A young socialist topples powerful incumbent Crowley in NY’s 14th Congressional District
In a sign of where the Democrats have been headed lately, 28-year-old socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has defeated 10-term Congressman Joe Crowley in New York’s 14th District.
Ocasio-Cortez is not only a young Hispanic woman, she’s remarkably telegenic (in other words, beautiful). I have no idea whether that latter fact made a difference, but my guess is that it didn’t hurt:
Joe Crowley, her opponent, wasn’t just a member of the House. He was one of the members of the House who was a contender for Pelosi’s job. Both Crowley and Ocasio-Cortez are progressives, but she is of the Bernie Sanders socialist wing and he is more mainstream progressive (if there is such a thing).
New York’s 14th District was redrawn in 2012:
The district includes the eastern Bronx and part of north-central Queens. The Queens portion includes the neighborhoods of Astoria, College Point, East Elmhurst, Jackson Heights and Woodside. The Bronx portion of the district includes the neighborhoods of Morris Park, Parkchester, Pelham Bay, and Throgs Neck as well as City Island. Before redistricting for the 2012 election, much of this area was in New York’s 7th congressional district.
The district’s ethnicity now is strongly Hispanic:
18.41% White
11.39% Black
16.24% Asian
49.80% Hispanic
0.45% Native American
3.71% other
Ocasio-Cortez is not just young, socialist, and beautiful, she is also Hispanic, which would probably give her an advantage over Crowley. Crowley also made a big boo-boo by not appearing for a debate with her in the Bronx. I certainly don’t have my finger on the pulse of the 14th, but I can’t imagine that it enhanced his clout with the voters.
Crowley had a lot of money, but his opponent used social media to her advantage as well. What’s more—in a reliably Democratic district where to get the Democratic nomination is tantamount to winning the general election—Crowley had never before faced an opponent in the Democratic primaries. So I think he got rusty, accustomed to sailing to sure victory after sure victory.
It is a curious fact—curious to me, anyway—that the voter turnout in this primary was awful:
On Tuesday, fewer than 28,000 votes were cast in the 14th district, which has more than 710,000 residents and 292,000 active voters.
That’s abysmal. It may be that Crowley supporters thought he was safe and stayed home. But they have no one to blame but themselves. Low turnout ensures that only activists get to decide the outcome of an important election.
Looking at her I think of the gag on the IMAO blog. An attractive woman, at a romantic dinner with a guy, says: “I’m a socialist.” The guy says, “Yeah, I don’t know much about economics either.”
I imagine it going further: “Why, Bilwick, you’re so clever and witty! Maybe socialism is the bunk!”
“We should discuss this further in my apartment, senorita . . .”
It is the height of arrogance and egotism to think that socialism, which has failed everywhere it has been implemented, will work this time because you’re in charge.
Tom Foley was Speaker when he lost his seat in 1994. Revolutions are like that. This one is not a national revolution like 1994. It is more like 1972 for Democrats when they adopted McGovern and sank like the Titanic.
Mike K — I so hope you’re right!!
The lure of socialism just never seems to get old. After all, what decent human being would be against equality and brotherhood?
Jeez, where to start??
If you’re even a little bit knowledgeable of history you would be very, very leery of going down the equality of results path. If you are at all self aware about your own motivations, you would think hard about legislation that encourages sloth and discourages energy.
One of the things I sort of glean from liberals around me, is that they see mainly the shortcomings of our system of government. They are idealists. They see the advances for all the different types of minority groups since the 60’s and 70’s and figure that gov’t is the problem, gov’t is what was in the way. IOW, our gov’t is the face of evil. And the folks – mostly white – in flyover country are despised because they hold on to a more traditional view of American life.
But this still doesn’t answer the question of why socialists think they have the better solution. Mostly, I think it’s feelings.
The way many progressives continue to namecall and carry on, I’m not sure they really care about winning over so-called “undecideds” or swing voters in 2018. They want to take over the Democratic Party, scare all the heretics into hiding. Then it can be a real civil war, and they’re right — that is, correct — on every issue, so they’ll naturally win.
They’re full of passionate conviction, and this always seems to prevail vs those who suffer from any doubt, or are lukewarm, or weakwilled.
These new fascists are anything but lukewarm. They’re hot, they’re burning up.
Ok…so one leftist is beaten handily by a harder-leftist in a safe left seat.
The tribe voted for their look-alike representative instead of the old guard guy.
I’m not seeing the downside here. She’s going to be more vocally strident & clearly less likely to negotiate with Rs, but will she vote any differently from the now-defeated incumbent?
Irv,
I was recently cornered by a couple of acquaintances at work who are proud Socialists. And they threw a new explanation at me (new to me, you all may have heard this one before):
Socialism has never worked because we have never seen True Democratic Socialism. They told me all Socialism seen thus far has been despotic not democratic and once we can get a Democratic Socialism cranked right up, all our problems will melt away.
Fractal Rabbit
“While an equality of rights under a limited government is possible and an essential condition of individual freedom, a claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers.”
? Friedrich A. Hayek, The Mirage of Social Justice
Fractal Rabbit
They told me all Socialism seen thus far has been despotic not democratic and once we can get a Democratic Socialism cranked right up, all our problems will melt away.
Perhaps these self-styled Democratic Socialists could explain to us why a self-styled Democratic Socialist like Bernie Sanders has endorsed Despot Socialism as practiced in Cuba, Sandinista Nicaragua in the 1980s, and in Chavista Venezuela. (“Who’s the banana republic new?”)
The theory that Socialism hasn’t been given a good try is based on the fact that everywhere it has been tried, it fails. Sweden is often quoted as an example. Sweden is a small country with, until, recently, a homogeneous population. They are now finding out how it works when the bad guys find the queue. By bad, I don’t mean just the poor. I mean the ignorant and uneducated who will never be self supporting.
I saw somewhere that Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is a young and confused socialist. I’ll second that. I will also suggest that she go live in a real socialist country so she can grow up a bit. People leave that crap to come here! She wants to make here there. A Puerto Rican socialist, no less! Do they even have their lights back on after last summers big blow? Probably not. This gal is attractive and if she is articulate and can stand heat, the progressive and very marxist left may end up pouring millions into promoting her ala Obama. One or two congressional terms, two years as a Senator and a 2024 run for the presidency. A young, attractive, female hispanic . . the milleneials will come out in droves.
I hope this scares the devil out of the establishment Dems who thought that more Hispanics would keep them in power forever. Maybe it will change their minds a bit about open borders and illegals.
Can that be right? Nine percent of eligible or active voters turned out? Surely that must highly unusual.
What surprised me is how young she is–28. I haven’t heard much about her background, other than she was a bartender is a “craft” drink bar. (Really? Is “craft” the new word for “trendy”?). I suspect her life experience is typical of someone just entering the workforce, which is why Socialism appeals to her.
To Mel and Fractal:
So, here’s the link to the letter David Horowitz wrote to his socialist mentor, after he realized that no variety of socialism could be de-coupled from authoritarianism and massacre and turned away from his communist compadres.
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/207161/road-nowhere-david-horowitz#_ftn2
I think I got it from comments on one of Neo’s posts a couple of days ago (involving Orwell in some way); feel free to claim the credit, whoever cited it.
10% turnout is abysmal, especially when you consider how few registered voters put her over the top for the win.
Such a sweet young thing she is too.
https://libertyunyielding.com/2018/06/27/democratic-socialist-firebrand-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-claims-ice-is-running-black-sites-on-the-border/
“If you need further proof of Democrats’ incipient insanity as a group, it can be derived from the primary victory in New York’s 14th congressional district of Democratic Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who defeated 10-term Congressman Joe Crowley. For those needing a quick education in what this 28-year-old firebrand stands for, J.E. Dyer has a handy platform crib sheet at her post on the outcome of this strange election.
Another indication of how far over the deep end the Left has plunged, Ocasio-Cortez ups the ante on the claim by some that ICE is a terrorist organization by insisting the agency is running “black sites” on the border.
…
Her justification for using that extreme term to characterize the child detention facilities run by the Department of Health and Human Services is the difficulties that some reporters and members of Congress claim to have experienced in gaining access to certain facilities, which lends a “secretive nature” to the whole enterprise.
…
But as a would-be member of Congress, surely Ocasio-Cortez is aware that just last week the ACLU’s Border Litigation Project published a report based on 30,000 pages of records obtained via FOIA laying bare actual abuses at some of these facilities. The report is available to the general public by merely linking to the report’s web page.
Then again, maybe she hasn’t heard about the report. It hasn’t generated as much media interest as it might primarily because the date range of the abuses cited is 2009 to 2014: years squarely within the Obama presidency!”
a few years back I met Crowley at a Norpac meeting. I found him stereotypical as a politician. he seemed a doofus and very non-slick. he also stated that he was in a democratic district and would never lose.
he is however not down for the count. he is still on the ballot.
Is it time to re-read David Mamet’s piece from 2008?
https://www.villagevoice.com/2008/03/11/david-mamet-why-i-am-no-longer-a-brain-dead-liberal/
If only Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi, Pol Pot, the Kims, Che, Chavez, etc knew the dystopia would have been unicorn utopia. “We have all been here before”. The left never learns and millions must suffer.
Socialism is the primary drive of all MOTHERS.
That’s why it never dies, and has really taken off with suffrage.
A mother’s inner desire is to have access to great resources and then shower them upon her children, and herself.
A father’s inner compulsion is to gather resources and then shower them upon his wife and children.
That’s the dynamic.
Mothers think collectively of all her children, and usually will dole out benefits regardless of her child’s merits… an unconditional love.
Fathers offer conditional love. The kids need to behave.
Both forces are required to raise children to adulthood.
Economic and historical arguments are NOT going to change a mother’s impulses.
For ugly women, the need to tap the government looms very, very large.
So it’s to no-one’s surprise that so many of the hard core Leftists are shrill spinsters. You don’t have to go far to find them.
ColoComment Says:
June 27th, 2018 at 10:29 pm
Is it time to re-read David Mamet’s piece from 2008?
https://www.villagevoice.com/2008/03/11/david-mamet-why-i-am-no-longer-a-brain-dead-liberal/
* * *
Mamet’s conversion story still seems ripped from the headlines.
“The Constitution, written by men with some experience of actual government, assumes that the chief executive will work to be king, the Parliament will scheme to sell off the silverware, and the judiciary will consider itself Olympian and do everything it can to much improve (destroy) the work of the other two branches. So the Constitution pits them against each other, in the attempt not to achieve stasis, but rather to allow for the constant corrections necessary to prevent one branch from getting too much power for too long.
Rather brilliant. For, in the abstract, we may envision an Olympian perfection of perfect beings in Washington doing the business of their employers, the people, but any of us who has ever been at a zoning meeting with our property at stake is aware of the urge to cut through all the pernicious bullshit and go straight to firearms.
I found not only that I didn’t trust the current government (that, to me, was no surprise), but that an impartial review revealed that the faults of this president—whom I, a good liberal, considered a monster—were little different from those of a president whom I revered.”
“What about the role of government? Well, in the abstract, coming from my time and background, I thought it was a rather good thing, but tallying up the ledger in those things which affect me and in those things I observe, I am hard-pressed to see an instance where the intervention of the government led to much beyond sorrow.
But if the government is not to intervene, how will we, mere human beings, work it all out?
I wondered and read, and it occurred to me that I knew the answer, and here it is: We just seem to. How do I know? From experience. I referred to my own—take away the director from the staged play and what do you get? Usually a diminution of strife, a shorter rehearsal period, and a better production.”
“[William Allen] White was a pretty clear-headed man, and he’d seen human nature as few can. (As Twain wrote, you want to understand men, run a country paper.) White knew that people need both to get ahead and to get along, and that they’re always working at one or the other, and that government should most probably stay out of the way and let them get on with it. But, he added, there is such a thing as liberalism, and it may be reduced to these saddest of words: ” . . . and yet . . . “
The right is mooing about faith, the left is mooing about change, and many are incensed about the fools on the other side—but, at the end of the day, they are the same folks we meet at the water cooler. Happy election season.”
AesopFan, yes, a lovely soul:
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/ocasio-cortez-compares-hamas-rioters-gaza-west-virginia-teachers-strike/
Wonder if at this rate, Bernie Sanders may well lose control of the “revolution” as the Democratic Party seems to be tacking ever leftward to meet the perceived desires of “woke” voters though in so doing is risking the loss of significant swaths of its traditional DP-supporting base.
(AKA Hillary’s quandary)…
– – – – – –
Blert, interesting, but how does one explain all those women who voted GOP (or who are inclined towards libertarianism)?
Trump is many things, but it became recently more and more obvious to me that his main (and divinely prescribed) mission is The Grand Exorcist who provokes coming out of legions of demons lurking in minds of liberals and leftists of any stripe. Eventually he was able to make the whole Democrat party to lose its collective mind and became a sitting duck at ballot box.
This is the end of the age of ideologies – all of them – which began in 1789 in France and left the bloody chaos all the way along their Long March to overthrow the pillars of the Western Civilization: religion, family, private property and liberty. No new ideology emerged for the last 50 years, and the all previous projects of radical transformation of society lie in shambles, completely discredited.
I was flabbergasted that these two individuals thought that spinning the failure of Socialsim in such a way (no Democratic Socialism) was effective.
But what shocked me the most about it was how in lockstep they were, how they were both saying the same things: it meant they were getting their marching orders from someone or some newsletter email to say exactly the same thing.
Someone, somewhere thinks they have a ‘Winning Piece of Propaganda’.
Regarding Miss Ocasio-Cortez: when I see a candidate so young and fresh (of any political persuasion) I think, “They don’t even know how much they don’t know yet.” In her little piece of NYC, where the population is starting to look just like her and think just like her, she probably thinks she has it all figured out. May the political machine chew her up and spit her out.
Actually, she’ll do. Hispanic is quickly becoming the dominant group in US, so it’s just a matter of time before US has a Latin-American leftist government and become a textbook Latin-American leftist republic.
Sooner or later she’ll experience it, no need to move to another country 🙂
“Latino”
Here’s a rather curious blast from the past—2013 to be exact, with echoes of options nuclear…. (As they say, “Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia”….):
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/because-he-is-latino-the-glorious-history-of-the-democrats-filibuster-fight
Laughter is healthy (so they say). Enjoy!
https://twitter.com/redsteeze?ref_src=twsrc
@ Fractal Rabbit –
I have heard that argument many times before. My thought is that the free market seems to at least mostly work even when most people are corrupt and stupid jerks. No need to wait for really excellent people to run the show. We can start anywhere.
As for Sweden, the quick rundown is: mildly socialist 1930-1970, after 25% of the population, mostly the poorest, left for North America. Hard socialism 1970-1990. Backed off from that since then, much more free market, a bit ruthless when dealing with other countries, actually. Now in cultural crisis because the new people don’t look like them and don’t value hard work and getting along as much as they do.
Sergey Says:
June 28th, 2018 at 5:43 am
Trump is many things, but it became recently more and more obvious to me that his main (and divinely prescribed) mission is The Grand Exorcist …
* * *
That was apparent even in the primaries, as he went about pulling masks off of the other GOP candidates.
However, we would be wise to not get cocky about it.
Return of an Unclean Spirit
(Luke 11:24-26) KJV
43 When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walks through dry places, seeking rest, and finds none.
44 Then he said, I will return into my house from where I came out; and when he is come, he finds it empty, swept, and garnished.
45 Then goes he, and takes with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also to this wicked generation.
Fractal Rabbit Says:
June 28th, 2018 at 6:18 am
…
But what shocked me the most about it was how in lockstep they were, how they were both saying the same things: it meant they were getting their marching orders from someone or some newsletter email to say exactly the same thing.
* * *
As recently discussed about news stories that seem to be collusion or conspiracy, and I think some of them are, the down-stream parroting by the hoi-polloi is just that: parroting.
You can also see the parrot (dead parrot?) phenomenon if you read though commentary on right-wing sites. The same examples, quotes, aphorisms, memes come up constantly on threads with similar topics, sometimes in the exact language seen elsewhere — I have done it myself, because it’s a shorthand for “we all know what this means so we don’t have to give the details.”
Sometimes the left calls it “dog whistles” and they have their own; there is not necessarily any nefarious intent.
Mostly, we just don’t take the time to recast ideas and principles in our own words.
That, after all, is what we hire pundits to do for us!
At the end of Socialism you get — Trekonomics.
(spare yourself the chore of reading the book, but do read the whole series of articles)
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/06/28/trekonomics-the-nightmare-ends-by-amanda-s-green/
“The title of the post says it all. Perhaps, however, nightmare isn’t the correct word. Perhaps farce, or maybe even con, is more appropriate. After all, Trekonomics is a book that purports to be all about the economics of the Star Trek universe and yet the author does his best to avoid canon when it doesn’t suit his purposes and, when that fails, to pull out of thin air explanations for why what he says will happen.
I could continue looking at the book, chapter by chapter, but I’ll be honest. The author spends a lot of time saying basically the same thing. Like so many who hold out the socialist utopia, it is all hype and very little substance.”
AesopFan: I see the danger, but USA is not alike Weimar Germany or Venezuela. Lots of unclean spirits will get loose here, we already have seen Anti-Fa madness and degradation of civility even among supposed “elites”. But these unhinged Progressives hardly would get more votes for Democrats in this November or in 2020, more probably they will lose the majority of Independents and see a repeat of 2016 elections. Socialism is still a dirty word for 80% of Americans. In this point in history, leftists are walking dead.
49.8% Hispanic. That’s a big difficulty. I was going to suggest that the incumbent challenge her as an independent in the general election as Joe Lieberman did.
I had read the Mamet piece when it came out, but remembered little.
Aesop left out what I thought was the best part.
“But if the government is not to intervene, how will we, mere human beings, work it all out?”
“I wondered and read, and it occurred to me that I knew the answer, and here it is: We just seem to. How do I know? From experience. I referred to my own—take away the director from the staged play and what do you get? Usually a diminution of strife, a shorter rehearsal period, and a better production.”
“The director, generally, does not cause strife, but his or her presence impels the actors to direct (and manufacture) claims designed to appeal to Authority—that is, to set aside the original goal (staging a play for the audience) and indulge in politics, the purpose of which may be to gain status and influence outside the ostensible goal of the endeavor.”
So what is true for the macro is also true for the micro, and vice versa. But sometimes, we can see the basic principles at work with our own eyes, in the micro. IF, we can see the forest for the trees.
TommyJay Says:
June 28th, 2018 at 3:14 pm
I had read the Mamet piece when it came out, but remembered little.
…
So what is true for the macro is also true for the micro, and vice versa. But sometimes, we can see the basic principles at work with our own eyes, in the micro. IF, we can see the forest for the trees.
* * *
The worldview of left seems to be different from the right in very basic ways, regarding power and who should have it and for what purposes.
I encountered this comment today, and thought an observation about the Red Hen would apply to this Red Chick:
https://www.samizdata.net/2018/06/ejecting-people-from-restaurants/
Ejecting people from restaurants
Rob Fisher (Surrey) · Civil liberty & Regulation · North American affairs
“The Whitehouse press secretary was required to leave a restaurant because the restaurant owner did not like her views. This seems like a perfectly civilised and non-violent way of objecting to views or actions. A restaurant owner should be free to require people to leave for any reason; the restaurant is private property.*
The Guardian article quotes Walter Shaub‘s tweet:
There’s no ethics rule against Sarah Sanders fans being cartoonish hypocrites in defending merchants discriminating against gay people but howling when a merchant rejects a human rights violator based on her involvement in harming babies & children. Ridicule will have to suffice.
The Guardian article does not mention the obvious response:
Conservatives aren’t arguing the restaurant didn’t have the right. Not asking for the government to step in and force the restaurant to serve her. Not going to the Supreme Court either. Let the free market decide.
It is surprising how often it is necessary to spell out the difference between not liking something and wanting the state to intervene to stop it.”
* *
And there is also the venerable wisdom of Matthew 7:5 “Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.”
*They are, of course, referring to all the comparisons with the Masterpiece Cake decision.
She is also a blithering idiot. Insanely stupid. Unhinged. But then, neo, you have already pointed out that she’s a socialist, so the stupid part goes with.
She’s accusing ICE of running “black sites” down on the border.
Fractal Rabbit said:
All socialism is despotic. It’s a socioeconomic creed based on greed and envy and is always enforced at the point of a gun. Always. Ask your super genius “Democratic Socialism” co-workers what happens when they vote to take other people’s property physical property, bank accounts, and other forms of wealth and the owner of said assets says “No.” If anybody has the slightest shred of understanding of how human nature works, it’s impossible to redistribute other people’s property unless it’s done by armed agents of the state.
https://babylonbee.com/news/democratic-socialist-candidates-primary-win-revoked-after-all-her-votes-forcibly-redistributed/
1. Must take exception. She’s not that attractive.
2. You could call her ‘hispanic’, but a more precisely descriptive term would be ‘Puerto Rican’. Puerto Rico has been, since about 1960 or thereabouts, a sadly unerperforming society. As we speak, those with roots in Puerto Rico live, as often as not, on the mainland. Alas, as a group, these settlers have been…sadly underperforming. I think that tends to produce a dysfunctional political class (and is promoted by such a class).
3. She has no trade. She actually attended a private research university which rejects 70% of those who apply. She followed an academic rather than a vocational course of study. Didn’t do her much good. Ten years after matriculating, she was tending bar. Nothing wrong with ordinary service employments per se, but you don’t need a BA degree for that sort of work. You don’t need an AA either if you’re working in bars and restaurants. She appears to have been at loose ends for some time not making a decision.
4. We really don’t need another politician for life a la upChuck Schumer. It would be agreeable if we had a constitutional provision that you had to be between the ages of 39 and 72 to run for office in any jurisdiction with more than 1,000,000 people living in it. It would also be agreeable if you had to vacate any office which you’d held for more than 10 of the last 12 years and were debarred from running for any office if you’d hit that wall during the term for which you were competing.
Art Deco Said:
On the outside she is. On the inside she’s an inhuman soulless ghoul like all leftists. You have to look at the heart. And since she’s a self avowed socialist I know she doesn’t have one. Someday, maybe soon, she’ll be just as ugly on the outside as she is on the inside.
BTW, I didn’t mean to say she is “that attractive.”
Merely that she’s more attractive than Crowley. Which considering I’m not gay isn’t saying much. It’s a very low bar and she squeezed by.
But I expect more honest ugliness from this one from her predecessor. Because he had to play a certain game and she doen’t think there are any rules that apply to her.
Why do the leftists keep thinking that they need to keep giving me h3ll to get Trump reellected.
On the outside she is. On the inside she’s an inhuman soulless ghoul like all leftists. You have to look at the heart.
Nope. Facial features out of proportion to each other and the tendons and ligaments in her neck too prominent. (BTW, Crowley’s not FAB and he’s not into physical culture, so he wouldn’t appeal to homosexual men, either).
You’re assessment of her person as being a function of her political views is de trop.
So, what you’re saying is my assessment of her outward appearance is unwelcome. But you can’t say I am being inaccurate nor am I wrong.
Thank you for confirming everything I wanted to confirm.
So sorry, but not sorry. Fate catches up to us all.
Steve57 Says:
June 30th, 2018 at 5:52 am
https://babylonbee.com/news/democratic-socialist-candidates-primary-win-revoked-after-all-her-votes-forcibly-redistributed/
* *
How long until some one cites this as “fake news” instead of satire?
So, what you’re saying is my assessment of her outward appearance is unwelcome. But you can’t say I am being inaccurate nor am I wrong.
No, that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying people aren’t the sum of their political views.