393
Ocasio-Cortez Loses the Democratic Socialists’ Endorsement Over Israel
(www.nytimes.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 14 Jul 2024
393 points (87.4% liked)
politics
19135 readers
1142 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 politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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 a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
She's an incumbent in a heavily gerrymandered safe seat. Very little was going to pry her out shy of the kind of primary upset she used to take the seat in the first place.
But even as the ostensibly far-left flank of the party, she's constantly pulling her punches in order to avoid getting censored and reprimanded within the Democrat's caucus. Its not inconceivable that she could be thrown out, the same way George Santos was, if enough of her colleagues decide being Pro-Palestinian rises to the level of an expulsion-worthy ethics violation.
You can argue the DSA is unreasonable. And you can argue that Congress is so swarmed with AIPAC loyalists that not being censored is cause for alarm. But however you slice it, she's putting her career ahead of any kind of personal conviction.
Do you mean New York is gerrymandered in the other direction? The 2022 map is +4% efficient gap for Republican. So she has her seat dispite the gerrymandering going the other direction.
I'm not with the tankies, but I do think you have a misunderstanding of how gerrymandering works, so I wanted to try explaining it.
Part of gerrymandering is packing:
The committee packs as many voters of the party they want to discriminate against, in as few districts as possible. This creates a lot of wasted votes in those packed (now safe) districts, which will benefit the other party in other more contested districts. So yes, the gerrymandering benefits the republican party when looking at ALL districts, but democrats within the packed districts have very safe general elections.
AOC is elected in one of those safe packed districts, so in that way she "benefitted" from the gerrymandering. I'm not going to hold that against her though, she didn't make the map and the fpp voting system isn't her fault either.
This picture shows it best imo: in one of the disproportiate examples there's a majority of blue voters, but thanks to 2 packed blue districts, there are more yellow representatives. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering#/media/File%3ADifferingApportionment.svg
Yeah that’s what the efficiency gap measures: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficiency_gap
Although I’m getting different numbers for the NY efficiency gap. It could be D leaning but other places calculate it as R.
The statewide efficiency gap is when you look at wasted votes across all districts of that state, it is not applicable to any single district. It is not correct to state that aoc was elected despite a state efficiency gap, because that gap is not applicable to the single district that she was elected in.
Court rules N.Y. Democrats gerrymandered congressional map: The judges ruled that the 2022 map “was drawn to discourage competition and favor Democrats.”
Regardless, NY-14 is a D+40 seat. Hard pressed to name a seat anywhere in the country that's safer.