LostArtist wrote on 05/24/19 at 11:52:50:

"...  oh, but we cant' dare treat AOC the same...

You, (and others) are NOT.
You are giving the, 'C ock Holster' a Great BIG PASS.

"so she made a mistake...  was it an honest one that she's not pursuing as a messaging aspect of her campaign or is she doubling down and calling everything "fake news""

 Yes.  Again - the point is she stated something incorrect similar to other politicians.

"so that's a correction...  under her direction assumingly right? "

 I typically avoid assumption.  I have witnessed situations where campaign managers act in defiance of their client's wishes as well as campaign managers act in accordance.  I don't know here, so I will not make an assessment.

"even so, I'll give you that she may not have a full understanding of all the details of everything, but her point of not wanting a quota for ICE detainees is a good one right? "

 I would have to see a cost to funding breakdown.  "it may have been " and "I think in practice" is not a validating statement of fact to me.  

 I have worked in Federal environments where the outside perspective is that funding is allocated by usage when it is not.  The idea that I would get paid more per bullet used is a direct opposite outcome from what actually happens.

"and no other politician ever exaggerates like that"

 I never said that, you did.  I very specifically indicated that other politicians do, and even included everyone else on the planet:

"because they say things that are wrong.  We all do that.

T And T Garage wrote on 05/24/19 at 12:40:36:

AOC ... She is the future of the democratic party .

So very glad to know you personally, LOVE a,
Socialist, Fairy Dust Springing, Ultra Liberal,
Who wants, Gimme/Gimme/Gimme,
with not the FIRST Clue of how to pay for it !

 

MnSpring wrote on 05/24/19 at 12:54:56:



well, see first we hire a someone to put you in a dunk box and let you have a mega phone and allow people to pay to pull a lever to dunk you into some water...  after they hear you for about 2 seconds they'll be lining up to dunk your sorry butt...  see MN, even you have your place in the new Utopia!!!  :p

"but you are assuming her mistakes are for ill intent, and you've never brought up Trump's inaccuracies here, so apparently those never bother you... but someone rude makes a comment about AOC and you're all over defending their stance... "

 Really?  Going this route again even though all of this is documented?

 I never said anything about intent.  Never.

"and you've never brought up Trump's inaccuracies here"

 Incorrect.  I have made threads specific to Trump's inaccurate comments.  

 Explain how this thread, that I started, is not very specifically about Trump making an inaccurate statement:

http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1546008345/4#4



 I even brought it up in this very thread, I stated:

"I think all politicians do this, including Trump.  As referenced here he did say the Chinese Government pays import tariffs, which in entirely wrong.  Also as referenced here he told US Military personnel that he gave them the largest raise in a decade which every person there knew was wrong."

 You can pretend I "never pointed out Trump's inaccuracies" but everyone here has seen me do this in the past.  It's right here on these very forums.  Until You asked, I have never brought up anything specific about AOC.

"but someone rude makes a comment about AOC and you're all over defending their stance"

 Incorrect.  I have never defended anyone's stance.  YOU asked for examples.  You did that, I didn't say anything about AOC as a person, I have no opinion of her.  Find a thread where I made any comment about her.

 I said she, as well as Trump, (literally the words "including Trump") makes comments with authority about things they don't know about.

 That is all I said until I was asked for examples, then asked more questions about those examples and now you want to pretend I never criticize Trump when I did.  Literally in this very thread?

Eegore wrote on 05/24/19 at 13:35:10:



yeah, fair enough...   sometimes I just like to argue for argument's sake  

justin_o_guy2 wrote on 05/23/19 at 20:52:07:


She's saying
Let's take the money we were gonna GIVE  Amazon and USE it to create jobs.
She's dumbernshit.
You Can't walk that back.

They weren't
Giving
Money to Amazon, though, were they?
Not making them pay property taxes doesn't create money to use. It's too simple to need an explanation, and yet, here I am.. TRYING to get adults to understand WHY she's an idiot.
Do people actually believe New York was GIVING CASH to Amazon?
Do people really not understand that the deal, a common deal, offered by cities to corporations as incentive to build, the state would Exempt them from property taxes for a period of time.
Why does that confuse sophisticated adults?
It's clear to me.
Wal-Mart has been a YUGE beneficiary of that very idea.

Running Amazon off cost that state tons of jobs.
And it would not have Cost them anything.
Zero.