Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez

1…1516182021…152

Comments

  • tempo_n_groove
    tempo_n_groove Posts: 41,359
    brianlux said:
    Some desperate right wingers out there.  Cretins!

    I didn't bother with this because it was debunked already.

    I'm trying to focus more on her politics and ideas now.

    That is what should be posted because a bunch of these things are gong to be around for a while...
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,830
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    Republicans are threatened by her. Because of that, the right is going to wage an online war on her. That is the only way they can try to discredit her. Expect to see much more of this bullshit happening to her in coming years.
    You know they really should just let her speak.  She seems to be doing enough damage to herself currently.

    And republicans should not like many of her policies for sure.  They should just focus on that, there is enough there.  Don't need to stoop down and vilify stupid stuff.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • CM189191
    CM189191 Posts: 6,927
    cincybearcat said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    Republicans are threatened by her. Because of that, the right is going to wage an online war on her. That is the only way they can try to discredit her. Expect to see much more of this bullshit happening to her in coming years.
    You know they really should just let her speak.  She seems to be doing enough damage to herself currently.

    And republicans should not like many of her policies for sure.  They should just focus on that, there is enough there.  Don't need to stoop down and vilify stupid stuff.
    bold strategy

    The only thing more likable than Sandy is her policies.  I wholeheartedly encourage the republicans to focus on the issues.

    let's see how that works out for them
  • mace1229
    mace1229 Posts: 9,825
    Are the fake pictures really because she's a democrat? I mean, don't most famous women, unfortunately, go through this? Didn't Sarah Palin? Even Marcia Clark had to deal with this during the OJ trial. I just don't see this as a R vs D thing, but how many just exploit all sorts of women to begin with.
    If she was republican I'm sure she'd be dealing with the same thing.
  • tempo_n_groove
    tempo_n_groove Posts: 41,359
    mace1229 said:
    Are the fake pictures really because she's a democrat? I mean, don't most famous women, unfortunately, go through this? Didn't Sarah Palin? Even Marcia Clark had to deal with this during the OJ trial. I just don't see this as a R vs D thing, but how many just exploit all sorts of women to begin with.
    If she was republican I'm sure she'd be dealing with the same thing.
    It was posted on a right wing site so that is where the R vs D came from.

    She is a good looking woman and this will happen a lot.  She just needs to ignore it because it's not going to stop until they ban photoshop.
  • mace1229
    mace1229 Posts: 9,825
    edited January 2019
    tempo_n_groove said:
    mace1229 said:
    Are the fake pictures really because she's a democrat? I mean, don't most famous women, unfortunately, go through this? Didn't Sarah Palin? Even Marcia Clark had to deal with this during the OJ trial. I just don't see this as a R vs D thing, but how many just exploit all sorts of women to begin with.
    If she was republican I'm sure she'd be dealing with the same thing.
    It was posted on a right wing site so that is where the R vs D came from.

    She is a good looking woman and this will happen a lot.  She just needs to ignore it because it's not going to stop until they ban photoshop.
    I never heard of the Daily Caller that published the pictures. But just going to their website it has a total tabloid vibe going on, with a hint of porn with all the adds and pop-ups jumping out.
    I can't imagine any significant portion of the right views this as any real news source.
  • tempo_n_groove
    tempo_n_groove Posts: 41,359
    mace1229 said:
    tempo_n_groove said:
    mace1229 said:
    Are the fake pictures really because she's a democrat? I mean, don't most famous women, unfortunately, go through this? Didn't Sarah Palin? Even Marcia Clark had to deal with this during the OJ trial. I just don't see this as a R vs D thing, but how many just exploit all sorts of women to begin with.
    If she was republican I'm sure she'd be dealing with the same thing.
    It was posted on a right wing site so that is where the R vs D came from.

    She is a good looking woman and this will happen a lot.  She just needs to ignore it because it's not going to stop until they ban photoshop.
    I never heard of the Daily Caller that published the pictures. But just going to their website it has a total tabloid vibe going on, with a hint of porn with all the adds and pop-ups jumping out.
    I can't imagine any significant portion of the right views this as any real news source.
    I sat the same thing about infowars, lol!
  • rgambs
    rgambs Posts: 13,576
    mace1229 said:
    tempo_n_groove said:
    mace1229 said:
    Are the fake pictures really because she's a democrat? I mean, don't most famous women, unfortunately, go through this? Didn't Sarah Palin? Even Marcia Clark had to deal with this during the OJ trial. I just don't see this as a R vs D thing, but how many just exploit all sorts of women to begin with.
    If she was republican I'm sure she'd be dealing with the same thing.
    It was posted on a right wing site so that is where the R vs D came from.

    She is a good looking woman and this will happen a lot.  She just needs to ignore it because it's not going to stop until they ban photoshop.
    I never heard of the Daily Caller that published the pictures. But just going to their website it has a total tabloid vibe going on, with a hint of porn with all the adds and pop-ups jumping out.
    I can't imagine any significant portion of the right views this as any real news source.
    Ha!  You are out of touch with the right then, brother!

    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • oftenreading
    oftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,856
    edited January 2019
    mace1229 said:
    tempo_n_groove said:
    mace1229 said:
    Are the fake pictures really because she's a democrat? I mean, don't most famous women, unfortunately, go through this? Didn't Sarah Palin? Even Marcia Clark had to deal with this during the OJ trial. I just don't see this as a R vs D thing, but how many just exploit all sorts of women to begin with.
    If she was republican I'm sure she'd be dealing with the same thing.
    It was posted on a right wing site so that is where the R vs D came from.

    She is a good looking woman and this will happen a lot.  She just needs to ignore it because it's not going to stop until they ban photoshop.
    I never heard of the Daily Caller that published the pictures. But just going to their website it has a total tabloid vibe going on, with a hint of porn with all the adds and pop-ups jumping out.
    I can't imagine any significant portion of the right views this as any real news source.
    Umm, the Daily Caller is big. 

    Edit - I should clarify that it’s crap, too. 
    Post edited by oftenreading on
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Halifax2TheMax
    Halifax2TheMax Posts: 42,104
    mace1229 said:
    tempo_n_groove said:
    mace1229 said:
    Are the fake pictures really because she's a democrat? I mean, don't most famous women, unfortunately, go through this? Didn't Sarah Palin? Even Marcia Clark had to deal with this during the OJ trial. I just don't see this as a R vs D thing, but how many just exploit all sorts of women to begin with.
    If she was republican I'm sure she'd be dealing with the same thing.
    It was posted on a right wing site so that is where the R vs D came from.

    She is a good looking woman and this will happen a lot.  She just needs to ignore it because it's not going to stop until they ban photoshop.
    I never heard of the Daily Caller that published the pictures. But just going to their website it has a total tabloid vibe going on, with a hint of porn with all the adds and pop-ups jumping out.
    I can't imagine any significant portion of the right views this as any real news source.
    Certain posters on here link to it when they post. Regularly.
    09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • Bentleyspop
    Bentleyspop Craft Beer Brewery, Colorado Posts: 11,409
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    mace1229 said:
    tempo_n_groove said:
    mace1229 said:
    Are the fake pictures really because she's a democrat? I mean, don't most famous women, unfortunately, go through this? Didn't Sarah Palin? Even Marcia Clark had to deal with this during the OJ trial. I just don't see this as a R vs D thing, but how many just exploit all sorts of women to begin with.
    If she was republican I'm sure she'd be dealing with the same thing.
    It was posted on a right wing site so that is where the R vs D came from.

    She is a good looking woman and this will happen a lot.  She just needs to ignore it because it's not going to stop until they ban photoshop.
    I never heard of the Daily Caller that published the pictures. But just going to their website it has a total tabloid vibe going on, with a hint of porn with all the adds and pop-ups jumping out.
    I can't imagine any significant portion of the right views this as any real news source.
    Certain posters on here link to it when they post. Regularly.
    Not too far removed from the daily stormer 
  • mace1229
    mace1229 Posts: 9,825
    So I looked into the story and The Daily Caller.
    One, I don't think I would say its big enough to state that is where many conservatives get their news from. According to wikipedia, it has 35 million views a month. I really don't know if that's a lot of an online "newspaper," but that's only a million a day. And I assume a large portion of that are the left trolling for bad stories to complain about, and many more read it realizing it is more opinion than journalism. Howard Stern's biggest audience were those who wanted him off the air. So I'm just not convinced this is really a big news source for the right. Most of my circles (family and many friends) are right and I never hear this brought up as news fact.

    Second, it doesn't look like they were part of that nude photo story. I couldn't find an original story that posted those pictures as The Guardian claimed. All I saw was an article that said fake photos were being distributed. https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/07/fake-nude-ocasio-cortez/

    So if that is the only story, what is offensive about that? Did I miss the original one where they actually posted the pictures? If not, then what really is there to be angry about with this particular story in relation to The Daily Caller and conservatives? 
  • oftenreading
    oftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,856
    mace1229 said:
    So I looked into the story and The Daily Caller.
    One, I don't think I would say its big enough to state that is where many conservatives get their news from. According to wikipedia, it has 35 million views a month. I really don't know if that's a lot of an online "newspaper," but that's only a million a day. And I assume a large portion of that are the left trolling for bad stories to complain about, and many more read it realizing it is more opinion than journalism. Howard Stern's biggest audience were those who wanted him off the air. So I'm just not convinced this is really a big news source for the right. Most of my circles (family and many friends) are right and I never hear this brought up as news fact.

    Second, it doesn't look like they were part of that nude photo story. I couldn't find an original story that posted those pictures as The Guardian claimed. All I saw was an article that said fake photos were being distributed. https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/07/fake-nude-ocasio-cortez/

    So if that is the only story, what is offensive about that? Did I miss the original one where they actually posted the pictures? If not, then what really is there to be angry about with this particular story in relation to The Daily Caller and conservatives? 
    Daily Caller is consistently on lists of most popular websites visited by conservatives. 

    https://www.google.ca/amp/s/insights.aelieve.com/website-rankings/news-media/top-conservative-websites/amp/
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Halifax2TheMax
    Halifax2TheMax Posts: 42,104
    The right doesn’t have any “real” news outlets for they don’t live in reality.
    09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478

    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's response to the Trump wall speech revealed why she threatens both Democrats and Republicans

    Of all the voices we heard from on Tuesday night, the freshman lawmaker's was by far the most compelling. And she's not going anywhere.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-s-response-trump-wall-speech-revealed-why-ncna957096
  • Ledbetterman10
    Ledbetterman10 Posts: 16,993
    edited January 2019
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    Republicans are threatened by her. 
    I disagree. I know this has been a often-repeated talking point in this thread: that these old, white men are scared of a feisty, Latino woman but I don't think that's the case. I think she just fits the description of someone that the Republicans find to be an easy target. And no, it's not "strong, minority woman." It's "inexperienced millennial socialist." I actually think the Republicans likes that she's possibly the "future" of the Democratic Party. It's easier to go against her than it is to go against slick, career politicians like the Clintons or Obama. 
    2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2, 2021: Sea. Hear. Now. 2022: Camden, 2024: Philly 2, 2025: Pittsburgh 1

    Pearl Jam bootlegs:
    http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
  • CM189191
    CM189191 Posts: 6,927
    Ledbetterman10 said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    Republicans are threatened by her. 
    I disagree. I know this has been a often-repeated talking point in this thread: that these old, white men are scared of a feisty, Latino woman but I don't think that's the case. I think she just fits the description of someone that the Republicans find to be an easy target. And no, it's not "strong, minority woman." It's "inexperienced millennial socialist." I actually think the Republicans likes that she's possibly the "future" of the Democratic Party. It's easier to go against her than it is to go against slick, career politicians like the Clintons or Obama. 
    why not both? either way it's a sad state of affairs she's been so vilified
  • oftenreading
    oftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,856
    Ledbetterman10 said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    Republicans are threatened by her. 
    I disagree. I know this has been a often-repeated talking point in this thread: that these old, white men are scared of a feisty, Latino woman but I don't think that's the case. I think she just fits the description of someone that the Republicans find to be an easy target. And no, it's not "strong, minority woman." It's "inexperienced millennial socialist." I actually think the Republicans likes that she's possibly the "future" of the Democratic Party. It's easier to go against her than it is to go against slick, career politicians like the Clintons or Obama. 

    I disagree that her gender has nothing to do with it. As evidence point #1, the repub that calls her "little girl". You know that there are many more examples. 
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Ledbetterman10
    Ledbetterman10 Posts: 16,993
    CM189191 said:
    Ledbetterman10 said:
    gimmesometruth27 said:
    Republicans are threatened by her. 
    I disagree. I know this has been a often-repeated talking point in this thread: that these old, white men are scared of a feisty, Latino woman but I don't think that's the case. I think she just fits the description of someone that the Republicans find to be an easy target. And no, it's not "strong, minority woman." It's "inexperienced millennial socialist." I actually think the Republicans likes that she's possibly the "future" of the Democratic Party. It's easier to go against her than it is to go against slick, career politicians like the Clintons or Obama. 
    why not both? either way it's a sad state of affairs she's been so vilified
    Stuff like her being criticized for that dance video from college is ridiculous. Totally agree there. But otherwise, hey, both sides vilify each other. She seems thick-skinned and able to take it though. I guess you have to be if you're in politics. 
    2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2, 2021: Sea. Hear. Now. 2022: Camden, 2024: Philly 2, 2025: Pittsburgh 1

    Pearl Jam bootlegs:
    http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
  • mace1229
    mace1229 Posts: 9,825
    oftenreading said:
    mace1229 said:
    So I looked into the story and The Daily Caller.
    One, I don't think I would say its big enough to state that is where many conservatives get their news from. According to wikipedia, it has 35 million views a month. I really don't know if that's a lot of an online "newspaper," but that's only a million a day. And I assume a large portion of that are the left trolling for bad stories to complain about, and many more read it realizing it is more opinion than journalism. Howard Stern's biggest audience were those who wanted him off the air. So I'm just not convinced this is really a big news source for the right. Most of my circles (family and many friends) are right and I never hear this brought up as news fact.

    Second, it doesn't look like they were part of that nude photo story. I couldn't find an original story that posted those pictures as The Guardian claimed. All I saw was an article that said fake photos were being distributed. https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/07/fake-nude-ocasio-cortez/

    So if that is the only story, what is offensive about that? Did I miss the original one where they actually posted the pictures? If not, then what really is there to be angry about with this particular story in relation to The Daily Caller and conservatives? 
    Daily Caller is consistently on lists of most popular websites visited by conservatives. 

    https://www.google.ca/amp/s/insights.aelieve.com/website-rankings/news-media/top-conservative-websites/amp/
    There is a huge difference between "most popular website visited by conservatives" and "most popular conservative website." The link you provided states was the latter. 
    My point is I really just don't believe most conservatives rely on these websites for their only source of daily news. Using this data, that calculates to about 140,000 daily users on Fox's website. That really isn't that many. And how many of those are there because they hate fox and want to find something to complain about? I would bet probably half, and considering more often than not when someone is linking a Fox News article it is to put it down, that may be a conservative guess. I bet many people here visit Fox daily for various reasons, they sure link to it a lot. And out of the ones who are conservative and look there for some news, what indication does anyone have that FOX is their only source? It is probably one of many that also include liberal sites, just like everyone else. with 320 million people in our country, and only 140,000 visiting FOX that includes all groups I mentioned above, I don't see how anyone can say conservatives are gullible and only rely on FOX.

    It is just a pet peeve of mine when I see blanket comments that say conservatives are so out of reality and imply that if you're a conservative you're only news source is some right wing media. That is so completely untrue. Why so many on the left think that the majority of conservatives only listen to Fox and nothing else I just don't get. That is about as accurate as me saying the left only gets their news from SNL's weekend update. I just hate blanket implications like that, and they, for the most part, aren't true.

Categories