Yeah it's risk v reward, and when the reward is bigger than the risk you might take the risk.
I mean that's she got Pelosi's favour and is supporting her Speakership thus far sort of demonstrates she isn't just going 100% purity test and opposing anyone who isn't in line with her policies.
While the risks of failure are greater than doing nothing, like primaries progressives like Davids. Which she lost.
That's simply the start of her relationship with Pelosi, she needs to maintain it like everybody else. Pelosi isn't giving her everything with just that, that's not how congress works. This isn't about purity testing, it's making sure you keep on the leader's good side, and don't anger her too much or she'll drop you. The one with the power in this dynamic is Pelosi, not AOC. It's like any other job you have at a company or an organisation.
Get her vote on what? They're not the ones putting bills up to vote.
Are you peeved that they decided to endorse someone in that race?
For leadership positions for committees, and bills she makes and supports, like the New Green Deal.
That's what this debate has been about, and this isn't about me - it's about politicians in the Democratic party. Her duties don't end at her district.
Ichthyosaurus has been concern trolling about aoc for weeks now, I don't know how they haven't been called out more about it
This is disingenuous. Why is that your candidates are not allowed to be critiqued but it's open season on everybody else? I've made sure to be logical, in depth, genuine, thorough and fair in all my posts - including actively agreeing with supporting her repeatedly because I do like her. It's like constructive criticism against AOC is a step too far, when all candidates go through that. Seriously, what did you think would happen when she hit the big time?
Why would you NOT want enemies? If you do not have enemies then you do not have integrity.
Do you even have experience in party politics? Because let me tell you that creating alliances and fighting internal battles is part of party politics and the way to change the course.
For a matter of fact just yesterday I was at a meeting with party members to push for a more open migration policy by organising within my own party and creating opposition to the board. This is how it works in real life.
She'd have plenty of enemies without making ones like Davids. AOC and the JD's need allies more than they need enemies in congress, why bother creating unneeded ones who are natural allies? What good does that help their causes? Internal battles are, of course, unavoidable but how you go about it can be make things worse when it's done incorrectly. Because I can guarantee you there are plenty of experienced Dems in congress who are organised in greater numbers with alliances and deeper relationships than the JD's have.
Creating alliances is very important, which is why I'm frustrated when the JD's are determined not to do that to anyone not in their club. Changing an organisations course is not just fighting, it's doing it smartly - you don't make enemies of everyone you find, or deliberately go out of your way to antagonise people who you'll need their vote one day.
I assume you didn't antagonise your own allies or potential allies needlessly while doing so.
