and AOC supporters will not bring up statements she made that are verifiably wrong.

have an example?


 I can think of 4 right off the top of my head:

"$21T in Pentagon accounting errors. Medicare for All costs ~$32T. That means 66% of Medicare for All could have been funded already by the Pentagon."

 Incorrect.  At first I thought it was a typo until I realized she read some article and didn't understand the difference in one dollar being miscounted across multiple channels versus a new dollar for each miscount.

 National security spending has been documented since 1940 and as of 2018, cumulatively, the number is at 643,266,000,000.  She claims the Pentagon alone, a portion of national security cost, miscount 21,000,000,000,000 all by itself.

 She also said:
"Just last year we gave the military a $700 billion dollar budget increase, which they didn’t even ask for."

 Her campaign later admitted this was wrong, and alluded to it being intentionally misleading.  The total budget neared 700million, the increase was 61.

 She stated that ICE needed to "Fill" 34 thousand beds.  This is wrong, she referenced the 2016 Appropriations Act, and it says "shall maintain a level of not less than 34,000 detention beds through September 30, 2016."

 Filling beds and maintaining beds is like saying maintaining trucks is the same as driving them.

https://www.congress.gov/114/bills/hr2029/BILLS-114hr2029enr.pdf

 Another one that is so obviously false one shouldn't even need to go to the Bureau of Labor Statistics to verify:

"Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs. Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their family."

 There's more, but people can see where I am coming from.  And yes Trump has significantly more inaccurate statements, but my point isn't volume of inaccuracies, it's that most people argue over the person and not the policy.

"we wanted to exploit their cheap labor, part of that deal was IP to them...  "

 This is not exactly how that works.  Not every IP and duplicate item made in China is due to a negotiated release of that IP.  

 The whole thing is a mess since it's hard to create a valuation, and there is a lot of moving parts.  Chinese business is just as greedy as the US, they are not typically "victims" of some aggressive American strategy to get sweatshop prices out of poor workers.  They outright steal or leverage, illegal yet unenforceable, a lot of product and content.

Eegore wrote on 05/24/19 at 10:48:10:



no, but it's still true that WE WENT TO THEM.   and, yes, they are the victims of us preaching our capitalistic way of life and  then we go in and say look how poor your are...    we shame them, then offer them "the way" and then exploit them.

and if you have them make it.... they kinda need to know how to make it, you know, they need the IP...  otherwise they can't make it...  so, you want to give them knowledge and then say, no no no, you can't use that for anything besides what we tell you to???   um...  good luck with that

MnSpring wrote on 05/24/19 at 10:30:41:



I've looked, I just spent like 30 minutes looking for any reference to this....  all i can find is there might have been an internal memo from her staff about farting cows...    wow! that's condemnable!!  besides that it's all a bunch of conservative SPIN hacks that are just lying.

AND  you believe them..... sad.  

and again...   the only thingy holster here is your as shole...   that's why you cant' think straight, got all that crap pounded up into your skull where your brain should be

MnSpring wrote on 05/24/19 at 11:11:55:


okay try 2 year old.. if that's more your speed...   since you obviously can't handle growing up anymore...  you're about that age where you need to start wearing diapers again aren't you?

"fair enough, so did the article misunderstand it and she just repeated it or ...  is this a repeated directed thing she's been saying? "

 She was wrong, the article was accurate and not complex.  The point is she stated something incorrect similar to other politicians.

"so, she's corrected this then? and she's not repeating this and using it as a messaging campaign?"

 She has not corrected herself.  Her campaign, after being confronted, released an email.

"I want more context for this one...you're kind of splitting hairs"

 In official regulatory context "maintaining" is very different than "filling".  As in 1000 storage containers being "maintained" or kept in useable state is different than "filled" or being volumetrically full of tangible product.

 A jail ordered to "maintain" 100 cells must have 100 useable cells, but some, or all, can be empty.

 A jail ordered to "fill" 100 cells, must have inmates in all 100.

 That, to me, is not splitting hairs, it is a common regulatory term used in many avanues of business or civic management.  

"are you saying no one is working 2 jobs? ... "

 No.  I am saying that the term "everybody is working two jobs" is less accurate by a very very large discrepancy.  That is a very inaccurate statement.


"are you as mad, or madder at Trump for having MORE than you are at AOC?   do you see her's as more egregious or something? "

 I have no opinion on trump or AOC, I couldn't imagine any reason I would consider anger an option because they say things that are wrong.  We all do that.

 I am saying that when humans here post inaccuracies they do not take multiple parties into account.  They aren't actually arguing the inaccuracy, they are arguing about the person.

Eegore wrote on 05/24/19 at 11:36:57:


no, I am arguing about the inaccuracy, I TAKE TRUMP LITERALLY, NOT SERIOUSLY (which is a completely asinine statement btw) remember...   oh, but we cant' dare treat AOC the same...