Cuomo Ocasio-Cortez Interview

#5
That was about as high quality of an interview with a politician you'll ever see on TV in a short segment . She managed to defend her points and address specific policy issues passionately in a 10 min time frame. I'm really not sure where this talking point of her being a bumbling idiot are coming from.

The non US context I can provide is this: Essentially every western country can't believe the US doesn't have a universal healthcare system. And her policies for free college and a green new deal are policies either in place or being taken seriously in the political discourse.
 
#9
That was about as high quality of an interview with a politician you'll ever see on TV in a short segment . She managed to defend her points and address specific policy issues passionately in a 10 min time frame. I'm really not sure where this talking point of her being a bumbling idiot are coming from.

The non US context I can provide is this: Essentially every western country can't believe the US doesn't have a universal healthcare system. And her policies for free college and a green new deal are policies either in place or being taken seriously in the political discourse.
The issues with her positions only become apparent under scrutinization, CNN are not going to push her at all.

For context Ben Shapiro offered 10k to her campaign or a charity of her choice to debate him, Candace offered 20k after that.... she doesn’t want to debate either for obvious reasons.
 
#10
The issues with her positions only become apparent under scrutinization, CNN are not going to push her at all.

For context Ben Shapiro offered 10k to her campaign or a charity of her choice to debate him, Candace offered 20k after that.... she doesn’t want to debate either for obvious reasons.
Because it's Ben Shapiro? His 'debating' boils down to simply saying so much unfounded nonsense in a short amount of time that there's not enough time to argue everything point by point.
 
#11
The issues with her positions only become apparent under scrutinization, CNN are not going to push her at all.

For context Ben Shapiro offered 10k to her campaign or a charity of her choice to debate him, Candace offered 20k after that.... she doesn’t want to debate either for obvious reasons.
I disagree. She has come under much more scrutiny from the media because her points are outside the acceptable discourse on public media. Like she pointed out, look at mainstream media interviews and discussion around the recent tax cuts. Who was challenging Republicans on anything other than partisan theatre then?

On the Shapiro debate issue, I could offer her 10k and if she accepted I bet I would make that back in YouTube revenue over the weekend. That doesn't mean anything. Think of it this way. If The Young Turks or your hardcore leftist of choice offered to debate your Republican wunderkind, would you be as eager?

Because it's Ben Shapiro? His 'debating' boils down to simply saying so much unfounded nonsense in a short amount of time that there's not enough time to argue everything point by point.
This guy gets it. Shapiro should have a " Gish gallop" neck tattoo. I don't get the love for Shapiro, he uses the same clickbait and dishonest editing tactics as any other modern unprincipled media outlet( meaning, he will air the full interview, then produce the standard 20 minute analysis video that everyone watches that is dishonest). Regardless of how well she did, they would find a way to generate a month long feedback loop of how "crazy" she is.
 
#12
The issues with her positions only become apparent under scrutinization, CNN are not going to push her at all.

For context Ben Shapiro offered 10k to her campaign or a charity of her choice to debate him, Candace offered 20k after that.... she doesn’t want to debate either for obvious reasons.
Debating with those clowns is a waste of time. She needs to win an election.
 
#14
Because it's Ben Shapiro? His 'debating' boils down to simply saying so much unfounded nonsense in a short amount of time that there's not enough time to argue everything point by point.
That’s disingenuous, he mostly relies on facts to build his argument.... it may be a different slant on statistics etc. but he is truthful. You can’t criticize someone for delivering their points quickly and concisely.

If it was a left winger delivering such debating skills, you would be celebrating.
What is the problem with Candace then?
 
#16
I think she is great.
Always well prepared, informed and read up on the topics.

I think the dems should unite and push for her as their bid in 2020.

Cortez 2020. Victory is in the bag!
She’s a moron, she doesn’t know who the head of the party is, she is an economics graduate and doesnt seem to understand any theories, concept or use the relevant terms....
She amalgamated public and private spending on health to compare it to only public in her theoretical free Medicare for all system..... private spending doesn’t affect the countries balance sheet darling! (I realize it was taken from a study)
 
Last edited:
#18
She’s a moron, she doesn’t know who the head of the party is, she is an economics graduate and doesnt seem to understand any theories, concept or use the relevant terms....
She amalgamated public and private spending on health to compare it to only public in her theoretical free Medicare for all system..... private spending doesn’t affect the countries balance sheet darling! (I realize it was taken from a study)
I'm not sure if your being intentionally obtuse here, but I'll try and break this down.

- She certainly knows who the party is. She's speaking this way yo either make a more general statement about the party or to avoid talking about her disagreements of Pelosi, depending how charitable you want to be.

- She at no point attempted to make the distinction between private and public spending, she has explained in more technical detail in other interviews, and her health care answer is quite sensible. Her point that she has explained is that the country is currently spending xTrillion dollars on healthcare. While yes, it's currently private spending and a UHC system would be public, the American people would save overall. The spending would now be tax revenue instead of insurance premiums, deductibles, etc. Her point about the Obamacare ruling is added framing due to the boogeyman of increased taxes, that the supreme court views Obamacare as a form of tax anyways.



I can't watch the video as I’m at work but just curious what are the funeral costs in the US like?
How she used 'funeral costs' was a way to explain that the current US healthcare system causes death when people can't afford care.
 
#19
Because it's Ben Shapiro? His 'debating' boils down to simply saying so much unfounded nonsense in a short amount of time that there's not enough time to argue everything point by point.
If all Ben says is nonsesne, then shouldn't she bat him away easily. It should be an easy 10k for her.

Back on topic, of course she looked good. CNN gave her a softball interview that is literally designed to make her look good. That's the point.
 
#20
Why are we pretending she is a good candidate? Lots of angles to come at her from like her next to nothing education on the Israeli-palestinian relationship but let's go with economics which seems to be her fortay since she majored in economics right!

1. “Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs”

No. People working multiple jobs has no distorting effect on the unemployment rate.

2. "Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week.”

Again, no. The number of hours worked also does not affect the unemployment rate

3. “One of the largest drivers of wealth inequality in the United States is inherited wealth.”

Actually inheritances decrease wealth inequality

Look, she's still young, but she's wildly off base when it comes to a myriad of issues. All these people labeling her as the new face of the Democratic party. Jesus.
 
#21
Why are we pretending she is a good candidate? Lots of angles to come at her from like her next to nothing education on the Israeli-palestinian relationship but let's go with economics which seems to be her fortay since she majored in economics right!

1. “Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs”

No. People working multiple jobs has no distorting effect on the unemployment rate.

2. "Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week.”

Again, no. The number of hours worked also does not affect the unemployment rate

3. “One of the largest drivers of wealth inequality in the United States is inherited wealth.”

Actually inheritances decrease wealth inequality

Look, she's still young, but she's wildly off base when it comes to a myriad of issues. All these people labeling her as the new face of the Democratic party. Jesus.
Precisely, I couldn’t remember all the points I had heard and rolled my eyes but then I am not even American. So I have little use to remember.

Just a general observation but she also seems to be confused or disoriented all the time too...
 
#22
Why are we pretending she is a good candidate? Lots of angles to come at her from like her next to nothing education on the Israeli-palestinian relationship but let's go with economics which seems to be her fortay since she majored in economics right!

1. “Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs”

No. People working multiple jobs has no distorting effect on the unemployment rate.

2. "Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week.”

Again, no. The number of hours worked also does not affect the unemployment rate

3. “One of the largest drivers of wealth inequality in the United States is inherited wealth.”

Actually inheritances decrease wealth inequality

Look, she's still young, but she's wildly off base when it comes to a myriad of issues. All these people labeling her as the new face of the Democratic party. Jesus.
None of what you wrote is a direct quote. I can find you the interview tomorrow if you like but I remember the conversation.

Her point wasn't that because many Americans work 2 jobs therefore unemployment is low. Her point was that yes, while unemployment is low, how much does that matter if people need to work 2 jobs or 60+ hours a week just to survive? I didn't think her initial soundbite was very clean, but she clarified her point a few seconds later.

As to your third point I have no idea the point you're trying to make. The Walton kids have ~ 60 billion, and didn't start any company or earn their way as an example. Is this inequality sane in a reasonable society?
 
#23
None of what you wrote is a direct quote. I can find you the interview tomorrow if you like but I remember the conversation.

Her point wasn't that because many Americans work 2 jobs therefore unemployment is low. Her point was that yes, while unemployment is low, how much does that matter if people need to work 2 jobs or 60+ hours a week just to survive? I didn't think her initial soundbite was very clean, but she clarified her point a few seconds later.

As to your third point I have no idea the point you're trying to make. The Walton kids have ~ 60 billion, and didn't start any company or earn their way as an example. Is this inequality sane in a reasonable society?

Even when she corrected, she made no sense.
 
#24
She’s a moron, she doesn’t know who the head of the party is, she is an economics graduate and doesnt seem to understand any theories, concept or use the relevant terms....
She amalgamated public and private spending on health to compare it to only public in her theoretical free Medicare for all system..... private spending doesn’t affect the countries balance sheet darling! (I realize it was taken from a study)
Whooooosh :)
 
#27
I think she is great.
Always well prepared, informed and read up on the topics.

I think the dems should unite and push for her as their bid in 2020.

Cortez 2020. Victory is in the bag!
First of all she will not be 35 in 2020 so she can't run for president but if she could omg please I would love for her to run.

The whole middle of the USA would turn into red and Trump would win in a landslide. Oh god I wish she could run in 2020
 
#29
Pretty rich to criticize her intelligence when we have a president who routinely spouts nonsense, never thinks before speaking, and utilizes a fourth grade vocabulary at best. Sad!
I agree.

She was asked about confirming the patriarchal hierarchy system with a white rich person on top, ruling everyone and she responded as a true democrat that we are all equal.
No one is above or leads anyone else.

We are all equal.

Anyone that criticizes this is a right winger mole just trying to destroy the working class when we trying to rise up and get equality.
You and your micro agressions make me want to puke.

Cortez 2020
 
Last edited:
#30
I agree.

She was asked about confirming the patriarchal hierarchy system with a white rich person on top, ruling everyone and she responded as a true democrat that we are all equal.
No one is above or leads anyone else.

We are all equal.

Anyone that criticizes this is a right winger mole just trying to destroy the working class when we trying to rise up and get equality.
You and your micro agressions make me want to puke.

Cortez 2020
Dude Cortez can't run for president so dont even say Cortez 2020. Also we are all not equal. We all have strengths and weaknesses and a system that is fair does not make us all equal.

Video for context:

 
#31
Dude Cortez can't run for president so dont even say Cortez 2020. Also we are all not equal. We all have strengths and weaknesses and a system that is fair does not make us all equal.
Again. White supremacy keeping a woman of color down.
Lets fix this! Lets punch these Nazis out and get a woman POC into office. We are the right side of history,

Cortez 2020.
 
Last edited:
#33
Lol you gotta be a troll at this point
Jesus. I already made it clear I am : https://www.neogaf.com/threads/cuomo-ocasio-cortez-interview.1464540/post-253384450

What is so hard to understand? Reading is hard, as Barbie says.


Anyway, I am standing up for a POC candidate that wants to erase the damage that Trumpster has made and heal the nation. And you and other vile far-right
extremists want to push her out of the light and keep her down. Shame on you, Trumpster.

Or are you meta-trolling me? If so, High Five !!!
 
Last edited:
#34
Jesus. I already made it clear I am : https://www.neogaf.com/threads/cuomo-ocasio-cortez-interview.1464540/post-253384450

What is so hard to understand? Reading is hard, as Barbie says.


Anyway, I am standing up for a POC candidate that wants to erase the damage that Trumpster has made and heal the nation. And you and other vile far-right
extremists want to push her out of the light and keep her down. Shame on you, Trumpster.

Or are you meta-trolling me? If so, High Five !!!
;) good job I guess lol
 
#42
Fact-checking Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s media blitz


WaPo rightfully calling out AOC for some incorrect and over-generalizing. This is the kind of shit I worry about with her. She seems to green and inexperienced and eager to spout off talking points without having a deep knowledge of her topics. I hope I'm proven wrong, because I don't want her to become a symbol of the Democratic Party if she's just going to be an easy target.
 
#44
I can't watch the video as I’m at work but just curious what are the funeral costs in the US like?
In the south, in several states you can find funeral homes that will cremate for 700. Nothing fancy and you get a wake. But funeral costs can go up into the high teens k's and some churches pay for everything if your a long standing member.

Life Insurance market also covers that. So her point is so out of place and irrelevant it becomes apparent to me she is appealing to the poor and ill informed.
 
#45
Why are we pretending she is a good candidate? Lots of angles to come at her from like her next to nothing education on the Israeli-palestinian relationship but let's go with economics which seems to be her fortay since she majored in economics right!

1. “Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs”

No. People working multiple jobs has no distorting effect on the unemployment rate.

2. "Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week.”

Again, no. The number of hours worked also does not affect the unemployment rate

3. “One of the largest drivers of wealth inequality in the United States is inherited wealth.”

Actually inheritances decrease wealth inequality

Look, she's still young, but she's wildly off base when it comes to a myriad of issues. All these people labeling her as the new face of the Democratic party. Jesus.
1. Democrats need a talking point to downplay unemployment numbers, which are generally reported as positive news for Trump
2. A lot of people don't know how unemployment is calculated. I'm willing to bet large amounts of the democratic voting base agree with this false talking point. I mean, it's not like our free press (like CNN) is holding her to any standard. This is a stupid democratic talking point
3. Again, stupid democratic talking point. I don't think she really understands any issue, but she knows what democrats/socialists want to hear, so she repeats it. True or not.

Can I ask something from everyone with some sense of humour.
From now on and until the end of the year, if we all just sign all our messages with "Cortez 2020. Victory for humanity!"
that would be really funny. Anyone with me?


Cortez 2020. Victory for humanity!
You gotta put a hashtag on it

#Cortez2020
 
Last edited:
#46
Pretty rich to criticize her intelligence when we have a president who routinely spouts nonsense, never thinks before speaking, and utilizes a fourth grade vocabulary at best. Sad!
The difference is the dumb shit he says is rarely reflected In his policy.

Like he makes fun of LeBron and is called a racist yet black unemployment is at a record low so....

No. With her, I have no doubt the dumb shit she says will also be reflected in her policy if she were to be elevated to a higher position
 
#47
Another classic NeoGAF circle jerk thread. Please continue to disregard her actual policies, comments, and clarifications and debate your strawman boogeyman instead.

There's plenty of room for actual debate on her lack of experience and preferred policies, but making shit up and intentionally being obtuse just makes you look silly.
 
#48
Another classic NeoGAF circle jerk thread. Please continue to disregard her actual policies, comments, and clarifications and debate your strawman boogeyman instead.

There's plenty of room for actual debate on her lack of experience and preferred policies, but making shit up and intentionally being obtuse just makes you look silly.
I've considered all of those things, which is why I went from originally thinking her nomination was a great thing, to being absolutely dumb flustered that she is a viable candidate for congress. It's almost like the people who voted for her were sending a message along the lines of "you think you mastered putting someone in office that doesn't belong there, well, hold my beer!"
 
#49
That was a really good interview. My question for Cuomo and CNN in general is this:

When Obama won the presidency, Pelosi was asked, “Do you work for the President?” She answered, “I work with the President.” They pressed her on this. The same happened here with Cortez. “Is Nancy Pelosi your leader?” Cortez, “We work together as a collective” and then later as he pressed her “I recognize Nancy as the leader” or something around that.

Why does CNN keep putting Democrats in awkward positions about who is leader? Is it to pressure people to follow the leader? What is the point of this question? Does it serve any real purpose?
 
#50
That was a really good interview. My question for Cuomo and CNN in general is this:

When Obama won the presidency, Pelosi was asked, “Do you work for the President?” She answered, “I work with the President.” They pressed her on this. The same happened here with Cortez. “Is Nancy Pelosi your leader?” Cortez, “We work together as a collective” and then later as he pressed her “I recognize Nancy as the leader” or something around that.

Why does CNN keep putting Democrats in awkward positions about who is leader? Is it to pressure people to follow the leader? What is the point of this question? Does it serve any real purpose?
I'm not exactly a CNN defender, but in their defense those are two really different questions. One is asking the leader of the party in the house whether the executive calls the shots for her or not. She rightfully said they work together which was perfect and accurate because they are in different branches of the government. Asking Cortz if the D leader in the house is her leader is not comparable because they would be in the same branch, the parties have whips, and the parties often vote in lockstep.

Also don't want you thinking my post is meant to criticize yours. In both cases the questions boil down to "do you think for yourself?" and I can understand why that may seem awkward to ask like you said. I think its proper though, because the opposition alleges they don't day in and day out.