Some state-level Democrats are seeking a primary challenger for Ilhan Omar already

Oct 25, 2017
5,849
It really, truly sucks that the Democrats are the only viable non-Republican party, because as an organization they're staggeringly incompetent. "At least we're not the GOP" is not enough anymore, and if they're going to rip one of their own to shreds over a comment they didn't even understand, then they're no good to any of us.
It’s a big tent party with many factions and not held in line by racial or religious connection. It’s never going to be lockstep 100% of the time.



The goal of removing Muslims from
Congress or at least silencing them on Israel is an implicit goal of AIPAC, this shouldn’t be surprising.
 

Fugu

Member
Oct 26, 2017
747
Whataboutism. What is driving this view that made you think of the argument that this primary challenge is ok because the justice dems do the same to those who are as bad as republicans. Would love to hear your view
No, it isn't whataboutism to say that this is something that both sides of the debate are engaged in. Whataboutism is when you say that you won't solve a problem because other problems exist. Noting that other Democrats get primaried, including by people who support Omar, is saying that regardless of whether this is a problem it shouldn't be viewed as a uniquely Omar thing since by all accounts it happens across the board. That fact also undermines the framing of this as a problem since the process of primarying candidates within your party that you don't like is fairly integral to the American political process.

I love Omar and I think primarying her is ridiculous, but that's not really the issue.
 

Blader

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,547
Probably cause she doesn't want it to look too blatant. Like pretending the bill wasn't really about her is laughable.
The point of the resolution was to turn the GOP's pearl clutching over Omar back around on them. If she wanted it to be about Omar, she could have made it all about Omar -- which is how it originally started. There are plenty of things Pelosi could do to reprimand Omar and marginalize her role in the House, and she hasn't done any of them. Not because "she doesn't want it to look too blatant" (why in the world would that matter?), but because she's actually not out for Omar's blood.

Trying to frame this as AIPAC working through Pelosi working through Minnesota Democrats in a 6D chess game to get rid of one congresswoman, instead of what it is -- a couple local constituents venting their anger at a DC publication all too eager to run Dems in disarray stories (as they all are) - reeks of simple confirmation bias. As it is, the House Dem leadership, DCCC, and DFL are all standing by Omar.
 

Kthulhu

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,590
This and that stupid resolution is what the left eating itself actually looks like. Don't let anyone else tell you otherwise
 

ned_ballad

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,299
Western New York
You'd think if Pelosi really wanted to silence Omar she'd strip her of her committee post, or formally censure her, or specifically call out Omar in an anti-Semitism resolution rather than broaden it to distance Omar from it. All things she has the power to do.

Can you guys, like, fucking read the article? So many jumping in here to get their 'Dems in disarray' takes in and paint this as an establishment hit job by Pelosi and the establishment centrist Dem leadership...when the only Dems even attached to this story are just a couple state figures, one of whom already supported a challenger against Omar last year.
Liberals love eating up right wing talking points. They fall for them hook, line and sinker, when one of these articles gets posted.

I blame "progressive" Twitter for amplifying these junk stories about random nobody Democrats that paint them as if they represent the entire party. Like they have a chip on their shoulder that the Democrats are "out to get them" and so they find any old rando Democrat and pretend like it's Nancy Pelosi herself giving direct orders.
 
Last edited:
Oct 27, 2017
12,046
What?

Are you really equating challenging someone because they spoke against Israel to challenging someone because they support corporate interests?
Either they put absolutely no thought into their post or they do believe those two things are equal. Either way a bad look

They will encourage a Corporate funded Somali to run.
Why would another Somalian want to run when they know their own party won't even have their back?
 

bionic77

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,691
Fuck them. She’ll win
I don't think she will.

It is never easy taking on the status quo. It takes guts and people who are honest as Rep Omar are almost always vilified in the short term. All she did is speak the truth on some obvious issues with two of our strongest allies in Israel and Saudi Arabia, who do some horrible things and yet we remain with them unconditionally.

I don't know if anything will change in the next 10-20 years, but if it does you can trace it back to brace people like Rep. Omar. She might only be a one term congresswoman but hopefully history judges her well and points out the hypocrisy of her detractors.
 

JealousKenny

Member
Jul 17, 2018
1,005
After her statement saying Obama was nothing more than Trump with a charming smile I would relish the opportunity to vote against her. Unfortunately I don't live in her district.
 

Zombegoast

Member
Oct 30, 2017
3,598
I hope AoC takes Chuck Shucmer's job in the next senate race.

As well as many other millennial and real democrats who aren't bought into power
 

Mr. X

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,350
Is this the same group that didn't want Nancy to be Speaker or a bigger group?
 

WrenchNinja

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,584
Canada
The point of the resolution was to turn the GOP's pearl clutching over Omar back around on them. If she wanted it to be about Omar, she could have made it all about Omar -- which is how it originally started. There are plenty of things Pelosi could do to reprimand Omar and marginalize her role in the House, and she hasn't done any of them.
That sounds alot like rewriting what actually happened the last few weeks. You framing the bill as some planned counterattack against the GOP to protect Omar all along is what's really unbelievable.
 

Sunster

The Fallen
Oct 5, 2018
1,719
What if the Dems all put their heads together and did something like get clean water for Flint? Instead, we're doing this...
 

JealousKenny

Member
Jul 17, 2018
1,005
link and quote this statement please
Everyone here knows what she said, something akin to the hope and change he promised was fake and murder is murder even if it comes with a nice smile .........

Im not going to play the semantics game, what she said came off as a diss against Obama and a Trump comparison to many in the AA community. I dont care if thats not what she meant, its how it came off and it was portrayed as such by the media as well. I as well as many others are not happy with her at all right now.
 

RailWays

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
4,527
link and quote this statement please
Likely referring to this quote:
“We can’t be only upset with Trump. … His policies are bad, but many of the people who came before him also had really bad policies. They just were more polished than he was,” Omar says. “And that’s not what we should be looking for anymore.
Which again, is not saying "Obama was nothing more than Trump with a charming smile"
 

The_hypocrite

Member
Oct 29, 2017
2,453
Flyover State
You'd think if Pelosi really wanted to silence Omar she'd strip her of her committee post, or formally censure her, or specifically call out Omar in an anti-Semitism resolution rather than broaden it to distance Omar from it. All things she has the power to do.

Can you guys, like, fucking read the article? So many jumping in here to get their 'Dems in disarray' takes in and paint this as an establishment hit job by Pelosi and the establishment centrist Dem leadership...when the only Dems even attached to this story are just a couple state figures, one of whom already supported a challenger against Omar last year.
She only modified the resolution when she got pushback on it. Additionally, if she does take those other actions she would suffer politically as she would be giving in to the GOP minority that was pushing for it. That's not a measure of support, that was the smarter play for her.
 

lacer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,416
Everyone here knows what she said, something akin to the hope and change he promised was fake and murder is murder even if it comes with a nice smile .........

Im not going to play the semantics game,

"everyone knows what she said"

proceeds to butcher her actual quote

"i'm not going to play the semantics game"

lol
 

phanphare

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,552
Everyone here knows what she said, something akin to the hope and change he promised was fake and murder is murder even if it comes with a nice smile .........

Im not going to play the semantics game, what she said came off as a diss against Obama and a Trump comparison to many in the AA community. I dont care if thats not what she meant, its how it came off and it was portrayed as such by the media as well. I as well as many others are not happy with her at all right now.
so no link and quote?

Likely referring to this quote:

Which again, is not saying "Obama was nothing more than Trump with a charming smile"
exactly, that poster was being disingenuous as hell solely to justify their distaste of omar in a seemingly legitimate way. basically the same ol' bullshit you're seeing from these spineless dems who want to silence her
 

Papaya

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
1,820
California
I'm all for primaries. In fact, we should primary every dem who has disingenuously smeared Omar. The democratic party is clearly for them, now.
 

Blader

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,547
I don't think she will.

It is never easy taking on the status quo. It takes guts and people who are honest as Rep Omar are almost always vilified in the short term. All she did is speak the truth on some obvious issues with two of our strongest allies in Israel and Saudi Arabia, who do some horrible things and yet we remain with them unconditionally.

I don't know if anything will change in the next 10-20 years, but if it does you can trace it back to brace people like Rep. Omar. She might only be a one term congresswoman but hopefully history judges her well and points out the hypocrisy of her detractors.
iirc Omar is popular in her district and it's probably telling that in the heat of the controversy the people trying to find primary challengers against her have run into dead ends.

That sounds alot like rewriting what actually happened the last few weeks. You framing the bill as some planned counterattack against the GOP to protect Omar all along is what's really unbelievable.
I think you have a reading comprehension problem. I never said it was a planned counterattack against the GOP. The resolution was first written about anti-Semitism and was an obvious rebuke to Omar. Pelosi, et al. broadened it to include all forms of bigotry, taking the heat squarely off Omar's shoulders and putting it back on the GOP and their hypocrisy over Trump (which, surprise surprise, it worked, as two dozen Republicans embarassed themselves in voting against it). If Pelosi wanted to specifically reprimand Omar, she could have kept the resolution as is.

For a corporate-owned establishment centrist shill, Nancy Pelosi has actually reserved most of her intraparty fire this Congress on the more moderate, red- and purple-district wing of her caucus, not the AOCs and Tlaibs of the party.
 

WrenchNinja

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,584
Canada
I think you have a reading comprehension problem. I never said it was a planned counterattack against the GOP. The resolution was first written about anti-Semitism and was an obvious rebuke to Omar. Pelosi, et al. broadened it to include all forms of bigotry, taking the heat squarely off Omar's shoulders and putting it back on the GOP and their hypocrisy over Trump (which, surprise surprise, it worked, as two dozen Republicans embarassed themselves in voting against it). If Pelosi wanted to specifically reprimand Omar, she could have kept the resolution as is.
Definitely a possibility that I have a reading comprehension problem. But you certainly aren't helping with it cause that definitely reads like you're saying she planned for it.
 

Blader

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,547
She only modified the resolution when she got pushback on it. Additionally, if she does take those other actions she would suffer politically as she would be giving in to the GOP minority that was pushing for it. That's not a measure of support, that was the smarter play for her.
Pelosi said she did not think Omar's remarks were anti-Semitic and Omar has publicly praised Pelosi.

Speaking of the smart play, I do not see what is especially politically savvy about the Speaker of the House trying to secretly back a primary challenge to one of her most visible members. That shit would stay secret for all of three seconds, which doesn't strike me as a not 'blatant' way of going after Omar. Is it really so hard to imagine Pelosi is not engineering Omar's downfall from behind the scenes, and that a primary challenge as described in the OP really is just the work of a handful of disgruntled constituents and not the national Democratic party?
 

Jeb

Avenger
Mar 14, 2018
826
Nope. She is incredibly popular in her district and is progressive as fuck. Also barely anyone in the house can do the job like her so maybe you need to stop blowing smoke up your own ass.
Yeah, that progressive ass kisser that takes money from lobbyists and panders to genocidal state.

So “progressive”
“Yas queen” anyone?
 

Zornack

Member
Oct 29, 2017
600
She's been a bad politician. Her first remark was anti-semitic. Her second, in my opinion, wasn't, but it was less than a month after the first one. Anything she says about Jews, Israel and money is going to be viewed harshly right now. And for people blaming Democrats for the resolution, when the majority of Jewish organizations are calling something anti-semeitic then you do something. To not would be hypocritical.
 

OtherWorldly

Member
Dec 3, 2018
1,858
She's been a bad politician. Her first remark was anti-semitic. Her second, in my opinion, wasn't, but it was less than a month after the first one. Anything she says about Jews, Israel and money is going to be viewed harshly right now. And for people blaming Democrats for the resolution, when the majority of Jewish organizations are calling something anti-semeitic then you do something. To not would be hypocritical.
Her statements were not antisemitic. In fact any criticism of her is islamophobic and anti Muslim considering only she is being targeted for it for actually being nicer to another MN politician who is even more blatant and gets 0 coverage
 

kittens

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,782
This is the same islamophobia that we're seeing in the NZ massacre. It's the same ugly hate making sure Muslims don't have power, don't thrive, don't live.
 

The_hypocrite

Member
Oct 29, 2017
2,453
Flyover State
Pelosi said she did not think Omar's remarks were anti-Semitic and Omar has publicly praised Pelosi.

Speaking of the smart play, I do not see what is especially politically savvy about the Speaker of the House trying to secretly back a primary challenge to one of her most visible members. That shit would stay secret for all of three seconds, which doesn't strike me as a not 'blatant' way of going after Omar. Is it really so hard to imagine Pelosi is not engineering Omar's downfall from behind the scenes, and that a primary challenge as described in the OP really is just the work of a handful of disgruntled constituents and not the national Democratic party?
I didn't say she was behind these bozos, must definitely their actions are they own. That doesn't mean she support Omar. If she felt her words weren't then why come up with not one but 2 resolutions on the matter in response to the reactions to Omar criticism of Israel and AIPAC power over USA Congress?
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,327
Nope. She is incredibly popular in her district and is progressive as fuck. Also barely anyone in the house can do the job like her so maybe you need to stop blowing smoke up your own ass.
Supporting an apartheid state=progressive as fuck?

You don’t get to be a bigot and apply antisemitism to any criticism of Israel policies just because specifically she is a hijab wearing black muslim woman
Lol, they think they're slick.
 

Zornack

Member
Oct 29, 2017
600
You don’t get to be a bigot and apply antisemitism to any criticism of Israel policies just because specifically she is a hijab wearing black muslim woman
Her first comment was not simply "criticism of Israel."

I'm not here to debate what's antisemitic. I believe her first comment was. A large list of Jewish individuals and organisations believe both were. To tell them "no, you're wrong, you're just mad at the black Muslim lady" is extremely hypocritical.
 

BigWinnie1

Banned
Feb 19, 2018
2,069
Supporting an apartheid state=progressive as fuck?


Lol, they think they're slick.
Naw most of her voting record is progressive. I'm not just gonna slap someone with a label because they are talking at a fucking conferance. AIPAC is not great but I aint disputing their right to exist and the democratic party would love to not need them as much as they do and pass some reforms but we aint in power so need some backing.

I've resigned myself that the Israel situation wont resolved until both leaderships change because the peace that was almost reached last time only stopped because the Israelian Prime Ministers sudden death and the moderate party of Palestine was uprooted for the more extremist friendly party and everything has devolved from that. Until Bibi is gone and his party loses power and Hamas either moderates itself or is thrown from power we will not get back to the peace deal from the 90's.
 

OtherWorldly

Member
Dec 3, 2018
1,858
Her first comment was not simply "criticism of Israel."

I'm not here to debate what's antisemitic. I believe her first comment was. A large list of Jewish individuals and organisations believe both were. To tell them "no, you're wrong, you're just mad at the black Muslim lady" is extremely hypocritical.
Don’t hide behind the shallow xenophobic and islamophobic ideals that somehow saying large Jewish individuals saying she was antisemitic while purposely ignoring the other large group of Jewish individuals saying she was not in her words and her conviction. The first comment was simply and always was about criticism about Israel. Not any faith . Not any ethnicity.

You are saying her intent was about faith and ethnicity when she says no. now why would you think that and doubt it
 

Zornack

Member
Oct 29, 2017
600
A large list of jewisg


Don’t hide behind the shallow xenophobic and islamophobic ideals that somehow saying large Jewish individuals saying she was antisemitic while purposely ignoring the other large group of Jewish individuals saying she was not in her words and her conviction. The first comment was simply and always was about criticism about Israel. Not any faith . Not any ethnicity.
The Jewish individuals who don't feel it was antisemitic don't invalidate the Jewish individuals who did.

Also, stop saying Jews have weaponized claims of antisemitism to attack Omar. That is extremely offensive.