937
Democrats were ‘horrifically cruel’ to me, says Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
(www.thetimes.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2026
937 points (98.3% liked)
politics
31898 readers
3988 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
'...Anyway, that's why I'm excited to give Hakeem Jefferies my full and unconditioned support.'
(Did the article mention this? It's paywalled for me.)
I can defend that. Jeffries is a nonentity; house democrats have been able to walk past him for 2 years. Schumer is far more of a problem, and has the contacts and connections to ratfuck anyone over anything. When Schumer wants to raise money and whip for Israel, he opens his Rolodex. When Jeffries wants to raise money and whip for Israel, he asks Schumer to open his Rolodex. Both need to go, but ousting Schumer as majority leader is step 1 towards that. You can disagree with the political calculus on that, but there is political calculus on that.
I'm not a parliamentary expert, but that doesn't sound correct to me.
Doesn't the speaker control who chairs each committee and what legislation makes it to the floor?
As speaker, Jeffries can -- and will -- put allies as chairs of committees to make sure that Medicare for All never gets out of committee. He could single-handedly prevent a vote to abolish ICE from taking place, even if a majority were in support. The speaker is third in line of succession to the presidency, and is arguably the most powerful position in the federal government after the President.
I don't think your characterization matches reality at all.
Just wanted to swoop back after recent revealings by an incoming house member: Fuck Jeffries. The other person who replied to you was right about what I meant, but, it is very disheartening to see... Like obviously the establishment will bully people to support Jeffries. But it's disheartening to see AOC among the people that tactic is successful on.
Fwiw, I have a theory about AOC: I admit, I was way into her cult of personality a few years ago, and I know a lot of people either still are or have snapped the other way.
I think on January 6th she got a big taste of what being a Malcolm X or a Che Guevara really means. She's talked about getting trapped in the capital in Katie Porter's office, and I think after surviving what she expected was her own assassination by a fascist mob at 30 she realized that she wasn't really as down with the revolutionary life as she thought.
Which I can forgive. I don't blame her. She's not the cold-blooded badass we'd hoped for, and that's okay.
She's a good member of congress, but we're going to have to look elsewhere for the future leader we thought she might be.
I think he is not talking about what the speaker can do, but what sort of person Jeffries is personally. I can kind of see it, he interviews kind of like phone tree. So if he 'leads' like that then he may be a fairly mundane pass through for whatever most folks are going with. Others can and have meddled a lot, but he may just be background character enough to insert much of anything specific to the role.
But not crazy about the concept of a guy that I don't think can think on his feet in being in such a high visibility role either way.
Did she say the bad treatment ended? She's probably getting bullied to support him like everyone else.