AOC in campaign money trouble

[The Black Party]

She said one smart thing one time so she should be absolved of all accusations.

[Czechoslovakia and Zakarpattia]

Washington Examiner has been spewing anti AOC nonsense for the last several months and have been shown to be willing to outright lie in favor of Trumpism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washingto ... ial_stance

Don’t...use Wikipedia as a source.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-examiner/
This one better?

[Liriena]

If she is concerned about climate change, where are the examples of her acting in her life to reduce her contribution? It's a perfectly relevant question to ask.

Not really. Why should a sole individual have to bear the burden of "fixing" climate change with her consumer choices when that's not the main contributor to climate change? But furthermore, you are acting as if one instance of her riding a car proves that she hasn't done anything in her life to reduce her individual carbon footprint, which there's no way you could really know unless (a) you were involved in her personal life, (b) you were stalking her or (c) she made enough of her personal lifestyle choices public for you to form a complete picture of how eco-friendly she is.

And you're very rude to suggest that I'm "purposefully" missing her point. I'm arguing in good faith. I'd appreciate if you didn't suggest otherwise.

If you are arguing in good faith, then you are making a bad argument in good faith.

[Aclion]

That's a dodge, really. The fact is that she and her staff could use public transportation but choose transportation with a higher carbon footprint. That shows an unwillingness to actually live by her principles.

And you are purposefully missing the point of her principles and doing what neoliberalism has been doing for years when it comes to environmental policy: making individual consumers responsible, rather than paying attention to the larger picture of systemic and structural issues, particularly on the supply side.

Again, her argument wasn't "individual Americans have to stop using cars right now". Her argument was "invest in more efficient forms of transportation so individual Americans won't need to use gas-fueled cars in the near future". You are holding her to a standard she never set for anyone.

No you are purposefully misrepresenting the point. The point is; why would she expect that Americans would switch from cars to trains simply because they're available, when she, an american herself, still prefers to travel through NYC by car rather then use it's mass transit system. If NYC's mass transport system isn't good enough to convince her to make the switch, how can she expect investment to work in places that aren't as well suited to mass transport, or people who aren't as ostensibly environmentally conscious to make the switch from cars?

Don’t...use Wikipedia as a source.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-examiner/
This one better?

Both sources have a greenlight from newsguard. So while you can probably assume they have bias you can also assume the claims they make are factual.
Any service that claims to be able objectively measure bias, or claims that a source is without bias is inherently untrustworthy.

[Genivaria]

Has AOC said that we need to ban people from using cars?

Dude, you've got to be fucking kidding. Read the post you're replying to. I never said that she said that.

Okay so how is using a car hypocritical?

[Fahran]

To address this on my own terms, I'm skeptical that she actually violated campaign finance law. She shuffled money around, which isn't good for transparency, but no ethics violations or criminal wrong-doing have been demonstrated yet. I'm not keen on her as a politician since I believe she's the left-wing equivalent to Sarah Palin, but I'm not really in the mood to suffer fools and their slanders.

She is from Puerto Rico that you think would happen?

"She is from Puetro Rico. What did you think would happen?" That's the correct translation. It's a tongue-in-cheek commentary on Puerto Rican political corruption.

Un poquito racista de tu parte, ¿no te parece?

Quizás un poco, pero es una broma satirica sobre corrupción política en Puerto Rico.

[Liriena]

If she is concerned about climate change, where are the examples of her acting in her life to reduce her contribution? It's a perfectly relevant question to ask.

Not really. Why should a sole individual have to bear the burden of "fixing" climate change with her consumer choices when that's not the main contributor to climate change? But furthermore, you are acting as if one instance of her riding a car proves that she hasn't done anything in her life to reduce her individual carbon footprint, which there's no way you could really know unless (a) you were involved in her personal life, (b) you were stalking her or (c) she made enough of her personal lifestyle choices public for you to form a complete picture of how eco-friendly she is.

And you're very rude to suggest that I'm "purposefully" missing her point. I'm arguing in good faith. I'd appreciate if you didn't suggest otherwise.

If you are arguing in good faith, then you are making a bad argument in good faith.

Seriously, though... "If you care so much about climate change, why do you used a car this one time, hypocrite?", even if argued in good faith, is an argument that only makes sense if we accept the premise that individuals are the ones who bear most of the responsibility for climate change and, therefor, fighting it, and that expressing concern for climate change and proposing ideas to fight it is only valid if the people live an eco-friendly life 24/7. And that's an unjust and impossible standard for most people, which also misses the point of most environmentalism.

Many left-wing environmentalists were critical of California's ban on plastic straws for this same reason: it effectively made individual consumers responsible for plastic pollution and "fixing" it, rather than systemic and structural forces which have the lion's share of real power and responsibility in the matter.

[Farnhamia]

Ella es de Puerto Rico que tu crees que iba a pasar?

She is from Puerto Rico that you think would happen?

She's from The Bronx.

[G-Tech Corporation]

She is from Puerto Rico that you think would happen?

She's from The Bronx.

But doesn’t the same stereotype still apply?

[Liriena]

when she, an american herself, still prefers to travel through NYC by car rather then use it's mass transit system.

This is a baseless assumption. You are assuming that her one decision to ride a car, as reported by the media, is indicative of her having a personal preference for cars and her using them more often than NYC's mass transit system. You have no actual proof of that. You have no proof of her motivation for riding a car that one time, nor any proof that she does that regularly as a matter of personal taste.

[Aclion]

Seriously, though... "If you care so much about climate change, why do you used a car this one time, hypocrite?", even if argued in good faith, is an argument that only makes sense if we accept the premise that individuals are the ones who bear most of the responsibility for climate change and, therefor, fighting it, and that expressing concern for climate change and proposing ideas to fight it is only valid if the people live an eco-friendly life 24/7.

Keep attacking that strawman. The actual argument is if the availability (superiority even) of mass transit failed to change your behaviour, why would you expect it to change other people's behaviour?

[Fahran]

Many left-wing environmentalists were critical of California's ban on plastic straws for this same reason: it effectively made individual consumers responsible for plastic pollution and "fixing" it, rather than systemic and structural forces which have the lion's share of real power and responsibility in the matter.

The argument there is generally that individual consumers prop up and contribute to the aforementioned systemic and structural forces. If everyone stopped eating beef, started carpooling, and reduced their energy consumption tomorrow, we'd probably make a noticeable dent on pollution and global warming within a decade. Social change, much like charity, begins at home. Corporations may have more responsibility and power, but who empowered them? And do those people not also bear responsibility for their actions and for the consequences of those actions? What happens if no one else moves? Should we just wait around?

[Scomagia]

Dude, you've got to be fucking kidding. Read the post you're replying to. I never said that she said that.

Okay so how is using a car hypocritical?

Using a car when you have convenient access to public transportation is hypocritical if you make a habit of handwringing about climate change.

[Aclion]

when she, an american herself, still prefers to travel through NYC by car rather then use it's mass transit system.

This is a baseless assumption. You are assuming that her one decision to ride a car, as reported by the media, is indicative of her having a personal preference for cars and her using them more often than NYC's mass transit system. You have no actual proof of that. You have no proof of her motivation for riding a car that one time, nor any proof that she does that regularly as a matter of personal taste.

It's not just one time. Her finances show a clear preference.

despite the fact that her campaign offices are located 138 feet from a subway station, she listed “1,049 transactions for Uber, Lyft, Juno and other car services, federal filings show. The campaign had 505 Uber expenses alone.” Overall, her campaign spent nearly $30,000 on ride-sharing, as opposed to just $8,335.41 on Metrocard transactions. Her campaign also logged over $25,000 worth of airline transactions and 66 flights despite taking Amtrak only 18 times.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/44210/ye ... en-shapiro

[Ostroeuropa]

Many left-wing environmentalists were critical of California's ban on plastic straws for this same reason: it effectively made individual consumers responsible for plastic pollution and "fixing" it, rather than systemic and structural forces which have the lion's share of real power and responsibility in the matter.

The argument there is generally that individual consumers prop up and contribute to the aforementioned systemic and structural forces. If everyone stopped eating beef, started carpooling, and reduced their energy consumption tomorrow, we'd probably make a noticeable dent on pollution and global warming within a decade. Social change, much like charity, begins at home. Corporations may have more responsibility and power, but who empowered them? And do those people not also bear responsibility for their actions and for the consequences of those actions? What happens if no one else moves? Should we just wait around?

One way to facilitate people changing their behavior would be to, you know, make the products more expensive, say by instituting regulations on pollution and a carbon tax.

[Liriena]

Seriously, though... "If you care so much about climate change, why do you used a car this one time, hypocrite?", even if argued in good faith, is an argument that only makes sense if we accept the premise that individuals are the ones who bear most of the responsibility for climate change and, therefor, fighting it, and that expressing concern for climate change and proposing ideas to fight it is only valid if the people live an eco-friendly life 24/7.

Keep attacking that strawman. The actual argument is if the availability (superiority even) of mass transit failed to change your behaviour, why would you expect it to change other people's behaviour?

But why do you think it "failed to change" her behavior that one time?

[Liriena]

This is a baseless assumption. You are assuming that her one decision to ride a car, as reported by the media, is indicative of her having a personal preference for cars and her using them more often than NYC's mass transit system. You have no actual proof of that. You have no proof of her motivation for riding a car that one time, nor any proof that she does that regularly as a matter of personal taste.

It's not just one time. Her finances show a clear preference.

despite the fact that her campaign offices are located 138 feet from a subway station, she listed “1,049 transactions for Uber, Lyft, Juno and other car services, federal filings show. The campaign had 505 Uber expenses alone.” Overall, her campaign spent nearly $30,000 on ride-sharing, as opposed to just $8,335.41 on Metrocard transactions. Her campaign also logged over $25,000 worth of airline transactions and 66 flights despite taking Amtrak only 18 times.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/44210/ye ... en-shapiro

And...?

Also, love the Daily Wire. Huge fan of their endless AOC thirst posting. Ben Shapiro ought to remember that he's a married man, though.

[Aclion]

The argument there is generally that individual consumers prop up and contribute to the aforementioned systemic and structural forces. If everyone stopped eating beef, started carpooling, and reduced their energy consumption tomorrow, we'd probably make a noticeable dent on pollution and global warming within a decade. Social change, much like charity, begins at home. Corporations may have more responsibility and power, but who empowered them? And do those people not also bear responsibility for their actions and for the consequences of those actions? What happens if no one else moves? Should we just wait around?

One way to facilitate people changing their behavior would be to, you know, make the products more expensive, say by instituting regulations on pollution and a carbon tax.

But how can someone expect that to work, when it is more expensive and slower then the mass transit available to them already?

Her finances showotherwise.

And...?

And... that show it's not a baseless assumption, she clearly avoids mass transit even when it is available[superior even], so...

why would she expect that Americans would switch from cars to trains simply because they're available, when she, an american herself, still prefers to travel through NYC by car rather then use it's mass transit system.

[Fahran]

One way to facilitate people changing their behavior would be to, you know, make the products more expensive, say by instituting regulations on pollution and a carbon tax.

True, but, if socioeconomic and political leadership doesn't lead by example, you're really just pricing out people too poor to afford those products. It's responsibility for the masses and luxuries/privileges for the elites. Unless you make the tax progressive. I actually think the better solution is to make green energy cheaper through subsidies and research and development grants.

[Valrifell]

Hey guys what if we moderately raised taxes no okay sorry I'll just go

93 trillion dollars is how much it the GND will cost. Do you know where 97% of Rare Earth Elements that are used in car batteries are found without looking it up on Google?

Sub-saharan Africa?

[Scomagia]

It's not just one time. Her finances show a clear preference.

despite the fact that her campaign offices are located 138 feet from a subway station, she listed “1,049 transactions for Uber, Lyft, Juno and other car services, federal filings show. The campaign had 505 Uber expenses alone.” Overall, her campaign spent nearly $30,000 on ride-sharing, as opposed to just $8,335.41 on Metrocard transactions. Her campaign also logged over $25,000 worth of airline transactions and 66 flights despite taking Amtrak only 18 times.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/44210/ye ... en-shapiro

And...?

Also, love the Daily Wire. Huge fan of their endless AOC thirst posting. Ben Shapiro ought to remember that he's a married man, though.

What do you mean "and". The posted link clearly demonstrates a repeated preference for dirtier means of travel simply for the sake of keeping the little priss comfy.

[Ostroeuropa]

One way to facilitate people changing their behavior would be to, you know, make the products more expensive, say by instituting regulations on pollution and a carbon tax.

But how can someone expect that to work, when it is more expensive and slower then the mass transit available to them already?

Okay, so ban advertising on pollution causing products to stop companies manipulating the public into viewing them as status symbols, tax pollution, and fund the reverse, campaigns to point out these products aren't desirable to own and have negative consequences for themselves and those around them.

...

I think I can literally hear the abstract concept of capitalism screaming in between hyperventilating.

But no seriously, why isn't this like cigarettes exactly?

"Well fuck you it's your fault just stop smoking" isn't how we marginalized the practice. We used the above tactic, and it worked.

[TURTLESHROOM II]

You think that's bad? Cortez's Chief of Staff allegedly embezzled money out of Cortez's campaign (presumably without her consent) into shell companies (which he owned) that were supposed to do campaign operations. Now that money is gone.

Cortez's thing with her boyfriend is only punishable by a fine, but stealing between eight hundred thousand and one million dollars from your boss' campaign coffers... I'm pretty sure that's a crime!

[Liriena]

And...?

Also, love the Daily Wire. Huge fan of their endless AOC thirst posting. Ben Shapiro ought to remember that he's a married man, though.

What do you mean "and". The posted link clearly demonstrates a repeated preference for dirtier means of travel simply for the sake of keeping the little priss comfy.

Were all those transactions for her personally?

[Farnhamia]

You think that's bad? Cortez's Chief of Staff allegedly embezzled money out of Cortez's campaign (presumably without her consent) into shell companies (which he owned) that were supposed to do campaign operations. Now that money is gone.

Cortez's thing with her boyfriend is only punishable by a fine, but stealing between eight hundred thousand and one million dollars from your boss' campaign coffers... I'm pretty sure that's a crime!

I'm pretty sure that's what the thread is actually about. That's how the articles in the OP seemed to be about, anyway.