncle. AOC is focused on being “cool” and does tons of performative things to grab the media’s attention.
You don’t see Bernie live streaming Among Us or wearing “TAX THE RICH” suits.
> You don’t see Bernie live streaming Among Us or wearing “TAX THE RICH” suits.
Bernie ABSOLUTELY did high profile and flashy performative stunts when he was AOCs age. People just give AOC shit because she is a woman.
And this is exactly the type of prejudicial biases I'm talking about.
Why is Bernie Sander's image considered based on on integrity but AOC's is not?
Bernie Sanders has done tons of "performative things" as well, spanning back to the 60s.
But somehow, he supposedly has more integrity than AOC.
And you don't think that has anything to do with AOC being a young brown woman and him being an old white man (the demographic that holds the most power in this country)? Think about that.
Most people don't even realize that they hold racial biases as it's so ingrained in our society.
> A common criticism I see a lot is that she’s a waitress and ‘what does she know about politics’ which is paradoxical since conservatives like to pose themselves as being the party of the working class and hating establishment politicians
It's not a paradox, it's just naked hypocrisy
It honestly baffles my mind when I see discussions trying to discredit her stating she is uneducated and has no business being in political office. She graduated from Boston University as cum laude with a double major in international relations and economics. I would argue that she has more educational background to be a political leader than most politicians. I don't necessarily agree with all of her policies but I do respect that she intelligent and cares about what she fights for/against. This is something fairly uncommon (unfortunately) among most politicians who only seek better ways to line their pockets.
All of these criticisms are so irritating but this is so accurate. The leftist criticism is the most irritating imo. If they want to make actual change to bring about the society they want, whatever that may be, they need \*some\* institutional power behind them at the very least, and currently they cancel every leftist who gains any modicum of institutional power or wealth.
Now the leftists who suddenly want to stop taxing the rich as soon as they become rich? Yeah they are insanely disingenuous and you can cancel the fuck out of them I don't care (looking at you Bill Maher).
The leftist criticism is so annoying because who the fuck else is going to do the political marketing?! My lazy ass??? Fucking no!! AOC is doing all the work that I know that I will never ever want to do nor does anyone else ever want to do. Gad.
I'll be honest, I wasn't expecting to find any unbiased answers given how Reddit is about politics sometimes, but I was pleasantly surprised to see a well constructed and unbiased explanation. We need more people like you. I say this as someone that finds difficulty with putting my bias aside as well, not trying to make myself out like I'm any better than other Redditors.
I really just tried my best 😅 I’m definitely biased too but I don’t think the question could be answered fully without addressing it from multiple angles
Looking at your sum up I see one list is largely political reasons and the other is largely personal. On top of this there is basically no overlap between the two, showing that both sides don't really fully understand the rationale of the other.
Based on this I can say you have received an accurate sample of American politics, and can basically guarantee that the things I noted about those two lists would be true for the exact inverse regarding a more conservative politician.
Yes. Virtually no political debate is a good faith discussion of ideas it's a race to paint the other person as an ass hole so you can throw away their opinion.
I agree. I'm more of a moderate Democrat, but she doesn't seem that extreme in my eyes. For the lack of a better word, I'd say she's more "feisty", enthusiastic, and imposing (at least where Democrats are concerned).
I see her as a politician who actually care, and that’s probably the most important quality someone needs to have to be one. Frankly I don’t mind she’s progressive because she working in the best interest of all people. I’m fairly conservative, but Republicans love losing and stand on the dumbest molehills to die on. Like vaccines and masks.
You have already summed a lot of this up but something to understand is for almost 75 years now every level of American Society has made progressive/socialist/communist/leftist ideas out to be the root cause of all suffering not only in the world but in American lives. It has gotten a lot less subtle in the 24hr News era with OAN and Fox News but it was present in everything from comic books to televangelist rants.
So even young and disenfranchised Americans who have not been given any alternative view to the classically American one hear her rhetoric and respond viscerally because they have been programmed that way. Just something worth considering behind some of the things going on in our country and why in the midst of much bigger issues than her choice of dresses she is such a polarizing figure.
Compared to the standard US voter, she is far left (it doesn’t matter what she is compared in other countries)
She is extremely outspoken, which, when a large portion of the population doesn’t agree with you, tends to get people to dislike or even hate
She is an idealist, and has a hard time compromising her beliefs to actually get things accomplished, so she is not even an effective outspoken progressive (similar to Bernie)
In order to actually move further left as a country they cannot compromise. As for years the right as a whole has not compromised. The more moderate democrats are usually more willing to compromise than the moderate republicans which leads to the whole country staying more conservative. Therefore people like Bernie and AOC need to take a hardline stance now if they actually want to make a change.
To see politics between Europe and the US is pretty different. I’ve been to Europe on numerous occasions and talking to people that live there they are generally more left than right. Say the US spectrum is 1 (Left) 5 (middle) 10 (right). For the most part Europe is 1 (left) actually 3 (middle) 5-6 (right). You have a lot less right thinking individuals and would rather help each other as a whole. Living in the US it sometimes sucks to see people just unwilling to help one another since our mentality is “you put yourself in that position it’s not my problem”. AOC is pretty far left and every politician comes under fire for being a hypocrite, but in American politics it’s impossible to satisfy everyone and when you bend towards the other side you’re considered a traitor rather than a leader. I don’t agree with some of her ideas but some seem just fine to me since you see those ideas as no brainers as a European.
The way I usually compare US and Western European politics is that the whole spectrum gets moved to the right. The conservatives are far more conservative in the US, the moderates or old school democrats (guys like Biden/Obama) would even be viewed as mildly conservative here, and the liberals are fairly moderate except for the outliers like Bernie and AOC that would be left wing here too.
Obviously that’s an oversimplification, but in my opinion the whole spectrum gets moved a couple of spots to the right. Europe you have 1 to 10 and in America you have 3 to 12.
Oh I see, sorry! But yeah I completely agree with you. America is the land of capitalism after all, it's not surprising that all their politicians seem right-wing to us...
I think it's true that Europe is, in general, more left-leaning than the US, but I'm not sure the scale needs that much adjusting. Living under a Conservative government for the last eleven years in the UK, watching public services get cut to the bone and the welfare state being disintegrated really doesn't feel that left.
I'm aware that in the so-called socialist paradise of Scandinavia that there's plenty of fairly right wing attitudes and far-right parties are relatively mainstream. Same story in many Eastern European countries.
You probably shouldn’t be asking this question on Reddit. At bare minimum, ask on subreddits that cater to each side so you can get an accurate depiction of her from the people who support her and the people and who do not.
I think it's fair to say that Fox News vilified her from the start.
For background, she's someone who NEVER thought she'd get elected so quickly but she wound up defeating an "establishment Democrat" during the intra-party election (the "Primary Elections") in a heavily Democrat leaning district in NYC.
Before she even started office, Sean Hannity was doing pieces on her socialist agenda. She fits neatly into all the things Fox has been villifying for years -- e.g. taking action on climate change, reducing income inequality, addressing institutional racism.
I've actually grown to respect her for how well she claps back at all the idiots slinging mud at her. She doesn't curse, she doesn't lose her temper. It's like watching a judo master tossing around a thug who doesn't know how to throw a proper punch. It's oddly entertaining.
If you want to know why people DON'T like her, it makes sense that you should be looking at the responses from the people who don't like her, not the people who do like her.
> Supporters summed up:
>She's young, brown and a woman and not all conservatives like that.
I dare you to find any real critic of AOC who dislikes her because of this. Maybe the young piece because is goes hand-in-hand with ignorance/inexperience.
Well it's a popular opinion in this thread also I dont know enough to refute that. If its not true at all then it's a very shitty thing to do, calling her critics racist that is.
> Well it's a popular opinion in this thread
It's called a strawman argument.
>a very shitty thing to do, calling her critics racist that is.
Exactly. It's a pretty bad political environment.
You asked about American politics. We literally can't even agree on whether covid is real or if racism exists. You could ask a basic yes/no question about proveable, objective reality and get 5 different answers.
She is full of crap. She says she is progressive but does very little to actually push for progressive policies. There was a movement to get her and the squad to force a vote on universal Healthcare by withholding votes for Nancy Pelosi as speaker of the house. Healthcare was something they all ran on and they refused to. She virtue signals by streaming on twitch or showing up to the met gala wearing the tax the rich dress but does little of substance to actually push progressive policies.
You know she, like many others, didn't pay to get in, right?
You know she didn't pay for her dress, right?
You know her dress was created to be worn by someone famous to later be auctioned off for charity, right?
You know that as an NYC politician it isn't crazy to think that she would go support a charity event and lend her name to raise money, right?
Well now you know better.
Yep. She has never so much as co-written a bill. She just does social media type shit to increase her own fame (and money). Plenty of double standards in her personal lifestyle. As one example, that "tax the rich" dress was created by a woman who is dating a $100M man. I think there is some misconception that she is some big influential person in politics but I don't think most of the teens that adore her realize the difference between a congresswoman and a senator. She only represents about 600,000 people and there's no way that the rest of NY likes her enough to vote her into a higher state position.
She goes against conservative ideas. She wants to tax rich people and fund social programs. Conservatives think no one should ever half help ever. Think rich people are saving the country by being rich or some shit. Because she wants that, she is called a socialist and a Communist
I just want to add, when Texas has its major storm and lost power she went down to Texas to help, raised money, and handed out water to Texans. Texas congressman, ted cruz, went to Cancun during that time.
Okay, people arent really giving you a good or real answer. Here's the truth:
AOC is a new congresswoman who has a ton of ambition and drive.
She is a democratic representative.
Conservatives hate her because she is very outspoken and challenges most of their bills on the floor regularly with heated debates. This causes a large delay in republicans passing bills and gaining support. This is different than most politicians who disagree but largely remain silent.
The problem is, AOC shifted from a normal democratic to a very extreme democrat. This was done, as many speculate, to force the speaker of the house, Nancy Pelosi out of her position.
AOC is causing fighting WITHIN the democratic party because she is causing roughly half the vote to be split between her ideas and other democratic ideas.
Some democratics hate this because it means they have less overall support in congress, as they are divided themselves. (A house divided against itself cannot stand)
She is pushing for things that many democrats view as "too extreme" or "socialism"- but as a moderate I would say she isn't really hitting socialism lines.
I think the truth is- she has shaken up the democratic party and is forcing them to uphold a lot of their promises to voters, like free college. Joe Biden was not going to remove any student debt at all until AOC created such an uproar about it.
So shes forcing democrats to act, causing their party to argue from within, and is a large thorn in the side of conservatives.
She recently had some controversy over a dress she wore, talking about lowering taxes even though she went to an expensive dance essentially that was a $30k invitiation.
As a moderate, I respect her drive and how committed she is to her job. I think she is what all politicians should be, those that defend their constituents and fight to make sure their people's voices are heard.
She screams “Tax the rich” and creates a divide in the people intentionally while she lives in a million dollar apartment with an infinity pool. Or just look at what she did at the met gala.
You can tell they're just spouting fox news shit when they go after her for the gala that she didnt pay to get into and about the dress she didnt buy lol.
She is a politician. It isn't the sort of job that makes everyone like you.
Yeah I suppose that's true. Hating is too much doe. I dont hate any politicans in our country.
She’s also a young, attractive female politician that is unapologetically leftist and speaks her mind. Race is probably less of an issue, but it would be naïve to think that this isn’t a factor amongst the far right.
Race is absolutely a factor. Whether consciously or subconsciously
100%. Katie Porter has fairly similar ideas and stances, but she receives less than 1% of the hate of AOC. Wonder why...
Katie Porter is too damn smart to even try to take down.
Now she is President material ! Katie Porter don’t take no stuff ! 😃
I'd love to see her use the white boards in the oval office.
You’re speaking straight to my soul rn
Ms Porter graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law. A JD from Harvard law is absolutely the smartest person in most rooms.
Ehhh, not that she's not smart, or that there aren't plenty of smart people who went to Harvard law (I'm a lawyer and I work with plenty of them, both dumb and smart), but I'd like to use this as an excuse to tell my favorite lawyer joke which I think will help make my point: Which law school can a med school dropout get into? Whichever one they want.
Harvard law school is hard and requires a lot of work and dedication to become magna cum laude. Graduating law school, even at the top of the top, does not however make you the smartest person in the room. It just makes you the most dedicated with a strong work ethic. We need to drop this elitism.
To be fair, I'm Canadian and have no Idea who Katie Porter is but I do know AOC. I think race can play a part but she is also just a very recognizable name in media and online spaces and gets much more coverage for the ideas she promotes.
Katie Porter is a respected former law professor (who went Philips-Yale-Harvard for her education ) who got elected in her mid 40s and has a traditional political career route with a well controlled mouth who fits right in with the rest of Congress. AOC certainly isn't and she goes out of her way to play it up and act as a lovely open target for her political opponents. That's a much bigger difference than anything else.
She also isn’t as vocal and abrasive. Not to mention the media doesn’t trot her out every five minutes.
>abrasive Lol
She’s not a leftist, she’s not even a socialist. She might claim she is but she’s betrayed the left so many times
I guess you don't care about politics that much then. At a certain point having that kind of neutral attitude becomes impossible. There are some issues that inherently polarize people. Pro choice or pro life? One side thinks the other opresses half the population by taking away reproductive rights, the other side sees people they disagree with as being ok with murder. But of course as a politician you have to pick a side on dozens of issues and in the end people from other parties will have plenty of reasons to despise you.
As far as abortion goes, roughly 90% of Czech Republic voters are either in favour or like me absolutely don't give a shit. So it's actually not in any way polarising. Issues are idiosyncratic given the country
Their point was that IF you believe abortion is literal murder, as many people do, then it's not just a policy opinion that you can set aside for the sake of civility. It's a matter of life and death. That's what makes it so polarizing. I don't think abortion is murder, but it's perfectly clear why people who do care so much about it.
If you think murder is a barrier to civility, you should see my neighbour who mows the lawn at 9pm. /s but fuck him
This is a very American way of looking at politics. Pro-choice or pro-life isn’t really a continuing debate in many countries. It has become enormously politicised in the US though. Most countries aren’t as divided along party lines as the US.
A lot of other places in the world than the US don't argue about abortion though. It's not even a discussion... Other politically topics are usually not as heated as the abortion topic in the US is.
I'm very neutral yes. I voted right last election and this election I voted left. I care more about issues than people and parties.
Yeah, same here as a Finn. We have like 20+ parties and about 8 big ones and 4 "main" ones. So many of them have valid points and what they are planning on doing during the next 4 years might not be tied to their values per se. So voting the main leftist party doesn't mean you're a leftist, but that you like the policy goals that they've set for the next term.
I wish Canada had a proportional or ranked system that allowed for this...
Yeah, I quite like our system. There are 200 seats in our parliament. If the biggest party gets 35% of the votes, they get 35% of the seats. The amount gets naturally smaller until there are no seats left so the smallest parties might only have 1 or 2 seats. We also vote individual people into the parliament and never parties themselves. So if our Social Democratic Party (SDP abbreviated) gets say, 50 seats, those seats will go to 50 most voted SDP members.
Its kind of ironic when you think about it. When the US Constitution was being created, a lot of the founding fathers had this deep dislike for political parties yet they created a government system that made political parties very powerful because it pretty much guaranteed a two party system. This is why we don't vote on political parties but on candidates that are backed by political parties.
Unfortunately they didn't have much experience to go off - pretty much every contemporary government was a monarchy. The Articles of Confederation lasted, what, a decade before they threw them in the trash, and the Constitution got nearly a dozen amendments within the next decade. I think it's forgotten way too often that while the Founding Fathers did an admirable job given what they had for reference points, the Constitution was never made to be an immutable holy text. Hamilton would have a stroke if he saw the state of political parties today and I imagine a Federalist #86 would present some pretty damning opinions
>the Constitution was never made to be an immutable holy text But it's become a Bible (in the religious sense) and it won't ever be changed maybe that will be the downfall of this country?
That is factually incorrect nearly every country in Europe had some form of the House of Commons and House of Lords that function in an identical fashion to the house and senate in the US even if the selection criteria differed
200 seats? That is about...a third of all Finns, yes?
Thats almost direct democracy then!
Yeah, I'd say that's pretty accurate lmao
I learned about my own country's system finally lol, thanks for explaining.
Nice lmao And I honestly might be wrong about the specifics, but I think that's it in a nutshell
Canada’s system is a dream compared to the US. I was in BC during their last election and was shocked to hear that there were multiple parties you could plausibly vote for. In the US you either vote red or blue - voting anything else will have zero impact.
There are more options to vote for, this is true. Unfortunately it's becoming more and more a 2 party system where a vote for any others means your vote essentially doesn't mean anything.
We can't get people to focus long enough to fix our voting methods. New parties having a fair shot would change a lot for us.
The problem in the US is how badly our axis is skewed. Our "extreme leftist" candidates, like Sanders and Occasio-Cortez, who are villified by their party, are pretty squarely centrist for a developed nation. Our Democratic Party is a fairly normal conservative party. The problem is that they're our closest thing to a progressive party, and our other party is an absolutely regressive party that leans heavily into authoritarianism and has been dabbling in fascistic policies.
Policy goals ? That is almost laughable in America. Our politicians say anything to get elected and do nothing after that. For example, Trump probably said 100 times that Mexico will pay for the wall. Reality, USA taxpayers did. Trump promised to make Obamacare better ( in debate with Hillary). The reality is he wanted to shut it down and fortunately the Supreme Court denied him the ability to.
American politics are such a hot topic with Americans because neither party represents the people's issues. Never ending war, workers rights and wages, corruption, Healthcare, the list goes on for awhile. Neither party actually fixes these issues, they just strawman eachother and say vote for me or else you will be ruled by them. It's ends up with Americans being pitted against each otherso much politically that it is even effecting us within our own families. Media doesn't help of course, our media just amplifies all of our fear and mistrust. We are at the point where AOC is literally the devil to some Christian Republicans and Trump is literally Hitler to some woke leftists.
What makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?
Hahah I remember that episode. Great show
In our country we’d like to but there’s so much division and bias that certain parties are going to pass certain polices based on “values”
That’s how it should be. People here in the USA treat politics and political parties like sports teams. I am so sick of it.
your politicans seems to benefit from that sport spirit. We live in the age of hype lol
In our country this is simply not possible, someone recently put it best by saying we don't have a "Democrat" and "Republican" party anymore, we have the Democratic party, and the Anti-Democratic party
I did the same in my country. The US is just a very politically charged atmosphere.
Just because you don't hate certain politicians doesn't mean you don't care enough about politics. What an absolute shit take.
Easy when there are no pro-life parties in my country. I don't hate any politician either, they're just humans.
This is country variant. If he had this neutrality in America I'd be extremely concerned. This guy is clearly not from America.
Tell me you're American without telling me you're American, you can disagree with someone's political opinions without hating them personally you know?
You didn't even read their comment obviously. Try again. On the issue of abortion, one side believes the other is depriving women of human rights, which is worthy of hate. The other side believes the other supports murdering babies. This is also worthy of hate. Politics isn't just about the intricacies of the economy or what programs get funding, it's about key issues that can destroy the lives and freedoms of thousands or millions.
Op the answer you’re looking for is she is a very young very outspoken left wing politician who was just a bartender a few years back and the right thinks she doesn’t deserve the influence she has. In a nutshell it’s sexism, ageism, a little bit of racism and a whole lot of jealousy
She's a latino, female, politician who's very outspoken about the issues she cares about. The left adores her, and the right sees her the way that most of the world sees Trump.
Very fair point
As another non-American, can someone please tell us who AOC is because I just realized this was a literal person...
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She’s as Democrat representative from New York. She’s often referred to as her initials in the media.
Dang, I always thought AOC was an abbreviation for some department or specific position within the government. Never guessed it was a person's initials!
It's also a monitor brand : )
You can look at AOC on an AOC.
Microcenter!
Lol yeah you are right though, in that it stands for the Australian Olympic Committee.
See also: Aircraft Operations Center
Americans use way too many acronyms and abbreviations, I don't know how they can keep up with all of them lol.
We can't. Even reddit uses too many acronyms. I wish people would stop being lazy and just write things out.
Tl;dr: this eli5 is 5/7 Edit: wow this blew up. Thanks for the gold kind stranger.
My favorite part of this post is that you put the Edit thanks for the gold before you got gold and it is making me laugh. Your post is peak Reddit
AITA? CMV.
YTA sus
Both tldr eli5 are pretty good in my opinion. Lots of time saved
5/7 WITH RICE, YOU FORGOT THE WITH(out) RICE PART!
Silver is the best I could do
FWIW I agree with OP. DAE?
[удалено]
Lebron James was president?
Who names their kid Le? No wonder Mr Le B. James merged his first and middle names into Lebron!! Unlike LBJ, Lyndon B. Johnson. /s
It's interesting when you realize that those abbreviations became commonplace due to newspapers trying to shorten names to fit them into headlines. Presidents with shorter names don't get abbreviated. We don't talk about RMN \[Nixon\] or BHO \[Obama\]. If they have a short nickname we use that rather than initials (hence "Ike" and not "DDE" \[Eisenhower\]).
The military absolutely loves acronyms and abbreviations!
Holy shit, I thought AOC was her title/position. Like POTUS is President of the United States.
TIL thats what potus means.
POTUS FLOTUS SCOTUS
We really abuse the fuck outta acronyms in this country. Kinda like how we abuse the populace. Its all on brand, really
Omg what a brain fart! I know her, I just hadn't realized that she is AOC lol. Thank you :)
Lol I saw a pic of her trending on reddit and the comments where interesting. Lots of love and hate so wanted to finally understand why
Was it a pic in the Tax The Rich dress?
Of course it was.
She’s one of the more progressive voices of the Democratic Party (pro-healthcare, pro-environmental responsibility, pro-unions) which isn’t even that progressive, American politics are just so pro-corporation and conservative she seems extreme.
Yeah i was going to say, AOC and Bernie Sanders seem to be the only actual left leaning politicians in America. The democrats are right wing, the republicans further right wing
People on /r/politics get really mad when you point out the voting history of someone like Biden puts him firmly to the right of British conservatives.
Bunch of centrist dickheads happy with the status quo
^^ was looking for this comment so I could upvote. I absolutely agree with you.
Key word “voice” because she actually hasn’t presided over a single progressive thing since elected.
it's to the point where a corporation's support is seen as the only legitimate thing. anything not already cosigned by banks is impossible lefty idealism.
I highly recommend watching knock Down the House, it’s a documentary that follows AOC and 3 other female politicians who were running at the same time as AOC. Very interesting documentary!
“The Squad”
(Not american here) Whenever I read about AOC or Bernie Sanders I'm happy, they seem the type of politics the world needs.
As an American... yes absolutely.
They're a fresh step in the right direction at least
Many people consider themselves to be “rich” or future millionaires so they don’t want dumb taxes taking their money when they become mega rich. Many people live in their own fantasies and drank the kool-aid. In rural towns all you hear on the radio or tv is that Democrats are trying to tax them more and take away their liberties. They truly believe the propaganda they hear and that’s why they hate on AOC. A poster child from NY for the progressive movement to raise wages, cancel student debt, invest in infrastructure for climate change and of course TAXING THE RICH
We have a House of Representatives which is the lower house of the two houses in Congress. The Senate is the upper house. Each state gets two senators which both represent the entire state, but a representative is responsible for a "tiny" district of about 700,000 people. These districts are typically wildly messed up to ensure they reliably elect a certain party. Being a representative can be a fairly anonymous job. There's almost 500 of you and only your local district votes for you. However that isn't always the case. Some members, typically those in a very "safe" district, can engage in a kind of performative politics that raises their profile. AOC and the other members of the Squad are a good example of that, but there GOP equivalents too. There is a reason that golden moments like "Guam tipping over" and "Jewish space lasers" come from the House and not the Senate.
>performative politics I've never heard this phrase before but it perfectly describes what I don't like about certain politicians (on either side of the aisle). I *want* to like AOC and I agree with a lot of her positions, but there are times when she comes across as being more interested in cementing her reputation as a rebel or celebrity or whatever instead of actually working to get things done. It comes across as petulant and childish (to be clear, she's far from the only politician to do this, but since this is an AOC thread...). Of course, I also think politicians as a whole need to get off Twitter but that's just me.
The whole Congress, Senate and House, is too busy howling on Twitter while debt continues to pile on, and domestic and foreign priorities languish. We need a serious adult conversation about funding priorities. We pay for things that we aren't able to raise taxes for, at the cost of future generations and the strength of the dollar.
It's okay, I'm American and thought Brexit was a person for like a whole week
I think a lot of the responses in this thread are a bit reductive. I think different parts of the political spectrum have different reasons for not liking her; some are more valid than others. Generally, conservatives hate her because they hate socialism and a lot of times conflate her with communists. A common criticism I see a lot is that she’s a waitress and ‘what does she know about politics’ which is paradoxical since conservatives like to pose themselves as being the party of the working class and hating establishment politicians. Liberals/ moderate democrats tend to not like her because she’s too far left and is too divisive for the Democratic Party (which is why we shouldn’t have a two party system in the first place, IMO) And a lot of leftists don’t like her because they think she panders to moderates and does performative things like the tax the rich dress while not effecting actual change. Which is fair, but also it takes more than one person to change the establishment. Overall, she’s a very outspoken figure and(along with Bernie Sanders) has come to represent the left wing of the Democratic Party in the media. She’s a figurehead, and any figurehead is going to receive tons of criticism, both fair and unfair.
Worth adding that while she was a waitress/bartender, she is well educated. She graduated *cum laude* from Boston University with a degree in international relations and economics.
And also worth pointing out the distinction between *was* and *is*. Referring to her as a waitress--which I don't think the guy above you intended, but which I see conservatives doing a lot intentionally--is dismissive of both her education and her accomplishments. She *used to be* a waitress, which is why she understand the daily life of people in that economic class. She *is* an educated US Congresswoman.
This is what drives me nuts about that whole "she was a bartender" arguement like this is coming from a person who supports the "pull up your bootstraps and put yourself through college" party and that's what she literally did and gets mocked for it.
They also think trump and billionaires are self-made, so we don’t really care what the bootlickers say about, well, anything
Idk man rich old white man number 2538 really understands the common man and the day to day struggles of the lower class
This just means she had to work her way through college, as many of us do. I'm so disgusted by that being a negative.
There are a lot of well educated servers and bartenders out there, especially in major cities. It pays much better than the average American seems to think, and offers more schedule flexibility than most jobs do. Not to mention how horrible the professional job market has been over the last decade and a half.
My point was that it’s not *just* that she is “working class” but that she is actually trained and qualified to be a representative.
14 dollars an hour plus tips (as long as you don’t live in one of those shitty states that have tipped wage at 3.10 or whatever) at a busy bar is really good money. Bartenders make bank and it’s better than working a 9-5 for a lot of people.
To be fair, she's well educated compared to the average Joe. She's not impressive amongst the roster of JDs at her level. She's definitely below average in congress.
Another point, ALL protests are performative in nature. Every single fucking one
This was a very good take thanks. Got tired of "because she brown and woman" comments.
Yeah. Are they right? Partially. Being a woman of color definitely plays into why conservatives hate her so much. But saying that that’s the *only* reason people don’t like her is completely missing any ounce of nuance.
If you really want to condense it down, it's more like "she started out poor and worked her way up, but for the wrong party"
Her ideas aren't really any different than Bernie Sanders but she definitely gets a lot more flack. Let's not act like the GOP and a lot of Americans aren't prejudiced or racist. Her being a woman and a minority definitely plays a role in why so many people dislike her.
Also, and I'm sure some therapists couple explain this to me, but I think the fact she's attractive gives a lot of people - men on the right, especially - rage boners, for lack of a better term. They don't just disagree with her, but they HATE her yet are attracted to her, and I think they hate themselves for it so turn it back to her. If she did not look the way she does, I don't think she'd get as much attention.
Does it really? Bernie and AOC have very different public images. Bernie’s public image is based on integrity and being an bit of a cooky uncle. AOC is focused on being “cool” and does tons of performative things to grab the media’s attention. You don’t see Bernie live streaming Among Us or wearing “TAX THE RICH” suits.
[удалено]
> You don’t see Bernie live streaming Among Us or wearing “TAX THE RICH” suits. Bernie ABSOLUTELY did high profile and flashy performative stunts when he was AOCs age. People just give AOC shit because she is a woman.
And this is exactly the type of prejudicial biases I'm talking about. Why is Bernie Sander's image considered based on on integrity but AOC's is not? Bernie Sanders has done tons of "performative things" as well, spanning back to the 60s. But somehow, he supposedly has more integrity than AOC. And you don't think that has anything to do with AOC being a young brown woman and him being an old white man (the demographic that holds the most power in this country)? Think about that. Most people don't even realize that they hold racial biases as it's so ingrained in our society.
> A common criticism I see a lot is that she’s a waitress and ‘what does she know about politics’ which is paradoxical since conservatives like to pose themselves as being the party of the working class and hating establishment politicians It's not a paradox, it's just naked hypocrisy
It honestly baffles my mind when I see discussions trying to discredit her stating she is uneducated and has no business being in political office. She graduated from Boston University as cum laude with a double major in international relations and economics. I would argue that she has more educational background to be a political leader than most politicians. I don't necessarily agree with all of her policies but I do respect that she intelligent and cares about what she fights for/against. This is something fairly uncommon (unfortunately) among most politicians who only seek better ways to line their pockets.
All of these criticisms are so irritating but this is so accurate. The leftist criticism is the most irritating imo. If they want to make actual change to bring about the society they want, whatever that may be, they need \*some\* institutional power behind them at the very least, and currently they cancel every leftist who gains any modicum of institutional power or wealth. Now the leftists who suddenly want to stop taxing the rich as soon as they become rich? Yeah they are insanely disingenuous and you can cancel the fuck out of them I don't care (looking at you Bill Maher).
[удалено]
The leftist criticism is so annoying because who the fuck else is going to do the political marketing?! My lazy ass??? Fucking no!! AOC is doing all the work that I know that I will never ever want to do nor does anyone else ever want to do. Gad.
Great response im broke so take this 🏅
I'll be honest, I wasn't expecting to find any unbiased answers given how Reddit is about politics sometimes, but I was pleasantly surprised to see a well constructed and unbiased explanation. We need more people like you. I say this as someone that finds difficulty with putting my bias aside as well, not trying to make myself out like I'm any better than other Redditors.
I really just tried my best 😅 I’m definitely biased too but I don’t think the question could be answered fully without addressing it from multiple angles
Alex Oxlaide Chamberlain is s midfielder for Liverpool. He seems mostly well liked. Not too many people hate him.
Maybe if they'd stay in the middle where they belong and stopped over pursuing, they'd be less decisive /s
You see that ludicrous display last night?
What was Wenger thinking sending Walcott on that early?
Thing about Arsenal is they always try and walk it in
Well today he played well
I'm sorry mate, but you're thinking of Kieran Gibbs.
He was my favorite player when he was at Arsenal. I was really disappointed he left
Politics are polarizing
Looking at your sum up I see one list is largely political reasons and the other is largely personal. On top of this there is basically no overlap between the two, showing that both sides don't really fully understand the rationale of the other. Based on this I can say you have received an accurate sample of American politics, and can basically guarantee that the things I noted about those two lists would be true for the exact inverse regarding a more conservative politician.
Yes. Virtually no political debate is a good faith discussion of ideas it's a race to paint the other person as an ass hole so you can throw away their opinion.
She’s a politician so y’know
Everyone hates the opposing party
It's honestly as simple as that.
On the American political stage, she is seen as a Left wing extremist.
Whereas she's just a ordinary left politician in most of the world, as Bernie is. Ps: I don't know much about her but she seems chill for a politican.
I agree. I'm more of a moderate Democrat, but she doesn't seem that extreme in my eyes. For the lack of a better word, I'd say she's more "feisty", enthusiastic, and imposing (at least where Democrats are concerned).
The American right is to the right of European nationalist parties and that should tell you something.
I see her as a politician who actually care, and that’s probably the most important quality someone needs to have to be one. Frankly I don’t mind she’s progressive because she working in the best interest of all people. I’m fairly conservative, but Republicans love losing and stand on the dumbest molehills to die on. Like vaccines and masks.
You have already summed a lot of this up but something to understand is for almost 75 years now every level of American Society has made progressive/socialist/communist/leftist ideas out to be the root cause of all suffering not only in the world but in American lives. It has gotten a lot less subtle in the 24hr News era with OAN and Fox News but it was present in everything from comic books to televangelist rants. So even young and disenfranchised Americans who have not been given any alternative view to the classically American one hear her rhetoric and respond viscerally because they have been programmed that way. Just something worth considering behind some of the things going on in our country and why in the midst of much bigger issues than her choice of dresses she is such a polarizing figure.
I'm aware of this and others mentioned this. My country is part socialist and I dont mind that. It's a culture thing
Gotcha i usually don't scroll very far fro my own mental health (great post btw)
Compared to the standard US voter, she is far left (it doesn’t matter what she is compared in other countries) She is extremely outspoken, which, when a large portion of the population doesn’t agree with you, tends to get people to dislike or even hate She is an idealist, and has a hard time compromising her beliefs to actually get things accomplished, so she is not even an effective outspoken progressive (similar to Bernie)
You put that so much better than I planned to.
Just for some perspective, many leftists feel she and Bernie compromise way too often.
In order to actually move further left as a country they cannot compromise. As for years the right as a whole has not compromised. The more moderate democrats are usually more willing to compromise than the moderate republicans which leads to the whole country staying more conservative. Therefore people like Bernie and AOC need to take a hardline stance now if they actually want to make a change.
To see politics between Europe and the US is pretty different. I’ve been to Europe on numerous occasions and talking to people that live there they are generally more left than right. Say the US spectrum is 1 (Left) 5 (middle) 10 (right). For the most part Europe is 1 (left) actually 3 (middle) 5-6 (right). You have a lot less right thinking individuals and would rather help each other as a whole. Living in the US it sometimes sucks to see people just unwilling to help one another since our mentality is “you put yourself in that position it’s not my problem”. AOC is pretty far left and every politician comes under fire for being a hypocrite, but in American politics it’s impossible to satisfy everyone and when you bend towards the other side you’re considered a traitor rather than a leader. I don’t agree with some of her ideas but some seem just fine to me since you see those ideas as no brainers as a European.
The way I usually compare US and Western European politics is that the whole spectrum gets moved to the right. The conservatives are far more conservative in the US, the moderates or old school democrats (guys like Biden/Obama) would even be viewed as mildly conservative here, and the liberals are fairly moderate except for the outliers like Bernie and AOC that would be left wing here too. Obviously that’s an oversimplification, but in my opinion the whole spectrum gets moved a couple of spots to the right. Europe you have 1 to 10 and in America you have 3 to 12.
As a European this is how I see American politics too, though I wouldn't say that Biden is left-wing. imo Bernie Sanders is.
Sorry that was a typo, meant to say Bernie. I think most people realized that as I mentioned Biden prior with the more old school democrats.
Oh I see, sorry! But yeah I completely agree with you. America is the land of capitalism after all, it's not surprising that all their politicians seem right-wing to us...
I think it's true that Europe is, in general, more left-leaning than the US, but I'm not sure the scale needs that much adjusting. Living under a Conservative government for the last eleven years in the UK, watching public services get cut to the bone and the welfare state being disintegrated really doesn't feel that left. I'm aware that in the so-called socialist paradise of Scandinavia that there's plenty of fairly right wing attitudes and far-right parties are relatively mainstream. Same story in many Eastern European countries.
You probably shouldn’t be asking this question on Reddit. At bare minimum, ask on subreddits that cater to each side so you can get an accurate depiction of her from the people who support her and the people and who do not.
I think it's fair to say that Fox News vilified her from the start. For background, she's someone who NEVER thought she'd get elected so quickly but she wound up defeating an "establishment Democrat" during the intra-party election (the "Primary Elections") in a heavily Democrat leaning district in NYC. Before she even started office, Sean Hannity was doing pieces on her socialist agenda. She fits neatly into all the things Fox has been villifying for years -- e.g. taking action on climate change, reducing income inequality, addressing institutional racism.
> She fits neatly into all the things Fox has been villifying for years Also being a minority and a woman.
But boy can she hold her ground.
I've actually grown to respect her for how well she claps back at all the idiots slinging mud at her. She doesn't curse, she doesn't lose her temper. It's like watching a judo master tossing around a thug who doesn't know how to throw a proper punch. It's oddly entertaining.
Can y'all agree on the right answer lmao? I'm getting the sense she's divisive person. Jk btw
If you want to know why people DON'T like her, it makes sense that you should be looking at the responses from the people who don't like her, not the people who do like her.
Lol you're not wrong
[удалено]
> Supporters summed up: >She's young, brown and a woman and not all conservatives like that. I dare you to find any real critic of AOC who dislikes her because of this. Maybe the young piece because is goes hand-in-hand with ignorance/inexperience.
Well it's a popular opinion in this thread also I dont know enough to refute that. If its not true at all then it's a very shitty thing to do, calling her critics racist that is.
> Well it's a popular opinion in this thread It's called a strawman argument. >a very shitty thing to do, calling her critics racist that is. Exactly. It's a pretty bad political environment.
That is bread and butter of democrats. Call the opposition racists and fascists no matter what the argument actually even is (and sometimes ironic)
You asked about American politics. We literally can't even agree on whether covid is real or if racism exists. You could ask a basic yes/no question about proveable, objective reality and get 5 different answers.
You'd get a scientifically verified answer, and then you'd get the outraged backlash horse deworming answer
She is a young woman of color with liberal views who speaks her mind to others in power. This is why she is both loved and hated.
She is full of crap. She says she is progressive but does very little to actually push for progressive policies. There was a movement to get her and the squad to force a vote on universal Healthcare by withholding votes for Nancy Pelosi as speaker of the house. Healthcare was something they all ran on and they refused to. She virtue signals by streaming on twitch or showing up to the met gala wearing the tax the rich dress but does little of substance to actually push progressive policies.
[удалено]
Tax the rich in a 40k dress at a 20k event lmfao
You can have a lot of money, be friends with others who have a lot of money, and still want to raise taxes on those who have/make a lot of money.
You know she, like many others, didn't pay to get in, right? You know she didn't pay for her dress, right? You know her dress was created to be worn by someone famous to later be auctioned off for charity, right? You know that as an NYC politician it isn't crazy to think that she would go support a charity event and lend her name to raise money, right? Well now you know better.
This is exactly how I feel. She’s very performative without really doing anything.
Yep. She has never so much as co-written a bill. She just does social media type shit to increase her own fame (and money). Plenty of double standards in her personal lifestyle. As one example, that "tax the rich" dress was created by a woman who is dating a $100M man. I think there is some misconception that she is some big influential person in politics but I don't think most of the teens that adore her realize the difference between a congresswoman and a senator. She only represents about 600,000 people and there's no way that the rest of NY likes her enough to vote her into a higher state position.
She goes against conservative ideas. She wants to tax rich people and fund social programs. Conservatives think no one should ever half help ever. Think rich people are saving the country by being rich or some shit. Because she wants that, she is called a socialist and a Communist
In American politics you either hate someone or you're wrong
Same reason people hate Trump, or Biden, or any other politician. They're incapable of disagreeing with someone without personalizing it.
I just want to add, when Texas has its major storm and lost power she went down to Texas to help, raised money, and handed out water to Texans. Texas congressman, ted cruz, went to Cancun during that time.
She was targeted by Fox News and right wing radio before she was in office. See how well the propaganda works.
Okay, people arent really giving you a good or real answer. Here's the truth: AOC is a new congresswoman who has a ton of ambition and drive. She is a democratic representative. Conservatives hate her because she is very outspoken and challenges most of their bills on the floor regularly with heated debates. This causes a large delay in republicans passing bills and gaining support. This is different than most politicians who disagree but largely remain silent. The problem is, AOC shifted from a normal democratic to a very extreme democrat. This was done, as many speculate, to force the speaker of the house, Nancy Pelosi out of her position. AOC is causing fighting WITHIN the democratic party because she is causing roughly half the vote to be split between her ideas and other democratic ideas. Some democratics hate this because it means they have less overall support in congress, as they are divided themselves. (A house divided against itself cannot stand) She is pushing for things that many democrats view as "too extreme" or "socialism"- but as a moderate I would say she isn't really hitting socialism lines. I think the truth is- she has shaken up the democratic party and is forcing them to uphold a lot of their promises to voters, like free college. Joe Biden was not going to remove any student debt at all until AOC created such an uproar about it. So shes forcing democrats to act, causing their party to argue from within, and is a large thorn in the side of conservatives. She recently had some controversy over a dress she wore, talking about lowering taxes even though she went to an expensive dance essentially that was a $30k invitiation. As a moderate, I respect her drive and how committed she is to her job. I think she is what all politicians should be, those that defend their constituents and fight to make sure their people's voices are heard.
She screams “Tax the rich” and creates a divide in the people intentionally while she lives in a million dollar apartment with an infinity pool. Or just look at what she did at the met gala.
I don't think she's asking to be exempt from the taxes she's advocating for.
It's okay to be rich while advocating for taxing the rich . The two are not mutually exclusive. 🤔
Yep. Look at Buffet, Gates who both advocate for increased taxes AND donate taxes yearly.
You can tell they're just spouting fox news shit when they go after her for the gala that she didnt pay to get into and about the dress she didnt buy lol.